User talk:Acroterion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Obscured jaguar.jpg Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.



Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016[edit]

I was posting on your talk page to discuss the rather hostile IP editor on Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016's talk page, who you blocked while I was writing this post. Anyways, thanks! Its safe to assume that I can remove the IP's irrelevant responses on the RfC threaded discussion right? Meatsgains (talk) 02:50, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, they were soapboxing and had moved into aggressive BLP violations. I think the whole thread (or at least the part they had hijacked) should be removed. I've revdel'd one particularly bad violation. Acroterion (talk) 02:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Got it. I'll remove it. Let me know if you see any issues. Meatsgains (talk) 02:58, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with this. —Nizolan (talk) 05:41, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
We learned our lesson in 2008, editors who use Wikipedia in a plainly partisan manner need to be dealt with quickly to stop the shitstorm before it starts. Acroterion (talk) 12:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Looks like the problem editor is back: [1] (or someone on a new account doing similar things, at any rate) —Nizolan (talk) 02:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Looks like they created a couple of accounts and got checkuser-blocked as a result. As such, any similar edits should be reverted out of hand and reported to AIV. Acroterion (talk) 10:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


was not done writing the page and putting in references, thanks for the delete.

Wikipedia is not a host for reviews or advice on the use of individual subreddits. As you appear to have realized, it may warrant a paragraph in controversial Reddit communities. Acroterion (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Cunningham Bounds LLC[edit]

Hi I created this because Cunningham Bounds LLC is representing the state of Alabama in the BP Oil Spill class action. I added them and was making sure when I added the rest, I had proper citations and was just writing it when you tagged this page for takedown. Any chance you would let me continue?

Gyr8 Gyr8 (talk) 17:09, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't see any particular claim to notability in the article, and I'm unconvinced that the firm meets WP:NOTE based on its participation in BP litigation - notability is not usually inherited by association with a notable event. If you can substantiate that the firm has received significant and fairly detailed coverage in major media, there's no bar to re-creation, and I'd be happy to place the content in a sandbox in your userspace for you to work on. Acroterion (talk) 17:12, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, They have received a ton of media coverage not only due to that event, but to achieving noteworthy verdicts in many other cases as well. Here is some background on those but mostly I have listed those related to the Gulf spill, which is probably the most noteworthy.

More of a general article on the head of the firm:

Firm has some of the top jury awards in 2012 / Other cases

Oil Spill Coverage

"Alabama Lawyers clean up in BP oil settlement"

Here you will see that some of the United States' biggest law firms represent the defendant (BP)

Cunningham Bounds initiating lawsuits before class action:

Judge Appoints Robert Cunningham to the Steering Committee of multidisctict litigation

Thanks in advance. If you want me to write in a sandbox first, I will assemble the entry in there. If you can help out, I would really appreciate it. Cheers, Gyr8Gyr8 (talk) 18:05, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Kfeet (talk) 07:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


Good afternoon -- you recently indef-blocked User:Sleazy Donald for trolling on the Zodiac Killer talk page; and now we have what I would assume (but lack the tools to prove) is a sock,, attempting to post the same nonsense. It has already been rev-del'd, and the IP warned by other editors, but I thought I'd give you a heads-up anyway. DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 20:03, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


Nice work. APK whisper in my ear 03:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Thankee! Acroterion (talk) 11:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Revdel request[edit]

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:11, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

The other edit by that same user could use a REVDEL too. Missed it before sending the email. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:14, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


Curious, what was the BLP vio on domestic violence? There's been a fair share of conflict there recently and the nature of the del may be important. TimothyJosephWood 16:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

It was soapboxing about a specific incident in Australia where the IP appears to be campaigning against an individual who has been an advocate for victims of domestic violence. Acroterion (talk) 16:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


Hi Acroterion. I'm sure you would notice this sooner or later, but (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log), the IP editor you previously blocked for disruptive editing, is continuing their disruptive behaviour by introducing Donald Trump related content with WP:SYNTH twist to multiple articles, and by soapboxing. Politrukki (talk) 10:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Fish collars[edit]

That editor has been making a lot of similar questionable edits. I'd appreciate it if someone other than me were also watching him. BTW, thanks for the note of appreciation. IPs usually "don't get no respect". (apologies to Rodney Dangerfield) (talk) 23:29, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I've been looking through their history and I see some concerns. I'm about to sit down for dinner, so I'll leave a note later. IPs don't get no respect, so I try to encourage them when I see good work. Feel free to establish an account, it's really more private. Acroterion (talk) 23:32, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Request to check edits[edit]


You have recently added a deletion request to my page for the reason: No assertion of notability. I have attempted to fix this by adding a notability section and another sentence to the intro. Please review my edits and if satisfactory remove the deletion request. Otherwise please tell me what I need to do to further fix my article as I am a beginner Wikipedian.

Thanks, Zenged — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenged (talkcontribs) 00:35, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

As I noted on the article talkpage, notability hinges on coverage in independent media, which would also satisfy verifiability and reliable sourcing. So far I see something someone with moderate notability made up, without any assertion that the semi-magic square is notable. Acroterion (talk) 00:38, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


A good job!Axxxion (talk) 12:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Block Review: Thank you. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 01:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Request your views on an article nominated for deletion[edit]

I'd request you to state your vote on [[2]] article for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:22, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


Hello. Please delete my personal page in the English Wikipedia. --Farsizabon (talk) 08:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Done. Acroterion (talk) 11:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Adam9007 on tyres[edit]

Didn't see any of that! What happened? Adam9007 (talk) 18:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

More impersonation/vandalism, a poor imitation of Willy on Wheels from long ago. Acroterion (talk) 12:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Please can you change the visibility of these attacks on my user and talk pages?[edit]

Thanks in advance. Linguist 111talk 14:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for getting rid of them! There's one more: [6]. Linguist 111talk 15:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for getting rid of it, and for protecting my page. Linguist 111talk 17:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome. I've been a bit distracted, dealing with lawn mower repairs and such. Acroterion (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

An IP,, you blocked[edit]

is back again doing personal attacks. See here[7] and here[8]. His first post was reverted by a non-involved editor, and he put it back up again....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:40, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Blocked again, this time for a week. Sorry about the time it took, I just got home from a trip to a project site several hours away. Acroterion (talk) 03:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
No problem about the delay and thanks. My talk page has been getting vandalized by that IP and another one and the page protection for my Talk page expired this morning. Let's see how things go....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I'll try to keep an eye on things. Acroterion (talk) 12:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Here's some background on List of Mayday episodes whose talk page the IP was vandalizing.
That particular article has been indefinitely semi-protected mostly due to IPs, but sometimes because of registered users, adding entries for episodes on aviation accidents that aren't going to be made. This has been going on for some. An editor first created a hoax article on an accident, then added it to the episode list. I'll give that hoax creator some credit, his article had to go through AFD two times before it was deleted as a hoax. Check here[9] and here[10] for the details. The first AFD was no consensus. Even after that was dealt with, hoax episodes were regularly added to the list. I chronicled it here[11]. Note eventually some of those hoax entries became episodes but not for at least one year had passed since the edit was made. My nominee for all time prize winner for fiction writing at WP is below. It is worth reading.
BA flight 0001 / September 21, 1960 / Mcdonald Douglas MD80 / CO-Pilot Suicide British Airways flight 0001 took off from Manchester Airport in 1960 the co-pilot hits the captian over the head with a fire extinguisher. on board flight attendant Lucy Rivers is shocked and disarms the co-pilot, but not before the plane plummets into a busy high school in Newall Green, Killing 600 on the ground and 200 on flight, 58 passengers survive and 8 cabin crew, co-pilot Sarah Donovan perishes but Pilot Patricia Itshen survives
No aviation accident has ever killed 600 people and the MD80 that crashed in 1960 supposedly wasn't flown until the 1980s. That entry[12] always makes me laugh.
Due to the hoaxes and fiction written into the article, a consensus was formed to regulate how and when episodes can be added. They always have to be referenced with a WP:RS and it was decided Imdb wasn't a RS.
The IP is unhappy because he can't access the article to play around and since I have been very high profile in enforcing the consensus, he targets me. Cheers!...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Wow. I'm pretty familiar with aviation history, that, erm, episode wins the prize easily. I'll watchlist the article. Acroterion (talk) 17:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
He's back. Click here[13], here[14], and here[15]. My talk page needs permanent protection otherwise this IP will be back as soon as any new block ends if he don't IP hop first....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
I see Widr got him. I'm not keen on permanent talkpage protection, it's certainly frowned upon for admins to do that with their own talkpages. Given that the IP seems reasonably static we might go longer than a month, I'll discuss with Widr when I get home. Acroterion (talk) 18:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

April 2016[edit]

Dear Acroterion, Thank you for deleting my page that was a school project, it was very considerate of you. I also want you to know that the language, fataneese, that my colleague has created is very useful and appropriate for wikipedia. Thanks again. (Wikimaster313 (talk) 03:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC))

The Bugle: Issue CXXI, April 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Deletion review for Darren Rhodes[edit]

