User:BD2412/Archive 004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
By topic (prior to June 1, 2009):

Dated (beginning June 1, 2009):

Blacks != African Americans[edit]

Please refrain from mindless mass edits like this -- black people in Brazil are not "African American". Jpatokal (talk) 08:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

  • You are correct, that was a mistake on my part. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:50, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Blind reverting[edit]

I started a discussion. Please join the discussion. Don't revert blindly. You cited a discussion from 5 years ago. Guess what. Consensus can and does change. You ought to work with me, rather than initiating an edit war. I will not join you. Instead, I will get some help. Jehochman Talk 14:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I've taken this to the fringe theories noticeboard. [1] Jehochman Talk 14:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Please assume good faith and do not accuse a fellow editor of "blind reverting", especially when consensus was cited in support of the reversion of a previously undiscussed move. I note that once you began an actual ex post facto discussion, your proposed title was swiftly rejected. bd2412 T 20:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Please be more careful when changing links with AWB[edit]

Your recent AWB work with fixing links to disambiguation pages has been replacing a link to GMC Yukon XL with a piped link showing as "GMCYukon" (without the space). In addition to that error, any time the Yukon XL is noted specifically it is meant to be distinct; saying just "GMC Yukon" implies the Tahoe-based truck, not the Suburban.

I have reverted your changes, and for the sake of simplicity and clarity now and in the future I've changed GMC Yukon XL to redirect to Chevrolet Suburban as it was originally intended, since any link to that is intended to go there, and any reader searching for it specifically will be looking for the Suburban-based vehicle.

Thank you. --Sable232 (talk) 16:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks for letting me know. The redirect will save a lot of time. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

AWB Stripped all of my Bold[edit]

I'm new to Wiki and I've written just one page ( I'm trying to do things correctly. I am confused regarding your AWB edit of my page. I do appreciated your disambiguation and improving my links. What I don't understand is why you stripped all of the bold text from the biography. I was using bold to accentuate the main points and to allow a reader to skim. I didn't feel that it was excessive. I un-did your edit and with it your disambiguation. Could you please explain to me why all of the bold text was stripped with AWB. I've seen other pages where abundant bold text is allowed. Perhaps there's a bug in your bot???

Could you kindly tell me if there are any specific rules on Wiki regarding bold text. I was unable to find specific guidelines myself. Here is a reference to your edit:

(cur | prev) 04:13, 8 September 2010 BD2412 (talk | contribs) m (58,539 bytes) (Fixing links to disambiguation pages, improving links,
other minor cleanup tasks; remove excess bolding using AWB) (undo)

Kind regards

Pariah —Preceding unsigned comment added by PariahCarry (talkcontribs) 23:41, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...Is there anyway to automatically change the bolded text into italics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by PariahCarry (talkcontribs) 23:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I didn't delete the bolded text automatically, I did it by hand. bd2412 T 00:23, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Got it. I re-formatted it based upon the above link changing bold to italics for emphasis. If you get a chance, please let me know if alterations are needed. best wishes..PariahCarry (talk) 01:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I fixed the remaining disambig links. Looks fine now. bd2412 T 01:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


I noticed that you were working on links to the Hittites. The link you provided however is a page about the wrong time period. The 18th and 19th dynasty materials should link to the Hittite Empire, which for some reason was renamed History of the Hittites by someone. The Hattians page you used is referring to the wrong time period for these articles (predates the events by more than a 1000 years). Cheers --AnnekeBart (talk) 23:57, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll fix it. Thanks! bd2412 T 00:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


Hey, I've been really busy the past few weeks and it's not getting any better now that school's back on. I haven't been able to devote much time to editing recently. If I ever get a break, you can expect me to get back on that train. Great job, though! You guys have moved really fast. –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 16:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks! Cheers. bd2412 T 16:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Automated editing[edit]

Hi BD2412! At least one of your edits seems to introduce a redirect in a hatnote instead of a link to the proper disambiguation page, in the article Arad, Israel. Please be more careful with automated editing. —Ynhockey (Talk) 20:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

