User talk:Velella

This talk page contents prior to 1st October 2011 have been archived. Please feel free to start new discussions below.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

My warning

Hi, I see here you gave a final warning to an IP user for spamming. I've just reverted this edit which I believe qualifies as promotional. I'm wondering if you'd like to pursue whatever the correct course of action is as, frankly, I have no idea what is supposed to happen next once a final warning has been reached. Regards, LordVetinari 11:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Apologies but I have been away for a couple of weeks - this IP appears to have stopped editing so that the issue appears to have been resolved - I will maintain an occasional watch just in case it returns.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree, and thanks for following up. BTW, for my own knowledge, can you please direct me to some useful WP:something page that describes the next course of action after a final warning. Thanks again. ClaretAsh (talk) 08:46, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

The next stage is to file a manual report at Administrator intervention against vandalism which is reasonably quick and easy. Alternatively Huggle and, I suspect, Twinkle do the task automatically following a level 4 warning. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   08:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that. ClaretAsh (talk) 09:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

You can't charge someone while all this happened is true this is not spamming everything has been validated by the police the criminal activities and the Corperation knows about this. If you have a problem about the truth then deal with the truth.

Comment?

Would you mind commenting on a content issue in Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) here? Some of the article's content and its source is being questioned by another editor who has repeatedly removed or altered it without I believe justification. Dan56 (talk) 01:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Apologies (see above). I regret this is outside my knowledge and hopefully is now resolved.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Periflex

Thanks for your interest in my work. Please have a look at the rewritten article about the Periflex camera. I hope it conforms to your kind suggestions. With respect, Jan von Erpecom 16:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Securitization

I amended a portion which was not sourced and which is actually dubious to (i) past tense and (ii) sourced to a company rather than a single person in this company. In fact, given the lack of references (even searching on the web), the correct course of action is to delete the whole paragraph, which I will do now. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.220.80 (talk) 22:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Nita Ambani - Dhirubhai Ambani International School

Hi Velella,

In the Career Section of the article on Nita Ambani there was an revert from Nita Ambani to Kishore Ambani. I wanted to clarify that Nita Ambani was accurate information provided and I'm reverting it by providing a stronger citation. Kishore Ambani is in no way related to Dhirubhai Ambani International School.

Nita Ambani Proof

MuzzammilB (talk) 05:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

My revert was from Kishore to Nita - which you have confirmed was correct - and thanks for the confirming reference. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   12:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

North American College

Hello, I am a faculty member at North American College in Houston, TX. We are a new college offering 4-year Bachelor degrees in three disciplines: Business Administration, Computer Science and Education. Our website is www.northamerican.edu We are accredited by ACICS which is a recognized accrediting agency by the US Department of Education. The problem I am having is to create a page under the title: North American College as it redirects to Pontifical North American College. I tried to cancel the redirect but you did undo it. How can I resolve this? Am I supposed to create a page like NORTH AMERICAN COLLEGE (HOUSTON, TEXAS)? Which seems the only plausible way currently. Please advise. Thanks, Osman Nal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osmannal2 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I have fixed it up as North American College as a stub article but it needs to be referenced and expanded otherwise it may be proposed for deletion as not notable and unreferenced. Hope that this helps. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

About the promotion of TRED

I believe the editions I did were constructive as real information with good sources were added . If this is not allowed, then what is supposed to be?? Otherwise, it's information, not promotion.--187.90.249.134 (talk) 22:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

There was only one source provided which was itself a weak source and looked like a reproduction of a press release. The group has not produced anything at all and is only rumoured to to make a release in 2012. As such it is all unreferenced crystal ball gazing. If the group releases material and becomes notable , then is the time to add information.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   09:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at R000t's talk page.
Message added 13:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I am r000t (talk) 13:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

