User talk:Noformation

Maybe of interest regarding sciatica therapy

I agree with your comment at 'sciatica:talk' that sciatica would be a horrible condition to suffer from, particularly if it becomes chronic. However, surgery is not the only option...just FYI, check out this study [1]. It is not a secondary source, so maybe not the best for in the sciatica article, but interesting none-the-less. Unfortunately for patients, the controversial history of chiropractic tends to make people shy away from a treatment that is effective for many musculoskeletal conditions. I have put the most recent systematic review examining this therapy into the sciatica article, unfortunately it does not include the study I included here for you, but I guess the next systematic review will. Best regards, Puhlaa (talk) 22:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Thansk for lettering me know about that, I'm gonna check it out and see if I can find a good MEDRS to back it up. Right now I'm going off of http://www.cks.nhs.uk/sciatica_lumbar_radiculopathy/management/scenario_sciatica_lumbar_radiculopathy/treatment/basis_for_recommendation (you need an account to view but it's free) and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1895638/ which is a nice meta study. This might be a little dirty for a couple days but lets see if we can get this section looking good. Noformation (talk) 22:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I usually use pubmed to find my sources. I have already included the most recent secondary source for spinal manipulation [2]. Also, the source I liked you to above meets MEDRS (as a primary source) but I learned a long time ago that if its not a secondary source, dont bother, chiropractic is still too controversial :) I have been looking for a secondary MEDRS source to support basic physiotherapy, but have not had any luck besides commentaries? Also, I cannot find any secondary sources to support non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) use, it seems it is only placebo effect. This is already mentioned in the sciatica article, but should perhaps be emphasized more? Puhlaa (talk) 22:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

This is what I've got right now but I haven't published it yet because I'm not quite finished. So far everything I'm going on is essentially saying "hey we'll give you some drugs but it's probably not gonna do much." So I agree that this should be emphasized more.

"Though chemotherapy is commonly prescribed for the treatment of sciatica, the NHS reports that "There is no good evidence from clinical trials to guide the use of analgesics to relieve pain and disability, so the recommendations about analgesics are extrapolated from guidelines on low back pain."[1] A meta review by Koes et al. found no significant difference between placebo and either NSAIDs, analgesics, or muscle relaxants, while noting that evidence for opiods and compound drugs is lacking. The same meta study also found little difference between recommendations of staying active and recommendations of bed rest.[2]

Elective surgery is the choice for unilateral sciatica and focuses on removal of the underlying cause by removing disk herniation and eventually part of the disc. In a meta study by Weber, surgical intervention was found to have better results after one year but after four and ten year follow ups no significant differences were found.[3]"

I'd like to put more in there about some actual treatments rather than just what doesn't work, but so far I haven't found much. And you're right about chiropracy needing a secondary source, I'll look a bit harder and see if can find one, but if you can please add it in (just let me publish this version first so we don't have an edit conflict).

see my talkpage

not neutral.... Liveintheforests (talk) 18:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Yong Hwa Salido

HellO! I see you added a proposed deletion to Yong Hwa Salido because of no refs. (I was on the page because it kicked out Category:Pages with broken reference names) Based on the links at the bottom, I find that it appears to be a revision/dupe of Jung Yong Hwa and not a real person at all. I suggest changing to a speedy deletion for being false information. - Salamurai (talk) 07:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks for letting me know, I nominated it for speedy deletion. N⁰formation^Talk 08:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Prod of Cameron Johnston

Just incase you weren't aware, per WP:ATHLETE, "Athletes from any sport are presumed notable if they have competed at the Summer or Winter Olympic Games". The above article clearly stated that he had done so and was already tagged to show that it needed inline citations from the links provided so there was really no need to attempt a prod - Basement12 (T.C) 17:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

My mistake, I won't retag.

