User talk:MikeWazowski

Dark Signs?

Why Did you delete the Darksigns page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Trimm (talk • contribs) 18:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I never did - but if it was anything like the current version, which only consists of the words "Dark Signs is a best discribed as a" and nothing else, then it deserved to be deleted. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I was working on editing it as it was deleted. But thanks for explaining. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Trimm (talk • contribs) 16:48, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm still working on the page don't delete it anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Trimm (talk • contribs) 17:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know how much clearer I can be - I'm not deleting anything. I'm simply tagging the article as a candidate for deletion, since at the time I tagged it, it was nothing more than an infobox, with no claims or signs of notability, and no references. If anything, this should be a watning flag to you to either accept that the subject doesn't pass muster to have an article and you need to stop recreating it, or that you need to wait until you have the references necessary before recreating. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Still multiple issues?

Hi Mike,

Does my page still have multiple issues? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roschier_Attorneys_Ltd.

If not, I was told the message must be removed manually.

--ChristineShaw (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I see why you are asking here since it was MikeWazowski who twice tagged the article as having issues. I think you'll have better luck getting a response from him if we fix the weird technical glitch that got into your link. The article is at: Roschier_Attorneys_Ltd.. Mike, could you please check the article to see if you still think it is ad-like and promotional, and has sourcing issues? Cloveapple (talk) 19:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks Cloveapple! Not sure what happened to my signature, I have used the button in the template... But let's see what Mike says about the article. --ChristineShaw (talk) 09:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Mike

You have deleted part of my life — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.103.59.238 (talk) 18:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're referring to. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Speed deletion request removal

Hi. I just thought I'd let you know out of courtesy that I removed your speedy deletion request from the article DirectFix. I don't think it is unambiguous advertising. The article has 4 independent references. I think the article fails WP:NOTE, but as the author points out in the talk there are similar article on Wikipedia about iFixit and iResQ. If these are acceptable then I don't think it would be consistent to nominate DirectFix for speedy deletion. This is just my opinion; please feel free to request speedy deletion again if you wish. NereusAJ (T | C) 00:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Considering that the user who created the article is named DirectFix, it seems unambiguously promotional to me. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

You're right, it is incriminating. It is definitely WP:COI. But still, this article is very similar to iFixit and iResQ. NereusAJ (T | C) 00:21, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Li Shengshun

why do you keep adding a redaction to the Li Shengshun article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kusaga (talk • contribs) 19:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Because the article is completely unreferenced, and you have shown no significance or notability outside the series. I've reverted to the redirect again, but if you try to restore it, I will nominate it for deletion. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Flintstones (2013) deletion

On my article, The Flintstones (2013 TV series) it says it will be deleted - why? Can you remove the deletion or let me know ways to make the article not get deleted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by TBrandley (talk • contribs)

No, I will not remove the speedy notice. The article was originally deleted per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Flintstones (Fox Television series). Since your version is not substantially different from prior versions that were deleted (including one you did back in December), the CSD G4 tag is appropriate. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Cuttance

I can't find any mention of him at the site you linked... Peridon (talk) 19:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

The third paragraph is a direct lift from the linked page. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Change to Babylon 5 article

I noticed you prefer a season 4 poster of Babylon 5 being used instead of a screenshot of it’s intertitle logo. As the use of a screenshot of an easily identifiable element of the television show (taken from the opening credits) appears to be more appropriate in the infobox television template, and is what is used in all the wiki articles I’ve found on similar television shows, can you provide some rational for removing the B5 logo and replacing it with the poster. I’ve undid your change for the moment, as a poster could possibly be better placed in something like the article on the Babylon franchise!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minsk59 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I just feel it better represents the series - it shows not only the logo, but the entire major cast. Kills two birds with one stone. Not only that, but as an image created by WB specifically for promotional purposes, I feel its better suited for a non-free use rationale than a screenshot, which was never licensed for such use. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Question about Star Wars

When I redid my edit, I did not change the quote. But why are you calling the other edits as "inaccurate"? PRProgRock (talk) 16:24, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Your changes made such inaccuracies as saying that Anakin's name was Darth Vader as a young slave - this is wrong. You claim that "Darth Sidious" corrupted him - however, as this is discussing plot points added in 1980, this is inaccurate, as the name was not invented until the late 1990s. The first prequel was originally called Episode I: The Beginning - your change of that to The Phantom Menace in that instance is also incorrect, as are your further name changes - they are all contextually incorrect in the forms you have changed. Do not make these changes again. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, but for one thing, Darth Sidious and Emperor Palpatine are supposed to be the same character. Darth Tyranus and Count Dooku are also supposed to be the same character. And last, but not least, Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker are also supposed to be the same character. PRProgRock (talk) 17:10, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

But you have to understand context - if the article is discussing these characters in historical context, your introduction of names introduced 15-20 years later is incorrect - and will be reverted. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:14, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Daniel Ortiz

Please delete the article of Daniel Ortiz, people still editing and know is consider to delete and I know that people still disturbing so please eliminate, I'm giving you the permission to do it, because I really don't know if you need the permission to do it, Daniel Ortiz (paintball player) this is the article, I placed the tag for deletion... This guy is relevant but eliminate this article and in the future I will make a better article with more relative sources... Paintballxtreme (talk) 19:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I cannot delete articles. However, had you left the article alone, it would have been speedy deleted under the G7 criteria - but since you then went back in and recreated all the content in the article, I think you need to just let the AfD process run its course, as you've presented too many mixed messages about your intentions today. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

MERKLE ARTICLE

Sorry, I thought I kept deleting the article myself since my computer has been freezing up. I didn't realize it was you. I'm trying to add a section similar to Ernst & Young's Global Structure: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_%26_Young. Can you tell me why I can't add the offices that Merkle has similar to Ernst & Young? Zavila (talk) 20:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Ernst & Young is in a far different league than Merkle. However, even that article doesn't have a section that lists every single regional office. If you're referring to the gallery at that article, I've removed it for similar reasons. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem I understand, thanks for your help - I really appreciate your guidance. Is it ok if I add external links? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zavila (talk • Zavila (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)contribs) 20:46, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Football Ramble - Dean Windass Hall of Fame

What is the reason for continuing to delete the hall of fame section? It is referenced and is entirely related and notable when having a discussion on the podcast ---User:Murrayszymanski —Preceding undated comment added 12:51, 19 January 2012 (UTC).

Wikipedia does not exist to be a repository or backup for the podcast's activities. There is no sign of notability for this "hall of fame" outside the podcast, and it is only referenced to the podcast website itself, which is hardly independent sourcing. There is a section about the hall of fame in the article, and that has never been deleted. However, there is no place for the entire list on Wikipedia - that is what the podcast's website is for. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me

Was there any legitimate reason why you felt that the Tom and Jerry poster images didn't belong on their respectable articles? I feel that they help illustrate their individual subjects without the need for a gross over abundance of non-free material, as many Tom and Jerry shorts articles are currently doing. Sarujo (talk) 03:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Because the style guides set forth in the Animaion Wikiproject (and as seen in most animated cartoon articles) is to show the film's title card in the infobox. I just restored the articles back to the preferred format. MikeWazowski (talk) 06:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Mike, I'm not taking advice about edits from a man who thinks he's starred in Disney Pixar's Monsters Inc.!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lv123jv456 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Then I'm afraid you're stuck. The Shadow-Fighter (talk) 17:00, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

on Robert Eisner

how could I enjoy editing here. Mr. Robert Eisner was to became my first contribution; I was kind of proud of that, and I was gathering some more related info on Him. You requested the new entry to be speedily deleted – for clear copyright infringement - how could it be. Please explain it to me. Alberto Veronese (talk) 15:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Because you cut-and-pasted text directly from the Chicago Tribune obituary. That's a clear copyright infringement, and not allowed on Wikipedia - I don't know how much clearer I can make it. However, someone has recreated the article, and in a much more acceptable version. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:14, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

This is false Wazowski. Yes, Cindamuse made then the article; a great page. But it was from a small (first) - bona fide - contribution I started. What I think and saw, was an inappropriate conduct from your side. Alberto Veronese (talk) 17:10, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, right. Please, try to make that an official complaint. The fact that another admin deleted it after I tagged it (remember, I can't delete articles - only an admin can do that) shows that there was merit to the tag. You don't like being called on the carpet for adding a copyvio? There's a a simple solution - in the future, DON'T ADD COPYVIOS. End of discussion. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:31, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Film festivals

You're trying to delete pages for film festivals that have been around for years but are run by people who aren't up to date with technology. We spent all night trying to increase knowledge of these events and rather than take the time to add information to them you nominate them for speedy deletion? They have every right to be in an encyclopedia that Cannes and Sundance do but don't have studio dollars backing them and when filmmakers try to help them out, someone comes along to take it all away for no reasonn. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.4.239 (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Every page you created not only appear to have all the text lifted directly from the respective websites, but all also just so happen to have ties to the movie Strings. Copyright violations and self-promotion have no place here. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Kim Man Lui Student

I am inviting the Wikipedia Ambassadors to review the page of Kim Man　Ｌｕｉ. Please do not remove the references. The page has been ruined. I am the student of Kim Man Lui and I spent lots of time to get those references. If references in Chinese are not allowed, please let me know rather deletion　（ａｓ　Ｉ　ｄｉｄ　ｎｏｔ　ｈａｖｅ　ｔｈｅ　ｃｏｐｙ） and I try my best to look for English reference of my teacher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nofriends9999 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC) Could you please restore the page as before. You of course add notability warning at the head. --Nofriends9999 (talk) 06:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

