User talk:Buffs/IP & New Users

Due to persistent harassment from an indef blocked user, my main talk page is semi-protected. Accordingly, I've created this page which is exclusively for IP users and Newly Registered Users.

Texas A&M Bonfire Edits[edit]

Howdy, Buffs. If a citation from the student newspaper at A&M quoting several of the student medics who were present the night of the collapse is not a sufficiently reliable news source, then what, in your interpretation of the reliable sources criteria, would be? After reviewing over the WP:RS page, I saw nothing about the source or the article that I can see conflicts with the standard. Could you please elaborate on your opinion why The Battalion doesn't fit? Is it that the article consists greatly of interviews, or is there bias on your part of a student news organization? There are other sources out there which backup the facts, such as the Texas Monthly interviews from the November 2009 article, and the Dallas Morning News from the same period. Would that satisfy your interpretation, or would the fact that the source contains mostly interviews prompt you to undo the entry again? It's not my intent to come across as hostile, but I am a bit confused, if not frustrated. Thanks! Hundredacreaggie (talk) 18:41, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I went back through some of your talk page archives when I saw you've been editing since 2007—you're Class of '01 as well?

Hundred Acre Aggie (talk) 19:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a proud member of the class of 2001 and have been editing for a while now. Welcome to the mix. My primary concern is that the assertions you made weren't reflected in the publication cited. However, I stand highly corrected and Upon further re-reading of said article I realize that one of my upperclassmen in my outfit (Jay Sartain) was mentioned in the article.

I stand corrected and your edits certainly were apropos. I have corrected the addition to reflect your changes.

on a side note, I was scheduled to work that night at stack and is only by a fluke I wasn't out there when it collapsed. I lost 7 friends that night. 18 hours after collapse, I met my future wife, though we didn't realize it until 5 years later. I take the account of the collapse seriously and I over reacted. My utmost apologies. Buffs (talk) 05:55, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, what a small world. Jay and I are old medic friends. I will never forget rolling up on scene after getting paged out and seeing him up on top of stack in a red tank top in that freezing weather, crawling around like a monkey. He had assumed triage command since he lived on campus and was one of the first TAMU EMS officers to arrive. I don't know how he didn't get hypothermia up there, but then again, we all were kind of on auto-pilot.

I can relate well to your fluke comment. I staffed the medic truck often, and was originally going to be out there that night, but because I needed to study for an exam, was at home. When I couldn't sleep in the truck, I'd go out, crawl around stack, and chat with the guys. I couldn't sleep that night, and was wide awake when my pager went off and phone rang. Nothing like a "there but for the grace of God" moment to make you think long and hard about your life.

Thanks again for the welcome. I'm in grad school now, and probably won't edit all that often, but as I dig through articles that relate to my area of expertise, I have noticed, from time to time, errors that need fixing. Instead of just editing as an unregistered user, as I have for over a year now, I figured it's time to actually join the fray. Hundred Acre Aggie (talk) 07:36, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are they spraying? The question indicates a conclusion that hasn't been proven...[edit]

I added the links to What in the World are they Spraying to the Talk page - but as for the congressional stuff, dunno where and not got time to look that out. As there seems to be a bit of an edit war on the page - I leave it to you or those that want to add mention of the movie into the page. - Of course critical review of the movie would be good too. BUT as of now IMDB lists it as a documentary.

M —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.96.60 (talk) 09:28, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear respected sir,

I would suggest that you also read and respect Wikipedia's user edibility in regards to my edit from Texas Qatar A&M page. Wikipedia is where it is due to generosity from users like me who take out the time and contribute to it the truth as I (an employee and resident of Education City) see it, despite its rather foggy credibility.