N^oformation ^Talk 19:33, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Aroshanti

Hello Noformation, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Aroshanti, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 22:18, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Logan, my apologies if I nominated it for speedy deletion in error. I found that since all the sources were self sources (not to mention that they were all broken links) and that this person did not seem notable that it met the criteria for a speedy deletion. I still think that this article should be deleted for those reasons, so what would be my next step here? A prod? Thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 22:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Creation science

I see you've been doing the same kind of reverting I have. Watch 1Thess5v16 (talk · contribs) closely. First edits seem awfully expert and very POV. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I noticed this right away and I'm starting to see some old talk page habits. Thanks for the heads up. N^oformation ^Talk 04:47, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Cwtch

As far as I know this word is used equally for a samll cosy corner where a pet sleeps, typically a dog. This can include a kennel(or at least the small part of one)n as well as a rug or open bed. It is used in the same wasy for a small hide-away or secret cupboard - somewhere one might 'ctwch' one's secret bottle of whisky! So no, certainly not vandalism. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

My apologies, in the diff it just looked like a random word. Thank you for letting me know! N^oformation ^Talk 08:08, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Internet Engineering Steering Group

Hi, the edit I made wasn't a test or vandalism. It removed the outdated list of IESG members (which changes every year) with a stable pointer to the web site that always lists the currently seating members. Larse (talk) 08:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Larse, thank you for letting me know. In the diff it just looked like content removal. However, it might be better for the article if the information was included, instead of an external link, as that is generally discouraged on Wikipedia as per policy on external links. If you'd rather not do this, then revert my edit and I will add the information later. Thanks N^oformation ^Talk 08:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Thermoproteus Greater sciatic notch Big Valley Creation Science Museum Caroline Keiff Valdecaballeros Nuclear Power Plant Daniel Siebert Radiculopathy Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid to Ask) Sterling Knight Ramona Marquez Greater sciatic foramen Becky Gulsvig Pyrodictiaceae Discectomy Inferior gluteal artery Will Provine Quadrat Hairspray (1988 soundtrack) Rondi Reed

Cleanup Sulphur Bank Mine Creationism Florence and the Machine Merge Knowledge discovery Tetany (action potential summation) Human Rights Watch Add Sources Mötley Crüe Association football club names Creation Science Wikify Shannon Durig Jonathan Dokuchitz Moshi Monsters Expand Muhammad Rwandan Genocide Index of knowledge articles

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Which one?

Is creationism considered Obvious pseudoscience, Generally considered pseudoscience, Questionable science, Alternative theoretical formulations? I just finished re-reading the WP:FRINGE page. Thank you. Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow} 14:00, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I would just like to know which one, thank you. Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow} 09:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey sorry I didn't see you left this message. I would put it in the obvious category because it is, at it's heart, a religious movement that masquerades as science and doesn't have any testable hypothesis. N^oformation ^Talk 09:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow} 09:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Say, wouldn't it also be considered obvious pseudoscience because by being supernatural, it doesn't follow any scientific laws? Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow}

Correct, supernatural causes are not part of the scientific method N^oformation ^Talk 10:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Would it be too much to ask you where in the scientific method article it says that (I'd find it myself, but it's extremely long)? Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow} 11:07, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh gosh, it is a long article and I haven't even read it. This is just something I know from experience/university, not from reading it here. Science, by definition, relies on testable hypothesis, and supernatural causes are not testable. N^oformation ^Talk 21:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Right. Thanks! Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow} 06:35, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Did you make a mistake?

Hi, Bible translations into Latin ? In ictu oculi (talk) 05:57, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand the context of the article. Is it about translating the bible into latin in general? Is it about specific passages being translated? Is it historical or literary? I'm sorry if my tag was incorrect I just can't seem to understand exactly what the article is about. N^oformation ^Talk 06:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's about Bible translations into Latin.... what else would it be about? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:39, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Maybe Latin Bible Translations would make more sense? N^oformation ^Talk 09:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Noah23

Noah23 is certainly a notable figure in independent hip-hop.

He has worked with dozens of the most prominent figures in indie hip-hop, has released numerous highly acclaimed albums, and is currently signed to one of the most prominent indie hip-hop labels.

He meets at least the following criteria, and arguably others:

- Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. - Has released two or more albums on one of the more important indie labels. - is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles.

Oh, and no, I have no affiliation of any kind with him, I'm just a long-time fan.