  • This is not an error, this is an intentional redirect as mandated by policy at WP:INTDABLINK, to prevent the page from showing up at the list of pages requiring repair. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing the guideline to my attention. I'm wondering though if there isn't a better technical way to avoid these links showing up as requiring repair. For example, a hatnote template that would cause the bot to ignore the links inside of it? Maybe I should ask at the guideline's talk page. —Ynhockey (Talk) 22:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
That wouldn't be of much help, since many disambiguators work by hand rather than by bot (and, even after a bot run, they check stray remaining links to see why they didn't get picked up). This method has the added benefit of alerting users that the page to which they are being taken by the link is indeed a disambiguation page. bd2412 T 22:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Have you seen...[edit]

...this? --Auntof6 (talk) 00:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Disambig pages[edit]

Now that I have gone through most of the "see also" links on disambig pages, I am going to generate a new list of links from disambiguation pages to other disambiguation pages, as you suggested. It will be in the subpages of User:RussBot/Disambiguation pages with links/from disambiguation pages, unless and until you want to move it into the project namespace. I didn't want to overwrite the pages you are working on now. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I probably will move them over the existing pages, since there's no point in going through large swaths of pages that are already fixed. bd2412 T 18:25, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Wow! Only 1,363 links found, compared to over 18,000 on the old list. I hope I did it right! --R'n'B (call me Russ) 01:35, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
That does seem suspiciously short. Well, let's have a look. bd2412 T 01:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
A more accurate report is now available. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Undo speedy deletion?[edit]

BD, it's been a long time since we talked. I just signed on and found that a 5 year old article Free Dominguez was deleted as a speedy deletion, without discussion. This is a 5 year old article that has had contributions from a number of different editors. The article cites a couple of third party reviews, notes several albums issued by an established (though now defunct) label, and her participation in notable band. The deletion also created about a dozen red links in other articles which linked .

I have no objection to someone putting this up for AFD (although I think the article has merit), but using the speedy deletion mechanism on a long-established article just is not right.

I would ask that you restore the article. -- DS1953 talk 20:51, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, but please provide sourcing and indicia of notability. It is certainly a likely deletion candidate as it stands. bd2412 T 21:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. You're right it needs work, but I couldn't fix what wasn't there. -- DS1953 talk 20:16, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

History merge mess[edit]

I don't think it was a particularly good idea to interleave the history of the page with the history of the talk page. Of course, since fixing would take forever, I'm not going to undo it, but you shouldn't do that in the future. It would've been better just to think of a neutrally-titled redirect to Hurricane Katrina and put the history there, with the talk page there on its own. However, please do accept my thanks for restoring the GFDL-significant edits (a necessity the closing administrator apparently overlooked). –xenotalk 14:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I see no problem with it whatsoever. It shouldn't take more than a few clicks here or there to find a particular point from the article history. bd2412 T 14:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
The attribution notes will be somewhat inaccurate ("see this page's history for attribution"; meanwhile a bunch of the edits are irrelevant talk page edits). And now it is not possible to view a series of diffs for either page, since they are will be polluted by the intermediate attendant page's edits. But again, not a disaster, just a mess. –xenotalk 14:44, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Getting to those. bd2412 T 14:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
You should mention that you've interleaved the pages, and a bunch of the edits do not represent article edits. –xenotalk 14:49, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

← I see maybe you're about to attempt a fix [2] - do note that these concerns will probably never come to fruition, so don't worry about it too much. Unmerging will be a huge PITA. My primary goal here was just to prevent this kind of merge being done again in the future. If you've already unmerged the edits though- thanks =) –xenotalk 15:08, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Done, turned out to be only a minor PITA. Thanks! bd2412 T 15:36, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
CopyClean Barnstar.png The Attention to Attribution Barnstar
For your diligent attention to attribution concerns, please accept this as a small token of my appreciation. –xenotalk 15:26, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of pages/redirects within project space[edit]

Wikipedia:Templates with red links/2007/Politics and Government - done. EmanWilm (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates with red links/2006jan25-1 - done. EmanWilm (talk) 16:48, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Page deleted accordingly. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Update Count on Sept. Dab page[edit]

