- 1 Decline Speedy Deletion
- 2 Hello
- 3 A beer for you!
- 4 Xavier West
- 5 November 2016
- 6 Mindstir Media AfD
- 7 Nick VanderLaan
- 8 ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
- 9 FYI
- 10 A bowl of strawberries for you!
- 11 Nomination of Elenor Rayner for deletion
- 12 A Duffbeer for you!
- 13 Commonwealth Freedom of Movement Organisation
- 14 Speedy deletion declined: Tribunal Records
- 15 Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories
- 16 For your information
- 17 Freeman article.
- 18 Skipp Williamson
- 19 James J. Leonard Jr.
- 20 Disambiguation link notification for April 12
- 21 Jack McCauley
- 22 Ill Slim Collin
- 23 Redcola music
- 24 Oculus VR
- 25 Message to you
- 26 Thank you!
- 27 Thank you so much for your great piece of advice!
- 28 Oleg Bezuglov for deletion
- 29 Concrete Roots Is Not A Bootleg
- 30 No Air
Decline Speedy Deletion
Hello Duffbeerforme, This is to inform you that a page which you nominated for speedy deletion was declined Due to an AFD Discussion. Please read This before nominating an article for speedy deletion.
- Pages created by a topic-banned user may be deleted if they come under that particular topic, but not if they are legitimately about some other topic.
A beer for you!
|Good contribution to wikipedia, Happy editing. Historical Ben (talk) 15:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)|
You PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:58, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- If you continue using this kind of nonsense edit summaries without providing any proofs then I will take it to ANI. --Riferbare (talk) 06:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Mindstir Media AfD
In reviewing your filing at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JessikaRita, I noticed you struck some comments by the accused users at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mindstir Media with a notice that they are confirmed sockpuppets. The investigation showed that one of the accounts that you struck was unrelated, and another was CheckUser-confirmed but not to the account you linked them to. I think that you probably just missed the CheckUser's comment that they're unrelated (it's below the long list of confirmed accounts). I've corrected your comments in the AfD archive and left a note for the closer in case they'd like to reevaluate, although I doubt the result would change. Just letting you know. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:04, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- User:Ivanvector. I only struck comments by Riferbare, the only confirmed sock in the AfD. I did not strike any others and did not identify a master as that was still under investigation. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
You must have a very specific agenda against a Nick VanderLaan article. Per WP:G4 – "It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version". My article on VanderLaan is nothing like the previous deleted version, which can been seen here. I have provided many independent sources and the article clearly meets WP:GNG. Have you actually considered the article's quality or have you put it up for speedy purely because you wanted it deleted last time? DaHuzyBru (talk) 09:17, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Regarding the creator of Rockerrazzi which you sent to AFD in November, I've identified them as a sock and undisclosed paid editor. So far nobody has disagreed and they've been blocked. There is a lot of tidying up to do. Cheers SmartSE (talk) 10:29, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
A bowl of strawberries for you!
|I appreciate your SPI work - always need something to keep me busy GABgab 17:16, 29 December 2016 (UTC)|
Nomination of Elenor Rayner for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elenor Rayner until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 19:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
A Duffbeer for you!
|And please help me improve Tres Watson|
Commonwealth Freedom of Movement Organisation
Speedy deletion declined: Tribunal Records
Hello Duffbeerforme. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tribunal Records, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article contains sources that were not published when the lack of sources led to deletion last time, so it's not substantially the same. Thank you. SoWhy 19:43, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories
This is a notice that a discussion you participated in, either at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 February 8 has resulted in a Request for comment at Wikipedia talk:User categories#Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:39, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
For your information
You are 100% wrong about freeman. He invented Electronic Talk'N Play. I know for a fact. One should do some research before making such aspersions − Duffbeerforme, your tone to me is accusatory and misguided. What matters is the man is notable and tons of references back this up. Plus there are tons more never used. What zealots might have done prior should have no effect on the future of the article. Recently a re-post of an old Larry king interview came up where Larry refers to him as “One of America’s reigning geniuses.” Can you post this to the article, assuming something like this is an acceptable wiki source, so it is done properly and non-promotionally to your standards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ecpub7_y7o4
firstname.lastname@example.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
− − Everything I say is correct but inappropriate to disclose on a public format like this. Easily provable. Easily verifiable. Can you email me so we can get this article resolved? The goal is simply to meet the wiki criteria? Nothing more. Nothing less. Nothing is being sold, promoted, or is there any wish to be promotional. Thanks, email@example.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 09:44, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