Here are some reviews of his latest album:

• http://uclaradio.com/2011/04/04/noah23-fry-cook-on-venus/
• http://exclaim.ca/Reviews/HipHop/noah23-fry_cook_on_venus
• http://www.chroniqueselectroniques.net/article-noah23-fry-cook-on-venus-70450719.html
• http://blog.mrhauer.com/2011/03/noah23-fry-cook-on-venus.html
• http://www.cokemachineglow.com/record_review/6101/noah23-frycook-2011
• http://mezzic.com/2011/05/19/review-noah23-fry-cook-on-venus-2011/
• http://phillipflavors.blogspot.com/2011/04/noah23-fry-cook-on-venus-album-review.html

He is well-known, well-respected, and well-covered in the indie hip-hop world. Wetdogmeat (talk) 07:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. They are weak sources but they should allow the articles to survive WP:CSD and I won't press any further for deletion unless another editor proposes. There is a problem with your articles on each of the albums and that is that they are totally unsourced, can you please get sources for all the information you're publishing? N^oformation ^Talk 07:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I will develop and add references to each of the articles, I was just building up a basic structure first. Wetdogmeat (talk) 16:07, 5 June 2011 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wetdogmeat (talk • contribs) 16:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Usually when an editor starts creating a lot of pages that surround one single subject it raises a red flag and can easily look promotional but this doesn't appear to be the case anymore. Happy editing :) N^oformation ^Talk 21:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, please keep in mind that blogs are not a WP:RS N^oformation ^Talk 07:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: MetaPad

Hello Noformation. I am just letting you know that I deleted MetaPad, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy on Blackberry River Inn (Norfolk, Connecticut)

While the article does suffer from certain issues, I restored the original version as it lacked significant promotional content. Granted, it includes the term 'elegant', but this is comparatively minor. Best, Meph^talk 12:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Success Is Certain (Royce Da 5'9 album)

Hi, I contested your speedy deletion of Success Is Certain (Royce Da 5'9 album) because the artist (Royce da 5'9") has an article and it is thus not an A9 candidate.

Note that this is the fifth time today somebody challenged your speedy deletion, so I suggest you read up on the criteria for speedy deletion and from now on only nominate pages of which you are absolutely certain they meet the criteria. Yoenit (talk) 20:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, that was a result of something very strange. When I tagged the page it did not contain the content that it does now, here is the diff. I think there was a redirect issue or something but I cannot seem to figure it out. If you look at the main page history you'll see that my CSD nom isn't even there. As far as my previous noms go, I had good reason at the time of making the nominations to believe that they were appropriate. I have nominated a lot of pages in the last day and so there's bound to be some contesting but most of the pages have been deleted without incident. N^oformation ^Talk 20:35, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

But yes I do understand that the artist has an article so this was my mistake. N^oformation ^Talk 20:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy schools

I don't really see why a really dreadful article about a school should not be speediable. Indeed you will probably find that I have deleted some. Thus I was perfectly happy to delete Lanna MMA on the grounds that it is not a school in the general sense. Conversely, moments later I came across Lyceum of Subic Bay and decided that is a proper school so I had better not try speedy. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 20:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know! N^oformation ^Talk 21:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

CSD of Little Creek Casino Resort

Just letting you know I have managed to turn it into a stub. --The Σ ^talk_contribs 06:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your quick work on the Mind control page, and reverting the vandalism almost instantly! Inks.LWC (talk) 08:22, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure! N^oformation ^Talk 09:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

For your attention

Hi.

Check this - it would appear that Hypnotic379 did not heed your warning... Nikthestoned 09:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Reported and he should be blocked soon, thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 09:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries :) Nikthestoned 10:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Translation

I've completed the translation, but need some help. Check my talk page. Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow} 10:42, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Electric Playground video

I'm not sure why a youtube video recording of a TV show discussing the game would be considered spam? See King's Quest III: To Heir Is Human (Infamous Adventures) and King's Quest II: Romancing the Stones. Any explanation is appreciated.Questfan (talk) 22:10, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. It's not exactly "spam" but that is the main template used when warning people for bad external links. Though it's not spam, it still should not be included as per Wikipedia's external links policy. I won't report you because I know you're doing good work on that page, but the bot will probably report you the next time you try to add that link and you might be blocked from editing for period. Other than that keep up the good work, page is looking good. N^oformation ^Talk 22:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your Message!

About how long would it take a page to go live?

Thank you!

=) Vdm2011 (talk) 01:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)vdm2011

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vdm2011 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey you're very welcome! Your page is already live and can be seen at Mike Constantino (MMA Trainer). Just so you know, when you leave a note on a user page or a talk page, you should sign your post at the end by typing 4 tildes in a row like this ~~~~ Thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 01:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much!