Hollo, I notice you update the numbers when you finish a page, should all link-repairers (like myself) do the same, or do you have that covered? The Interior (talk) 00:43, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I do it when I see that the last editor to finish a dab hasn't. In theory, everyone should do it, but I have no problem catching the count up. bd2412 T 00:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
cool, I'll start doing my own. Some of these pages are far beyond my ability, especially "Freedom". Wow, that one's a doozy. The Interior (talk) 01:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I've been trying to chip away at it, a little at a time. We seem to have imperfect articles to match some of the concepts being expressed. bd2412 T 01:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I skipped most of my "Intro to Philosophy" lectures at school. The Interior (talk) 02:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, there's a disambig link on the fully protected Ayan (film) page. Could you jump in and change it? I think it should go to [[Congo (region)|Congo]]. It would let me close out Congo. Cheers, The Interior (talk) 03:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Done. :-) bd2412 T 03:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Wicked awesome. The Interior (talk) 04:08, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Help in a debate[edit]

There is a year long debate about the status of Kosovo War - is it a part of Yugoslav Wars or not? You can find it here: (

I was hoping you or someone else more qualified can finally bring a conclusion to it so that the matter can finally be put to rest. Thank you in advance.--Justice and Arbitration (talk) 12:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Great month[edit]

Disambiguation Barnstar Small.png The Disambiguator's Barnstar
The Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who are prolific disambiguators.
For fixing a ton of links this month and tackling a whole host of very difficult dabbed articles. --JaGatalk 08:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! bd2412 T 14:14, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


Good job winning the Disambiguation Challenge this month; it's about you got your name at the top of the leaderboard! (And it's amazing that Woohookitty has fallen into second place for two consecutive months; that hasn't happened since June 2009!) --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I think she just held back to encourage others to get into it. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:56, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Yep congrats! --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 05:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I have been made a Reviewer without my knowledge[edit]

I have been made a Reviewer without my knowledge, the first I knew of it was when I looked at my preferences to see my number of edits. Could you please remove this right. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 09:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

According to User list this was done on 2 September 2007 at 13:25 before my first official edit with this username on 2 September 2007 at 13:29. Also AFAIK there was no user right of Reviewer at that time --kathleen wright5 (talk) 10:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC) .

Seriously, you're getting really annoying.[edit]

Do you annoy other people on this website like you annoy me? Seriously, stop being so irritating. By irritating, I mean going into my contributions and reverting my edits for stupid reasons. Sure, not all whites in America are citizens of the country. Boo Hoo. Get over yourself.

The Universe Is Cool (talk) 06:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

  • Basically, then, you are acknowledging that you are knowingly adding incorrect information to the encyclopedia by adding your preferred terms. bd2412 T 14:08, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect? What are you talking about?

The Universe Is Cool (talk) 19:09, 9 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

  • You acknowledged that "not all whites in America are citizens", yet you persist in changing "Whites" (which encompasses non-American whites) to "White Americans". You have also provided no evidence that "White Americans", "Caucasian Americans", or "European Americans" are commonly used terms. Of course, "Europeans" can be of any race, and Whites can have entirely non-European origins, such as the Middle-East and parts of India, and the Ainu of Japan. The strangeness of your collocations makes them instead appear to be some kind of attempt at hyper-political correctness. bd2412 T 19:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You don't mind me saying "Black Americans" or "Asian Americans", but God forbid I say "White Americans" or "European Americans". I have typed "White Americans" in many other demographics sections; no one else cares. What's your problem? Just leave it the way it is. You're making this more complicated than it needs to be.

The Universe Is Cool (talk) 21:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe is Cool

  • The Census, which provides the data we use for these articles, uses the categories of "White", "Black or African American", "Asian", etc. To change the terms used in the articles to characterize them as something other than what the Census has counted is putting flatly inaccurate information into the encyclopedia. As for "European Americans", the phrase is demographically meaningless and misleading. I have already explained that Europeans can be of any race, and "white" people can come from places other than Europe. It is irrelevant that you find inaccurate wording to be more appealing. bd2412 T 00:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Um...You do know there is an article for the term "European American", right? The term isn't "demographically meaningless and misleading". Again, you're making this more complicated than it needs to be. A European American is an American of European descent. An African American is an American of African descent. Etc, etc. My wording is not inaccurate. The Universe Is Cool (talk) 16:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

Federal Building, United States Post Office and Courthouse (Hilo, Hawaii)[edit]