THANK YOU: Reservation in India page

Hey, Thanks for the edits on the Reservation in India page. I am working on the page for an assignment for one of my classes at Mills College so thanks for the edits you did in terms of organizing the article. I know you haven't done so but please do not delete anything we put up on the article and I would love for you to look over the edits we make over time and give us feedback on our talk pages. Thanks again! Kkhari29 (talk) 21:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Please rest assured that I only delete material that appear to be wrong. In this case,as I understand that this is work in progress, I will hold back from any editing to allow you a free hand for the moment. Best of luck with the assignment!.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Kkhari29 (talk) 05:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Dispute over Spirulina

Dear Velella - you edited a grammar mistake on a controversial thread a few hours ago. If you're interested there is a discussion going on to determine a new NPOV:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Spirulina_(dietary_supplement)". Thank you. --Rdavout (talk) 17:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Kappa Kappa Gamma

Hi! I'd like to ask about this edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kappa_Kappa_Gamma&diff=459173320&oldid=459173098

It seems that I'd only cleaned up the information, putting it in better place in that section whilst including all the same details, while you reverted my edit as "unsourced speculation". However, all of the information can be found readily in the references which are already included in the article's section, including a NYTimes article. I was only being bold with my edit, keeping the flow of the article clear (i.e. removing the word "alleged" from the first sentence which had appeared twice; putting his suicide more appropriately on the section's tail - since his death didn't really have to do with the sorority anyway...)

Perhaps we could come to consensus on an edit? Thanks. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 16:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The reason for my revert was your change from "....Mr. Ivins may have been driven to suicide...." to "... who is alleged to have been driven to suicide by unfounded allegations ..."

Your edit introduces two separate allegations which raises the spectres of others who have made these allegations but for which no reference is made to indicate the identity of these persons. The original version was much more neutral and avoided these ambiguous allegations. Hope that that helps.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

No, that's not quite right. The edit as I found it had the two separate allegations...reading, "...who is alleged to have been driven to suicide by unfounded allegations..." in the lede of the Bruce Ivins section. I thusly removed that from the section-lede and moved it to the bottom of that section to read "Mr. Ivins may have been driven to suicide by the accusations with regard to his involvement in the the attacks. Because he died before charges could be filed, no court case will be brought to fruition on this matter, nor on the matter of his involvement with KKG or other sororities." You then reversed my edit with the note "rvt unsourced speculation" and the Huggle tag.

All sources for the info I properly included can be found in the NY Times article which accompanies that section (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/science/10anthrax.html), as well as in sources 3 through 5 of the Bruce Ivins article. I'm not the most efficient formatting editor, but the facts are well sourced and I do believe my edit was strong. Perhaps you could assist? Thanks again. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 21:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Velella. I see you've continued editing over the past week, but haven't addressed my comments above. I'm going to assume you see my edits were valid as I described, and will re-include them to the Kappa Kappa Gamma article in the next day or so. Thanks again for your input. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 17:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Both links 3 and 5 of the Bruce Irvins article are dead links and reference 4 provides no support. Nor do I see support in the reference that you have quoted. What we have is a release of anthrax, a scientist accused of its release, the suicide of the scientist - all fact but no ostensible proof that said scientist released the anthrax. So where is the source that says "...who is alleged to have been driven to suicide by unfounded allegations ...". I can't even see the word alleged. To be alleged, somebody has to allege something - there must be a capability of saying "alleged by xxxxxxx" We don't seem to have that xxxxx, do we ? 20:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

RIGHT! Which is WHY I removed the "alleged" from the article (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kappa_Kappa_Gamma&diff=459173098&oldid=455363382). It IS asserted in many places that Ivins acted in that attack, per http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/06/AR2008080601400.html (and the NYTimes article), which is cited in the Kappa Kappa Gamma article already. But you UNDID my edit here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kappa_Kappa_Gamma&diff=459173320&oldid=459173098 , with a note of ""rvt unsourced speculation" and the Huggle tag. Perhaps we could do without the part of the edit about the motivation for his suicide, but there is ample citations for including that he was involved in the anthrax attacks. And, you can see, inclusion of ivins in this article has been re-hashed before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kappa_Kappa_Gamma/Archive_3 . Please advise. 38.109.88.218 (talk) 03:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Message Me