You are quite helpful & welcoming!

=)

Vdm2011 (talk) 01:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Vdm2011

69 crusade in China tag

Criterion G1... patent nonsense, which does not apply to hoaxes, badly translated material, vandalism, or bad writing.

A quick and easy way to see whether it's G1 or something else: If you can understand at least 1 sentence, it's not G1. Field guide to CSD for more details. --The Σ ^talk_contribs 02:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you I will keep that in mind. So what should I have tagged that as?N^oformation ^Talk 02:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

When in doubt, call it a test page :P or use {{db}} for a custom reason. --The Σ ^talk_contribs 02:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Awesome thank you for the advice. Sometimes it's hard to class pages even when you know that they shouldn't be there! N^oformation ^Talk

Hello

Am very concern that most of the information on the Page of Yolandota Monge is been biuld with non acurate information, and am suprise that No one have ever noticed that, like for instance, she has not a single certification at the RIAA data base for the certification of Gold or Platinum for the album,s she has sold, is well known that she have not sale a lot of records, so why not to mmake the proper chages, why are we allowing this page to full of inpresition and false information, some of her fans are to obsess feeding false information , Wikipedia encorages to do verify all information, She is not included at the RIAA, that means she has never really win a Gold Album, less a Platinum. please help to correct the information. , Yolandita Monge , Thanks Chanisman — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.239.157.38 (talk) 07:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=SEARCH not a single Album from Yolandita Monge is been certified by the RIAA, all information is not acurate is only false adveetisement that missleads the Public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.239.157.38 (talk) 07:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this is something you need to discuss on the talk page of the article. If you like, you can be bold and simply remove unsourced information, but if it is challenged please discuss it on the talk page. However, you should not argue in the article against a different part of the article, rather just remove anything that isn't true. Thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 07:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ronika

Hello Noformation. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ronika, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: BBC link is enough to get through A7. Take to AfD if required. Thank you. GedUK  20:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

A1

I have moved The Food Travel Experts SSP (should be deleted under R2) to a userspace draft. It is generally a bad idea to mark for speedy deletion under A1 or A3 when it is extremely new and it is a newcomer. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 21:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, I will keep that in mind. N^oformation ^Talk 21:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Trevor White (British stage actor)

This is a disimbauation fix and theatre stub. Please remove your deletion request as the article is 5 minutes old and I am in the middle of working on it and feel you have assumed bad faith incorrectly. It would be very civil of you to remove it and give me time to produce further information and referencing. He is listed on IMDB, has published references in book, article and film and television. He is at least as notable as the information shows. Not famouse, but indeed notable.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, no bad faith assumed, I use Huggle and tag articles as they come up. The BLP prod gives you 10 days to add a single WP:RS, so if you add one please feel free to remove it. According to policy, all BLPs must have at least one reliable source. Thanks. N^oformation ^Talk 22:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Geothermal areas of Yellowstone

Hallo Noformation

the IP has found that the other WPs have separate articles for the Mammoth_Hot_Springs and changed the redirect at EN into a full article. And by creative use one of the mostly unknown features of the software this article ist still included in the Geothermal areas of Yellowstone.

I think many of the features in Yellowstone justify an article in their own right. Looking forward to be there this July....

--Eingangskontrolle (talk) 13:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, I didn't see anything in the edit summary so I assumed it was vandalism. My mistake and my apologies, enjoy your trip! N^oformation ^Talk 02:03, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Hi Noformation. Just a heads-up regarding this edit: users are allowed to blank their talk pages. Per WP:BLANKING, it simply means they've read or acknowledged the messages. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi 28bytes, thanks for leaving this note. I would like to ask, actually, about the policy in this particular instance. I am aware that users can blank their talk pages, but in this case the user had just recreated a deleted page and me, as well as other editors, were trying to leave warnings/messages on his talk page and engage in dialogue. Eventually the user seemed to let a different editor talk to him but he still kept deleting the previous comment from the conversation and replacing it with his own, making it very hard to follow. In instances like this, is there any exception to policy or any sort of way to deal with a user who, say, deletes old warnings so they can continue vandalizing (not saying this editor did that, but just in general)? Thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 22:48, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree, it's kind of annoying when they do that, but replacing an editor's comment with their reply to it is allowed. The best thing to do is to keep an eye on their contribution history, and if you need to give them a warning, check their talk page history; if they've blanked it after receiving level 1 and level 2 warnings (which they're allowed to do), then you'll know to give them a level 3. It's actually quite common for vandals to blank their talk page to try to fool people into thinking they haven't been warned yet, which is why it's always good to check their talk page history if you're warning them manually. (Huggle, I think, does this automatically for you.) Do you have popups enabled? It's really handy for this sort of thing: you can just mouse over their username and see their contribs and talk page history at a glance. 28bytes (talk) 04:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Khaled al-Johani