Hello, I ran across this, which describes the same building I took a picture of and added infobox and redirect from the NRHP listings. So I updated the NRHP pointer to redirect to yours, and merged in my picture and infobox. Also merged in location and links to nearby sites. I am not an architect however, so not sure of the style terminology or how those should link. If you have a minute you might want to take and make sure I did not do too much damage. W Nowicki (talk) 18:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll have a look. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:03, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

United States Post Office (Phoenix, Arizona)[edit]


This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of United States Post Office (Phoenix, Arizona), and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

This material is originally from the U.S. General Services Administration, and is in the public domain. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for creating a boatload of work for me. Seriously. Not being sarcastic. :) I always wondered how that was a redirect. --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 06:15, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

  • I'd pitch in, but I have an AWB issue. bd2412 T 13:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Legal subject[edit]

What's your opinion here? Uncle G (talk) 14:10, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Merge into CM/ECF. No reason to entirely delete accurate and useful info that can be covered in a legitimate article. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Seriously...STOP IT![edit]

You're just reverting my edits to be annoying, and you're doing a very good job of it.

Why the hell do only care about the terminology for whites?

I don't know you, but you're getting so annoying to the point where I feel that I hate you. I'm being honest. Every time I see that you reverted my edits, I get tense.


The Universe Is Cool (talk) 21:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

I've already explained to you several times that the U.S. Census data that you are misrepresenting does not indicate the geographic origin of the white people on which it reports. bd2412 T 22:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

What about other groups?! You only care if I use "wrong terms" for whites, but not for blacks, Asians, or any other group! What the hell?!

The Universe Is Cool (talk) 22:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

The U.S. Census intentionally uses the phrase "Black or African American" in recognition of the fact that there are black people not of African descent. There is plenty of scientific literature to support the use of "African American" in this way, and the same scientific literature (including the U.S. Census itself) supports use of "White" or "Caucasian" to identify people who, whatever their background, self-identify and are commonly identified as White. Do you count Israel, Afghanistan and Siberia as part of "Europe"? What is your proof that other people do, or that every use of "White" is intended to exclude non-European whites? I am now expressly requesting evidence to back up the assumptions necessary to support your position. bd2412 T 22:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The social definition of "white" is a person of European descent. The Census definition includes Europe in its definition of "White", so there is nothing "wrong" with referring to whites as "European Americans" because the general public commonly thinks of white Americans as being exclusivity of European descent.

I'm sure that if you ask any person if he or she thinks Middle Easterners, North Africans, or Central Asians are white, they will most likely say no. Again, we commonly associate only European Americans as being white.

The Universe Is Cool (talk) 22:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)The Universe Is Cool

What you are "sure" of is irrelevant. Please provide published sources for your claims. I am curious as to what ethnicity you think the general public would ascribe to Israelis, and to Russians from east of the Ural Mountains. bd2412 T 22:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The Choir (disambiguation)[edit]

One doesn't contest proposed deletions by removing the template, unless you're an admin and it has been agreed to remove the template. Since I placed that template there minutes earlier, I can't see how that's possible. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Are you at all familiar with Wikipedia:Proposed deletion? I suggest you go read step two on that page. bd2412 T 19:29, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry. I should have add an rfd instead of the prod. Thanks for pointing that out instead of fixing the problem. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
The problem was that a page was nominated for proposed deletion which should not be deleted at all, because it complies with a policy that is absolutely necessary for the proper functioning of our disambiguation efforts. I fixed that problem by removing the tag. bd2412 T 19:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Everything you write in [3] is true of a page that does not contain the phrase "(disambiguation)". You have not made your case and I quite frankly think that you don't understand what you're saying. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Wrong. A page that does not contain the phrase "(disambiguation)" would not show up on the "what links here" page as redirecting through a "foo (disambiguation)" page. In any case, your opinion about whether I've made my case is outweighed by the measured and experiences opinions of those who acknowledged the necessity of these redirects and their use in the discussion. Just to be sure you understand, I will now bestow disambig vision on you. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Experience of a bunch of people who haven't tried it another way. Makes no sense to me. I have removed the two pages from that disambiguation page so your bot won't bother me any longer. And if pages without "(disambiguation)" don't show-up as disambiguation pages then please explain this. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:47, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Look at Harley 1775. Does that link need to be fixed or not? bd2412 T 03:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