User:MilenaGlebova1989 has asked for a deletion review of Darren Rhodes. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 05:16, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THE PHOTO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:21, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

OK, which one? Acroterion (talk) 11:58, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

could you send me an email refer to the uss savanna photos so i know who you are. this site isnt a good place to discuss this. a liitle privacy if you dont mind. ;> thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

User Org.aidepikiw[edit]

Hey there, re this--I was already in the process of writing up the GG T-ban when I saw your block (good call)... I assume this is what you were referring to when you said "paperwork". If you had another idea in mind, no problem, feel free to undo my admin action and move forward with whatever it was you were going to do, but per your "Thank" it looks like we both came to the same conclusion here. Zad68 12:30, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. It was time to leave for work and I didn't have time to find the relevant template, fill it out and log it properly. An indef topic ban was my intention too, since the combative tone of their actions convinced me that there was little likelihood of change. Acroterion (talk) 16:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

One of your blocks might be connected to an SPI case[edit]

Hello Acroterion. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Patrick1425. The first IP listed there is blocked by you for three years. If this is the same person as User:Patrick1425 then maybe the named account should also have a long block or an indef. The behavior of Patrick1425 came up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive315#User:Patrick1425 reported by User:EvergreenFir (Result: Blocked) due to a report by User:EvergreenFir. The socking complaint about Patrick1425 was opened by User:Grayfell. I closed the 3RR but haven't checked the sock evidence carefully. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:29, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd give them an 80% chance that they're the same person. The overlap in subject matter is close, the individual edits are a bit less so but still pretty damned close. Acroterion (talk) 02:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC) access[edit]

I noticed that you have filled out the Google form for Wikipedia Library access a second time. You should have access to all content there (other than Publisher Select) now. Please let me know if there are any problems. HazelAB (talk) 13:43, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


I'm back and ready to contribute. Where should I start? (talk) 04:31, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Revision Deletion[edit]

Dear Admin, my revision history includes my real name! please delete them to prevent harassment. Thank you. --Mahdad (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Remove Commons Contributions[edit]

Dear Admin, my commons contributions includes my real name! please remove them to prevent harassment. Thank you. --Mahdad (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Revision Deletion[edit]

Dear Admin, my revision history includes my real name! please delete them to prevent harassment. 20 dec 2011 - 10 May 2016Thank you. --Mahdad (talk) 11:31, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I can't remove revisions on any other wiki or on Commons, and there aren't any copyright violations that I know of. I'll look into your userspace revisions when I have a little time to see if they qualify for deletion, but it won't be right away as I have other obligations in Real Life. Acroterion (talk) 16:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
I think I've cleared all occurrences of your real name. I didn't have to deal with many, as all of your article contributions show up under your current username and you've edited few talkpages where your previous name would have appeared. I've removed those and some edit summaries that included that name. You might want to check and see if there are any I missed or something a bot or automated edit summary inserted. Please email me with links to those pages rather than posting them here. I will email Oversight as well once I've assembled the diffs. Acroterion (talk) 02:22, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Warriors owners[edit]

Just leave it on there — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trailblazersownwarriors23 (talkcontribs) 03:34, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Trailblazersownwarriors23: Absolutely not. Joke edits such as that are not welcome on Wikipedia. --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 03:36, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) (talk page stalker) That's an oddly phrased way to request a block. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:37, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Request granted. Hello Mr. Badger! Acroterion (talk) 03:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Still learning[edit]

Hi I will follow the rules. im on day 10 of understanding so stand by! unless you have any useful tips to support anyone who feels like expressing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumpy's (talkcontribs) 12:25, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

List of most liked YouTube videos[edit]

Hi, I wish to accept a draft (Draft:List of most liked YouTube videos) but I can't because there's already an article in mainspace. Could you please delete it? I've tagged it for A7. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:56, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Done, your version is a vast improvement. Acroterion (talk) 11:58, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
@Acroterion: Thanks mate, also, do you think I should nominate it for RPP already or wait until the inevitable selective like editing starts happening? Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:19, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
I think you'll need to go through the motions of the inevitable opinion-based edits before it can be protected. I'll keep an eye on it. Acroterion (talk) 12:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)


Hi, you have - justifiably - deleted my page on Veebase. Brand new to creating content on Wikipedia, I was editing the page to add references when it went! Don't supose there's any way to get it back? Regards, Davidqhog — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidqhog (talkcontribs) 17:01, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I can place the deleted content into your userspace sandbox for you. User:Davidqhog/sandbox. Acroterion (talk) 17:05, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Acroterion,

my name is Tony and I'm with CREAM Collective. Earlier yesterday you deleted a page of mine that I was trying create using our website's information copied onto the wiki page. I'd like to get that please as soon as possible and cite it correctly as we are in a mometum phase where all things must be taken into consideration for our branding to be successful. Please let me know what you need from me.

Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonelow (talkcontribs) 23:13, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Real Life Barnstar.jpg The Real Life Barnstar
Dear Acroterion -- I don't know if you knew until know, but I have been unblocked from sock puppetry. I know we have had a very tough, rough and personal attack relationship, but I want to thank you for correcting me. You taught me civility on Wikipedia, and civility online as well. I made some terrible trouble and caused messes on Wikipedia in 2014/2015, but now I am here as a good editor, and currently in training at the CVUA and will get the rollback changes in the future. I am also very active at AfC, my favorite project on Wikipedia. I am also currently working on a subpage about my story of Wikipedia editing. I just want to thank you for all you have done for me and the Wikipedia Community. Cheers! CookieMonster755 📞 23:50, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

I have inserted the word Irish because they are of Irish descent and not just English or American as has been stated. Not to state this is not only inaccurate but also misleading. JFK being a good example.

'Irish American' is an accepted term as is 'of Irish descent' To just describe them as English or American is not accurate.

Another example is Mark Carney who you state is Canadian when he has Irish and Canadian nationality and is of Irish descent.

I would be interested to know what your background is and why you think they are just 'English' or just 'American' because I am sure it would throw light on your opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claiomh22 (talkcontribs) 14:21, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Claiomh22 – Please post your topic in your own section. Thanks! CookieMonster755 📞 21:30, 15 May 2016 (UTC)


You have written Please stop adding "Irish" to the nationalities of people who never had Irish nationality. Ethnicity may be mentioned, but not in a context where the nationality may be confused. Ethnicity should never be emphasized unless it forms a strong part of the individual's identity.

Again to repeat as an example Mark Carney does have Irish citizenship. But that is irrelevant, in my opinion, because I have used a well known and well used terms such as 'Irish-American' and 'of Irish descent' not as a nationality but as a true description of their background. You don't have to be an Irish citizen to be Irish.

Your argument fails because I amended the word 'English' and that is also not a nationality, it is an ethnicity. So where is your argument? I amended a misleading ethnic description with an accurate one.

Without being rude but wanting to understand your thinking please state your background and nationality? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claiomh22 (talkcontribs) 14:33, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

It is not Wikipedia's practice to, for example, add "Irish" to the lede in a biography of John F. Kennedy simply because he was of Irish ethnic background. He was of American nationality, full stop. His family was very much Irish, but in the context of the lede, Irish-American implies (strongly) that he was of dual nationality, which is obviously wrong. It is also something that has been extensively abused by nationalist and ethnic partisans to place their preferred stamp on individuals, and has been the source of considerable disruption. It is fine to describe a person's ethnic background in the proper context, as I explained before, but not in a misleading hyphenated statement in the lede. It is considered disruptive to do so (for a particularly tiresome example, look at Copernicus), so please confine your edits of this kind to those who can be proven through references to hold dual nationality, and please remember that repeated inappropriate ethnic characterization of this kind is often viewed as partisan and disruptive.
A good example of appropriate practice can be seen at Frank Sinatra (a reviewed Good Article), who is specifically described as American, born to Italian immigrants. He is not "Italian-American," just American, and he was far less removed from Italy than the Kennedys were from Ireland. Ireland was four generations removed from Jack Kennedy.
For my part I would have to be described as ethnically (in rough priority) English-Scottish-German-Irish-Dutch-Native American/African/Romani/Indian ? (see Melungeon), and that Germany did not exist when my ancestors left, and my Irish ancestors were probably Protestants from Ulster. I'm from West Virginia and therefore American in nationality, where the majority of people could be, and usually are described as Scotch-Irish Americans. But that doesn't get put in the lede. Acroterion (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[edit]

You may wish to re-block the IP ; As soon as your block expired, five edits producing this happened. Regards, Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 00:27, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, blocked this time for a week. Acroterion (talk) 00:48, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Joe Bains Standup comedians page[edit]

Hi M8,

I wasn't attacking anybody with the Joe Bains page - that is me and I was trying to create a page for myself in a funny way. Joe Bains — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riverart2000 (talkcontribs) 03:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

We have no way of knowing or proving that: attack pages or apparent attack pages are deleted on sight. Don't do that again, please. Acroterion (talk) 03:04, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Hall of Game Awards/42nd Peoples Choice Awards/StealthForce[edit]

Greetings, I don't post anything major to warrant myself creating an account here, but I've been involed with a few flamewars with StealthForce (and three other unknown IPs) who have supported him regarding the two wiki articles: 42nd People's Choice Awards, and the Hall of Game Awards. There has been some numerous edit warring over the winner of the Sci-Fi show on the former, and about the latter having its last awards in 2014. I created a report page yesterday (under a different IP), but no action has been taken. Also, please look at StealthForce's talk page; he is giving off an abrasive tone defending his edits when he's wrong. I hope you can talk about all this. Thank you. 2601:601:4002:E260:5029:271:DF84:AEEB (talk) 03:16, 16 May 2016 (UTC)


You wrote 'It is not Wikipedia's practice to, for example, add "Irish" to the lede in a biography of John F. Kennedy simply because he was of Irish ethnic background. He was of American nationality, full stop'

First of all JFK was not 'just' American, full stop. You may have many different ethnicities in your background but people like JFK and Conan O'Brien et al do not and therefore identify strongly with their ethnic background, hence the term Irish-American.