No, I made the edits I did for a reason. Furthermore, I'd suggest you read up on the conflict of interest guidelines, now that you've admitted your own COI in the subject. MikeWazowski (talk) 06:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, I called in Cindamuse for help. Many references are in Chinese. Thanks, Kim Man Lui has thousands of students. Thanks. So we cannot write for him? FYI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cindamuse#Kim_Man_Lui_Page--Nofriends9999 (talk) 06:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC) I am not going to write or edit anything until Cindamuse says I can write it. Thanks, --Nofriends9999 (talk) 06:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

explanation politely requested

Hi Mike,

Can you please provide justification of this edit? [1]

It would have been possible to have done this, either in the edit summary or on the talk page. I think it's a fairly common courtesy to me, as a fellow editor, that you do this. In particular, can you explain, why somebody would be listed by the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Who's Who. Did you do any research yourself? Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)‎

I've generally found most Who's Who to be questionable sources, as they generally require some form of payment to be listed. I cannot speak to the Oxford volume, nor can I read it at present, but based on one line (she was a British psychologist), that's hardly enough to demonstrate notability - hence the tag. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Mike, Thanks for your reply. Who's Who does not require payment to be included but is compiled professionally. Oxford DNB is a biographical encyclopedia also compiled professionally (as per the articles on both). They both select their members based on merit alone. She's also the subject of a book by an academic (the same has written some papers on her too). I agree the article is short, and I have not read the book but if I put down some facts like she was the first woman to be awarded a PhD in psychology in Britain, the first female professor of psychology in Britain, is that not good enough? Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Oo-lone

Hi, if you're still not happy with the news sources quoted could you please delete the page in its entirety, rather than keeping a page saying it has been deleted? Thanks Jonquilljones (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

First off, I didn't delete anything, but the page has been deleted. Unfortunately, I can't do anything about the notice that something had been deleted - that's just part of the way Wikipedia works. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your reply. Could you delete this talk section so that the title doesn't get picked up by search engines? Thanks Jonquilljones (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Popcorn?

	Have a bowl of popcorn!
	Would you care for some? I've been enjoying a bowl as I watch this circus unfold before me. This suspense is terrible. I hope it will last. Erikeltic (Talk) 19:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

I found this to be both hypocritical and hysterical - apparently being shown the truth was "unconstructive". Whatever. That block was long overdue. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

editing bernhard thalheim wiki

Why are you editing this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamdhal (talk • contribs) 19:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't aware I needed anyone's permission. Considering that I removed text that was a copyright violation, I was entirely justified in my editing. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Djathinkimacowboy

Please note that per WP:BLANKING, editors are allowed to remove comments from their own talk pages and these should not be restored. And also note that users who repeatedly restore the same comment to another user's talk page may be blocked for violating the three-revert rule or harassing another user, cf. Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 21:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

However, don't you think it's a bit hypocritical of him to accuse me of posting inaccurate content on his page (which did not happen), and for him to then continually remove a simple request to prove that, while his original allegation remains uncontested? MikeWazowski (talk) 21:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

He's been having bad days lately. Don't bother him. It'll only make him do worse things. Jasper Deng (talk) 00:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

What Jasper said. Dja was blocked and is now feeling upset and ganged up on; your posts on his talk page can only aggravate him further, even if that's never been your intention... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Listen to Jasper. I had to learn the hard way. The Shadow-Fighter (talk) 17:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

why?

I went back in and posted links to his Endorsement page with Pearl Drums and validated everything I wrote about the guy with links.. What is the problem here?? He is in 2 national bands both are signed to record labels and he has national and international releases? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaoticcreations (talk • contribs) 00:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

No, you just posted a bunch of links to various primary sources, not all of which even mention the guy. Nothing you added is from independent reliable sources that demonstrate notability, which is why I restored the redirect. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:39, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is actual actual artist link on Pearl Drums - http://www.pearldrum.com/Artists/Drumset-Artists.aspx?id=683 Validated!! Here is the press release on his envolement with Inzane Records - http://keithentertainmentgroup.com/inzanerecords.cfm , if you take the time to read the 1st paragraph it says he is director of A&R.. Bonz - http://keithentertainmentgroup.com/bonz.cfm if you again take the time to scroll down the page to the pictures, thet include band members and postions..

And then there is The Chaos Agent, witch are signed to Inzane Records in the US and Bellaphon Records in Germany - Once again if you just look, it is validated.. - http://www.facebook.com/thechaosagent

The guy is real and the links validate it.. If you look at Allele's facebook pages you can validate that KEG Management is who reps them..http://www.facebook.com/official.allele1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaoticcreations (talk • contribs) 00:53, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

You've posted a lot of primary sources, and Facebook is not a reliable source - please read the appropriate guidelines for verifiability and reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for putting in an effort to find sources. Unfortunately Mike is right that Wikipedia can't use an endorsement page or a Facebook page as a source of information. What is needed for a Wikipedia article is sources such as magazine articles, newspaper articles, or books. If you have some sources like that I'd be glad to help you learn how to use them to back up a Wikipedia article. Cloveapple (talk) 01:03, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Carrie's Life With Magic

Please do not bite the newcomers, like you did here. I have reverted your edit and instead welcomed them. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but the entire "article" is a fraud - there is no program called Carrie's Life With Magic - this is also likely not a new user, but a repeat offender, as there have been a rash of these accounts that try to create fake television program histories over the past few months. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:16, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Ever heard of WP:AGF? Don't judge a book by it's cover. Tag it as a draft first, which will put it in this category, which can be purged later. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:21, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Just to point out that AGF is not a suicide pact. I often close MfDs and I recognise a pattern, here, though I honestly can't remember who the main account is. This is most definitely not a newbie... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 16:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I did a Google search on "Carrie's Life With Magic", and found zero results. AGF is all fine and dandy, but in this case, I don't think it applies - the content (not in article space, mind you, but on a talk page, where it wouldn't belong anyway) was a complete hoax. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:29, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Userspace is an even less pressing issue than article space, because remember, user's are given wide latitude to do what they please with their user space. It's one thing to react the way you did in article space, but you are being extremely bite-y by doing it in a new user's space. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:41, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, that user's gone and removed all your welcomes and messages, so I've gone ahead and flagged it as a hoax speedy deletion. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Not a surprise considering the way you treated them. Also, CSD G3 doesn't apply to user pages. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Horse hockey. This is not a new user, the content is fraudulent, and per the FAKEARTICLE guidelines, I was perfectly within my rights to remove it. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

University of Washington - United Greek Council

Hi I am new to Wikipedia and I would like to understand why my article is marked for a speedy deletion. I got the following response from someone who is trying to delete my article.

"This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a company, corporation, organization, or group that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. Note that schools are not eligible under this criterion"

How can I justify that the organization I am try to write about is an important subject? I provided a brief description of the organization and I was hoping to interview some of the members of the organization for a history section later on. You can find my article at "University of Washington - United Greek Council"

Thank you Wilsonlu (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I think you have a misunderstanding about what kinds of articles Wikipedia has. We can't host the sort of original research you are planning to do. If you want to do a series of original interviews it would be best to find a different sort of website to host them, maybe start a blog for your school's Greek history?

If you still want to write a Wikipedia article on the topic, what you need to get started is sources that Wikipedia will accept. (And finding such sources would show that others have considered the topic important enough to write about.) So to write an article here you'd need to find newspaper articles, magazine articles, or books that discuss U of W's Greek organizations. If you have sources like that I'd be glad to help you learn the basics of writing an article here. If you don't have that sort of source, then Wikipedia is not a good place for your information. Cloveapple (talk) 20:25, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

There are only two sources that are credible regarding the subject I am talking about. One is from the University's newspaper and the second one is the organization's website. There are no other sources that (I know of) that has reported on this organization. Both of the sources I named are listed and referenced in my article. I was hoping to conduct interviews on the founders of the organization to add additional information in the future. Currently, only information provided by the sources are presented on the article. Wilsonlu (talk) 23:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

If I put the United Greek Council on the University of Washington page, will that be more appropriate for my work? Wilsonlu (talk) 21:29, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Adding a sentence or two to the school article would be better than trying to write a complete article on the subject. However if all you have is a student newspaper as a source, I'd still say it's a little iffy. (The organization's own website wouldn't be a very good source for Wikipedia.) If you really really want the information in Wikipedia I'd suggest asking a school librarian for help in finding sources such as non-student newspapers, books, or magazine articles. It's sometimes surprising what you find with the help of somebody who knows how to research.

However it still might turn out that the best use of your time is to find a different web space for your information. Cloveapple (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

PRProgRock

I made one of my rare decisions to impose a block of less than 24 hours on them, as it is entirely possible their position could be right ... they're not, as you admitted, adding false information per se, just using a name for a character not used at that point in the narrative. Since that might be defensible under current policy, I don't consider it vandalism.