I just came across the Katrina alternative theory article splits, and I think it works better that way. One of my major problems with the old article is that it was just a dumping ground for fringe theories, which I think ran counter to FRINGE. Splitting, in that case, solves that problem. The quality of sourcing is much better too! Sceptre (talk) 14:22, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Skarlet[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Skarlet has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, no indication of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 13:28, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Please note that Skarlet was initially created by me as a disambiguation page at the title Scarlett (see here), then merged by me into Scarlet here, then turned into an article on the current subject by an anon, here, and thereafter moved to Skarlet by another editor, who also recreated the earlier disambig page at that title. I suggest merger of the edit history of Skarlet back to Scarlett, in compliance with the GFDL. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:38, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


Could you please change back the Stockman article to Stockman (disambiguation) — and then return the Stockman page to its original usage for the Australian Stockman (which dates back to July 2005).

The change from Stockman to Stockman (Australia) was suggested, earlier this year, by anonymous user (who was later banned from editing Wikipedia for doing the same thing to other Wikipedia articles — see User_talk: Although only wanted the change (from Stockman to Stockman (Australia)) the move was made against consensus (as can be seen on the talk:Stockman (Australia) page.

Stockmen are an important part of Australian cultural heritage and history, and deserve better than to be only able to be reached through a disambiguation page.

It is noticeable that the American equivalent of Stockman (i.e. the Cowboy), has been allowed to retain its 'primary' page status (i.e. the American Cowboy is not titled Cowboy (American)).

Therefore, at present, the two — while holding similar work positions — are being treated unequally by Wikipedia — with a bias shown towards the American Cowboy — while the Australian equivalent of Stockman is being unfairly treated as inferior. Figaro (talk) 04:53, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Stockman is susceptible to substantially more meanings than cowboy. For example, there is no one in the encyclopedia with the surname, "Cowboy", while there are numerous people surnamed Stockman, some quite notable. All of the terms using "cowboy" are derived from the initial sense of a person who oversees cattle, a situation that is not apparent with Stockman. bd2412 T 18:43, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Exactly. In other words, the American cowboy is the primary topic for "cowboy", while the Australian stockman is not the primary topic for "stockman". Naming in Wikipedia reflects usage in the English language; we don't determine it. --Born2cycle (talk) 16:21, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Erie Federal Courthouse[edit]

I just noticed you created the article. Being an Erieite, I had seen this on your list of GSA-documented buildings and was going to see if you wanted any help with it, but completely forgot about it. I do have photos of the buildings, including the Baker Building and Main Library (having made an effort to get photos of NRHP-listed building in downtown Erie the last time I was there). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 18:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Great - please upload them! We can work some into the article, and add a gallery. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
OK, I uploaded some and put them into the article. The library photo is over 2 years old, as currently the library is enclosed with some form of scaffolding and covered with black mesh (which I have a photo of, but probably won't upload it as it doesn't seem have much in the way of EV). Also, I was debating about whether to move the article to just Erie Federal Courthouse per WP:COMMONNAME. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 22:53, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
These are very well done, thank you. bd2412 T 23:40, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

DC and contributions[edit]

Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.

If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 02:58, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

As an aside, I think this would really support any work you do with the DC group, especially the GLAM/SI program. There are a lot of ways these groups can work together. You can reach me on my talk page, or by email at with questions; I can't guarantee that I'll be checking back on your talk page often enough to hold a sustained conversation there. Regards, DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 02:58, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

The page Genesis (disambiguation) does not exist. The page is called simply Genesis. Do not disambiguate where it is not necessary. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Please review WP:INTDABLINK. Where an intentional disambiguation link appears in article space, it must redirect through the "foo (disambiguation)" redirect, in order to remove the link from the list of pages requiring repair. Cheers! bd2412 T 02:03, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Question about WPUSCJ[edit]

You seem to be pretty active in this project so Ill ask you about this since knowone responded to my comments on the projects talk page. I would like to rename the projects template from {{WikiProject USCJ}} to WikiProject United States courts and judges so the meaning of the template is clearer. Do you have a problem with this? I also created some documentation for the projects template based on the documentation for WPUS but I didnt implement it yet. Do you think thats ok? --Kumioko (talk) 19:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