− − We are about 800 students (with a group) who still follow Dr. Freeman, who was our professor. He is not involved in the group. None of us are wikipedians and have little idea how to fix this article to your liking. Please email me so you can give us guidance so this gets back up properly. That is the only goal!! firstname.lastname@example.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 01:22, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- "We" are 800 people. Really, they know you're talking on their behalf? He was your professor? Check out WP:COI. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:11, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
− − Freeman article. Hi Duffbeerforme, I noticed you have stubied this article on more than one occasion. The article has been fixed to a great extent, the man quite notable, supportive references in place, and unlike so many other articles on Wiki, there is no commercial bent here. Nothing is being promoted or sold. The man is widely known (which is obvious from the references) and your unwavering negative bias seems odd. You should recuse yourself from further involvement with this article and person. If the article is truly so onerous that it requires stubied, others will figure this out. I am also not sure why you think everyone is a paid-spammy? I know I am not so please do not put that title on me as well. Thanks, Frank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 04:57, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Question, How best to proceed? Can you please answer this question? Freeman (Michael j.freeman article) is a truly accomplished guy and was my professor. Larry King called Freeman one of America’s Top Reigning geniuses (hear is a recent re-post of what King said here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ecpub7_y7o4, Freeman won the intel science fair at 13 by inventing computer memory (Time Magazine article), he invented touch tone phone branching, i.e. touch #1 for this choice or #2 for that (Kiplingers magazine and US Patent), he spoke at Harvard (I was there), he invented the first smart toy (named 2-XL) , won Mattel’s inventor of the Year Award for Kasey the kinderbot in 2001 etc. How does this article get fixed properly? Who knows how to do it so it meets Wiki’s strict standards? This article deserves to be up in a clear and non-promo way? But how? Who can do this so it is proper? Please advise? Thanks AnthonyDelpregno@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 03:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
- Hello. Visiting here on my matter and I noticed this. WoW the article has been ruined. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_J._Freeman&oldid=744757302 (previous version). Where exactly is the "paid editing" you mention? The COI is obvious, but that is an on going problem with professor articles with many of them being allowed to make a big COI mess on the project. This particular subject seems to me an uninvolved editor, to be worthy of more encyclopaedic coverage here.TeeVeeed (talk) 12:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- So I have manually restored the article. That was just sad Duff! I have opened a discussion on the article Talk Page which is where COI editors need to be Talk:Michael J. Freeman.TeeVeeed (talk) 13:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- TeeVeeed "Where exactly is the "paid editing"". Perhaps have a look. Who created the article? That would be User:Renzoy16. Check out his user page. Under the heading of "Conflict of interest" is the statement "The following is a complete list of paid freelance projects;". On that list is "Michael J. Freeman — done for a brother of Mr. Freeman.". Clear belatedly declared paid editing. Others did not disclose but were clearly paid.
- In case you are wondering why I did not answer the last comment above from the 800 people above, they removed their question here. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply. Oh Okay, the article was essentially a paid creation. The 800 or so interested COIs have been directed to the article Talk Page and I am hopeful they like it there? Paid articles are a three-way prob. for me. One----volunteer editors such as myself, and you I presume, giving paid articles "extra" TLC and attention when that is not exactly organic and we are doing work for someone who got paid for it yuk. BUT----on the other hand it is a slippery slope to "punish" the articles or topics, (we are punishing the project users at that point and the project), for any ignorant or mercenary problems by editors, and THREE the insidious possibility of "punishing" a subject topic, or article, like a company for instance who has diabolically COI-edited a competitor hoping that we will "punish" the article. I showed the topic a little ♥ and hope for more improvement. It was correct that refs were bad, but I think I checked them all nowTeeVeeed (talk) 00:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Duffbeerforme, I tried to eliminate the 2 templates you placed on the freeman article after the fix up, but soon realized it is "protected" , so you can do this and not I. Please remove the two templates. Thanks, Drycroft4 (talk) 09:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
- I have no special powers to remove templates that others can't. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
I see you previously deleted the Skipp Williamson article as sockpuppets of Mamadoutadioukone had created it. Well, the article is back again; another sock drawer may need cleaning out. Schwede66 19:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
hello. I created the article using an old account which I do not use anymore-forgot password and using a different account now. So----in this matter I have been using my IP so as not to appear as a SP, not sure if this is the best way to go here. And, I don't quite understand your points? If you do a search for James Leonard lawyer, you will find a lot of references. The news link checker in your AFD goes to "nothing" but that is not correct because of the name. 2601:80:4300:155E:80A8:B5DF:D340:7D46 (talk) 11:59, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James J. Leonard Jr. is the place for this discussion. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:20, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Our Home, Our Land, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Neil Murray and Tiddas (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.