However, refusing to discuss and continuing to edit this way either against, or in the absence of, clear consensus is undeniably disruptive, so the editing's blockable. In the future, should they continue, report them for that rather than vandalism. Daniel Case (talk) 19:36, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - the best I ever got out of him was this section above, where I tried to explain it to him - he apparently does not understand (or refuses to acknowledge) context. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Pride Toronto Information

Mike, I would like to know why the leadership information is not required or the WorldPride 2014 information. Its valuable info regarding the date! thanks SMCKINNON (talk) 03:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)Steven

The leadership information would be fine for the group's own website, but it doesn't belong in a Wikipedia article - this site does not exist to be a mirror of your group's website. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:01, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Dennis Hollinger

Why did you remove the quote from Dennis Hollinger and what purpoes do the maintainece plates serve, neither of them appear to apply to the article (which was not self-published... I am not Dennis Hollinger)ReformedArsenal (talk) 14:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The quote is inappropriately placed - that type of promotional opening is fine for a personal website, but completely out of place in an encyclopedic article. The tags were added because you have references to self-published items - his books. The do nothing to indicate notability, just existence. The primary sources tag refers to the school websites - again, these do little to indicate notability, just confirm existence from connected sources. Until you can supply better references, these tags need to remain. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

MTV Czech, Nickelodeon Central & Eastern Europe

Hello, I would like to ask why you have removed "Coming Soon" aka future programming sections from MTV Czech and Nickelodeon Central and Eastern Europe? These two articles are edited and updated regularely by myself and I have all the information for them first hand, not only becuase I live in this area and watch the feeds at a regular basis. All of the mentioned future programming is accurate and even has been cited by the channels themselves - though there is no available link to prove it. However, the upcoming programming on Nickelodeon UK has been preserved, yet on the CEE feed it has been removed. Jack 6428 (talk) 13:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Whatever I removed was done because it was completely unreferenced speculation, which (as WP:CRYSTAL states) has no place here. Without proper references from reliable sources, I would feel no hesitation in removing it again. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Spotware Systems Ltd

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Spotware Systems Ltd to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Bmusician 14:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

While no notability is asserted in the article, I don't think it is advertising. Thoughts? --Bmusician 14:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

This one set off every red flag in my book as far as advertising was concerned - new user account (and possibly connected to the company. as they claimed copyright ownership on all the images used, including the logo), first edit was an incredibly detailed article about a company and its products, complete with a raft of images better suited to an internal article on their website than an encyclopedic article on the company - it's more focused on promoting their products, IMHO. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Roma (Character)

plz stop removing info on roma character coz people r cleanin the article up now so u dont need 2 delete so plz stop doin that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.169.211 (talk) 14:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

As the AfD was closed with the recommendation to redirect the article, I will continue to restore the redirect. You are out of line in restoring the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

but the article looks better than b4 plz leave it like that plz :)

I don't care. You have not given any valid reasons for restoring it, so I have reverted you. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

M Class planet

I just watched the episode of Star Trek: Enterprise where they said that. Here's a link to a Star Trek page that confirms it http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Class_M--94.15.42.24 (talk) 18:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Memory Alpha is non a reliable source, as it is both a fan site and user-editable. However, while the term Minshara is used in the series, nowhere is it specifically stated from a reliable source that Minshara and M-class are the same - not even on the official page at startrek.com. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Ink Global

Looking at the source and target it looks like a copy and paste. However, assuming that load of awards, which I think is undue weight anyway, is to be left in, since it's a list, how can one avoid it? Thoughts for the article creator would be appreciated, too, please. I think they are very new to WP. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd say go ahead and remove it - I'm finding a lot of copyvios or copy/pastes from the primary source already, so I'm beginning to think we've got a COI advert on our hands, anyway... MikeWazowski (talk) 15:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Do not delete my pages about the members

it took me 2 hours to make those pages. would you please revert on the notability maybe you're right but i don't want the member section on the One Direction page to became huge and filled up with info. The coldplay members all have there own page the only that's notable in the group is Chris Martin i don't even know the other band members name. User: AdabowtheSecond — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdabowtheSecond (talk • contribs) 18:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

They were not deleted, just redirected to the main band article because they showed little notability outside the group. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

your edit for stipple

Stipple is the company name so not sure how you've determined it to be a hijacking of the redirect! Any suggestions on what the page name should be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmcdonnel (talk • contribs) 21:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, if anything, you should have created a new page, such as Stipple (company) instead of hijacking an existing redirect, as you most certainly did. However, given than the company is a startup of questionable notability and the article had a very advertising tone, and had already been proposed for deletion, I'm not sure it would have lasted long anyway. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Niall Horan

You are dangerously close to 3RR on Niall Horan. Three different editors have expressed a different opinion than you. If you think the article should be deleted for notability concerns, then please file an AfD. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 22:52, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

One is the article creator, the other seems connected, and Barney was just making a WP:POINTy revert after making a personal yesterday. If you'll unprotect the article, I intend to file an AfD on it to force the issue on the redirect - I don't wish to delete it, but I don't believe the kid has demonstrated any significant notability outside the group. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I understand there is a background here, but reverting is still edit-warring - it's not a solution. Unprotected for you to take it to AfD, but please do not revert again. Best, CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Epic film

It's not vandlaism if i'm making positive work on an article. Instead of giving me incorrect warnings, I suggest you discuss my edits on a talk page. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Except you're not making positive work on it. Your edits are becoming increasingly WP:POINTy in my opinion, and you're this close to getting a block for edit-warring. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

You seem to accuse a lot of users of WP:Point as an argument, but I feel you are doing the same to boost your own definition of "epic science fiction" in the lead of the 2001 article. I've made discussions on the epic film article's talk page which you have ignored. I don't appreciate this and if you want to contribute to the article go right ahead and add citations, try to add a conversation than just deleting me based on speculation. Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Marble

I've come across a couple of pages today where your edit summary said you were redirecting the title to marble, but instead of properly redirecting you actually just blanked the page instead. So just wanted to give you a quick reminder that if you're redirecting, you need to actually put a #REDIRECT, followed by the target title, into the page. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 20:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Weird - I could have sworn I redirected all those properly. Must've been a glitch, somehow... MikeWazowski (talk) 21:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Don (character)

Umm, sir... if Don 3 releases, will u accept "Don" (protagonist of the Don series) as a notable character? Kailash29792 (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Not without reliable sources that indicate some sense of notability outside the films. Not all movie series characters are notable outside their own films... MikeWazowski (talk) 17:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Free Internet Correspondence Games Server

Hello, could you please rename my article from Free Internet Correspondence Games Server to FICGS. FICGS does get google search results. Also I updated my sources. Thanks for the help. Dimvass (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

One Direction individual pages

when will the faith off the articles be finalized seems like forever? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdabowtheSecond (talk • contribs) 19:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Cassidy Turley

Hi Mike, I worked to remove text that may appear promotion in tone or style to adhere to compliance standards and your remarks. Also removed some external links and added a few independent sources to improve references. Can you weigh in as I would like to remove the maintenance templates if that is now appropriate. Thx --Laura Wallace 21:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurawallace799 (talk • contribs)

Adding external links

Hi Mike,

My apologies. As you can see, this is my first time adding links to wikipedia. If possible, I'd like to resubmit. Popcornflix, which is listed as a source on Wikipedia, owns all the rights to these movie titles. We'd simply just like to be added as a reference for your visitors to learn more about the movies you have listed on your site. I'll be happy to resend the links in this format:

Movie title at Popcornflix (linking to the Wiki article).

Would this be acceptable?

Thank you, Popcornflix1 (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)Carol

I'm sorry, but advertising links like this just aren't allowed on Wikipedia. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Do it for Columbo

As if this were a surprise ... I'd appreciate it if you did not fritter round with this article whilst we are in mediation, Mike. I know how you cannot stay away from yanking my chain when something's cooking that doesn't even concern you ... but please leave it alone. It'll only get reverted anyway, what's the use of you sticking your beak in?--Djathinkimacowboy 04:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Dude, what's your problem? Every movie and TV article I have on my watchlist (and Columbo is one of them) has an IMDB link in the external links section - it's not a controversial edit, I was just following standard practice. I don't need your permission to edit or not edit any article, and this has nothing to do with you, so I'd appreciate you dropping the insinuation that any time we cross paths is meant to be confrontational. Go away. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

You know, you were right and I was wrong about the whole issue, and I came here to apologise as well as to let you know I admitted this at the MedCab. But I see you just told me to "go away", so I'll do that. I was only going to indicate furthermore, it's a little funny the way you keep showing up wherever I am having a 'to-do'. You picked one heck of a time to decide to go over to Columbo and fix the error, though I appreciate that you did it. It called it to my attention. So, how about this: we each go away from the other? Can you do that? I know I can, and I did it in the past, yet here you showed up again apparently to avoid a confrontation with me, right?....--Djathinkimacowboy 01:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

CoolNovo

I've declined your A7, as it's a web browser not web content. If the article were about www.herbertsfavourites.gb. where one could download it, yes, that's web content. The prog itself, no, sorry. Prod or AfD as it's not spammy in tone. BTW I don't think IMDb is forbidden so long as not used for notability. If it has been while I wasn't looking, someone's going to very busy removing it... Peridon (talk) 17:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I retagged it under A10 - seems the editor already created CoolNovo last week. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Seth Morgan Romero

I didn't mean to do any disruptive editing. I didn't know what I did was wrong. I feel the page Seth Morgan Romero has enough references and credibility to stay as a page on its own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malvinworks (talk • contribs) 21:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it doesn't at this point. Personal pages from Facebook, Tumblr, and IMDB are not reliable sources. Of the two Amazon links, one shows a self-published book (barely a pamphlet, actually) which is not a good indicator, and the other has no mention of Romero. Credibility is in short supply on the article as it stands now. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

How is IMDb not credible? Isn't IMDb more credible than Wikipedia? Ladyxlolita (talk) 19:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC) Ladyxlolita

Transcreation

Why did you delete the Wikipedia entry for Transcreation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeptiktb (talk • contribs) 22:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I did not - I redirected it to the WikiDictionary link, as it was before. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

What does that mean? Where can someone read the article? Wiktionary has none of that text in its entry for Transcreation. Skeptiktb (talk) 22:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

edits to Ian Watkins

what if you are now conversing with a reliable source? Do you class tabloid newspapers as reliable sources? Ian has always told me and everyone else that he was never in a relationship with Alexa Chung, only seeing her casually, yet because a tabloid picked up on it suddenly it's fact because it was printed. I AM a reliable source you can trust me on that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonninj1 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, no, you're not. Please read the guidelines on reliable sources - neither you nor the link you're using qualify. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for comments

Hello, you are welcome to contribute to the following page.