Instead of calling me a vandal you could have messaged me back. Dont hide from the fact that you dont know somthing so you choose to delete it. I have now restored that information and quoted sources. I hope thats better and now you should read up on the story and gain some insight and do your job properly. OK! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodman44 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

You have provided no reliable source whatsoever to justify what is potentially very damaging and probably libellous information. To support such an assertion like that you need a robust and reliable source and that certainly isn't YouTube. On a general note, notoriety affecting children would, in my view, require the strongest possible justification for inclusion and not just someone's vicarious enjoyment of the predicament of others.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:29, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Regulation of the release of genetic modified organisms‎

I spent hours researching and writing an article, so I hope you understand why I might feel a little bit annoyed when someone comes along and changes it without offering a good reason. The order is important because each section is supposed to link to the next and changing the order changes the flow. And it is logical as I have explained on the talk page. Can you please read it an leave a response. AIRcorn (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I disagree and have replied at article talk page.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:08, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Gloria Jeans is advertising in Wikipedia

Hi

I have a personal blog (www.LearnAboutAustralia.com) in which I write about Australia. I wanted to share the information that I put in my Blog with the readers of Wikipedia. However you removed the links to the completely relevant articles that I had put in some pages because because you believed I was advertising!! Gloria Jeans is a brand and belongs to a private company. How come Gloria Jeans can even have a page and advertise for its brand in Wikipedia, but if I place a link which is about Coffee Menu in Australia, it is assumed as advertising!?! It's stupid isn't it?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learnaboutoz (talk • contribs) 23:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

It was exactly that - you have a blog and all your edits were to promote that Blog. That is not acceptable editing practice on Wikipedia - simple.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   00:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc S

Hello Velella. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc S, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to products. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 17:21, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

And of course i should inset that this article is about the best phone of Sony Ericsson, I do not know about America or Europe but in asia it has good sale and of course my phone is arc s :) --Faramarz^♚♔♚ 14:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Changing article's name

Hello, I've created this page, if you want change an article's name you can proceed from here, don't change the name manually because it will damage my contributions (as creator of the page). Thanks --Faramarz^♚♔♚ 09:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I neither changed its name nor moved it as you will see if you check the edit history of both this and its redirect. I revered my temporary reversion of the redirect. Some other editor later decided to change the redirect to the article.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh! i didn't pay attention and i apologize for this unduly comment. sincerely --Faramarz^♚♔♚ 10:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit at Watt: energy vs power

You were doubtless thinking of the calorie, but you put its definition in watt - I reflexively typed "rv v" in my edit comment but that may have been a bit harsh; sorry. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I was looking at Watt, Joule, Ampere and Kilowatt and somehow conflated the information between them to come up with a brilliant insight that I thought would be insightful for readers. Trouble was that it was wrong - brain just in temporary melt-down I suspect!  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   18:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Ashlee Herlin

Hello Velella. I am just letting you know that I deleted Ashlee Herlin, 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. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:37, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Vandal

Let the vandal be. I have already reported him. | ^help_dןǝɥ | 21:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

For reverting the IP that vandalized my talk page. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

No worries. He got fixed in the end!  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with 24/7 Real Media article

Much appreciated. Standard2211 (talk) 20:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Amazon river dolphin

Have actually been reading up on them in our uni library and amazingly this is one of the many odd myths surrounding them! It's the only one I could remember. When I'm next back in I'll find the book to cite it with and pop in a few of the other myths too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.161.210 (talk) 11:40, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Gallery Chez Valentin

Hello, I'm from the gallery Chez Valentin in Paris, I'm the owner of information concerning french artist Laurent Grasso, so all of my information provided are true and verified. The references added are the two websites of Gallerie Chez Valentin, on which you will find artist information, and Sean Kelly Gallery.