Please answer my question which I posed to you, with regard to the term English. There is no English self governing nation, hence no English passport, as it is a constituent part of the UK. Therefore if I amend say Boy Georges ID to born in England of Irish descent it is an accurate description of his ethnicity and the influences that shaped his personality. Just putting English does not do this and it does not fit your parameters as a description of nationality. He is not ethnically English nor does he have English nationality.

I also amended the entry for the head of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, to read Irish-Canadian. In this case he does have dual nationality but he is of Irish descent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claiomh22 (talkcontribs) 11:58, 17 May 2016 (UTC) See WP:NATIONALITY: +

See WP:NATIONALITY: "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the lead unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." This is part of the manual of style,. Your question is an invitation to debate, and I'm not interested in debating hypotheticals with you when the MoS clearly states what is to be done. Stick to what the MoS requires. You are muddling nationality and ethnicity, or giving higher prominence to ethnicity than Wikipedia guidelines do.
Kennedy was notable as an American politician, not as a person of Irish descent. Sinatra was an American singer. Madeleine Albright is an American politician, not a Czech-American politician. Boy George's Irish descent should not be featured prominently in the lead, per MoS. Carney is probably fine as a dual national: others may disagree. Acroterion (talk) 12:27, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

About Your defense of User EdJohnston[edit]

I answer to Your post at my site please read it.--Darek555 (talk) 17:50, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

See my answer User talk:EdJohnston --Darek555 (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Crack Cocaine Aficionado[edit]

I think they're just going to go on like this. Should they have talk page access revoked if they're just going to personally attack people and continue their soapboxing? RA0808 talkcontribs 00:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

It went about the way I expected it to. That was by far the finest coatrack article I've seen since 2008. MaxSem has taken care of talkpage access. I very much doubt it's that editor's first time on Wikipedia. Kep in mind we have arbitration enforcement remedies for this sort of thing too. Acroterion (talk) 01:14, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I couldn't see it ending any other way either. Given this is my first time dealing with a coatrack (and while I have you here)... in a future similar situation, how would Arbitration enforcement apply? And could coatracks be nominated under a CSD? RA0808 talkcontribs 01:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I would consider it an attack page/BLP violation, especially given its particular title, and that was the basis for speedy-deleting it. In this particular case AN/I might have been an option, or flagging down a passing admin. It wasn't even close to being acceptable as an article. As I noted, there might be room for an article on this event/person if the topic gains legs, but the malicious intent of that editor was plenty to delete out of hand, and was confirmed by their post-block actions. That's why the WMF gives admins asbestos underwear (in lieu of the wikicoins and wiki-groupies they promised us). Acroterion (talk) 01:31, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
In a less extreme case arbitration enforcement would be for American politics 2, I would call the article an obvious violation warranting a topic ban if the editor seemed salvageable. In that case the arbitration enforcement page would be an option. Acroterion (talk) 01:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)


Kindly take action against this user [16] Makeandtoss (talk) 13:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Done, a VOA. Acroterion (talk) 16:45, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

More polemic[edit]

Despite your warnings, this content was added some months ago, and it's still there. It's time for an extended block. Nyttend (talk) 13:51, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it when I get some time to re-review the history. Having been there six months I don't see a need to act right now and I want to review my warnings and their timing. Acroterion (talk) 16:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Sure; it's not an emergency. Nyttend (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
What is absolutely disgusting is that an administrator will lie to get someone blocked as proved by his and another administrator's statements and I will quote another administrator who replied[17] on Nyttend's prior effort to get me blocked. "No rational person could possibly see an edit by you (Nyttend) making some improvements of the article, followed by an edit by William making different improvements of the article and think to themselves that William was confronting or inhibiting you." Sphilbrick called Nyttend irrational with good reason.
Nyttend, why did you threaten to have me blocked for harassment on the grounds that I had been blocked for it before when you in very own words said I didn't commit harassment? Acroterion, please make him answer that question or explain his behavior?
So I quoted people's statements made on my or other's talk pages and I have replied to them in the same places. I quoted Jimbo Wales too on what he thinks is grounds for immediate dysopping. Why this administrator is allowed to continue to have the ability to abuse people when he has been called irrational by another administrator I'd love to know. Irrational people shouldn't have the administrative tools, especially ones who take any criticism[18] or this[19] against them as a personal attack. In that 2nd one you should read the comments from Liz and Drmies on what Nyttend terms a PA ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Oh for Christ's sake, this again? You really don't understand that you can't keep a shrine on your userpage to remind yourself of the editors you've taken against? Your userpage isn't some kind of breaching experiment. While what you put back a month and a half after Sphilbrick and I asked you to remove your previous manifesto is short of what I removed, but it's still a shrine to an old grudge that you've been repeatedly advised is destructive and against community practice. Please find something else to do that doesn't involve cherishing grievances. I'm removing it as another clear breach of WP:POLEMIC. If it goes back, I will take it up at AN/I. Acroterion (talk) 01:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
<extensive personal attack on Nyttend redacted>
Fine. The above commentary from you is certainly worth discussing at ANI. Acroterion (talk) 02:03, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Airplaneman and Jehoshua Alvear and Richard the Crocodile[edit]


I went to post this on Airplaneman's talk, but he seems to be away for two months or so, so, since you last edited his talk, I'm coming to you about this.

Last night I was looking at the user creation log and discovered that a newly registered user, user:Richard the Crocodile, redirected the page Jehoshua Alvear, a page deleted by Airplaneman in 2011, to point to Judge Judy.

I would have deleted the edit except I find this so curious. It seems pointless to redirect a deleted page so I don't know what may be going on. I thought you might want to know.

I have your talk page on my watchlist, so I will see any reply here. Thank you.Dan D. Ric (talk) 13:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Correction, deleted 30 September, 2010.Dan D. Ric (talk) 13:10, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
I've deleted it as a recently re-created implausible redirect. I don't get any obvious search results that would lead me to think there's a connection. I'm at a conference and will probably have to leave early to attend to a veterinary crisis at home, so I'll be out of touch from about now for a day or so. Acroterion (talk) 13:26, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks[edit]

I was wondering how much further that would go. Meters (talk) 07:13, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

It should have stopped when you explained why you had BLP concerns. Hopefully they'll get the point now that they really do have to stop and discuss in earnest, regardless of the apparent juiciness of their content, without resorting to allegations of bullying to try to discredit you. Acroterion (talk) 07:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

User Talk:DinosaurKiller[edit]

Thank you for blocking this user.

LionPrince101 (talk) 15:04, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks LionPrince101 (talk) 15:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of Talk[edit]

Sorry for any infraction. I am new to Wikipedia and just grasping the process. I'm not sure what it is you have responded to that I've done. I am attempting to have the entry Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory altered and DID respond in TALK to someone who commented on my contribution. Djagda (talk) 02:32, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Article talkpages are for discussion of article improvements, not for advocacy in favor of fringe topics. See WP:FRINGE. Acroterion (talk) 02:34, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey pal[edit]

Why are you deleting my articles and why do you talk to me with templates? I'm a person, treat me as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaubry100 (talkcontribs) 17:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Valérie Aubry[edit]

Ididn;t delete this. It clearly identifies the subject. It of course does need references and more information. DGG ( talk ) 17:49, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

My concern was mainly based on the creation of Denis Cavanagh by the same editor, whose context puzzles me. I think it's a fictional character, which is fine if we can identify the work. Acroterion (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

SpectroCoin removal[edit]

Hi, I wanted to ask why you have removed SpectroCoin page, as there are similar pages like or which have not been deleted, so I believe the SpectroCoin page should also have a right to be there. Regards, Vytautas — Preceding unsigned comment added by VytautasKara (talkcontribs) 01:41, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Because it represents a subject that was previously deleted by discussion, for which the new article does not represent a significant change or improvement. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpectroCoin. Pleasee also review the conflict of interest guidelines, since you appear to be closely associated with the subject. Acroterion (talk) 02:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the[edit]

picture thing with Hallowed Ground: A Walk at Gettysburg by James M. McPherson, A quick check of my library reveals that I have Hallowed Ground: Battlefields of the Civil War by Hunt, so this Pulitzer Prize fellow even ripped off the title for his book. Well it is nice to hear that I got credit. Howard Zinn (well his publisher) used one of my wikipedia pictures, but he (she?) asked me and gave me a free copy of the book. That is what we hope for but do not, it appears, always get. Still I might look for the book, see what a used copy costs and add it to my slender "Publications" section. Life is supposed to be interesting. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 05:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