WP:Requests for comment/TBrandley

Thanks.

Logical Cowboy (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Ashley Blake misinformation

Thank you for your swift reply.

Your source, as you say was The Birmingham Post whose article was also incorrect. I was not in a position to personally correct their article as I was sentenced to prison, however my solicitor wrote to the editor to ask for a correction of the facts, to which they agreed. Therefore can you please remove this part the page with immediate effect. I thank you for your assistance in this matter. Kind regards A. Blake — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.200.80 (talk) 19:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but the Birmingham Post reference (as it reads right now) specifically backs up the claims in the article. Your explanation holds no water. Please do not continue to vandalize the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I have notified this user myself after reviewing the edits made and gave a warning and an overview of the rules. I personally think that you should have given more warnings before you gave the final warning. The user's edits may not be considered vandalism, but rather a Conflict of interest. Please hold off on the matter for now, and if the user continues I will take further action.

Thanks. Hghyux (talk) 20:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Who are you Mike Wazowski? I am thinking it might be someone that knows me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkd07 (talk • contribs) 06:22, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Multiple issues-tag

You have tagged the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roschier with multiple issues. Since then it has been amended with the help and input from wiki-admins. Could you now take a look at it again, and re-evaluate the tagging. Thank you! --ChristineShaw (talk) 09:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

proposed deletion of pre-popping article

Hi Mark,

My name is Yaniv Nizan and I wrote the article about pre-popping.

I noticed that while the terms pre-pop, pre-popping and pre-poppable are widely used in the lead generation industry that turns around $4.7 billion dollars annually and employees tens of thousands of people, the definition of the terms is missing from wikipedia.

My main concern is that deleting this article is indicative of a larger problem that can be thought of as a chicken and egg problem. If wikipedia can't define terms that haven't been already defined elsewhere, and others are not willing to define terms not previously defined in wiki then we are at a deadlock. In other words, someone has to go first and formalize terms commonly used by large amounts of people.

Regards,

Yaniv Nizan (212.25.110.130 (talk) 10:08, 1 March 2012 (UTC))

• (talk page stalker) Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Wikipedia is also not here to promote usage of any term, only to state facts that can be verified with reliable sources. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit war a brewin...

Mike, I just noticed that there appears to be an edit war going on at Star Trek canon. Instead of reverting, please use other methods to make people agree with your version of an article. Thanks! --Jayron32 18:24, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Already discussing it on that talk page - we're dealing with a WP:SPA who's trying to restore his own preferred version from eight months ago. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

It appears that you and the other user are in a content dispute. Labeling them as a [WP:SPA|single purpose account]] doesn't give you justification for edit warring. Also note that having a narrow topic interest doesn't make an account a single purpose account. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 17:51, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Lindsay McCaul

I think your tagging is in error because I provide adequate resource for WP:N and I took all the info from her own website that is personal in nature and found others to back up the information not contained in the official website.HotHat (talk) 05:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Cassidy Turley

Mike, I did post to your talk page earlier this week. Looks like you've been busy! I revised edit for promotional tone and also scrubbed the references a bit. I removed maintenance tags. Please weigh in if this looks good. Thanks for your help.--Laura Wallace 17:26, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to Tags Discussion on Karen Wynn Talk page

Hello MikeWasowski, Since you have made edits recently to Karen Wynn page I invite you to join discussion (if you choose to) of possible removal of "References," "Original Research," and "Improper References" tags. This is occurring on the Talk:Karen Wynn talk page. Thanks! Dianeblack (talk) 22:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Preemptive warning

In light of the burgeoning dispute between you and Hahnchen concerning Super Hornio Brothers and/or the Unofficial media category, Template:Mario franchise has been reverted to the last stable version; please read WP:BRD and take your concerns to the talk page before this devolves into an edit war. :) Salvidrim! 17:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Ghanau

It was a copy of http://hi.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A4%98%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%8A so I deleted it as that. Peridon (talk) 16:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Apology to MikeWazowski

Hi Mike, I owe you an apology. After a few weeks of reflection as well as reviewing Wikipedia policies carefully, I realized that I was wrong and also misunderstood some of these processes. While I was disheartened that you nominated the My Revenge (band) article for deletion without more discussion about it with me on my talk page; I nevertheless made some poor decisions following the nomination. I do want you to know, that with regards to sockpuppetry - some of the editors on the deletion discussion page who wanted to keep the article were entirely independant of me and I have no relationship or knowledge of them whatsoever. Indeed though, some of the editors who wanted to keep the article did have a relationship with me and liked the article, so they logged on with the specific purpose of wanting to vote to keep the article. I recognize this is not sound Wikipedia policy and I should not have had anything to do with that - but I do want to clarify that it was not me just using separate accounts to support the article, but indeed though some were friends. I apologize for that, as well as my vitriol towards you in on the discussion and talk pages. I am going to take a break, reassess what I'd like to do, and perhaps do some minor editing to other articles for the time being. I wanted to tell you that you're a great editor and a solid contributor to Wikipedia. I am truly sorry for what happened. No excuses at all, I apologize. Sincerely, Vermont Hardcore Punk (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Cash method of accounting

Hello Mike how are you? That paragraph to which you brought my newly created article of "Cash method of accounting" relates to the tax concept, whereas I am writing the article on GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). The only sentence that can relate to my article in that paragraph, which I intend to expand is "Similar definition of cash basis accounting is true for financial accounting purposes". As a practicing CPA I am quite aware of the difference, so, unless you have an argument against it, would you please gently revert your edit which deleted the "Cash method of accounting" article and redirected it into the cash accrual concept? You can also consult the sources that I brought forth. Thanks! Markerdryer (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Top Foods Monopoly Game

Why did you delete my entry on the Top Foods Monopoly Game? The article was not promotional. The information was presented in a concise factual manner. The article also included useful statistical analysis of the game not available anywhere else. The article was very similar to the article on the McDonalds Monopoly game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlovejoy (talk • contribs) 20:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Blodsrit

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Blodsrit, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A signed band with albums that are not self-released is beyond the garage bands what A7 is for. . Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

OR Academy Award content

Hi.

Please excuse my ignorance on this, but if you're going to delete the multiple award nominations lists that I've either added or ammended, why are you leaving the very same list on the Academy Award for Best Director page, which has been up since early 2008 (and was essentially the basis for me doing the rest of them)? Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Furthermore, how does this qualify as synthesis if it's merely a frequency tally? This doesn't qualify as drawing a conclusion not stated in the original source, it's merely a reconstitution of the exact same data. Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mike, just wondering if I would still be able to get a bit of a better explanation on this with relevant and equitable precedents rather than just an edit summary. And why the four-year-old section on the Director page still seems to be an exception. Cheers, Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Friendly nudge

Hello. Regarding your tag-interaction with Kmhistory recently, while your tag additions are valid, please beware of tag bombing articles. Regards —Eustress ^talk 01:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Musical B@man!

I noticed that you where the initial editor to tag Holy Musical B@man! for deletion. I have now brought it to an AFD discussion. As someone who has edited this article and tagged it before, I presume that I can consider you an interested party to this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Musical B@man!. -Aaron Booth (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/bank book, term loan, revolving credit, others

Hi Mike,

You prohibited publication of several entries I made last week -- bank book, term loan, revolving credit, etc. Forgive me for any missteps. I've used Wikipedia for years, but am new to editing. I am grateful for its existence, and certainly want to work with you and others to maintain its high standards. This is an important resource that demands high quality and diligent enforcement.

I've since read extensively in an attempt to educate myself. I've read about Conflict of Interest, neutral point of view, verifiability, what Wikipedia is not, copyright compliance, etc.

Please help me understand something. When I posted the article, my talk page (below) stated that I was involved with putting online the Leveraged Finance Primer. I do help maintain the website on which the Primer resides, and I never tried to be deceptive about this. The site does not produce a revenue stream. It has a neutral point of view. It is created by a reporting and research division of Standard and Poor's as a service to the leveraged finance community. It is meant to help that community, particularly students and those new to the industry, in understanding key terms and dynamics. The information is presented in an exceedingly neutral form, by industry professionals. These professionals are not in the business of sales or trading, but rather reporting.

We note that many terms used in the industry are not addressed in articles currently in Wikipedia. The articles are of use to the leveraged finance community. Just as importantly, they are of use to a public that is becoming -- as a requirement against the sort of blindness that caused the financial collapse of a couple years ago -- more educated. As the market changes and becomes more robust, it will be important for the public to understand terms such as a "dividend loan" to perform policing and over watch of the financial community.

There is a subscription-based website that this division of S&P produces. However, we've created this new free website especially to help educate the industry in a neutral way. On it is a "Leveraged Loan Primer" which some experts have put time into creating. This Primer contains terms which those new to the industry will need defined. This is the primary reference which we'll use in creating new Wikipedia entries.

Again, we don't sell S&P services on this site or in the Primer. It is created as an information vehicle only.

We think information on the website and in other internal copyrighted documents can be enormously beneficial to Wikipedia users.

I am working to get complete copyright information so I can supply that as needed when I quote directly or reference the site. I will have permission, but want to make sure all copyright is in order before proceeding. Can you please confirm that once this is available, that I will be able to post this material?

Again, we believe that defining terms and dynamics of this industry -- most not at present addressed by Wikipedia -- is precisely in lines of supplying the community a verifiable resource with a neutral point of view.