You deleted cited articles. What is your purpose here? You cannot delete correct citations. Please respond as to why and how these violate Wiki rules on articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MintonBrice (talk • contribs) 16:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
- The articles talk page is the best place to discuss your Wiki rules violations. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Ill Slim Collin
You deleted a article with strong sources. What is your purpose here? You delete correct article. This Article got so many sources like THIS IS 50, DUBCNN, SICCNESS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickEAST83 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Since you PRODded this article, please also look at those that Grindlechee mentioned on that page's talk page:
- User:Rms125a@hotmail.com, "Sourced" text that says something the source does not.
- The page said "To develop the new product, Luckey founded Oculus VR with Scaleform co-founders Brendan Iribe and Michael Antonov, engineer Jack McCauley, Nate Mitchell and Andrew Scott Reisse."
- The source (press release straight from Luckey himself) used says "We’ve expanded the team with some amazing key hires." The source says Jack McCauley was hired by Oculus VR, not that he was a founder. Since he was not a founder I removed him from the list of founders. See my comment "source says McCauley was not a founder"  the first time I removed that text.
- See also the source from the Jack McCauley page that has been used to support the claim he was the founder. "The company hired Jack McCauley, the lead engineer of Guitar Hero, to oversee the Rift’s manufacturing process." . duffbeerforme (talk) 02:43, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Message to you
- To expedite the situation it would be best if you could put me in contact with yourself and your lawyers. Could you please provide details so that I can get in touch with the first point of contact. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:10, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your great piece of advice!
After taking your advice into consideration, I did few exercises to have better understandings of the Wikipedia New Article Creation Guidelines and gone through all the Wikipages you have advised me to go through like conflict of interest, conflict of interest guideline, FAQ for organizations, WP:DISCLOSE, WP:SPAM, content policies, WP:PAID, neutral point of view, sourcing, autobiographies
I would also like to mention that I don't have any external relationships with any of the people/place neither getting WP:PAID to do so.
Its my personal interest to try and create my first successful article, I started creating article with Toradex first, I'm working on to meet the Wikipedia guidelines to get my first article to be live, And I have also created couple of other articles too, but those articles also got deleted, So I have started again with my first article, recently found few reliable sources which are valid.
- I'm not talking about just being paid directly to create an article. There is also, as a non specific example, working as a companies SEO Specialist and writing about that company is a COI that NEEDS to be declared. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:14, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Oleg Bezuglov for deletion
Since you sometimes contribute to AfD discussions, could you, please take a look at the Oleg Bezuglov article and express your opinion in discussion on whether it should be deleted or not. It was nominated on suspicion of not passing the WP:MUSICBIO criterion. The discussion is currently dead in the water, and I'm afraid it might be relisted again because of that. Thanks in advance! Fiddler11 07:15, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- I am currently not in a position to do a full check so won't be !voting at this point but a quick look suggests that this page is pure promotion so should be deleted. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:08, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Concrete Roots Is Not A Bootleg
Is their some personal reason you continue to refer to the Dr. Dre Concrete Roots Compilation album as a "Bootleg" Aside from just being untrue & Your Personal Opinion. it's also slanderous to the Attorneys, Record Labels, Publishers and Distributors who invested their time & money into the album. At the time the album was created Dr. Dre had long ago signed away his rights to any of the Material utilized on the album. All songs were legally licensed through the Publishing Co. & the Record Labels who Owned All Rights & Licensing Authority to the Compositions. Concrete Roots was Mfg & Distributed by Rhino/Warner Brothers (who to my knowledge have never & would never touch a "Bootlegged" album) Just because you keep ref. to Dre's comment on MTV stating that he didn't like the Album, Tuff it doesn't mean it was "Bootlegged" At the time Dre made that statement he was in the mists of "Creating a New Gangster Image" for himself. Understandably Concrete Roots may have been "Inconvenient" for the narrative he was trying to promote, but it certainly doesn't Mean it was Bootlegged, That is just something you made up in your head. So unless you can produce documentation such as a Lawsuit or a court action please leave your personal opinion out of the article ... Respectfully !!! Wiki-dos808 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 12 July 2017
- Thanks for pointing out my mistake, such unethical releases are not bootlegs. duffbeerforme (talk) 23:12, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
I added the official Broadcast Music Incorporated listing, which does credit Steve Russell as a writer. No idea why the liners omit it. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:02, 10 September 2017 (UTC)