You recently made an edit which made a statement about the EAA, and which another editor supported [4]. Can you please tell me what constitutes "appropriate recognition or authorization to grant an accreditation?" Or in other words, what source makes that statement for us? As Wikipedians in compliance with the WP:NPOV policy, we can't be making statements like that on our own authority. Of course, I have no doubt that this is a diploma mill, but that's not the issue. The issue is that while we can say that the state doesn't support EAA, we don't seem to have a source supporting the above quote. BECritical__Talk 23:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Legal subject nominated for deletion[edit]

As far as I can tell, there's a difference between U.S. Federal law (as explained by the FBI) and Indiana state law (Garner 2001, pp. 278 et seq.), and thus at least two types of franchise fraud. You might like to research this one and give an opinion. Uncle G (talk)

  • You might like to take a stab at giving the article a better introduction, too. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 03:39, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Help in finding out about legal case[edit]

Hi bd2412, my name is Hunter. I see that you are a member of WP:LAW and you appear to be pretty knowledgeable about legal matters, so I thought maybe you could help me, or direct me to someone (or some resource) that could. I have been working to improve the article about a B movie called Laserblast, and while searching for sources I found an old press release from PR Newswire dated October 11, 1983, about three favorable judgments that MCA-Universal had won. Regarding one of them, it said:

The "E.T." suite (sic) was a federal action filed by J.A.R. Sales and claimed that "E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial" infringed rights they own in the feature film "Laserblast." On Monday, Oct. 3, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of

California dismissed the complaint with prejudice.

Now, this didn't make very much sense to me (which makes me suspect the press release is no good) and I was having trouble finding anything else about this. However, while searching Google, I did find this page, which seems to indicate there was a suit between Universal and J.A.R. Sales over alleged copyright infringement regarding the film E.T. This source, however, mentions nothing about Laserblast. (The dates also don't match up, as the website is from 1984 and the press release is from 1983, so it's possible there is a different lawsuit between Universal and J.A.R. Sales over E.T.)

What I'm wondering is whether I can get ahold of the original complaint or docket related to this case. However, I don't have a PACER account, and don't know of any other way to get it. Do you know where I might be able to find this, or find more information about this case? Please let me know. Sorry to bother you. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 02:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not in a position to give you any advice, as I'm no longer in practice. Good luck, though! bd2412 T 02:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


It appears that Kb was working on this as part of the article on Royal National Theatre. Can you tell if he had already made his changes to that article? All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like all of that information was moved into the article in July 08. Cheers! bd2412 T 14:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Recommend a Project:Law editor?[edit]

Hi. I flagged Pacific Legal Foundation as POV/advertisement, because it seemed to me to be very biased in favor of the organization. It essentially contains all of the information that the group would want to advertise about themselves, and nothing that they would not. I don't have the time/experience to fix it. Also, because of my participation in a non-wiki research project that tangentially relates to PLF, I don't know if it would be appropriate for me to dive into editing this article. Can you recommend an editor who might be able to take a look at it? My flag got a very defensive response from an editor there. Thanks! A5553434 (talk) 18:27, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Have you posted this concern at Wikipedia:WikiProject Law? Cheers! bd2412 T 19:07, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Your DYK nomination of Kenneth M. Hoyt[edit]

The Kenneth M. Hoyt article is not new and does not meet other DYK selection criteria. The best option for qualification at this point is to expand the prose 5x within the next 5 days. KimChee (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

  • It is new in the sense that it was a bot-created upload of raw material from a government database which has just been cleaned up to qualify as an article. bd2412 T 21:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I checked the current revision against the previous version from 17 June 2010; DYK rules require articles to have been created (or expanded fivefold) within the last 5 days to be counted as new. Exceptions are granted for correcting copyright violations, but that would require a complete rewrite of the article of at least 1,500 characters in prose length. KimChee (talk) 22:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk page banners added to article[edit]

Hi, I'm guessing that your addition of WikiProject banners to Samuel D. Johnson, Jr. was an accidental manual paste. But I thought I should notify you just in case there's something strange going on with your AWB settings. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 02:35, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that was an accident - doing two things at once! bd2412 T 02:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

LGBT articles of Brazil[edit]

Hello! I am Brazilian and I need of you to correct my translation edits, please help me in the Changing legal gender assignment in Brazil, LGBT rights in Brazil, Recognition of same-sex unions in Brazil, Age of consent in Brazil, Prejudice in the Brazilian LGBT community. 28 December 2010 (UTC) User: Hentzer