Thanks

ORIGINAL "TALK" PLACED ON "TERM LOAN" PAGE-- I originally created this page and provided the reference: http://www.leveragedloan.com/primer/ This is a new online source, expanding upon the hard copy brochure published by Standard & Poor's: "A Guide to the Loan Market," Copyright 2011 by Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC (S&P) a subsidiary of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. This is the most requested document concerning Leveraged Loans in the $375 billion leveraged finance community. The Primer is written by experts with decades of experience in leveraged finance. The lead writer is Steven Miller, who is Director of Leveraged Commentary and Data at S&P. Among other things, he hosts a Forbes blog dedicated to leveraged finance. He is one of the preeminent authorities in this field in the world. We put the publication online as a service to the asset class and leveraged finance community, and are spending considerable time creating, updating, and adding attribution to Wikipedia articles in this niche area of finance. Again, as a service to those who work and study leveraged finance. We find that many key terms -- such as this, "term loan" -- are not included in Wikipedia. For that reason, I created this short article yesterday, attributing it to the online Primer. We also find that some terms listed can be improved and are therefore pasting in a couple of sentences, where appropriate, to articles in order to provide the Wikipedia community with more detailed and updated info — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misterwl37 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The problem was that nearly everything you poster was a direct copyright violation - i.e. a word for word copy/paste of the material on those websites. As to whether it can be posted, it would be better if you were able to supply references to sites NOT controlled by you or your company, so that any conflict of interest/promotional aspects can be cleared up. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Mike, I had external links deleted when I tried to link out from certain wikipedia pages to sections of the LeveragedLoan.com's online primer. I thought these links added to understanding of the topic by Wikipedia users. I don't understand why my external links were omitted but those by investopedia were not, especially since investopedia links wikipedia users to its pages with advertisements. (See "high yield bond," and many other pages.)Misterwl37 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:28, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Mike, Some examples of where investopedia linked out to its site (which has ads) to help explain certain terms in wikipedia: "investment grade," "leveraged buyout," "high yield bond," "leveraged finance." When I tried to do the same, linking from "syndicated loan" to our Primer, you deleted that. I think our Primer, written by top industry professionals, offers great information to wikipedia users. Why were we deleted while investopedia was not? Thanks Misterwl37 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

PRETTYBIRD

Hi Mike,

I contested the speedy deletion of the page by leaving a comment in Talk:PRETTYBIRD. I have removed a significant amount of content and revised as much information as possible to adhere to NPOV guidelines.

Redfriday27 (talk) 23:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Page "Rémi E. Ballot"

Hello,

Following your message, I add a biography and sources.

Sincerely, Lebosscali — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebosscali (talk • contribs) 05:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Paul MJ Miller

Following an email regarding proposed deletion of the page Paul MJ Miller for lack of references. Numerous links and reliable references have now been added to verify the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximusazurri (talk • contribs) 13:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Rytmus

Please do not speedy tag articles which have interwikis, references and countless more references on their interwikis. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of "no assertion of notability". Rytmus is clearly notable, he's one of the most (unfortunately) influential hip hop musicians in CZ/SK and has appeared all over the idol shows there as a judge, I started that article as a stub because I don't have the time or energy to translate the whole article from cs.wiki yet. As for Kontrafakt, if anything I think this could redirect to Rytmus, because he's the only one who's really notable. - filelakeshoe 17:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I did not speedy Rytmus, I redirected it, as I did not believe him to be notable outside his group. While you may disagree, do not lecture me, as I did nothing wrong in my edits. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Page

Hi Mike, You deleted our page, Navigating the Product Mindset. Can you please provide insight into how we could get the page back up? Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by ULdialogue (talk • contribs) 14:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't delete it, I just flagged it for deletion, as blatant promotional pieces like you posted for your company just aren't allowed on Wikipedia. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Web Links

Mike can you please review the Scotiabank Caribbean Carnival Toronto Wikipedia page about a user deleting some valuable websites and in the process blocked my other username SMCKINNON_SBCCT I jsut choose that username not to website or group and I should have unblocked.SMCKINNON (talk) 06:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

• Hey Mike, if you connect the letters SBCCT to Scotiabank Caribbean Carnival Toronto, you'll figure out pretty quickly why I blocked that account. On User talk:SMCKINNON SBCCT there is a kind of explanation for the two accounts but it doesn't make a damn bit of sense, and one could actually interpret the events as socking. SMCKINNON, you need to consider that this is an encyclopedia, not a means for you to promote an event with which you appear to be connected. Speaking of which, I just found something else I think is interesting, but I will place that on your talk page. Thanks Mike. Drmies (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Congrats

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For helping prevent Wikipedia from being used for fraudulent purposes. Regards —Eustress talk 00:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Nice sleuthing with the sock ID here. As a cautionary note, I would remind you to beware of WP:WH, as I've noticed your edits on several pages attributed to kmhistory. But I'm bestowing this award so you know your efforts are not going unnoticed. Cheers —Eustress ^talk 00:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks... :) I'm not trying to hound her, but she's had a history of problem contributions, so I figured giving her new article a look as prudent - which is how I noticed it was full of copyvios, in addition to her own COI with the organization. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Hunger Games

At this site they have confirmed news of tracks included in the film so why is the possible tracks ludicrous. http://hungergamesdwtc.net/2012/03/credits-for-the-hunger-games-reveal-songs-included-in-the-film-links-to-listen-too/ AND HERE http://hungergamesmovie.org/category/hunger-games-soundtrack/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinhaff (talk • contribs) 09:52, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Those are fansites - they are not reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

They have sourced it from Lionsgate themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinhaff (talk • contribs) 22:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Please even report to UAA if necessary

Hello, you recently put a deletion tag on User:Classified4newspaper's page. I agree with you. It would be more nice if you would be reporting to WP:UAA, as it violates the username policy (Promotional). No need to report, I've already reported. Thanking you, Dipankan says.. ^{("Be bold and edit!")} 14:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Zenprise: Multiple Issues

Hello Mike,

Thanks for taking the time to review the Zenprise article. I have made edits to the page (removed some claims and provided evidence of others) to resolve the issues you raised. I'm appreciate and welcome further suggestions and critique when you have a moment. Thanks.

Shogrefe (talk) 15:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

re: Multiple issues usage

Hi Mike. This was a bit redundant; as per the {{Multiple issues}} documentation: "Please do not insert tags that are too similar or redundant with each other" - I'd say one of those would have sufficed! Cheers, Nikthestoned 17:30, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Email

I've sent you an email. DH85868993 (talk) 01:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Toaha Qureshi MBE DELETION

Hi Mike

Thanks for leaving the trail. I got the message yesterday that the article may be deleted in ten days and then it was deleted the very next day. I have refernces to include from credible sources. However the question is HOW and WHERE to add as ther articel has already been deleted.

Please advise,

Kind regards,

Freud

Freudmiller (talk) 13:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't delete anything, just flagged it for possible deletion - if someone added a speedy to your article later I have nothing to do with that. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:25, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Page Deletions

"I can do whatI I like, and you have shown no real indications of notability for this on its own - it is up to you to convince us otherwise on the talk page"

Seriously?..

I joined Wikipedia three days ago, read the rules, and apparently know more about this website's policy than a frequent editor who has been here for many years. Contrary to what you say, you can't simply "do what you like" on here. There are rules, and I suggest you read them before deleting articles that I have written.

Flagging is fine, speedy deletion requests are also fine, using the talk page is fine, but arbitrarily deleting articles like you have been is not, because you are not an admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghudner (talk • contribs) 03:39, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Unlike you, I do know what I am doing here. Unlike you, I know that what I was doing was a redirect, not a deletion. I do not need to be an admin to redirect pages that I feel are not notable. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Choke the Word

Hi, Mike.

You've marked Choke the Word for deletion due to questionable notability and lack of results in a Google news search. I was wondering if the band's recent nomination in Westword newspaper's 2012 Music Showcase competition (as noted here) would be sufficiently notable for a stay of execution?

Thanks!

Shawn — Preceding unsigned comment added by XON2000 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

TameraSmith

Mike,it seems as if you may have a personal problem with some of the people referenced because you are continuously "finding issues" with the articles. Are you a staff member of Wikipedia? If so please direct me to the supervior so that I can fix the issue. This is the 4th time you have been noted to have a bias against my submissions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TameraSmith (talk • contribs) 13:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

This is discouraging me from utilizing Wilkepedia as a company. If they are having such issues for good service is to provide better solutions for the problemes. I'm beggining to feel singled out for an unknown reason. Marlon Campbell is a legitimate filmmaker and all people and references are extremely I am beggining to feel you have a personal problem with the articles. The situation will be handeled. Thank you for your concern and I will update the quality of the referenced issues to meet your company standards.- Tamera Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by TameraSmith (talk • contribs) 13:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

reliable source

excuse me, but we are the reliable source. We own the name "TwinSister" under trademark laws with copyright and have so informed this other Twinsister who has repeatedly neglected to make a change in their name. They know they must change their name, but for some reason, decided not to. We have been fair and understanding and even told them to add one or two words, but they have still asked to share "our" name. This can not be done. There is only one "TwinSister" and they are form PA not NY, as there is only one "Kiss", one "Heart", one "Styxx"....you get the point. If they do not comply, there will soon be a lawsuit.It has been 8 months! blessings, linda holt of The holt Twins & TwinSister — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holt Twins (talk • contribs) 14:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

This is the link to the trademark page- http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4007:9mmc9q.2.1 This is the link to the copyright page(Logo)- http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=1&ti=1,1&Search%5FArg=twinsister&Search%5FCode=FT%2A&CNT=25&PID=XsLC_olrKAuPEvj6EHefdwl3&SEQ=20120316113432&SID=4

www.holttwins.com www.cdbaby.com/all/twinsister www.myspace.com/holttwins www.facebook.com/TwinSisterBand musicallyyours@dejazzd.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holt Twins (talk • contribs) 15:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

OptrixHD

Mike,

Can you assist me? Can you tell me exactly why our Wiki has been deleted? I understand you are not supposed to advertise companies on here, but I see companies (competitors) Go Pro on here and a company I used to work for Sensear here as well. Does the wording need to be changed? Is it my user name?