hi Noformation. i just saw that someone created Khaled al-Johani. i put in an edit to show where the content came from - 2011 Saudi Arabian protests - so that shows up now in the edit history. i'm not the person who did the copy/paste, but i'm familiar with the content (as part author!) on the original page.

i think that most of the problems you listed came from copy/pasting - with good intentions by the person creating the page, but certainly requiring cleanup as you correctly tagged. i've done a minimal cleanup. Since i am part author of most of the content back on the original page, it would be good if someone else other than me (e.g. you :) took a quick look at the updated version and decided which, if any, of the cleanup parameters still remain valid. Thanks. Boud (talk) 22:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, I rephrased a couple phrases in the lead, corrected grammar and removed all the tags. The article looks good, thanks for cleaning it up! It probably needs a bit more work but nothing that calls for a tag imo at this point. N^oformation ^Talk 22:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Cool! :) (Though Khaled's situation as a prisoner sounds more like :( than :)...) Boud (talk) 23:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Re Nova Rex

I don't have any particular objection to it; I tend to be a bit harsher with articles from obvious corporate accounts (such as this one, which I've reported to UAA), and I knew this one was pretty close to the line. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 03:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Im am very sorry

Im am very sorry and i wont do it again> Im am very sorry to attack you. please forgive me. Archiveman2011

Please dont report me allso' Im am very sorry attack to you

I promise i wont do it again please reply to me

Im am sorry to get you angey

Can you delete the report because i said sorry can you reply to me now asap from Archiveman2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archiveman2011 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I will not delete the report. Your behavior is not acceptable for Wikipedia, at this point I will ask that you please stop editing my talk page here and leave any comments you want on your talk page instead. N^oformation ^Talk 06:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Im am very sorry

Hello Noformation I like to say Sorry to you now i know my behavior been bad and i I will I wont do it again i really really promise please forgiven. I really mean it now I am really sorry this time. once again sorry to you now from [[User:Archiveman2011|Archiveman2011] —Preceding undated comment added 06:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC).

vandalism

Hey Mate Im not vandalism in here. I just doing my job to requesting terroa2011 to be delete and that all once again im vandalism in here cya — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liam20112011 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Please don't discuss pages in article space, this is what the talk page is for. Furthermore, I had already requested speedy deletion, which is the fastest way to get an article deleted. Thanks. N^oformation ^Talk 05:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Archiveman2011

please could you ask him calm down in here

i did delete a rude comment in here. thank for you help Liam20112011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liam20112011 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I have reported him to WP:AIV and he will likely be blocked shortly. N^oformation ^Talk 05:28, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

No Need to report him just give him a 2nd final last chance in here

i request please dont report him now Liam20112011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liam20112011 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I have reported him and I have mentioned in the report that I suspect you and him are the same person. An admin will check this out and take appropriate action as necessary. N^oformation ^Talk 05:35, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Im am very sorry

I am being nice to you because i am saying sorry now i wont do it again from Archiveman2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archiveman2011 (talk • contribs) 07:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trollheim's Grott (2nd nomination)

Hi. Could you please sign your !vote :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:24, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

So sorry mate! Done and done. N^oformation ^Talk 08:27, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

vandalism

hello im not vandalism in here i am trying to SORRY for yoou please forgive me.