Thank You very much ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galeriechezvalentin (talk • contribs) 12:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Your reply gives me great concern that you have been editing with a significant conflict of interest. Please read the guideline urgently and please refrain from further editing until you are certain that your editing practice is consistent with guidelines.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   13:16, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Removing my topics while they are valid of Remkoolhaas

Dear User, you have deleted my topics while I am one of the people who are sitting in the Real Estate Corperate of Ymere in Amsterdam. I also have discussed with the the local residents,the employees of the Real Estate Corperate. How can you delete my topic while all this happened is true and has been taken place in the living complexes of Remkool Haas. The residents are either victim or guilty what happened in those complexes. How dare you to put those topics of Vandalism while what happened has been true even the Police knows. I am also a resident of Remkool Haas and have seen al this happening in front of my street. Those building lack safety and living standards at the moment. You are putting the real subject out of the line, you can't hide what is true. I have to complain about you of privacy breachment. You give me false allegations that I am spamming, doing vandalism, if you count that up it really looks that I am charged for nothing. My apologies you can't charge someone while what has happened is true, where do you come from the Netherlads or a foreigner country. All we want is the truth that's it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Work number1987 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Because it makes serious allegations, none of which are backed up by any source of reference. In addition it was difficult to understand and I suspect that English may not be your native tongue. If you can find robust references, especially for the racial allegations, I would strongly suggest finding a native English speaker to help with copy-editing before posting here. Also re-posting the same complaint on several User's talk page is generally considered to be canvassing which is deprecated here  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   13:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Bullet Records

I've asked for semi-pp of the page. At least one of the IP accounts is I think User:ClarkMusic - possible Clark Enslin - as the IP edits only started after I put a COI notice on his talk page. The registration of the trademark isn't in dispute but he/they don't get that existence of a registered trademark doesn't prove the existance of the record label either trading or defunct. NtheP (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

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

A Barnstar For You!

		The Userpage Shield
		In recognition of reverts to Vandalism on my user page, it's my privilege to award this to you. --Slazenger (Contact Me) 23:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - the first in 7 years and 29000 edits! Must obviously try harder!.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   16:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion - Pirates of the Caribbean 5 (2013 film)

I have removed the Speedy Deletion from Pirates of the Caribbean 5 (2013 film), see the article's talk page for more detail. Callanecc (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Jellied Eels

Dear Velella this is what I wrote to Denisarona 30 minutes ago - which you would have seen on my talk page where you added a comment - p.s. we are not just "adding in links"!! Either change them or remove them, we don't care, we are just doing a service to wikipedea visitors based upon peoples genuine interest in finding out the correct recipes which we research, and which other people have linked to.

First message - I should probably have left notes in the edits that we are doing today and tomorrow on certain Wikipedea pages, but did not feel it was necassary at the time - I am the editor of HistoricalFoods.com where a lot of references on wikipedea food pages point to - the site has moved name and domain to RecipeWISE.co.uk so all of the old links on wikipedia pointing to historicalfoods.com are now dead, the exact same recipe or article can be found on our new named website recipewise.co.uk ... by altering all the names accross today and tomorrow we are attempting to clean up all the dead links - but you keep changing them back ... ??? so either they need to be removed or changed.

From Denisarona - If you had stated why the edits were being made then they wouldn't have been reverted. Check out Edit summary for further guidance. Denisarona (talk) 13:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

My reply - Like I said, not a noob, didn't think it was necassary as the pages are all quite niche and not particularly contentious with editors. We don't put the links here, we are just helping people out by changing the link to point to the correct address, (they seem quite popular as the links show up in our analytics) while changing nothing else on the page ... but yes, I could have added something into the pages talk - thanks.