Thanks in advance,

Pam Allan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.108.22 (talk) 15:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mike,

For the moment I'm a little lost reading your message. My english is not as perfect as I wish but I keep on learning. I really don't understand all the Wikipedia rules...

... So could you help me to find the right way to avoid to be deleted.

Thank you very much in advance. Kind regards. Cool-morning-lights — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.9.200 (talk) 20:06, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

ON24

Hi Mike,

Regarding ON24, the current Wikipedia entry does not reflect the company at all. It was last updated in 2009.

Since that time, ON24 has been covered by the Associated Press, AFP, CNET, and Success magazine.

I tried to update the entry based on the below copy and citations, but I was told I was writing an advertisement. What can I do to make this current?

Thatcurtis (talk) 00:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Curtis

The text you added was unambiguously promotional. Wikipedia does not exist to create a separate marketing platform for companies. MikeWazowski (talk) 03:38, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MikeWazowski. You have new messages at Talk:Samuel H. Wood.
Message added 03:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

VQuakr (talk) 03:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

deletion of THE PEOPLE'S FILM FESTIVAL

Please take a look at the content of my recent posts. If you feel once again that this is in violation,kindly inform us of WHAT EXACTLY IS acceptable and what is not. We have looked at other film festivals and their postings and tailored ours along the same line. Please review other similar festivals before deleting our postings without a more detailed explanation instead of the general excuse you used to delete our last posts. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tptp149 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

If you're referring to List of film festivals in North and Central America, you'll notice that every other festival listed has an article, or has references to reliable third party sources - your entry did not. Thus, it was removed. MikeWazowski (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Your treatment of Kmhistory

Look before you give him templates. Check the talk page of Samuel's article again before you use the erroneous SPS tags, and make sure you're using the correct definition. He really feels bitten by you; the last thing we want is to lose him.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Erroneous? She is the one in the wrong here, Jasper. Don't forget, she's the one who engaged in lies and deception to keep a puff piece article about herself. She's brought this on herself by not understanding how things work, and denying her own COI in various articles. Her original additions to the Wood article were some of the most blatant promotional copy I've seen recently. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

She's changed now. Your definition of WP:SPS and the templating was completely unhelpful. If someone has a COI you guide them, not shove them off. In either case it isn't worth an edit war over.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:39, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Apparently the self-published tag was restored accidentally with a rollback - however, the primary sources tag is valid, and if she removes it again I will treat it as vandalism. The reasons for it have been explained to her, but she refuses to accept them. This is not my problem - until the situation is corrected, I will restore the proper tag. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

No, she disputes your concern, and I do to. Please take this to the article talk page. Primary does not mean focused on, it means non-third-party.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

There are six primary references in the article, direct links to articles written by Wood. These are primary sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:45, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Then be specific and point them out; 6 is not too many out of the 20ish or 30ish total I see.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: Gordon Swaby

I added yet another citation from a reputable source. 6 sources a few of which are from two of Jamaica's leading newspapers. He's also made a lot of radio and TV appearances. What else do I need before the messages are removed?Ojamaican (talk) 15:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Peter N Peregrine

Hi Mike,

I have made the additions you asked on the page I created for Peter N. Peregrine. Could you look at it again and see if they are sufficient? Thank you,

KingH81 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingh81 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Added several additional external citations to establish notability. Please remove the tags you placed on the entry. Thank you. Kingh81 (talk) 14:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Dick Cheech

I know this man and he is a friend of mine, I made this page for him, how to i correctly source him without being deleted, as you have proposed this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badretro (talk • contribs) 18:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Wait...

Why did you redirect the Xbox Portable page to Xbox? KuhnstylePro, his talk his contributions!

Because there's no indication the Xbox portable is a real item at this time - would you prefer I flag it for deletion as a possible hoax? MikeWazowski (talk) 15:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Palpatine

I've semi protected Palpatine per your RFPP request, due to the IP-hopping. Nonetheless you really ought to be using the talk page to give the reasoning for your side of the dispute. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

George Schindler article

Perhaps before making assumptions about other editor's intentions in creating an article (or better, to explain your own reasoning) you could include some communication on the article's talk page so that there could be discussion about what improvements are needed? Just placing "tags" and nothing else seems very counterproductive. --MrMagix (talk) 00:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Steel Panther

Hi Mike,

Why did you flag the Steel Panther article? The content I added are strictly facts and I plan to cite all of it once I figured out how to cite correctly (new to wiki). The content added has no promotional purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steelpantherwiki (talk • contribs) 01:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Look at your username - you appear to be editing on behalf of the band, which is why I added the COI tag. I did not remove any of your additions - but they do seem rather promotional. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:38, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Can't you argue that ALL fans are technically editing on behalf of the band? Can you give me an example of what you find to be "promotional?" That way, I'll know what I need to change. How can I get you to remove the COI tag? I honestly intended to add factual infomation that was missing that adds to the article. I plan to add more as well.

And are you a fan or do you simply monitor all of Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steelpantherwiki (talk • contribs) 01:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Never heard of the group before - your username basically set off red flags. MikeWazowski (talk) 02:02, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Mike, Can you please address my other questions? Sorry for the poor formatting earlier

Notice

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. The thread is Editor placing COI tags on articles and not discussing. Thank you. Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

source citings

Ah. Thank you MikeWazokski. Okay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exstraap (talk • contribs) 21:40, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Palaye Royale

I manage the Band Palaye Royale how do I go about submitting a proper wikipedia page for them? Is there someone I can contact and speak to directly? Stephanie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palaye Royale (talk • contribs) 21:49, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Best of CN

OK, enough! Why do you think Best of CN is minor? It's a block, CN hasn't done blocks for 2 years now. Plus, it's not a block that airs premieres like most do, it's a block that airs older cartoons. And this is also going to be a Cartoon Planet revival, it'll be hosted by Brak and Zorak, it'll have songs and comedy bits between shows. Andy Merrill confirmed it. It's an improvement for Cartoon Network, when was the last time CN cared for their older shows and characters, huh? And seriously, if you think Best of CN is a minor thing, there are a lot more minor things in the CN article than this.--Vasko444 (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

As has been explained to you, just because something exists doesn't make it notable. You've never provided independent references from reliable third party sources, just primary sources that mention it exists. Big whoop. As for "other things", I'd suggest you read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS first. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

KNME-TV

Hi. You edited the page KNME-TV--I changed it to redirect to New Mexico PBS. New Mexico PBS is the NEW NAME for this organization--they dropped KNME.

I also corrected broken links which are now broken again. I'm not sure why you prefer to have incorrect information up here?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmpbsjmraz (talk • contribs) 21:16, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

You do not start new articles, you edit the existing ones. And you have a COI, for the record. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to do that. I'm going to go ahead and fix those links AGAIN so they actually go to the correct page. THANKS!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmpbsjmraz (talk • contribs) 21:22, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually, no, you will not. The station's callsign has not changed, and the page correctly identifies them as "New Mexico's PBS". MikeWazowski (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

What?

What I gotta do to you do not get the page that I did?

Renan C. Nunes (talk) 23:53, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

on saving: Glenzo999

Ok, I was not aware that I saved it. I thought that i previewed it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glenzo999 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mike,

I left a message on the talk page of ToastTV asking for suggested amendments after re-editing the page - is there a particular reason that this is now scheduled for speedy deletion?

Thanks, Vicky — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vickytoast (talk • contribs) 14:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Internecine

Why was Internecine deleted? As I am director of this movie, I think I know that it is coming out in 2014, as I planned that date. I am a 13-year-old indie filmmaker, and am just trying to get an article for my film out. Nobody besides my school district Holmen School District and you know that I am making it. The film is currently having it's script written by me, and I started to be a user on wikipedia so I could post articles about my movie. If it is okay with you, I will recreate the page. FireBird Studios (talk)

You just answered yourself - the film doesn't exist yet, it's not being made by anyone notable, so it utterly fails the requirements for notability on Wikipedia. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Brickell World Plaza

I appreciate your comments, but the text deleted was inaccurate to the building description. I work directly with the ownership and those comments are negative in regards to the actual and current status of the building. I request your revisions to be undone and respect my revisions. Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lulides1976 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

How was it inaccurate? The text you removed was referenced to what appear to be independent reliable sources. I'm sorry if you perceive them to be negative, but unfortunately, you or your employers/partners do not control or own pages on Wikipedia. If you can show (through your own links to independent reliable sources) that information is false, that's another matter - but just because you don't like something presented factually is not a good reason for removal, and further such removals without legitimate reasons or sources will be reverted. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Alleyne School

Hello Mike

I have permissions from Richard to use his material.

his email is:richardstephens4@aol.com

mine is murad@tajstevenage.com

I am a governor at that school

Murad

Mortuzac (talk) 23:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

You need to go through the OTRS procedures to verify that - otherwise it will be removed again. Please also keep in mind the conflict of interest and promotional guidelines. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Brickell World Plaza

If you are not letting actual facts to be displayed in Wikipedia I request the deletion of the entire article. The facts and comments expressed by Daniel Christensen are negative and not true. The comment regarding the window panels that were temporarily protected has nothing to do with the building being environmentally conscious. I don't know the real reasons why Mr. Christensen had to provide such negative comment, but I request it to be removed from the Talk section. My intention is not to promote the building, but to mention the actual facts of what the building has to offer. Brickell Financial Centre II, as expressed by Mr. Christensen in the article, is not part of the project and his comments are negative in this regard. I hope this serves as the "neutral" explanation you requested. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.84.105.176 (talk) 00:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello! about Notability