A used copy cost US$ 3.50, including shipping. I ordered one. Carptrash (talk) 05:59, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The "Hallowed Ground" business is sort of a trademark for the corridor running down from Gettysburg to Charlottesville - branded as the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area. It gets a little tiresome. I am constantly surprised when things turn up. The best ask my permission, and they get a freshly-edited TIF instead of having to work with the JPG - that has happened several times and it pleases me. I occasionally get a free book out of the deal. Acroterion (talk) 14:57, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
It appears that you have no one to blame for that Hallowed Ground business but your self since you made half the edits in that article. (joke). Except for the categories, of course, which were by Ser Amantio di Nicolao. (no joke) None of this excuses the publishers for not politely asking. And getting a better print. Carptrash (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Just so, I was inspired by seeing the signs all over the roads and by all those tourist handouts! Acroterion (talk) 15:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
And people wonder where we get our ideas for new articles from. Carptrash (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016[edit]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you purposefully and blatantly harass a fellow Wikipedian. I am the one being harassed and bullied here. It does not mean you have been editing longer than me makes you someone better without taking to account that a new editor might be telling the truth. GMA Network is a reliable source in the Philippines for all sorts of news. My article is about a real person with real facts. The problem with Philippines not having enough information about their politicians is because of people like you who do not listen. This person unlike many Filipino Politicians is actual someone who has improved the city of Botolan and could possibly improve the province of Zambales with the right exposure. Workerwiki (talk) 09:56, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

I have blocked you because you are harassing editors who are acting in good faith instead of participating calmly in the deletion discussion. Other editors are following normal Wikipedia practices. You may not substitute bluster for discussion, nor may you claim bullying when other editors have politely informed you of a discussion process that is followed dozens of times a day. We are all aware of systemic bias, and work to counteract it. That does not entitle you to claim exception to the rules or to harass other editors. Acroterion (talk) 10:00, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Amen, Acroterion! CookieMonster755 📞 22:54, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Something in need of attention[edit]

It is time to page protect it. Every time a block expires, they come back. Blocking is therefore a waste of time....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:10, 1 June 2016 (UTC)- Taken care of but there is something else below.

There is an editor who could use a administrator speaking to him. He is constantly putting mentions into articles of books this editor probably wrote themselves. Editor is Rustyjj70, Author's name is John J. Rust. He has been doing this for 4 years, but it only caught the attention of other editors this week. Here are recent examples- 1[20], 2[21], 3[22], and 4[23]. There has been some talk page discussion about the editor or his edits. Click here[24], here[25], and here[26]. This is a self-published writer (I'm one myself) trying to promote his books with the help of Amazon IMHO. Could you please handle this....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Yeesh, that's bad. I'll have a word. Acroterion (talk) 01:55, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


Am Muhammed Asif, my username is machoasif 02:41, 24 July 2013 Acroterion (talk | contribs) deleted page Saazish Sidhu (A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content) . I want to restart the same article this time i have enough sources.So i request you to grant me the permission to restart it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Machoasif (talkcontribs) 17:36, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

You don't need permission from me to re-create the article. You need sources and evidence that the person is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Assuming you've got those, then it can be reviewd like any other new article. Acroterion (talk) 03:40, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Drunk Ex-Pastors[edit]

You have removed my article about the Drunk Ex-Pastors for failing to credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject.

All of my citations are valid.

This article was not created by anyone involved with the show. I do not understand what makes it a candidate for removal.

It explained a lot having to do with a culturally significant podcast of nearly two years with multiple references in popular culture, including WAMU, The Daily Dot and others.

This is simply not right, and it does not appear any degree of cultural significance will convince anyone that it is legitimate.

The guidelines do not specifically prohibit anything I have posted, and there are other podcasts which are on Wikipedia, such as The Nerdist, WTF_with_Marc_Maron, Serial (podcast), many many others.

Please explain.

The TurkeyBoy (talk) 02:29, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Please provide evidence that the podcast has received significant in-depth coverage in major media. That is the basis for establishing notability on Wikipedia. See WP:WEB and WP:NOTE for notability guidelines. Passing mention by the Daily Dot and WAMU are OK, but we prefer to see a lot more than that, and all content must be fully supported by references, which those don't do. You may wish to develop the article with such sources, if available, in your userspace. I would be happy to place the deleted content in a sandbox in your userspace if you wish. Acroterion (talk) 02:59, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Changes on Malaysia Airlines Flight 17[edit]

You recently reverted on Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, I wonder whether you reverted to the correct version. Although you reverted to 'my' version, it was not to my final one. I'm not sure whether this was intentional on your part. My final edits were largely 'tidying' and placing 'like with like' and attaching refs. comparison between my final and your revert here. Please ping if replying.Pincrete (talk) 17:45, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I have reverted to what I think was the intended version. Sincere apologies if my assumption is wrong. ps it has probably not escaped you notice that the IP was inserting text identical to a very recently banned user.18:05, 5 June 2016 (UTC)Pincrete (talk)

It was not intentional, and I was distracted by range-blocking the IP once I realized that it was a recently-blocked disruptive user. Feel free to reinstate the appropriate revision. Acroterion (talk) 19:48, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXII, May–June 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:04, 6 June 2016 (UTC)


Hello Acroterion, Trust you are well? Can I please ask you to look at the contribution from the above IP (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) at the foot of my personal Talk page. I strongly suspect that this could be another sock from the various IP's who have been blocked in the past? Frankly, I find the content offensive and they cannot even sign the communication. I have replied on their Talk page and feel this proposed merge is completely unnecessary. Your comments are welcome. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:49, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

It's the UK Kennedy/Lincoln/Titanic IP. I've just blocked a couple of their IPs, I'll block this one too. They tend to be on Opal mobile networks. Acroterion (talk) 22:11, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Put more completely it's a UK IP that edits articles related to Kennedy, Lincoln, the Titanic, Das Boot, Manfred von Richtofen, Alcatraz, Dr. Who, 9/11, various serial killers ... They've been doing this for years, making a variety of edits that can be incrementally detrimental rewordings, often unsourced, and often conspiratist. They're generally polite when talked to (I've tried to give them second, third and fourth chances), but can get obnoxious when frustrated, and they consistently fail to understand that they wore out the community's (and my) patience a couple of years ago. Acroterion (talk) 01:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks for your help. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 07:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


Hello, Could you help me explain what the unremarkable flag means? Should I do any more edits to the page? How would this page be different to say, Epicor?

Aazmanch (talk) 06:06, 8 June 2016 (UTC) 05:59, 8 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aazmanch (talkcontribs)

The deletion discussion is meant to determine if the subject meets Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. See WP:NOTE and [[WP:CORP]. The subject should have received significant coverage in major third-party media that indicate that it is suitable for inclusion in a global encyclopedia. At present there is no assertion or substantiation of notability. Additionally, you appear to have a conflict of interest: see [WP:COI]], you should follow the guidelines there and declare any COI that you have. Acroterion (talk) 11:36, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, noted. Thank you. 01:29, 9 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aazmanch (talkcontribs)

User Akashnayak151288[edit]

He changed the Miss World 2015 article into one on the 2016 pageant[27]. Miss World 2016 was deleted and salted. He also did this edit to Miss World changing it into a article on the 2016 event too[28]. This same editor keeps making changes to a template, here[29] and here[30], that's against consensus. Could you please handle this? Honestly I think a block is needed....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:21, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

I gave them a final warning to back up your note, a block will happen if they keep messing with the template or the 2015 article. Acroterion (talk) 11:39, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
He edited the template again. See here[31]. He also recreated[32] the Miss World 2016 article that was deleted and salted by putting it under a different name- 66th Miss World Pageant...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:04, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Blocked, deleted, salted. It's only a 31-hour block, as they appear to be acting in good faith, but against consensus and process. Longer blocks will happen if this continues. Acroterion (talk) 11:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
AGF after he changed two articles, Miss World and Miss World 2015, into articles on Miss World 2016. Those aren't good faith edits IMHO....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm a little past AGF, but we generally don't block for a long time or indef on first offense for anything but obvious clear-cut vandalism. I'll keep an eye on it, but not too much optimism. Acroterion (talk) 11:44, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Didn't disagree with the length of your block. I just respectfully disagreed on the AGF statement based on this editor's other behavior. After your reply, I think we're on the same wave length. Cheers....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:47, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Agreed - we don't want to be too quick to permablock editors from the Encyclopedia Anyone can Edit unless they're writing POOP all over the place. Acroterion (talk) 12:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
He's done it again. Delinking from a valid article to a redlink with Miss Universe template. Here it is[33]....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:07, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm back from an out-of-town trip. Now blocked for a week, we'll go up the ladder to indef on the next problem probably. Acroterion (talk) 03:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Either later today or tomorrow I'm going to post something to this User's talk page to encourage him to edit pageant articles without them being disruptive. There are plenty of pageant articles that can use work. From now on you're bad cop to my good cop so far as this User goes. LOL....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I finally made that post to his talk page. Here it is.[34]...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:53, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Contested deletion of " Tourist attractions in the United Arab Emirates"[edit]