I AM really sorry really mean it now sorry please forgive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archiveman2011 (talk • contribs) 08:36, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Please stop harassing me. N^oformation ^Talk 08:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I want to make deal is i am going stop harassing you if say forgive me. that a deal im really mean now

please make a deal ok bye from Archiveman2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archiveman2011 (talk • contribs) 08:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

And hey presto, we know what he looks like, too

See GHits for "Sundog Sakai" + "Griffin de Luce". --Shirt58 (talk) 08:54, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow good find, sir! N^oformation ^Talk 08:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

ANI Note

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Im not sure why archiveman2011 is edit warring the the AIV board but this has got to stop--Lerdthenerd wiki defender 09:06, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: User deleted his own AIV

Re your message: Sorry that I wasn't around at the time. I see that the issue was taken care of on WP:ANI by a Checkuser. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:44, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I have created AbuseFilter 419 to deal with this issue. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

That is awesome, thank you! N^oformation ^Talk 20:46, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! We'll see if it gets any FPs, and then I'll set the flags to 'disallow'. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

'disallow' flag set, sa the only hits were vandals removing themselves and replacing it with their reporters. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

It's amazing that this was overlooked for so many years, thank you again for fixing it. N^oformation ^Talk 03:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Big-boards.com is "dubious unsourced content" according to you?

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

It is linked at the end of this article. Will you delete it here also to be consistent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wootfarm (talk • contribs) 11:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, the unsourced statement was that bigboards is one of the "most popular," if you want to state this then you should probably have a third party source that says so. N^oformation ^Talk 20:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Serer related

Hello,

I have couple of issues regarding the editions being made about all Serer related articles including our people, our religion and history, in particularly our religion and history, but more so our religion. The relevant URLs are pasted here for your review and consideration:

[A] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serer_Religion

• 1. Why is the neutrality of the above link disputed?
• 2. The article has been sourced, so would you please remove the “original research” mark you put on it.

[B] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiemassassians

• 1. Why is the factual accuracy of this link disputed?
• 2. Sources have been stated so would you please remove the “does not cite references or sources” mark.

[C] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serer_people

• 1. Sources have been cited for the above url in relation to “Notable Serer”, so would you please remove the “does not cite references or sources” remark.

Thank you Tamsier (talk) 09:19, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

He Tamsier, I have a lot on my plate for the next couple days but I will respond to this on the weekend. Thanks N^oformation ^Talk 09:23, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. It looks like you have improved the articles quite a bit so please feel free to remove those tags. Thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 00:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Noformation, but before I do can I confirm which pages should I remove such tags from? Do you mean all of them? As you can see a speedy deletion has been placed on one of them. Can I remove that too? I don't want to be penalised or anything. Please advise.

Thank you Tamsier (talk) 09:54, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, I removed all the tags except for the articles for deletion tag because I didn't place it so I can't withdraw the AFD unfortunately. However, now that everything looks sourced I don't think that you should have a problem with deletion, and you've already mentioned that on the AFD page so I think you'll be ok. Let me know if you have any other questions or if you need help with anything. N^oformation ^Talk 10:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you help?

Hi Noformation,

I'm stuck with that Aelita Andre article. The criticism section was absent until moments ago, because another editor kept adding a non-NPOV tag to my article and even inserted a blog entry as a source to counter the main focus of the article. I removed those edits, but I added the Criticism section (the source about the vanity gallery and the attempted justification of the insertion of that fact) in order to prevent a seemingly imminent edit war. Now you've removed that section (which isn't a big deal since I know there are no sources that outwardly criticize her), which is all right by me but will inevitably cause more trouble later. Can you help me out here? I want arguments that don't exist in reliable sources to remain out of the article, but the current editor I'm talking about now is the third one in the course of a week that's been doing this, so I need to figure out a way to stick with reliable sources and also prevent these repetitive unsourced critical edits. The best I could do was cite the gallery itself noting its fee requirement. I can't source the counterargument, which is why I never put it there in the first place. But its absence is causing a lot of trouble. Do you know what I can do?

Hey there. WP:BLP articles can be really tough and annoying to work on because there are very strict standards as to what kinds of negative statements can be said (I'm in the middle of a similar storm myself on the Trevor Marshall bio). I'm really not sure how to help you out because I don't know this subject at all, the only real advice I can give is this:

1. Don't get caught in a 3RR violation because even if you are right you could get blocked
2. You could try asking for help at Wikipedia:BLPN as they would likely be more knowledgeable than myself
3. If that fails you could try WP:ANI but that really should be a last resort and it should be because the content being added is unsourced (in other words, ANI doesn't deal with content disputes, but with policy violations)

I'll go ahead and remove the autobiography tag, it seems to me that if you're trying to add a criticism section you're probably not the subject :)

Sorry I couldn't do more, but I do wish you the best of luck.