What's the standard of Notability? --Zhwxy (talk) 02:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

There are several standards - has there been significant coverage of the department itself in independent reliable sources? A quick Google search on "Nanjing University Literature Department" shows only 5 unique results, and four of them are all from one source. So no, I'm not seeing a not to indicate notability, which is why I redirected the article to Nanjing University. MikeWazowski (talk) 02:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I konw your questioning. Actually the name 南京大學文學系 (Nanjing University Literature Department) was adopted in 2007. It's former name was 南京大學中國語言文學系 (the Department of Chinese Language and Literature, Nanjing University), or it's a major part of it, and it mainly comes from it. And also the current Nanjing University School of Literature (School of Liberal Arts as offically translated) was also mostly from the former Department of Chinese Language and Literature. -Zhwxy (talk) 02:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

208.123.30.105 and Berenstain Bears

I've blocked the abovesaid IP for 31 hours. I've decided to replace your "only warning" message with my block message even though the IP hasn't edited since the "only warning", because any further disruption after your original "last warning" should've warranted a block. With that, and with the other disrupting IP user also blocked, I don't think page protection is necessary at the moment. Deryck C. 17:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your email. I note that you have removed all my amendments (plus some made by someone else?). I am unable to cite my sources yet, as they are not published. However, there are several inaccuracies and some glaring omissions in the page as it now stands. I am the authorised biographer of George Mitchell, creator of the Black and White Minstrels and as such, I feel a strong need to correct the mistakes in the Wikipedia feature. However, the biography is not yet published. Is there a way I can at least correct the inaccuracies? Thanks for your help. Penny PennyVR (talk) 21:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding TWELP vocoder

Hi, I don't understand why you removed the information regarding TWELP vocoder. Users should have complete information regarding all vocoders in the world. If you removed information regarding TWELP vocoder, then you should remove information about other vocoders too. Otherwise, this page doesn't give complete information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.23.62.214 (talk) 23:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Vocoders

Hi Mike, You deleted much more information than I've added. The information about TWELP was located on the Vocoders page before me. I just tried to wide this information. Please return the information that was before my changing. Thanks, Alex

The Black and White Minstrel Show

Hello Mike,

Sorry you didn't like the truth about the B&W Minstrels. I was there, you see -- even though I'm a Canadian I was one of the lead singers in 2 productions, director of a professional chorus in the Liverpool version (Dec/Jan 61-62), I trained the singers for 3 productions including the Victoria Palace which ran for 10 years, sang on 2 of the LP's and in the recording chorus for the 1961 TV season. I knew everyone involved. George Mitchell did not create the show, BBC producer George Inns did. He devised the format and the total concept of having the men in blackface. Even Mitchell's obituary in The Telegraph, 29 Aug 2002, confirms this. And quoting pop psychologists about embarrassment is certainly below the standards of what Wikipedia should be all about. Why is no one embarrassed about Al Jolson? Read the Wikipedia article about Jolson. Lenny Henry's sudden announcement of 'contractual obligations' doesn't ring true. I knew Bob Luff, who was the money man behind the stage productions and also Henry's agent. He would never have compelled Henry to do the show against his wishes. If Henry's career is declining, and I don't know that, it's certainly a neat way of putting yourself in the limelight. Black performers had no qualms about working with Jolson in blackface. This whole article needs to be rewritten with accuracy. Minstrel62 (talk) 02:51, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Greg Bennett (Graphic Designer)

So what is the best way to get a listing up for Greg that is considered acceptable? Greg modeled his content after other living designer listings on Wiki. This is our first try at all this, and the process has proved to be frustrating, as the info on verifiable sources has been difficult to parse and seems to generate more questions than answers. We pulled in sources beyond Greg's own site for references - external interviews, design shows, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexdotbarber (talk • contribs) 06:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

We're No Heroes

Hi there, I recently put some work into the article 'We're No Heroes' that you have removed. It took me a very long time to do and it was without a doubt for the benefit of the article as a whole, making it very much more comprehensible and to the point, easier to read and more reliable. Please withdraw these changes and alter the article back to how it was in it's last edit. Thank you.

• update* it's ok, i have taken care of it all...removed all primary sources and made it more compliant, thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 08:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

In actuality, your edits removed a large section about the history of the group without re-incorporating that content into your revisions. I've also noticed a serious problem, in that all your edits seem to be adding poorly referenced promotional content about Jordan Andrews an his company - this is unacceptable, and I've restored the article back to a version before your promotional additions. Please discuss any further changes on the article talk page before you attempt to restore them, as this type of promotional editing is severely frowned upon. MikeWazowski (talk) 13:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

The content I added is not in anyway meant to be promotional at all, but informative and to the point. No where in my revisions is there any wording that even suggests some kind of promotional intent. The revisions I had made incorperate recent developments in the groups history and work with Jordan Andrews. Sorry for coming accross confrontational but i promise you this is not my intent, iv'e just tried to fix many flaws i've noticed within this article. All the best and thank you.

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 15:43, 30 March 2012 (UTC) 

P.S: Just a little something to help you in youre desicions to edit this article, I've personally conducted interviews with this group and the original history of this group as written in the article is not acurate nor backed up but relevant references if you notice, so my edit had removed all info that had no relevant references and also cleaned up the groups 'history' which after personally talking to them a while back i am deffinetly sure they would have not wanted included in the article as it was. Sorry again for the trouble, I hope we can come to a middle ground on this, i would very much like to work alongside you in making this an up to standard article, your help would greatly be appreciated!

Also could you please help in either showing me how to add citations and footnotes to relevant referances, what references in the article constitute at primary so we can replace this and get them up to standard. The latest edit is a compremise between the original and the latest edit. Please work with me as a team to get this up to par, I am sure after readin the above messages you will understand. Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 16:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey MikeWazowski

I never said that others do vandalism in this encyclopedia, you said that you, just say in my edits "vandalism PLEASE do not" because all the administrators and users (like you) always call me Vandal without justification, and absolutely NEVER I appreciate the issues here, just threaten me again and again with wicked pleasure.--OliverDF (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

also MikeWazowski

vandalize which here are:

1. Most of the anonymous users, and here unfortunately not attempt to identify those who vandalize.

2. Some registered users, and again here unfortunately not attempt to identify and differentiate those who vandalize, vandalize those who do not like me (I've never vandalized here).--OliverDF (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

WNH

Please refer to my recent messages to you on your TALK page, i want to clear this up and bring this article up to standard working with you as a team to make it the best it can be. so with nothing but good intentions i promise you the edits i have made and adjusted are for the best, they are greatly more acurate speaking from a direct secondary source to this group and the collective of artists involved with them as I have wrote national interviews and articles about these artists, unfortunatly not having the pleasure of meeting them as of yet! So thank you for your care however let us try find a middle ground, i am sure you will be pleased with my last edit but lets try get this up to standard now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 17:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, I understand that I was not giving reasons for my edits, which from the normal persons perspective such as yourself you would see as some kind of article vandalism, however my edits a re far from it, as stated many times now it is in the total interest of the article. There is wrong information with no relevant references, broken links, mispelled names and words, bad grammer, there has been recent developments that contradict the article of the subject and needed up dating. Etc, I'm sure you can now see I have a genuine interest in making this work with you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 17:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Spencer Sacia

Hi Mike, My username is User: HorrorDirector. I am involved in the making of the 2014 horror/slasher film "Internecine", in which Spencer Sacia is both an actor and a director. I have looked it up and the page Spencer Sacia have been deleted two times, the first because it did not conform with Wikipedia's guidlines, and the second for being a blatant hoax. Both were not created by me, and I, not trying to be rude, and not being a blatant hoaxer, am going to recreate this page. If you would like to contact me, please go to my talk page. I would also like to become an admin on Wikipedia. Is that possible?

Thank You. HorrorDirector (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)HorrorDirector

Without reliable sources that indicate notability, the article will likely be deleted again. And as a new editor, you have no chance of being made an administrator - not without a lot of time and effort, and without acting as a COI account, as you appear to be doing at this time. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Shot (Card Game)

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Shot (Card Game) to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 15:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Aaaaarrgh! Previously dePRODed - I should have checked! My conscience wouldn't quite let me speedy it as a hoax, which implies intent to deceive. Ah well, off to AfD... JohnCD (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Superman Goes Greek

It was only an April Fools Day gag XD I would have reverted it myself first thing tomorrow anyway. Jienum (talk) 19:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Templars of Kayne

Sorry, I meant to let you know that I had de-PRODded that, in fact I intended to AfD it myself, but I got distracted. JohnCD (talk) 20:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

On Paul Petrie's page

Hi Mike, thank you very much for helping me improving the page on Paul Petrie by pointing out shortcomings and potential verifiability issues.

I wanted to ask you if you could be so kind to point out a little more precisely what sections you feel need more work or what statements you think are more problematic, so that I can focus on them. I will add references to his work from secondary sources in the "Work" section, do you also feel his biography needs more work?