Hello, the article's marking for speedy deletion was contested in Talk:Tourist attractions in the United Arab Emirates#Contested deletion --MMC's (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome to re-start the article without copyrighted content and promotion, but it might be best hosted at Wikivoyage. It was deleted because copyrighted material was present in its first edit. Acroterion (talk) 17:51, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

TWA Flight 800 Page[edit]


You objected to my suggested changes to the TWA Flight 800 page, and I'm writing to ask if you'd consider discussing your specific objections. While I certainly agree that Wikipedia should steer clear of conspiracy theories, I also do not believe it should be a source of official misinformation (e.g. official pre-Iraq war misinformation linking Iraq to the 9/11 attacks). My edits may sound unbelievable on a first read, especially since I didn't source my rather long Talk page entry, but I assure you (and can provide you with source material for any claim/fact presented upon request) that they represent what the evidence shows and have been vetted by former high-ranking members of the original investigation including senior NTSB investigator Hank Hughes, TWA Chief Safety Officer Robert Young, Medical Examiner Charles Wetli, and party coordinator for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Rocky Miller.

Putting myself in your shoes now, I know that it is not enjoyable getting into a protracted discussion with someone who is just plain wrong on something, but who thinks he/she is right. So I propose that you only consider the radar evidence that disproves the official fuel-air explosion theory. It's pretty easy to grasp. Officially, the front of the center tank blew forward at low velocity (slower than sound), and this caused the front wall to rotate down and create a hole in the belly of the plane. The first debris items were sucked out of that hole. In contrast (and physically impossible within the official theory) debris was tracked by multiple radar sites ejecting from the area of the plane at high velocity off the right side. If I can't convince you of that, and how that disproves the official theory, we end our discussion.

Finally, there is a LOT of misinformation about this crash from all quarters, so Googling is not a useful tool to learn about it. You may find a recent and heavily-sourced article of mine helpful however, which explains how the major news outlets got the story wrong: How the Media Got TWA 800 Wrong.

Tom Stalcup (talk) 13:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

It's very simple. Wikipedia is not a means of promoting fringe views, which appears to be your sole purpose on Wikipedia. Until the New York Times or a consensus of similarly promiment media outlets gives those views authoritative credence as non-fringe ideas, Wikipedia must follow mainstream media, which use the NTSB report as the basis for events. Wikipedia is not a means of righting perceived wrongs. Acroterion (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
I understand, and I just reviewed the Wikipedia Guidelines more closely and my suggested edits on the TWA Flight 800 Talk page. I now agree that although the information I provided was accurate, I was providing more bandwidth than may be allowed for a minority viewpoint. Would you agree however, that what once may have been a fringe view may now be, due to the titles and number of former officials who publicly endorse it, a significant minority view?
Regarding me "promoting" such views, after re-reading my edits, I can see how some of my references to the whistle-blowers can give that impression. I plan to go over and correct any edits so affected and will let you know when I do.

Stalcup (talk) 20:52, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Well-stated on the bandwidth observation, that sums up WP:WEIGHT, except that weight is also determined by coverage of fringe, alternate or dissenting views in mainstream media, so simply having someone signed on to your POV is not enough. Their views have to have been discussed in major media as well, so that they are covered in secondary sourcing rather than using their views incorporated directly from primary sources. That is how Wikipedia sorts content, to prevent everybody who's ever expressed an opinion, credible or not, on practically anything from having to be discussed in the encyclopedia. Acroterion (talk) 23:02, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism on the Duck family page[edit]

Hi, I want to point out that yesterday the (now unprotected) article Duck family (Disney) was subjected to the usual vandalism, which I reverted. The vandalism was added again a few minutes ago, and I had to revert it again. --Newblackwhite (talk) 15:56, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Protected now for six months. Acroterion (talk) 16:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

British Isles[edit]

I edited an article on "The British Isles" which unjustly states that they "consist of the Great Britan the Island of Ireland and 6,000 other islands". This is not so. The Island of Ireland is not part of the "British Isles' nor is Great Brittan part of the "Irish Isles" and therefore the opening of the article is misleading. This moniker was formed by British geologists when Éire was colonised by the British. the greater part of Éire is no longer colonised by the British and so it is only fair that a qualification, "in British Colonial terms" be added to the opening sentance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rossa Ó Snodaigh (talkcontribs) 17:46, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Geographic naming is a tired partisan issue: see Sea of Japan/East Sea, Palestine/Israel, Persian Gulf/Arabian Gulf. We go by common usage, and therefore the British Isles are Britain and Ireland and others. Irish nationalism doesn't determine what the rest of the world says. We get disruptive editors from both sides, and neither are entitled to our patience. Stop your disruption, or expect to be blocked. Acroterion (talk) 23:06, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Augustus Rowe and Wes Covington[edit]

Unregistered users keep removing valid categories from these pages. Rowe's page says he is from Toronto and it is referenced but here[35], here[36], and here[37] a unregistered user has removed the category. I've asked in a edit summary, because he keeps moving around so a talk page post don't make much sense, as to why he removes People from Toronto. No answer has been given. The Wes Covington article is having similar experiences. After his baseball days were over, Covington lived in Edmonton. It is referenced and a Sportspeople from Edmonton category was put on the page but it has been removed here[38] and here[39] by an unregistered editor who keeps moving around. Can you do anything about this?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:32, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

They've been making a lot of edits like that. I've left a note on their latest IP: they're all part of a single user's IPv6 range, and it's hard to communicate under those circumstances, I may have to do a /64 block on theat IP. I'll check back this evening to see if it's gotten any better. Acroterion (talk) 17:25, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

TWL HighBeam check-in[edit]

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

  • Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
  • Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
  • Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. 20:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Appreciate the congrats for being right on Islamic terrorism[edit]

Was I right in that it was an attack page? Its tone was entirely negative. Adam9007 (talk) 23:23, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes. It was a coatrack article, the kind we often see in an election year from a partisan editor. I see they've veered into Godwin's Law already too. Acroterion (talk) 23:25, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm no expert in American politics, but the page seemed to be intended to harass Donald Trump to me. Was I right in saying the page didn't have to be unsourced to meet G10? As for the "page must not be blanked" during an AfD, not only did the AfD start after I tagged it G10, but the need to blank such content trumps (no pun intended) that surely? Adam9007 (talk) 23:37, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
You were probably dealing with a sock of a banned user who understands Wikipedia processes and who was trying to game the rules. I don't think it was essential that it be blanked, as it was only an indirect attack, carefully crafted to try to sow confusion, but I don't fault your actions. It was a fine example of a coatrack article intended to disparage, and I and other admins have little tolerance of such nonsense in an election year. You did the best you could, don't worry about it. Acroterion (talk) 23:43, 19 June 2016 (UTC)


Hi there. I've blocked User:Acroterion getting a crinkley bottom as a sock, which is likely. Please feel free to socktag if you know who it is, or blocktag, or DENY. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I blocked This is Blobby-C one (talk · contribs) who is undoubtedly somebody's sock a little while ago, and who created the same article as Mr. Crinkley-Bottom. Acroterion (talk) 23:32, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Deletion about the page created[edit]

Hi, Acroterion There is no reason to delete the page I created about Charlie Conte. Conte had join several TV Shows in the philipines why did you deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kazaro (talkcontribs) 02:49, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

The article described him as a blogger first and an actor second. Simply appearing in a show does not confer notability. Perhaps you can develop a draft in your userspace that has references, and which attaches appropriate priority to his claims to notability? Acroterion (talk) 02:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Hello Kazaro (talk) 02:50, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is strange.[edit]

How am I supposed to write an article on Wikipedia, it's so complicated, I've tried to create one and then you deleted it, why? Is there any guide on how make a new article or any hint how to do something on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HorCrux48 (talkcontribs) 01:24, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

You're right, it is strange. If you stick around you'll see lots of peculiar things.
For advice on your first article, take a look at WP:YFA. For notability of individuals, see WP:BIO. All articles, particularly biographies, have to credibly indicate that their subject is notable. That's why your article was deleted, there was no sign that the person you were writing about had received significant attention from major independent media outlets, which is the standard by which notability is judged. Acroterion (talk) 01:56, 25 June 2016 (UTC)


A7? That was obviously a hoax. Formed today, but has seats in the house of commons and the house of lords, and lead by Jeremy Corbyn? Of course... Adam9007 (talk) 02:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

That's fine too. Either way, it's gone. Acroterion (talk) 02:31, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, we'd have heard about it if Jeremy Corbyn or anyone like that had formed or led it, even if there was no EU referendum. Adam9007 (talk) 02:34, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
I understand he and Mr. Cameron are looking for jobs. Acroterion (talk) 02:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)


Another user who created the article is PavkoD (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). Perhaps a sock? Thanks! GABgab 19:08, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I deleted that creation too. I don't understand the objection to the username, if it's a personal alias I don't see a basis for a username violation, and they may have been simply trying to change their name after being templated. Acroterion (talk) 19:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[edit] (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

FYI — These two IPs: (talk · contribs · WHOIS) & (talk · contribs · WHOIS) are definitely the same user. Tevlev3 (talk) 03:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually, it's a 4chan raid, coordinated off-wiki. Thanks fpr the heads-up. Acroterion (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

NOTE: And now we've got another one: 2605:e000:1609:121:b17f:3a33:73b0:a370 (talk · contribs · WHOIS).
NOTE: More IP's: (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
2602:306:321B:58A0:FD9A:E0D4:57EB:EEBE (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
2607:FB90:4486:E221:BAA0:4FAE:FFA3:1317 (talk · contribs · WHOIS).