N^oformation ^Talk 00:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Noformation! I really appreciate your help. I haven't ever been involved in an argument like this before, and it's really frustrating to me because I've been so cautious in adding inline citations after nearly every single sentence in order to avoid accusations like this. I know the article is on a slightly risky subject because it's a prime target for anyone who wants to criticize modern art, but I'm working hard to include every bit of information I can find from reliable sources. They all seem to have a single POV, though, so the best I can do is still attracting vandals and people who want to add the counterargument with no sources (or with unreliable sources). It hurts to be totally falsely accused of bias after spending hours doing my best to support everything I said, usually with more than one source per sentence. I appreciate very much that you put the article back to the way it was before this all happened, because I worked hard for that. Thank you : ) Armadillopteryx^talk 00:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx^talk 00:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC) Note: Since you basically reverted the article to the state it was in before User:Cramyourspam started changing it today, can I ask you if you believe the autobiography tag at the top of the article should be removed, too? It's a completely invalid tag since, as the article's author, I know I have nothing to do with the subject and have in fact only quoted and excessively cited the news (which, unfortunately, is only praising her). I won't remove the tag myself because I don't want to violate 3RR, so if you agree that the article as it was a few hours ago is fine, would you like to delete that tag? Thanks for reading. Armadillopteryx^talk 00:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I just saw what you added to the article's talk page. I really appreciate your rational input. Thank you. Also, I followed your advice and started a section about this article at Wikipedia:BLPN because I was worried that consecutive edits might not count as 1 in 3RR (though I've since been told they do, so it's okay). I'm not sure whether User:Cramyourspam will respond there or not, but my guess is that something will probably said. I think at this point, if the debate continues anywhere, it's better for it to be monitored on BLPN anyway. Hoping that things will stay cooled down, though. Armadillopteryx^talk 10:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! Good job with everything, you were clearly in the right here. That user seems really standoffish and I'm getting the impression he's part of the "art world" and doesn't like that "pop art" is enjoyed by the masses but hated by the academics. N^oformation ^Talk 00:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Personally, I also wish that there were some reliable sources that questioned her work, because I think it would make the article a lot more interesting. My real issue was that the user was willing to insert counter-arguments with unreliable sources, which, in addition to violating WP:BLP and WP:RS, just compromised the integrity of the article (a few hours before it went onto the main page for DYK, no less). My take on the whole situation is that regardless of whether her art is "good" or not, it's at least interesting that a toddler is holding a public exhibition in a gallery on another continent, and the extensive news coverage of the event made her notable enough for an article here. Armadillopteryx^talk 05:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Pizza Article

Hi. I didn't see your edit to change it to A7 until I had already deleted it. I felt it was an attack page, though, as I felt it's true purpose was designed to attack the management.--v/r - TP 23:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries, it would have gotten deleted either way but I've run across admins in the past who have refused to speedy because it was under the wrong critera. N^oformation ^Talk 23:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Well I'm new to the mop, but I've just changed the deletion rationale if it qualifies under something else.--v/r - TP 00:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Welcome

Thank you. 69.181.248.16 (talk) 00:48, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if you're aware, but we have a few really cool tools to assist in fighting vandalism/tagging pages for deletion. One of them is built into Wikipedia and it's called twinkle, there's another called Huggle (which is what I use) and yet another called STiki. You need an account to use them but they really make reverting easy and automatically warn/report vandals as they come about. N^oformation ^Talk 00:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm aware of them, but as you point out they require an account and I prefer to edit without one. Thanks for the heads-up though! 69.181.248.16 (talk) 00:56, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, happy vandal fighting! N^oformation ^Talk 01:20, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your kind edit summary here. Talk about it, fiddle with the article, see what works, go back on what does not - this is how editing is supposed to work. Keep it up. - 2/0 (cont.) 07:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Huggle revert

Hello, you recently reverted this edit on User:Reactionaryprinciple/Mark Loveys as an unexplained blanking of page. I would like to point out that the change was explained. The page was also an attack page. (I almost reverted it as well) Ryan Vesey (talk) 23:34, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, I was just about to tag as an attack page and you beat me to the punch! I meant to revert without warning but force of habit and whatnot, I will delete my warning from that user's page. Thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 23:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