However I also appreciate and respect your right to freely edit any Wikipedia page.

regards, Hurfy Durfy Hamrak

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.36.49.1 (talk) 21:03, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to have a look under research - I'm assuming that Hut101 added the part about the Nuclear Science Center (back in 01/2007), but the way he wrote it, it would appear that A&M got a new reactor, when in fact all that happened was the reactor was refueled, with fuel that has a lower U235 content. In other words, the first 2 lines of the last paragraph are completely wrong, and should be fixed ASAP. Check the article he linked it to for verification (Reference #68). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.198.10 (talk) 09:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

360training.com Conflict of Interest issue[edit]

Re: discussions on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:360training_wikimaster

Thank you for coming to my aid, Buffs. I would be very thankful indeed for anything you could share from your experience about COI issues. I'm an editor and I understand editors are bound to have disagreements. But I am willing to be bound to a commitment to produce an objective article -- no less objective than that of Blackboard or HSBC, or the University of Phoenix which I'm using as models of sorts.

My immediate problem is that Daniel Case has blocked my account. He gives helpful advice and says I need to either create a new username or change my username. He suggests the former more strongly. My only problem with that is that I don't want to lose the trail of helpful (albeit somewhat tedious) discussions about COI. So I'm opting to go the "change username" route. I tried to do this but was unable to....

If you can view my talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:360training_wikimaster , this message appears:

>This blocked user is asking to be unblocked to request a change in username. 360training wikimaster (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock)

Requested username: your new username here (talk · new username here account availability check)<

The new username I'm trying to create is fatherseyes_snapblogs . But this doesn't seem to be reflected here.

I would value your opinions and advice. Am I taking the right route? Why can't I change my username? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.55.111.146 (talk) 14:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in response. I'll happily pass along your request and see what we can get done here. Buffs (talk) 21:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Buffs, I was happily surprised to find my account unblocked! thanks for taking me under your wing. I've been thinking of volunteering on Wikipedia in my spare time, when I don't have editorial moonlighting load. I still think it's a very dynamic place to work and learn in, but was beginning to get discouraged about my own Wikipedia article. This environment seems tougher than a newsroom and I realize there are a lot of sharks out there. You really need someone to help you navigate the waters. I'll follow your advice and update you on my progress. all the best 360training wikimaster (talk) 11:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Texas Aggies 2006 Football Season[edit]

Hey, I was hoping to fix some little details on said page, such as the flyover info (the numbering seems to be written from the Longhorn perspective, and doesn't make sense on the Aggie page) and saw in the history you had info on a discussion about content on that page. I didn't see anything on the talk page, so I was wondering if you could direct me to that discussion so I don't tread on anyone's toes. Thanks! 209.116.239.178 (talk) 06:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No reason you can't rewrite it. It looks like a copy/paste job from the 2006 Texas Longhorns season, so it's going to have some references in there that aren't necessary (who cares who was in the audience rooting for Texas in the A&M article?). However, the basic tone is neutral and factual, so stick to that kind of style and you should be fine. Buffs (talk) 20:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Change in username of 360training_wikimaster[edit]

Hi Buffs, I made a change username request on my talkpage, i.e.

  Would like to request a change in username to:  fatherseyes_snapblogs.

Is this the right way to go about this? 360training wikimaster (talk) 11:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your Wikipedia entries[edit]

I've actually started to write content on my User page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:360training_wikimaster/360training.com. Would appreciate it if you could give your comments when you have the time to check this out. I'd also love to check out the articles you wrote - where you said you were kind of involved with the subject of your articles, but managed to come up with an encyclopaedic entry so I can make these references/models. thanks 360training wikimaster (talk) 12:01, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading of new logo image[edit]

Hi Buffs, I re-uploaded a logo of 360training.com on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:360training_logo.jpg , beefed up the rationale. Did I execute this correctly? 360training wikimaster (talk) 15:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. This logo does not meet the criteria of being copyrightable in the first place, so, despite its status as a trademark, it is considered a PD image. I keep an example repository of such images on User:Buffs/FBS Trademarked logos. You can use File:ECU_logo.gif as a template. Buffs (talk) 16:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My User page deleted by Bwilkins[edit]

Hi buffs, about 3 hours ago, I opened my 360training_wikimaster userpage and found a recommendation for deletion by a Yunshui. But right after I posted my reply/appeal/reason for his not deleting my post, my user talk page was quickly deleted by Bwilkins.