Tevlev3 (talk) 03:28, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

IPs blocked, 117 protected. Acroterion (talk) 03:32, 3 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi Acroterion, I need to know why I am banned to create a page named Vezeeta? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rana Hesham Mahfouz (talkcontribs) 14:56, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

You may not use Wikipedia for advertising. Acroterion (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)


Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

The Bugle: Issue CXXIII, July 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

There's a question would be I want to ask.[edit]

Hello, I've seen many wikipedia pages that unofficial pages have been given as external links. Even social media pages such as facebook fanpages and the other fan pages which are non-social media pages. Could we give that unofficial pages as external links on the pages ? Please check this a few example, the unofficial pages have been given as external links:

I gave facebook fanpage's link as external link onına_(dizi) (Miami Vice tv series's Turkish Wikipedia Page) but the mods deleted. I've got it back a few times and lastly they blocked me 'cause of vandalism (Violation of Wikipedia Rules) on The Turkish Mods are always creating problems. They've been making usurpation of powers. I don't know how can I inform-complaint to original management. Besides they've been ignoring the rules for their own. Example, there's a mod called "Sakhalinio" always creates football team pages especially related some Turkish football team called Fenerbahçe. He always brokes the rules. Doesn't call this "double standard" ? We informed him to Turkish Attendant Complaint Page but the others've been saving his back. Before he blocked our account supposed we did copyright violation. We only uploaded the images and they didn't violate any copyrights. If I'm wrong in this case then why the unofficial pages've been given as external links on the pages which I metioned above ?

Best Regards, --Vicenarcotics (talk) 07:23, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

See WP:ELNO for a discussion of the English Wikipedia's advice on external links to be avoided. In general, external links should be added sparingly, and only to external sites that offer serious, substantial content that extends the encyclopedic content of the article. Fansites are generally discouraged, and should be added on a case-by-case basis where they are clearly superior to the usual fan content.
As for the Turkish Wikipedia, I have no knowledge of their policies or actions and have no influence there, nor would anybody else on the English Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 11:31, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

You mean the policies of Turkish Wikipedia are different ? I thought wikipedia platform is an international page. Means that the rules're valid for all language and the same. There's a mod called "Eldarion" has taken our account's permission and putted white list because of this. We've sent an e-mail to him, said "we're gonna inform all of your acts to US Wikipedia Admins". He's answered to us with this way "Say hello from me to US Admins" You see the case. They think theirselves untouchable. Don't have any idea what would I do... --Vicenarcotics (talk) 09:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks[edit]

Hello A. Thank you for all the work that you performed on my user page. Yowza, I step away from the keyboard to watch a little TV and things go haywire. The trolls seem to be more active this summer than usual. Again much appreciated and I hope that you have a pleasant weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 04:07, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


FWIW, I appreciate you removing that ridiculous personal attack and it was the right move. But I've turned them into badges of honor ([40])... I mean, a Muslim Conservative Leftist Jewish ISIS supporter! What could be better!? (But seriously, thanks for removing that). EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 03:52, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Once editors start down that "anybody who disagrees with me is obviously a horrible person" rabbit hole it's rare that they climb back out. I should resurrect the Uncle Duce Award for Contradictory Ideology-Driven Editing award I gave to Antandrus long ago. Acroterion (talk) 12:06, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for deleting that. Sorry I missed it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:54, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. The trolls seem to be more active than usual this week. Acroterion (talk) 00:00, 13 July 2016 (UTC)



can i have permission to move the Brooke Loganpage alan≈

Why? Acroterion (talk) 22:51, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) There is no reason to move the Brooke Logan page. livelikemusic talk! 18:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)


Please RevDel this editor's comments on talk pages and edit summaries. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:03, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

In process between sleeper socks. Acroterion (talk) 01:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Add User:Avenger of Ariel‎ and User: to the list if they are not already there. Meters (talk) 01:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:10, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
I think we've got them all for now. Acroterion (talk) 01:14, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
The sinebot edit summary (at 09:33) following the IP's second edit should go too. Meters (talk) 01:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, this edit [[41]] Meters (talk) 01:19, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Got it, thanks. Acroterion (talk) 01:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)


Please RevDel this editor's comments on talk pages and edit summaries. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

User:In 1984, criticizing manga is thoughtcrime[edit]

The two above users seem to be the same user as the one who you recently blocked (in the section title). More info can be seen here. Thanks! (talk) 02:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, got them. I appreciate your help. Acroterion (talk) 03:01, 17 July 2016 (UTC)


I'm here to tell you that my reference to the phelps family is in the sense of COi. I said that only excepting edits by someone with a pro-feminist view to a gamergate related article would be like only excepting edits to the WBC article by the phelps family. Your lack of understanding of my comment doesn't mean much, but it just means you need to review what I said. Both cases would involve a COI. PHerhaps the PHelps family wasn't the best example, but it still applies that if we only allow one set of views on an article then either the editors pushing those views would have a COI or the article needs POV tags. I also on the same page where I mention the phelps faily use myself as an example. I'm a pilot for WestJet Airlines, and have been since 2008. I love working for WestJet and plan to for as long as I can (i'm 32 years old and still have quite a few more years of flying ahread of me.) If I was to start patrolling the WestJet article given my obvious pro-WestJet views, and I started redacting the insidents section or anything that may look bad in any way, then that would be pushing my POV and I'd have a conflict of interest. If alls you got on that comment is a misreading of it just because I mention the phelps family, then that's your fault not mine. I never compared anyone to the phelps family, I said that it would be a COI if we only allowed them to edit WBC related articles in the same way as it would be COI to only except edits by a pro-feminist article to gamergate. I've never said "feminists are like the phelps family." ever at all. Again, your misreading of my comment is purely your fault in mising the fact that I never said that feminists are like WBC. also people forget that I'm not too please with gamergate's side either.

Eric Ramus (talk) 04:28, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

On the subject of sources, I'm in the process of compiling a list of links i'm going to post on some talkpages soon, once I'm satisfied that I got enough. Right now it's in a word document. I'm not going to list points too detailed about these links, but I will give my brief summary of how each one relates to the article. So I am doing that. You'll see it when my list is complete.

Eric Ramus — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:51, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

You clearly don't understand what a conflict of interest is in this context: a COI is when you derive a benefit from making certain edits, as in being paid by an employer or client. It is not a COI to have an opinion, as you clearly do. By your standards anyone at all with an opinion, including you, has no business editing a given subject. We all have opinions, and we must set them aside when editing. You are attempting to exclude editors whom you view as presenting a point of view that differs from yours by alleging a conflict of interest while presenting your own point of view as objectively neutral. Neutrality is derived from a preponderance of sources, not from the opinions of individual editors. So far you have been appear to have been attempting an argument from semantics, not from sourcing.
Stop alleging a conflict of interest against other editors, particularly when you are using the allegation to gain an advantage by excluding editors you perceive to disagree with you.
I did not misread your comment about the Phelps family: you made a wholly inappropriate comparison on at least two levels, and you will be sanctioned if you do that again. There are an infinite number of inoffensive comparisons you could have made, but you chose a deeply offensive analogy, which can't be an accient. Acroterion (talk) 14:28, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

kid kid kid kid kid. You clearly don't get it. If a feminist comes along and wants to make achange to the Anita Sarkeesian article in order to push a feminist POV then that is POV pushing and their feminist oppinion presents a COI because they're using said feminist oppinion to push the idea that Anita Sarkeesian is always the victim let's say. IN the same way, if I was editing the WestJet article, and because I work for WJ and want people to fly with them, I decide to remove any references to insidents, then that too would be a COI on my part. Whether or not the people at West Jet paid me is regardless, I'd be trying to make the article non-neutral. IN comparison, what I proposed to Tropes vs. Women in Video Games was a re-wording of the sentance, to say "backlash and sexist harassment" rather than just "sexist harassment." How is that pushing my POV? I personally think she got almost no "sexist harassment" for that kick starter, that came after the vids came out. However, I'm not putting that because I don't know what was said. Also what about the fact that that source they're defending on the tropes vs. women in video games talk page that says the part about harassment is a god damn blog? Everybody seams to ignore that in favor of the status quo. and "semantics"? you sound like you're trying to accuse me of pushing the gamergate side which I disagree with. I have nothing to gain from editing that sentance, except a feeling that I helped Wikipedia make an article look more neutral. look at all my comments on the tropes vs. women talk page, since you'd rather stock me than deal with the article. ok kid?