Second reply - thanks Denisaroa - we were 301 ing the new links accross but the site has now been pulled offline so the new site needs the new links put into wikipedea to be updated, we will be doing about twenty page changes (just the links). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.160.136 (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

FrischBits

FrischBits

WHY IN THE WORLD do you keep deleting FrischBits from the Frisch School Wikipedia page? It is an important part of Frisch, and it would be preferred that it stay there. If you wish to shorten it, do so, but do not get rid of any information or destroy the grammar, two things you have done countless times in the past. Your stubbornness really baffles me. Shbangbang (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Stephen Huynh

I'm afraid your bot is too sensitive. Please clarify your comment at my talk page and undo your edits to the article. Thanks. 218.250.159.25 (talk) 11:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

User 218.250.159.25

Dear Velella, please see this. Just FYI. Cheers AKS 18:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I do begin to despair and wonder whether we are just are just Troll feeding !  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

• I am bit disappointed by action of other Admin (even though the action did not involve me directly). Please see this and this. Do you want to step into the first discussion? I have raised objection as although you had rightfully reverted edits on Stefan Wong (actor), your decision was overruled. Cheers AKS 08:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Wales

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

Uniblue

Hi Velella, Could you please consider removing the speedy deletion tag on the above article.Kindly view the talk page. I would be more than happy to improve the article if the user advises how. It seems he went through all the pages that i created and recommended them for deletion. Thank you for your time and effort. regards Keithmonti (talk) 17:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't nominate it, another editor did. I simply replaced the AfD tag that you deleted. Having said that, if I had seen the article I would have probably nominated it for AfD too  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Natalie Mendoza

Hi.

Regarding Ms Mendoza, her original wikipedia page from 2006 put her DOB in 1978. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=75960549&oldid=40703290

It was changed to 1980 in July of 2010, then to 1982: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=373055685&oldid=373054951

Then in December 2010 back to 1980: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=400624531&oldid=400425583

Back to 1982 in September 2011: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=450606818&oldid=450606586

Back to 1981 in December 2011: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natalie_Mendoza&action=historysubmit&diff=465080081&oldid=459674068

TV.com puts her DOB at 1978: http://www.tv.com/people/natalie-mendoza/

This article from the Sun-Herald from August 2001 states: "In the meantime, Mendoza, who turned 23 on the weekend ...", putting her DOB at 1978: http://www.angelfire.com/biz5/beeswing/articles/mendoza1.html

While none of these are absolute, it is clear something weird is going on - the best explanation being either the actress or her people are using wikipedia as her own personal PR page. In light of this, I suggest leaving her DOB as 1978 as per the original page which ran unchanged for four years. So, either that one was correct and the date was changed when she began getting more recognition, or it was wrong and the actress did not wikipedia herself for four years (unlikely at best).

Rgds.

MMBS — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrMrBlueSky (talk • contribs) 13:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

The real issue was a date change in an article with no references and, more significantly, no edit summary. I have no idea who Natalie Mendoza is and have no interest in her age, only in trying to keep Wikipedia on the straight and narrow ! Please use edit summaries to avoid future problems  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok got it! Let me know if that's OK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrMrBlueSky (talk • contribs) 14:38, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

That looks fine by me. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:49, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

kerry katona article

Hi, sorry if that edit has caused any trouble, but I'm afraid this is a shared IP for an entire college... we did have some kind of user page set up, but we had an internet link upgrade recently that I guess must have changed our IP? random techie 193.63.174.211 (talk) 11:46, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I will keep an occasional eye on things. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Yosri Derma Raju

Hello Velella. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Yosri Derma Raju, 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. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

This one isn't mine. I merely reverted an unexplained deletion of an AFD tag. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Ekstraklasa

Hi, I'm writing in response to Your massage abou editing the article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ekstraklasa&oldid=478490871 The problem is about a number of league championschips - It's doubtless that Górnik Zabrze and Ruch Chorzów won the titles 14th times. In 1951 Ruch won the league championschip because of winning "Poland's Cup", and in the same year Wisła Kraków won the league without winning the championschip. The edition that I've linked in this message is - in my opinion - consensually, but another user is still "undoing" it, to make a impression that Wisła Kraków was polish champion 14th time, which is no true. Remarkable is fact, that in the text in the infobox says about "Most championschips", not "Most league winners". In my opinion this edition (in version that I've linked in this message) is necessary. Thank You for Your letter. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 601B (talk • contribs) 21:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. My problem when monitoring the page was that your edit at 21.11 contained no edit summary and looked as if you were simply inserting unreferenced facts. Using edit summaries does help monitoring editors greatly in understanding what is intended by an edit and thus avoiding instances such as this. In addition your edit inserted or moved <br/> , a formatting command that is now deprecated in Wikipedia because it interferes with a number of automated tools. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