Here was his message on my User page. A tag has been placed on User:360training wikimaster/360training.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam. If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Yunshui 雲水 09:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Here was the argument I posted on my user page in response to this --

This page is not unambiguously promotional because it belongs to a notable topic of interest, particularly elearning. Blackboard also has an entry on Wikipedia and is proof of the notability of the subject. 360training.com represents a branch of elearning which is becoming more significant in the last 4 years -- compliance learning -- especially in the light of the global financial crisis. More and more industries are now under strict government regulation and professionals need to pass stringent standards, including taking continuing education. But using online learning for compliance is something that was controversial until companies possessing expertise in this sub-field proved otherwise. 360training.com is one such company.

Because of the systems it has proposed to government bodies that consulted with the company elearning courses have been accepted as continuing education media. This is true especially of 360training.com which is recognized by over 300 government agencies (these agencies are all referenced here for verification). But this has also become true for other elearning providers.

Compliance education, of which 360training.com is a recognized pioneer, is an important step in the evolution of elearning. The private sector-nation/state partnership implication of this is particularly significant. Blackboard does not have this capability and expertise. 360training.com content therefore provides/fills in important missing information on Wikipedia.

Further, this has been the subject of discussion involving Bwilkins and Buffs [refer to earlier entries on talk page]. A constructive concession has been arrived at where Buffs has agreed to critique and provide guidance to the author of this content. 360training wikimaster (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm beginning to think these guys are the ones who have conflict of interest in this matter. Are they trying to protect other elearning companies on Wikipedia who might be feeling threatened?

POST-DELETION OF 360training.com and blocking of user[edit]

Hi Buffs, I'm sorry it has taken me some time to get back on. As I mention above, my original 360training.com was deleted. Nobody attended to my request for change of username. I think Hammersoft is deaf to my arguments and hasn't addressed these. Instead, he responded in a backhanded way by not approving my request for name change and deleting my account/blocking me. Wikipedia certainly seems to be more of a cut-throat corporate ladder than an editorial room where people are free to throw ideas around and wrestle with these in a spirit of fair play. He's a bully. I don't know what his editorial credentials are. But he seems to be really enjoying pulling his weight around here. I can see you're one of the few people who stand up to him head to head.

So where am I now? Is my cause hopeless? I don't believe in that word. I would really appreciate a word of advice from you. I know you seem to be busy in your own battles. But when you have time to lend a hand to a beaten down newbie, I'd really be thankful. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.55.220.34 (talk) 20:10, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talked with IP via email Buffs (talk) 04:49, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.122.75.14 (talk) 14:19, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dodge Tomohawk, sockpuppet of sennen goroshi?[edit]

I think that 136.158.59.173 is a sock of sennen goroshi? Edit warring on dodge tomahawk again, as they have previously.106.69.53.60 (talk) 04:15, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possible, I suppose. But I don't think we've ever met. I'm not an admin. I recommend WP:SPA. Buffs (talk) 04:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutralhomer[edit]

Regarding "If someone took that as a death threat, I think their skin needs to be toughened up a notch." The point being, someone did take it as a death threat, Cullen328. Even after he was called out for his gross mischaracterisation of an easily checked post, Cullen328 doubled down rather than just admit a mistake was made and accept that if Wikipedia Administrators can get it so spectacularly wrong when the stakes are that high, then the rest of that block log probably is more fiction than fact too. I think you owe it to Neutralhomer to push back a little harder on people like Cullen328 when then try and pull this sort of BS and then have the sheer gall to dress it up as "compassion", otherwise it will continue to be true that ""Wikipedia and it's editors are not very ... willing to correct an incorrect action". Spoken like a man who has been on Wikipedia since 2007, clearly. Glory Be To Jog (talk) 01:33, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I find it very odd that you are jumping into this as your first action. You're clearly the account of someone else and as such, I feel you are appropriately blocked, but it should be as an WP:SPA. As for the meat of your argument, two wrongs don't make a right. Just because NeutralHomer was mischaracterized in this instance, it doesn't mean he isn't appropriately characterized elsewhere. Likewise, that doesn't mean I endorse/condemn Cullen328 either. That wasn't the question at hand. Buffs (talk) 21:31, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]