Superintendents of patents[edit]

Hello again. Hope you are enjoying the holidays and will have a good new year. Glad to see you created the category for superintendents of patents, but you might want to move it as 'superintendent' is misspelled as is. Good idea to have the category though. Best wishes, MarmadukePercy (talk) 00:22, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

K. the Surveyor[edit]

Before you give in to K. the Surveyor (talk · contribs)'s wishes, you might want to take a look at the contribution list. I think contributions indicate that this is a POV warrior on the warpath. --Nlu (talk) 17:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

In fact, I was thinking about submitting an RfC on his/her behavior last night, and may yet do so tonight or tomorrow. --Nlu (talk) 17:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I think it is common sense to include landmark rulings in an article on the court that made them, and objectively defensible to include the abortion decision. bd2412 T 17:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States[edit]

Flag of the United States.svg

Hello, BD2412/Archive 004! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 02:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm already heading up U.S. Courts and Judges. That should count for fairly extensive participation. bd2412 T 03:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Lol, yes I agree. You all seem to be very busy there too, I see a lot of activity. Know that WPUS has started to gain some momentum I am going to keep it going by starting work on Portal:United States and try and get that back up and going too if you are interested or know someone that might be feel free to pitch in. --Kumioko (talk) 18:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Judge X, Governor X, Doctor X, Mayor X[edit]

General X, Judge X, Governor X, Doctor X, Mayor X. Confusing when you read about someone only known as Judge X, I hope you and I can clear up most of them and make them easy to find. Newspapers always expect you to know who they are referring to because the news is usually so local. The Bain image collection is full of people only labelled by their title and last name. At least President X and Governor X is easy. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


I think this was a very bad edit. It had previously redirected to primus, a disambiguation page. If that is the title of a disambiguation page, then Primus (band) should not be treated as the main meaning. Clearly this should redirect either to primus, the disambiguation page, or to PRIMUS (journal), since that is the only one normally spelled entirely with capital letters. In fact, you did not even put a hatnote at the top of Primus (band) saying that PRIMUS redirects to that page, and linking to the disambiguation page for other senses of the word. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:01, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

That link takes me to a "Cannot find the section" page. bd2412 T 22:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

wrong place[edit]

You wrote

My thinking on this is that we should now have a separate article on the Tuscons memorial, of which Obama's speech would be a part. The memorial was a notable gathering, not just for Obama's speech, but for remarks by other public figures (the governor, Attorney General, and Secretary of Homeland Security), and the separate criticism raised by some regarding the 'rally-like' atmosphere of the event. bd2412 T 20:08, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

You put it in the wrong place. Suggest you remove the comment and move it to

This is what you want, it seems. Madrid 2020 (talk) 21:24, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I put my comment exactly where I intended it. The memorial service is a single, specific event, not the same as the broader subject of reactions to the aftermath of the shooting. bd2412 T 22:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

3 branches[edit]

Not sure if John Marvin Jones meets the criteria, but under Bibliography and references

Jones, Marvin (1973). Memoirs; 1917-1973, fifty-six years of continuing service in all three branches of the Federal Government. Edited and annotated by Joseph M. Ray.. El Paso: Texas Western Press.