POV tag

Hello I noticed you removed the POV tag in the Potato thinking it was about the Tomato genetics, but the debate was about the the phrase that is repeated 3 times in the article saying that the cultivated potato was originated in Peru, while I think it should say Western Bolivia and Peru, the debate is here and here but I think it's about to be finished. I just had to clarify that. Cheers Teberald (talk) 22:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Velella. You have new messages at RA0808's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

New Page Triage engagement strategy released

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:05, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Solihull

Re recent edits about pronunciation 1) I don't understand phonetic notation, but 2) as a child I was brought up in Solihull from 1939 to 1956 during which I encountered dozens or hundreds of local residents at all social levels. Like the other editor my grandparents lived locally from the mid-Victorian period. I have never ever then or since heard any pronunciation other than 'sole' i-hull, (nor have I ever encountered the spelling with the double 'l'). I don't dispute that you have heard both pronunciations, but my feeling is that the short 'o' version has been introduced in relatively recent years. Where this leaves a Wikipedia entry, I'm not quite sure! Flying Stag (talk) 22:51, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Always a difficult subject, as incomers (which was almost all of Solihull in the 1950s) had a variety of pronunciations. My own experience as a school-child in Solihull in the 1950s (which, as always, counts for nothing on Wikipedia - and quite rightly), that school friends from Knowle and Dorridge and Barston Green and Monkspath used the long O whilst those from Shirley, Acocks Green and Olton used the short O. I guess nether is right or wrong. Some might say posh versus local, but since both are in common use, I guess we should reflect that fact. Regards.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:59, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Fascinating! Because I was on the Shirley 'side of the fence'. The posh versus local explanation is tempting but I think not borne out by our joint experiences. Regards. Flying Stag (talk) 11:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

SocialFire AFD

All of the previous Deletion requests for my Article have been declined. The editor has been persistently putting the deletion requests on my Article even if the previous ones have been declined. Each deletion that was declined was done so by different Admins. I also hate the idea that i will be blocked because of the idiotic editor. OwenReeceBaines (talk) 22:45, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The fact that previous deletion proposals have been declined, doesn't mean a thing. If the article topic is not notable as set out in WP guidelines then it will always be at risk of deletion. For what it is worth,having looked at the article, I personally would not vote to keep it. But hey, that's just my personal opinion. Sorry.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:50, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Joshua Topolsky

HG recently reverted [1] on this article. The birth name given, however, is attested by Ref. 1 in the article; this reference appears to be a reliable source... are you happy for me to reinstate the birth name? DWeir (talk) 22:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I am happy with that. It is a pity that the IP edit provided no edit summary or any indication that the change was referenced ! Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

My Relationship with A2Z Group

I understand and am sorry for the confusion, I stay in the same city as the headquarters of A2Z Group and therefore know this organization very well. I started writing this article about this organization a few months back but lacked online references to major events/landmarks in the companies history. This is when user A2Z Group helped me with links and information. If my contribution continues to be suspect I can place all the information I have in the talk pages for the article and others can verify the information before they add it to the article. I know this would delay the updation of the article a lot but it would ensure only verifiable, unprejudiced information reach the final LIVE version of the article. Please do let me know in case I should provide any information. Willonthemove (talk) 06:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. When somebody sends me a link that tells me that he wants to be wealthy, has a career in Content Management and Web Marketing, it gives me no confidence whatsoever. I strongly suspect a serious conflict of interest here.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Velella. If the question is regarding the notability of the company, give me a day or two and I will collect all possible references about the company that proves its notability. This will also help me collect more material for the Article. And if you have questions about my relationship with the organization I can guarantee I will not directly contribute to the Article but only post all my data on the talk pages. About the content that is already there, each of those references/links will show you its 100% accurate. Do tell me if any particular section needs more corroborative references. Thanks again for your help Velella.Willonthemove (talk) 02:25, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Please review my research on one of A2Z's Business Units - A2Z Infrastructure at the A2Z Group's talk page. I will compile more data around the rest of the Business Units soon. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willonthemove (talk • contribs) 10:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Levanataphobia