Eric Ramus — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not interested in arguments in either direction, I'm addressing conduct and your misunderstanding of what a conflict of interest is, along with your continued misunderstanding of what administrators do and don't do. We don't adjudicate content. Use the talkpage, provide sources, and stop accusing those who disagree with you of a conflict of interest. And please learn how to sign your posts. Acroterion (talk) 00:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

An old friend[edit] (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). -- Softlavender (talk) 23:34, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Blocked, time sure moves fast on the Internet. Acroterion (talk) 00:00, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, you recently deleted priceblaze page. I had already removed the promotional content from the page. Kindly please review the deleted page.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharjeelashraf (talkcontribs) 11:41, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Priceblaze deletion[edit]

Hello, you recently deleted priceblaze page. I had already removed the promotional content from the page. Kindly please review the deleted page.

Thanks Sharjeelashraf (talk) 11:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

It was deleted as non-notable. Please see WP:WEB and WP:NOTE for the notability guidelines for companies and websites. Wikipedia is not a business directory or a platform for advertising. Acroterion (talk) 11:44, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Right. But as it is a price comparison website can I add it to comparison shopping website?Sharjeelashraf (talk) 11:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

No, if it's not notable enough for an article it's not notable enough for a list. Acroterion (talk) 12:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. Actually there are similar websites listed on comparison shopping such as, Can you tell why they are listed? Thanks again. Sharjeelashraf (talk) 12:03, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

I've removed a couple with no articles, thanks for spotting that. I'm not convinced that Priceoye is notable, but since it's received some press in major papers it's something that would need to be deleted through a formal deletion discussion if consensus agrees that that's not enough.. Acroterion (talk) 12:10, 19 July 2016 (UTC).

Right. Thank you for your time & explanation Sharjeelashraf (talk) 12:16, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


Can you please re-enable account creation for User:Mexicanbeachpebbles. The user did not have an intent to promote/advertise, but I agree the username sounds promotional. This user emailed the OTRS team under ticket:2016071910022961. Thanks. Music1201 talk 17:21, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Unblocked and welcomed. Acroterion (talk) 23:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi. Would you please tell me why you reverted this edit? Assisting US forces by Iran is better to come in military operations section; not international reactions. It had 3 good sources. Thanks. Maadikhah (talk) 07:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

My apologies, I did not scroll far enough down to see that you'd reorganized, rather than just removing the material. Acroterion (talk) 11:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Douglas Warrick deletion request[edit]

Hi. I was just wondering if you could delete the Douglas Warrick page. The person Douglas Warrick is my father, and he does not like having a wiki page because it contains false info about his early life and work. People also think he created it himself to let others know he is a famous biologist. He did not create it himself; it was apparently created by a guy called Robinh who I do not know at all. My dad is not a famous biologist and does not want people to start asking him questions about what he does (this has been happening frequently ever since his page was created). He tried to delete it himself but was blocked from editing because this was taken as vandalism, and I can't delete it because I have no administrator privileges, so would you be kind enough to delete it for us?

-Thanks! User:Anderswarr 01:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hmm - take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Douglas Warrick, which was closed as a keep in 2009 (and very complementary of his work). You could try putting it up for deletion discussion again, but I can't just delete it out of hand, and deletion discussions tend to attract attention. In general, folks are sympathetic to the wishes of someone who's not a public figure who'd rather not be on WP, but it's still a tough sell. As a start, we can cut out the material that's wrong. How about you or your dad emailing me privately about this for the sake of your privacy and your father's (you don't appear to have email enabled on your account)? Acroterion (talk) 01:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Valhalla train crash[edit]

I have A LOT of firsthand information on this incident, and probably the best independent private archive (other than anything held by NTSB etc) on the Valhalla train crash of February 3rd, 2015. I'm willing to add a lot of in depth material to the page.

However, if my material keeps getting altered and deleted, I will refrain from sharing my research and experiences as a firefighter with Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laststopvalhalla (talkcontribs) 03:43, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@Laststopvalhalla: Ordinarily I don't like responding to people on a third person's talk page, but in the interests of keeping this nascent discussion together, I will do it this time.
  • First, as regards your material being repeatedly "altered and deleted", please take a look again at the text above the edit window: "Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone—subject to certain terms and conditions." You agree to this when you edit and save your work. You cannot opt out of it. If you don't like these terms then you don't have to edit, as you seem to understand.
  • Second, to the specific edit of mine you reverted. "Encyclopedic" doesn't mean everything. I have deleted the numbers of the cars involved in the accident, as (I suspect) has Acroterion, because that information has not been shown as having any relevance to the incident itself; therefore it doesn't have to be in the article; that's too much detail. It is thus indiscriminate information and by general consensus reading of our editorial policies shouldn't be in the article, anymore than, say, the exact air temperature at the time and place of the accident would be. I apologize for not being able to explain this to you earlier to this level for lack of space in the edit-summary field
  • Lastly, it does sound like you have a lot of firsthand info on the accident. But our policies on firsthand material as article sourcing is, uh, sort of complex; I wouldn't say you can't use it, but it takes some care. And I would also commend this page to your attention.

    It is possible that some of what you have might be relevant to the article and usable as a source ... but the point of Wikipedia is to be an encyclopedia, not a repository. There are other Wikimedia Foundation projects where some of this source material might be more appropriate; I can certainly help direct you to them if you'd like. If not, nothing's stopping you from putting together a website of your own, which might at least qualify as an external link.

(Honestly, I'd be interested in what you have, if for no better reason other than to see if any of it touches on a theory I have, and that I've heard floating around Westchester when I've been down there since then and alluded to in comments sections, about a possible indirect contributing cause to the crash that I'm not comfortable talking about publicly at the moment). Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

SharkSSL Page Nominated for Deletion and Harrassment[edit]

Acroterion, you kindly helped me to get SharkSSL page in order when it was looking like advertising, etc. and made even edits to contribute and make it better. This editor MSJapan keeps attacking anything I've worked on and it's pretty obvious she twists and makes untrue statements despite I have answered all her questions. She accused me of COI and working for RealTimeLogic and has an open discussion for that too. I explained in detail that I don't work for Realtime, not a paid writer, and why I chose the topics, how they were inter-related and after that even started Draft for approval topic Lua Server Pages that has nothing to do with the other articles "other than that techology is used by realtimelogic products along with other companies listed". Would you kindly look at both the COI and the SharkSSL page and the other pages she had deleted Barracuda Application Server and Barracuda Web Server. I spend more time arguing with her and trying to respond to everything that I don't even have time to work on any article. Also, look at my talk page she was even taunting there that I should admit something that isn't true. For Barracuda my answers were not fast enough, as I don't do Wikipedia full time and they went for speedy deletion. I'm happy to work and fix anything, as I'm not experienced and only started doing this for almost 5 months and probably made mistakes, but this person offers nothing but negativity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorisen (talkcontribs) 11:43, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually, what I did was cut out the promotion you'd placed on Wikipedia. I was not convinced that the article was appropriate at all but did not pursue deletion. Now that someone has, I have no issue with the current nomination, and you're not being harassed. I too have concerns about a conflict of interest, given all the image uploads and promotional content in the original article. You're not helping by being so combative at AfD , and I support the deletion proposal. Acroterion (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Ok I think you are a fair guy and I respect your opinion. Can you help me save the original draft to an area that I can work on it? I need to read more on all of the rules and I know now there is a place that the article can be submitted for scrutiny for others to review before it goes live, such as I did for Draft Lua Server Pages. Regarding the images... I thought they would improve the content with visual reference, but I have no problem leaving them out completely. Sorisen (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Sorisen, the problem with your page is not the content: if it was only the content it will not go to AfD. The problem is that the company is not notable at this time. If the subject of the article is not notable, there is nothing that can be done. It is very clear that it doesn't belong to Wikipedia. It is possible that in a few years it may become notable and you may wish to try again at that time, but at this point it is clearly not. Also, it is very clear now that you have a COI. COI is not a problem in itself: we just encourage editors to be transparent about it. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:44, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting that article[edit]

Thanks for removing an article written by myself that failed WP:N, and telling me that stats do not tell notability. NasssaNser 13:12, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Shaman Poet[edit]

Forgot that the bot removes blocked accounts from AIV. Would you kindly revoke talk page access from The shaman poet (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • edit filter log • block user • block log)

Personal attacks continue days after your block ([42]). Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 07:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

TP access revoked. They already know how to use UTRS. Acroterion (talk) 11:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

i want to create Highfield Distillers company profile[edit]

i want to create Highfield Distillers company profile.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitin tyagi44 (talkcontribs) 11:45, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

You need to show that it is appropriate for inclusion in a global encyclopedia by providing evidence that it has ben noticed and documented by major independent sources. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not social media or a busines directory. You also need to declare any conficts of interest - you seem to be working in public relations. Acroterion (talk) 11:47, 26 July 2016 (UTC)


This troll completely ignored your warning (and another one from NeilN) and doubled down besides. It's time to pull the plug, yes? DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 12:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm about to leave for work and will be out of town the next couple of days. I'll look at it this evening when I get a chance. Acroterion (talk) 12:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm going to give a topic ban a chance, we'll see how it goes. Acroterion (talk) 01:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Seems to be working so far. Many thanks. DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 12:56, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Tom Ridge Wikipedia Page[edit]

Hello Acroterion,

So I am reaching out because you recently removed some of the links and edits I made to the following wikipedia page: I am new to wikipedia as you can tell, and I am trying to get this resolved. The information I am updating is factual and accurate information. The website is the correct website,, and the company name is the RIDGE-LANE Limited Partners. Could you please advise what I need to do so these changes stick? Thank you for your assistance.