List of cases of police brutality

Hello, Noformation. I can see that you have been active on the List of cases of police brutality. This is a hot topic here in Macedonia - a boy has been murdered by a policeman, and the police and the establishment in general have been trying very hard to keep face and minimize the scandal. I can see that someone is consistently trying to remove the referenced part, and I do believe that this will continue in the future. In addition of being a nasty continuation of a police cover up, it's also a pure case of Wikipedia vandalism. I haven't been active on en.wiki for a long, long time; so I am not really familiar with the page protection policies and their implementation, but do you think that a semi-protection would be a good idea? --FlavrSavr (talk) 01:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm not really active on that page in specific, I was just reverting vandalism. Initial I actually requested page protection because of that IP and because I was not sure how long it would take before an admin came around to block, but I rescinded my request when one came around pretty quick. If this is going to be a hot topic and if vandalism continues like that then I would definitely say at least semi-protection is warranted. Have there been other cases in the last few days? N^oformation ^Talk 01:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I just saw that another IP tried to delete the same section. I will rerequest semi-protection. Thanks for bringing this up. N^oformation ^Talk 01:41, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that was a fast reply. Awesome! :) Well, yes, actually, I have reverted the anon two times now. As for the situation in Macedonia, there are ongoing protests against police brutality (mostly organized through Facebook and Twitter), so one might say that it is a controversial topic (one more reason for semi-protecting, I guess). --FlavrSavr (talk) 01:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Interesting, well PP has been requested and this seems pretty open and shut. Good luck with all of that, there's nothing as bad in the world as corrupt government. N^oformation ^Talk 01:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Sonicsgate

I appreciate your help on the Sonicsgate article, but as you can see, the same IP address reverted your edit as "vandalism". That's typical of the agenda-driven editors on that page. Chicken Wing (talk) 01:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I can revert a couple more times without violating 3RR, so if he violates it feel free to report :) N^oformation ^Talk 01:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

interrail

i-m trying to edit this page to make it more accurate - 3 hrs work, provided LOTS of references etc. and now you have reverted it because of vandalism? How are we going to resolve this? Michael81.62.100.35 (talk) 02:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I made a big mistake and already rolled back to your last version, minus the external links, which seem to violate WP:ELNO. At first I thought you were a spammer then I noticed that I reverted a lot more than just a spam link. Anyway, no harm no foul, everything should be restored to normal. N^oformation ^Talk 02:23, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks, I had a bit of a heart-attack, but then saw you reverted.

I had just removed the last External Link, which was a pure sales site. Now you've removed all but 1 of the Ext. Links. Some of them - as I remember - were quite informative links (?) Michael81.62.100.35 (talk) 02:44, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Just to say, none of the Ext. Links are/were from me! Michael81.62.100.35 (talk) 02:46, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Ha I about had a heart attack as well when I saw that you had done 35 revisions :D. I removed those links because it seemed like a lot of overkill. Also a couple of them were blogs, a couple seemed commercial, etc, and that's generally frowned upon here. If you go over WP:ELNO and want to readd links that you think I was mistaken about then please feel free. N^oformation ^Talk 02:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Hotels in London

Issues with huggle hm? -Cntras (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

First thought it was spam then noticed it was in the reflist so I undid to investigate before removing finally. I hate leaving a warning for someone who didn't deserve it. N^oformation ^Talk 04:41, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

AFD

I thought you might be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstate (software) as you entered a speedy deletion nomination and subsequently withdrew it for this article. Toddst1 (talk) 16:53, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Your message

I edit Wikipedia as I see fit. I do not sign edits, follow procedures or read the rules anymore. I've decided to edit organically, and let more rigorously minded users deal with the appearances. "Aeroplane Thieves" should not be a category if there is only one person, who is notable for that reason. Oscar the grouch does not belong to a "green monsters" category (maybe he does now?)

As a fellow scientist, I hope your experiences with the internal affairs of Wikipedia are less like mine. They are usually petty power plays by people who don't care for the long term development of wikipedia. They internal system of administrators and signing posts will be the death of wikipedia.

Have a look at the decline in posts. You're a science lover, you'll see the growth curve wikipedia is on, and you know where it is going to end up. My money is on website closure 2015.