Might want to check on Levanataphobia, I think the page creator was allowed to blank that page. You can not blank a page that you created if significant content was added, but I don't think a bot adding reflist would count. Sometimes huggle does not make the distinction. (been there, done that) Cheers! Jim1138 (talk) 22:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - but it was actually more complicated than that with a simultaneous creating of Levantaphobia and the potential copyvio from the original page (?) It all makes my brain hurt !. But thanks for the heads up anyway. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   22:14, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Lawrence v. Texas

I think you were a tad unkind to the person (amateur is my guess) who added that bit about the new book about Lawrence v. Texas. I added a note to the person's talk page under yours. That canned note is rather harsh for what this person did, IMHO. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 23:40, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

You may be right. Huggle is an unforgiving master - and when you have been trawling through a ton of racist garbage added to footballer articles (it is Saturday after all), the reflexes get a little jaundiced. But that is no real excuse - thanks for mollifying the message.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Cenima

I've acted on your WP:AIV report and have indefinitely blocked User:Cenima. I've also done my best to undo the ridiculous page move vandalism and whatnot. Thanks for reporting them. If there's anything I've missed that requires admin tools to fix, feel free to let me know. --Kinu ^t/_c 00:19, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

That looks good. Thanks for taking the necessary action - it defied my capability to unpick what he had created !  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

tb

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

An award for you

Golden Wiki Award Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.2.193 (talk) 16:35, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello Velella well I ask you truly Libya maintains Azawad 188.254.230.210 (talk) 16:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry - but that makes no sense to me. Can you explain please ?  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   16:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Pea bean

Further to your request at WP:EAR, in case you are having trouble locating the discussion referred to in the deletion summary, it is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants/Archive54#Pea bean. Also, see WP:UNDELETE. SpinningSpark 01:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I will pursue it there. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   08:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

ANonymous carl

Why did you deleted my message. Does this mean that you don't want to engage in a polite debate and impose your opinion. I hope not. Please do not consider this as an attack, and come discuss about the article on the discussion page. My name is Oliver, and believe me I was motivated when I gave my contribution. So please, I don't think anyone on wikipedia should have and have to power to automatically and arbitrarily dismiss someones contribution, without even proving that it was wrong, without debating it, without even reading the sources. Thanks, again this is not an attack but an invitation to a polite discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.239.254 (talk) 20:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Please read the general Wikipedia guidelines before editing further, especially those about providing meaningful edit summaries - your total of such summaries to date is one in September 2011. All your other edits have no edit summary. Regrettably I did read the references supplied with your edits which was a major factor in my decision to remove the text. Whether on my dying day I will regret wasting the 10 minutes it took to download the Assyrian discretionary only to discover that it helped not one jot, I can only conjecture. And, for the record, what I did any editor could do; this was not abuse of privilege but commonplace common sense - it is a commodity that can be in short supply in the modern world.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

You see you dismissed the whole assyrian in just 5 seconds. You haven't red it, yet you say it's not relevant. This is unscientific. If you really want to undo everything I did, you should first begin prove I'm wrong, which will be difficult since I am right (I know this is not a good ppoint, but I really think I am right). Common sense is not an excuse, and is a vague concept, not not a very scientifically good point. Wikipedia is not about common sense, because this common sense vary too much from one person to another. Wikipedia is about fact, demonstration, and scientific method. It's in the rules. So before you undo a 5 days long contribution, you should prove how the source are wrong and/or not relevant, which will be hard since those are from institution like the MIT and other prestigious universities : I don't think you can dismiss sources from those institutions. We should all go on the talk page to discuss about this.