caught my eye as I had looked at the article after your WP:USCongress mention. Dru of Id (talk) 05:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Congressional bio has Executive branch positions. Dru of Id (talk) 05:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
I would call this a near miss, because the Court of Claims is not an Article III Court, and is therefore not actually part of the Judicial Branch. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Is the idea here a list of US officials who have served in all three branches of government? If so, I might have a couple of nominees ... there must be a link to an article or list somewhere, but I'm not quickly finding it. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
The list is at List of persons who have served in all three branches of the United States federal government‎. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm ... interesting! Of the three people I was thinking of, two are already listed and the third is Frank M. Coffin, who was a Congressman and a Circuit Judge, but may not meet the Executive Branch qualification if USAID is considered an independent agency rather than an executive one. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and as for a Court of Claims Judge, you are correct that the Court of Claims is an "Article I court" (no life tenure, etc.), but I don't know if that means that the court is "outside the judicial branch." (I think it is served by the Administrative Office of the Courts; it would be of interest whether the Judges' salaries come from the Judicial Branch appropriations bill each year, and so forth.) Regards again, Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
The above conversation has been moved to Talk:List of persons who have served in all three branches of the United States federal government‎ Cheers! bd2412 T 19:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi, you introduced a typo to a bunch of pages, misspelling "aura" as "arua". I fixed the error on 42 pages, and I think others may have fixed about eight, so I think they've all been corrected now. But if you have any more to do, please adjust your AWB settings. Please note that I only quickly corrected the typos, not checking the proper context. But looking at the example link I provided, I noticed that the disambiguation was also incorrect; aura should have either been unlinked or changed to Wiktionary (which I did in this case). MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 20:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for catching that, I will hunt down and repair any that remain. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi BD2412, I noticed that you disambiguated Lime (confusingly the British name for Linden trees) to Lime (fruit) it should be Tilia. But thank you for giving me the image of my local park with a sub-tropical climate filled with ripe citrus bushes. :-) Grim23 01:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the tip. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite[edit]

I'm just a glutton for punishment, the prospect of disambiguating an endless supply of links wasn't arduous enough so I decided I should start adding references to 40,000 biographies of Fijian basketball players and Somalian tribal chiefs! Come to think of it, disambiguating some links sounds like a nice diversion...I think I'll aim for the middle of the leader board though. J04n(talk page) 03:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Do you have the disambiguation j-script (the one that automatically highlights disambig links in yellow)? It's a boon - I hardly open a page anymore without noticing (and fixing) a handful. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I do not, I assume it must be added to one's monobook? Let me know how to add it. J04n(talk page) 04:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I have it at User:BD2412/monobook.css and User:BD2412/monobook.js (to be honest, I'm not sure which one does it). It's the only script I'm running. It slows down page loading a bit for pages with lots of disambig links, but it's easy enough to turn on and off. bd2412 T 04:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Done, thanks. J04n(talk page) 04:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


I wasn't sure about this addition to Pillar. It sounds awfully close to a dictionary definition (which should not appear on dab pages by definition) and the word "pillar" isn't even mentioned in principle. Yes I wasn't sure enough to just revert it. What do you think? --Muhandes (talk) 15:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I added that because, while disambiguating links to Pillar, I came across several, such as this one, referring to the sense of principles. Links should be on the page if they will help with future disambiguation. bd2412 T 16:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Of course you did, I presumed so. When I disambiguated per se I encountered more than fifty links which had just the dictionary meaning, but instead of adding that to the dab page, I linked them to wikt:per se. Wouldn't that be a more suitable approach than adding a dictionary meaning to a dab page? --Muhandes (talk) 18:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Funny thing, I just checked and the dictionary meaning actually is on the dab page... not sure what it means, but I guess I'm as undecided as I began with. --Muhandes (talk) 18:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "a dictionary meaning". To say that a pillar is another name for a column could be considered a dictionary meaning, since column is a word in the dictionary. However, it is also the subject of an encyclopedia article, as is principle. Principle is a noun, whereas per se is an adjective, and not a "thing" that can have a proper encyclopedia article. bd2412 T 18:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
I guess what II tried to say is that if an article linked to pillar when it meant one of a set of principles, maybe that wikilink is redundant to begin with, as no one will write an article about this meaning. It could either be removed or linked to wiktionary. Would you pipe pillar? I guess you will. --Muhandes (talk) 18:26, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
If an organization refers to itself as having "five pillars", or some other number, as many do, they mean principles. I haven't made these links, I have only fixed the ones that were already made. No doubt more will come. If other editors feel that these are worth linking, I will reserve judgment. bd2412 T 18:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


I'd be happy to, I'm not really a "fish guy", but have had some experience with these fish in the past. I think Lionfish should redirect to: Pterois and folks can drill down and find the correct species/subspecies. The problem comes into paradise when another genus uses the same common name. Personally, I think all articles on animals (especially reptiles, amphibians, and fish) should be titled by Latin name, then Common names redirected there. So what do we want to do, change Lionfish to "any number of species of the genus Pterois and alternatively these species? Let me know what direction you want to take and I'll get on it. Thanks!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Let's take this discussion to Talk:Lionfish, so we can get additional perspectives. I'll copy it there. bd2412 T 00:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)