Thanks a lot, in advance, for your help.Best Regards
Fgep (talk) 14:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Modest Barnstar
		You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.0.230 (talk) 17:35, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Kumite ryu

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kumite ryu, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article is not substantially the same as the deleted version. A new deletion discussion is required. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Reason

Please look at WP:STARWARS's talk page to see the given reasons. Also, even if you can't find my reason to be good enough, try to look for other reasons.Lucia Black (talk) 03:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MikeWazowski. You have new messages at TheGeneralUser's talk page.
Message added 18:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Columbo

Do you consider what I had deleted are anything relative to the subject Columbo? B3430715 (talk) 17:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't matter - you do not delete talk page comments by others, especially considering how involved you were in the recent unpleasantness. Let them be archived by proper procedures. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:08, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Then archived it. Yes, I'm involved, so what, everything is there, you want it, look at the history. But how shall others continue the talk? B3430715 (talk) 18:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Inaddition, you shall also restore this and this. B3430715 (talk) 18:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Fyi

I'm guessing you already saw this, but in the event you didn't, here it is. [2] I can't say I'm terribly surprised. Oh well... Erikeltic ^(Talk) 02:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Optical Express

Hi there,

I just made a revert to a talk page (my first) over at Optical_Express - because I thought the text was libelous under Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_comments - but looking back though the page history it looks like you've taken the oppersite position previously - can we talk about the reasons for this? It would be cool if I could get a bit more of an insight into how the guidelines should apply… Fayedizard (talk) 05:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

please look at the history of this talk page to see comments deleted by MW. That tells you what you need to know.94.9.64.45 (talk) 06:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

DRAGON BOOSTER sock of Padmal?

Hello. I think you have mistaken this user here. DRAGON BOOSTER has been over 2 years now. Padmal has been known to create socks with names of good editors. He even tried to impersonate Vensatry. I'd suggest you to remove the report on DRAGON BOOSTER. Cheers. — Abhishek  ^Talk 16:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Cartoon Network Studios

Turns out Johnny Bravo Goes to Hollywood is real: Google search. (I'm surprised too.) Trivialist (talk) 02:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge Domain coloring with Color wheel graphs of complex functions

just wondering why you unmerged it???? Glenzo999 (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I think you deserve this! Glenzo999 (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

DUDE!

I am not making test edits! im merging them! SHEESH! I asked for an admin for a move lock! please stop! Glenzo999 (talk) 16:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

There is no need for a merge - they are separate subjects, there was no consensus for a move, and you should not be merging them. Continuing to do so will only get you blocked. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

Hi. When you recently edited 1978–79 United States network television schedule, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hizzoner (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

DEar MIKE:

I would like to stop this editing war with Domain coloring and Color wheel graphs of complex functions merge/unmerge. I will leave it up to someone else to merge it. Sincerly, Glenzo999 (talk) 16:24, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Apology

I am disappointingly sorry about that WP Revolution. I resigned my account temporarily, but I decided to just go with the rules. WebTV3 (talk) 21:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	With so many things helped, you should be awarded with this barnstar. "With great power comes great responsibility", Uncle Ben said, and you've overwhelmingly exceeded expectations here on Wikipedia. Take this barnstar in honor that recognition. Thanks, Mike. WebTV3 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

The World Tomorrow

Mike, Pleased leave articles on Wikipedia alone that you have absolutely no education about. I am one of the program producer's. The World Tomorrow program is not "new". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garnerted (talk • contribs) 15:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

That is not your article. Please read WP:OWN.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 16:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

There's a new message directed at you at Joel McHale's talk page

There's a new message directed at you at Talk:Joel McHale. --31Julho1985 (talk) 20:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Minecon

Dear Mr Wazowski

RE: The minecon controversy (that was a bit of a typo wasn't it) I feel that all of the sources referenced provide ample evidence that the fall-out was a notable part of the event. The information is drawn from secondary sources of proven longevity and reliability. Both PC Gamer Magazine and Edge magazine are substantial and notable publications. Secondly I do not believe that the notability or otherwise of the podcast in question is relevant to the issue at hand. It has already been established by the article that Notch is notable as was MineCon, therefore it merely needs to be demonstrated that the events formed a notable part of minecon, not that every single one of the protagonists are individually notable. The sources are sufficient to establish this, indeed edge magazine not only published a number of articles but also included it in their weekly round-up of notable news and their yearly round of of indie gaming related news which largely discussed minecraft.

I hope you understand my position more clearly now and if you have any suggestions of potential refinements to this section they would be very welcome.

Many Thanks

Dispute resolution notice

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 "The Black Album/Come On Feel the Dandy Warhols". Thank you. --Neuroticguru (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

DisneyCSIfan socks

I see you've been following the various socks of DisneyCSIfan. I caught up with a couple more, plus the underlying IP and filed a new report this afternoon. I thought I'd let you know, just FYI. --Drmargi (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't surprise me... MikeWazowski (talk) 20:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Checkuser just confirmed, but he/she has gone quiet while the SPI wheels grind at the pace of an iceberg. They'll probably abandon this account before it is blocked and be back shortly with a new one. --Drmargi (talk) 16:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Aaand we're blocked, but not the IP. They'll be back. --Drmargi (talk) 17:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Chitti (character)

You would, of course have a reason for redirecting it despite it satisfying WP:GNG? Secret of success (talk) 05:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

You know, deleting messages posted on your talk page that oppose your views does not help your cause. Messages are always saved in your page history in case you're worried about anything. In the meantime, I kindly ask you to discuss your actions at Talk:Chitti (character) first and then a unanimous conclusion can be made on what to do with the page. Until then, do not blank and redirect the page. Thanks. EelamStyleZ talk 22:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Well done my friends, I hope he agrees. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lolahp2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lolahp2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have questions, please post them here.
• I will automatically remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please ask an admin to turn it off here.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 13:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LolaBunny.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:21, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Berenstain Bears

Mike, I'm wondering whether you are being too hard on User talk:208.123.30.105. My impression is that this is a child who is editing in good faith, yet you started with a level 3 warning. Recently on List of Berenstain Bears books the editor removed his/her own edit. I have added a welcome message with a link to advice for young new users. RockMagnetist (talk) 16:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

That editor is an IP hopping vandal who has disrupted the article MANY many times over the last year, changing IPs a lot... it may have been the first time I warned that specific address, but it was NOT the first time the editor had been warned. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I see what you mean. It's an odd combination of childish interests and internet sophistication. RockMagnetist (talk) 05:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Lolahp2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Lolahp2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:LolaBunny.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Tron2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Tron2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

MADtv

Could you please explain how the series had no connection with the humor magazine? I've always thought it was based on the magazine. - PRProgRock (talk) 15:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

No one's saying it had no connection - this is the problem when you continually change things based on something you're obviously don't know about. There is a distinct difference between your blanket "based on" version to the factual version about the name being licensed. The makers of the Magazine had no input into the show, and apart from one or two instances (noted in the article), the show was *not* based on content from the magazine. I'm sorry that you appear to not be able to tell the difference, but the added detail about the licensing of the name is a necessary point, as the two ways to describe the connection have two different connotations. Your version does not give a true picture of the situation, but the original wording does. Do not change it again. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

So, MADtv is not an adaptation of the issues, it is just inspired by the magazine in terms of humor. Am I right? PRProgRock (talk) 02:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Look, I understand why you are so angry. I'm not being rude, I'm suggesting something. Can you PLEASE stop chasing me around Wikipedia? Let someone else deal with me, okay? PRProgRock (talk) 02:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not angry - you just refuse to understand why your edits are problematic, and you continue to edit war, something you promised you would not do when you were unblocked. You're just going to get blocked again if you keep this up, you know. MikeWazowski (talk) 03:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Agents of Secret Stuff (2010) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Agents of Secret Stuff (2010) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agents of Secret Stuff (2010) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. 117Avenue (talk) 03:15, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Friendly question

I was just wondering, did you get your username from Monsters, Inc.? PRProgRock (talk) 17:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Dude, what do you think? The Shadow-Fighter (talk) 22:43, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agents of Secret Stuff (2010)

I have no idea what kind of shape the two previous versions were that had those two versions deleted,[3][4] but the current version... though it started off as pretty crappy,[5] has gone through some improvements.[6] What was nominated as a 93-word unsourced stub, is now somwhat better than when I found it. You are invited to revisit the article, and the above deletion discussion. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:35, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion?

I noticed that your main user page has been vandalized several times. I would like to suggest requesting permanent protection of your main user page. I'm only trying to help, no offense intended. PRProgRock (talk) 02:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Please try NOT to chase me around this site. PRProgRock (talk) 16:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Please try to follow the rules, not edit war and complain when you are correctly reverted, and generally try to understand WHY people are reverting your contributions. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Syfy.png)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:29, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Spy vs. Spy

Listen, Mike, have you even READ the more recent issues of MAD Magazine? Since at least 2000, the issues have shown Spy vs. Spy in full color, and from what I can tell so far, Peter Kuper is the only MAD artist who has drawn the Spies in full color. PRProgRock (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Boundless Saga of Love...and the Endless Wait

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Boundless Saga of Love...and the Endless Wait to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question - there is not doubt promotional intent, but G11 is for pages actually written in a promotional style. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:14, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Movim

I have left you a message on the talk page. Please let me know if there is anything in particular that is missing on the page. Etenil the destroyer (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Spy vs. Spy...again

Listen, Mike, have you even READ the more recent issues of MAD Magazine? Since at least 2000, the issues have shown Spy vs. Spy in full color, and from what I can tell so far, Peter Kuper is the only MAD artist who has drawn the Spies in full color. PRProgRock (talk) 15:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

See this link, and read the list VERY carefully, and then you will understand that info about the strip being in full color since Peter Kuper's inception. PRProgRock (talk) 15:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

thanks mike for helping.

thanks for undoing that bad edit on me page. i would have done so next time i was signed in. but thanks to you it get removed sooner.

i just don,t get why some users do that. i know sometimes i make mistakes or do some edits that some people don,t think are right. but there no need really for the way that ip user acted the way he or she did. but thanks again.

--Iniced (talk) 20:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)