Brs rodriguez (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

You added external links into the body of the article, which is considered linkspamming and is not allowed. You may correct the name if you can provide appropriate sourcing. Acroterion (talk) 00:51, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Gun show loophole[edit]

Hello Acroterion,

Another disruptive IP editor has jumped into this article and its talk page. Will you please take a look, and I am pinging Bishonen as well. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:44, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Gun show loophole: IP edit warring continues[edit]

Hi Acroterion, The problems of edit-warring IPs on Gun show loophole continues, with another IP (possibly the same one block evading—your earlier block—possibly a new one) doing the same as it did before. Could you lock the Gun show loophole page for a period to focus minds on the talk page and to allow a consensus to develop there without increased disruption on the page? Pinging Bishonen and Ymblanter as others who were involved in the earlier shenanigans. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:11, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Sorry - just seen Cullen's slightly earlier comment on this too... - SchroCat (talk) 08:12, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Ymblanter protected it. Bishonen | talk 08:39, 27 July 2016 (UTC).
I'm on the road today and tomorrow, so I won't be very available for intervention, thanks. 11:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC)


Congrats on 10 years here at the insane asylum. :) I hit the big 10 next month. We're getting to be the "old fogies" around here. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 05:09 on July 31, 2016 (UTC)


I believe this is a link to a legitimate website owned by MJ12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:56, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

I've blocked you before for similar mischief. It'll happen again if you don't stop. Acroterion (talk) 01:58, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Conspiracy mail[edit]

But hey, it might lead to something. FallingGravity 06:36, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for August 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beaucatcher Tunnel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Interstate 240 (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) 09:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you![edit]

Erdbeerteller01.jpg You saved that edit warring and you did blocked both editors :)

Oh wait i have buy about 30 strawberries in bowl for £25. *Gives strawberries 30* Well done! (づ。◕‿‿◕。)づ ~ Junior5a (Talk) Cont 03:23, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXIV, August 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:57, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

BeeSafe app review[edit]

Hello, I would like to ask which part of the BeeSafe safety app page did not meet the criteria and what was considered as advertising, other websites have their info on the Wikipedia. Thank you for response. Regards, matobeno1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matobeno1 (talkcontribs) 15:17, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

All of it. You appear to be trying to promote the app. Wikipedia requires that people, products, websites and other subjects provide evidence of significant coverage by major independent media to establish notability, and that articles be free of promotional content. The material in the article read as a marketing release rather than an encyclopedia article. Acroterion (talk) 15:20, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Jordan Wold[edit]


I'm curious as to why you removed the page a fan made for me, Jordan Wold, as I have founded a notable podcasting network, host multiple shows, and work as a comedian. I tweeted photographs of the article as it was written here. The sources were cited properly, and I'm curious as to what makes you say I'm not notable enough to have a Wiki page?

Best, Jordan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JordanWold (talkcontribs) 17:32, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

There was no credible assertion of notability as written: see the general notability guidelines and the notability guidelines for biographies for more. If it can be shown that you've received substantial coverage in multiple independent major media outlets, an article could be sustained. In essence, if the world at large thinks a subject is notable, then Wikipedia will think it's notable. You'll need coverage by recognized academic or journalism outlets. A quick search doesn't show me much outside of social media, blogs and user-generated content, none of which can substantiate notability. Do you know of anything else? Acroterion (talk) 18:55, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

9/11 truth movement - undo change[edit]

Hi, What does "Rv lede to summary of sourced material" mean? Regards, Petra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petra Liverani (talkcontribs) 06:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

The lead paragraph of an article summarizes the sourced content of the rest of the article. You changed it so that it no longer represented the sources, which state that adherents of 9/11 Truth organizations are broadly considered conspiracy theorists in mainstream publications. Please see WP:LEDE and WP:FRINGE for more. Acroterion (talk) 06:40, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

"Conspiracy theorist" is a pejorative term that I would think is best not used in an encyclopedic article. I don't believe I changed meaning, I simply used a non-controversial term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petra Liverani (talkcontribs) 07:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia describes fringe theories and fringe theorists what they are called in mainstream journalism and scholarship. Watering such descriptions down to fit a personal point of view is discouraged, and since Truthers posit a vast ongoing conspiracy, they are the archetypal conspiracy theorists. You are presently edit-warring over this and over links to every 9/11 conspiracy group, please stop. Acroterion (talk) 11:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Block evasion[edit]

User:What a failed attempt at being funny is obviously a sockpuppet of User:JimBobBoJack, whom you just recently blocked. Cheers. (talk) 04:21, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

wiki page creation[edit]

Hi I have created a wiki page for my model friend. However the page got deleted.

Would be gr8 if you can provide the guidelines for creating page or reference to it . for your information i have copied the text from other reference ppl for structure and updated the content related to model i work with. I just copied the wiki structure from other person not their content — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrvishnu (talkcontribs) 03:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Your friend isn't notable yet - see WP:NOTE, and you appear to be trying to drive traffic to her Instagram account. Please don't use Wikipedia for promotion. Acroterion (talk) 03:08, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Category:Morris Lapidus buildings[edit]

Hello. Would you object to renaming it Category:Buildings designed by Morris Lapidus?Zigzig20s (talk) 15:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

That's fine with me. Acroterion (talk) 23:31, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Jefferson Starship[edit]

Did I screw up cleaning the page move vandalism? Adam9007 (talk) 01:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

In cases like these it's simplest for admins to do the cleanup - the interface allows us to combine the move back to the original title and the deletion of the redirect. But yes, it's Jefferson Starship, not Jefferson Khan Starship. Acroterion (talk) 01:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I moved it, but then realised the "Khan" was still there; I moved it to the wrong target! Adam9007 (talk) 01:29, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
It happens, no problems. Acroterion (talk) 01:29, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Your templating of a user's talk page[edit]

This morning, you placed this template on a user's talk page:

<unnecessary blocking templates removed>

You then, without explanation, changed it to this:

Why did you do that? (talk) 11:33, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Because I made a mistake with the template and corrected it. Why is this important? Stop messing with 31.x's talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 11:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

deleted page[edit]

Hi Acroterion

you recently deleted a page called beBee. I am not sure why. I was writing it and I am only a user on their platform so I have no idea why you tagged it as promotion. I wrote what i found about them after a heavy research. This is my first entry on wiki, so if something was not correct, you could have just warned or changed. All what I have said there was properly backed up by the articles published about them. this is pretty discouraging that I add something genuinely and you just delete it.

The company has over over 11 million users and you tag it as not proper back up sources. Your feedback is more than welcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Several versions of this topic have been deleted by four different administrators as advertising. The version I deleted was BeBee, Inc., the other was BeBee. Each version appears to have been written to promote rather than to describe. Draft:BeBee has been declined for lack of notability. If it has reached the notability threshold it might be developed from there. Please use your account to do so if it is possible. 10:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


Hello A. I wanted to let you know about this Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Reporting email abuse nonsense. I hope that, in spite of this, you enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 18:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Update: Thankfully the thread has already been removed by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. MarnetteD|Talk 18:15, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Here to serve! Muffled Pocketed 18:19, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
No doubt we'll see another thread in a couple of weeks accusing NeilN or Fortuna of the same thing. Thanks for keeping me in the know. Acroterion (talk) 20:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Marked for deletion before event posted - lost almost all text I wrote.[edit]

Hi Acroterion,

I am devasteded, as my whole article has disappeared. Not sure if it happened between my initial post and my edit, but I spent a long time writing about a new trend and genre inside the sound system world, for which I am organizing a festival (global first), and I wanted people to be able to read about it and the background for it. however now all is lost but the first 5 lines. I have not posted to Wikipedia before, so possible I have not done it right. Is there anyway you can retrieve from cashe, what I wrote before it got marked to be deleted.

Thank you very much.

H — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mousaisound (talkcontribs) 17:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm happy to place it in a sandbox in your userspace, but please remember that Wikipedia isn't an appropriate place for you to promote your endeavors. You can find it at User:Mousaisound/sandbox. Acroterion (talk) 02:11, 29 August 2016 (UTC)