User talk:Mangoe

Archives

no archives yet (create)

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by .

DYK

On 15 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Smith Point Light, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genealogical relationships of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom

As this article says "This page is intended to reflect the page Genealogical relationships of Presidents of the United States." I am notifying all those who !voted in the AfD for that article about this AfD discussion. Dougweller (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SchuminWeb

Thanks for the notification - I'm not sure how much I can add beyond what I stated at the RFC but I'm more than happy to make a statement, which I'll do later this evening. Regards, Giant Snowman 17:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interest in Cohen/Cruse Ruse

Could you give me any information to solve this mystery? Also why did User talk:Alexandria deleted "Jonathan Cohen (vintner)"in 2011? Is there any way to recover the deleted article? Thanks Fujix100 (talk) 23:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)1720 Fujix100 18 December 2012[reply]

New Testament Christian Churches of America

I've reverted him once - he's deleting material claiming dead links, but he's obviously not attempting to find replacements. Dougweller (talk) 19:32, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the comment that a lot of this material is dated is probably correct. I don't have the time to research it this weekend (something about church, hmmmm) but there does need to be some follow through. That said, his approach is not the right way. Mangoe (talk) 19:34, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

..

Merry Christmas to you and yours
Dougweller (talk) 13:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SchuminWeb

Resolved by motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case that:

The accepted case is hereby suspended pending SchuminWeb's return to editing. SchuminWeb is instructed not to use his administrator tools in any way until the closure of the case; doing so will be grounds for removal of his administrator userrights. Should SchuminWeb decide to resign his administrative tools, the case will be closed and no further action taken. Should SchuminWeb not return to participate in the case within three months of this motion passing, this case will be closed, and the account will be desysopped. If the tools are resigned or removed in either of the circumstances described above, restoration of the tools to SchuminWeb will require a new request for adminship.

For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this

Disambiguation link notification for December 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Washington National Cathedral, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frederick Hart (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) 12:41, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page on Cacique Cheese

I noticed your comments regarding the "starter page" that I had on Cacique Cheese. As you noted, its trade secret suit was considered a landmark verdict in the food industry and deserves WP coverage. As noted in my comments, I have no direct affiliation with the company, but thought it deserved to have equal footing with several other companies in the cheese manufacturing segment of the food industry, which I work.

Best regards, Jim Delijim (talk) 17:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be glad to help with the article. Regarding the trade secrets case the suit involved Cacique and Stella Cheese Company, who had launched a hispanic cheese line called "Estrella Cheese" in 1993, under the direction of several ex-Cacique employees. Prior to 1990, Stella had been a division of Universal Foods Corp. of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. [Source: The Milwaukee Sentinel, Feb. 2, 1993, "Stella Foods at the top of the Italian Cheese Line", by Larry Engel]. The $24 million judgement is considered "the largest in food technology". [Source: Los Angeles Times article listed below].

The following Los Angeles Times article details the case:

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/12/business/fi-51551

The court of appeals verdict is at the following URL:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1217467.html

Stella Cheese was subsequently acquired by Saputo Cheese Co. in 1997. [Source:Hoover's Company Profiles: Saputo, Inc].

http://www.answers.com/topic/saputo-inc

The case really is a facinating one, especially since I am familiar with several of the people involved on both sides of the case (I work in the Food Industry).

Let me know how I can help from here.

Thanks and best regards,

Jim Delijim (talk) 18:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I took a "first stab" at the article, feel free to edit to meet WP standards.

Thanks and best regards,

Jim Delijim (talk) 23:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "talk:Paul Krugman".

Guide for participants

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:

It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:

It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:

Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~".
If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 07:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Krugman

FTR, I am substantially in agreement with your revised remarks at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#talk:Paul_Krugman. I wish I could see a clear way forward.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 22:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Loanwords categories?

Hi Mangoe. Whatever happened with your CfD to delete all the loanwords categories? It appears that there was consensus to listify and delete, but somehow these categories never got deleted.

I noticed this as a result of the current CfD proposal to delete the Greek loanwords category. You might be interested in that discussion.--Srleffler (talk) 02:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Catechism

Sorry mate, I tried to twinkle-revert that last POV edit at the same time as you. Looks like yours actually worked and mine ec'd. Hope I didn't break anything. I'll keep an eye on it too. Stalwart111 03:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lutheran reappearance

I deleted it as A7 as the article was rather different. Nice catch, however you found it... Peridon (talk) 12:26, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pure dumb luck. I happened to be looking at categories of churches by denomination and clicked on it as an example. Mangoe (talk) 13:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confused on why you withdrew the AfD in favor of a prod, though... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because it looked (from my non-admin perspective) as though someone had simply recreated the old article. I wasn't aware of the previous deletion until the usual AFD walk-through prompts didn't appear. Mangoe (talk) 14:25, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vulcan facade

Consider yourself Vulcan Death Grip-ped over that comment. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FCAC entry

Thank you for your entry in the Talk:Financial Consumer Agency of Canada page. I just thought I would let you know that I responded to it (my aapologies if I am not following Wikipedia user etiquette - I'm new to this), and I think it's important to explain that, while there may be an apparent conflict of interest given that all the contributors to the FCAC page have been employees of that agency, we have all tried to be neutal and objective. Furthermore, the possibility of conflict is outweighed by the benefit to readers from the information contained in the article, because FCAC enforces provisions that protect consumers of financial services, and promotes financial literacy.

We would welcome editing and addition to the article by non-FCAC associated Wikipedians, but so far, none have done so. Scott Bury (talk) 17:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]