User talk:Edcolins

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Patent troll[edit]

Thanks for reviewing my contribution to Patent troll. I saw the article about LOT in the SF Chronicle, and went to Wikipedia for more information. When I could not find it, I added the section to patent troll. That is what I like about Wikipedia. When something is wrong or missing, I can fix it.

Thanks for your other corrections to this article and your many contributions to Wikipedia, including being an administrator. Comfr (talk) 19:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Edcolins (talk) 21:18, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

CIPA Past Presidents[edit]


Can I ask why you have added a 'citation needed' tag to the list of CIPA Past Presidents spanning 1944 - 1990?

Thanks Member Wise (talk) 06:59, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Reference for complete list added. Member Wise (talk) 07:26, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

User Talk:Jytdog vandalism[edit]

I wanted to let you know that the vandalism you recently reverted on User Talk:Jytdog was recently reapplied by a different, but similar, IPv6 address. It probably merits further monitoring and, possibly, a block ban if it persists. Jtrevor99 (talk) 20:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I also noticed possible long-standing vandalism using the same image at User talk:7mike5000 and User talk:Beegneekolai. Jtrevor99 (talk) 20:09, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. The first one (User talk:7mike5000) seems to fall under free speech. I've reverted the second one. --Edcolins (talk) 12:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Something to Remember You By (disambiguation)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Something to Remember You By (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnecessary page, refer to WP:TWODABS.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 06:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Software patents under TRIPs Agreement[edit]

Hi Edcolins,

I'm not quite sure what the problem is that you see with my edits. As I found this page it read like a debate between two editors and I was attempting to render it into a single voice. Hence, my use of the term 'offending' - this was not a subjective judgement on my part, but merely an observation that the quote had in fact been objected to by another editor.

The problem with the quote is this. Although it represents a comment by a recognised authority and is thus a useful reference for characterisation of European law, it also introduces the non-legal issue of economic motivation. I submit therefore that it is quite proper to base a paragraph on it, rather than reproducing the quote.

The issue that this article discusses is the treatment of patents under TRIPS and the section in question is concerned with the relevance of Article 27 to this issue. The difference between US and European views of this would seem to be highly relevant.

Also, if you are going to remove that paragraph, then you remove the context for the following one, which becomes a non-sequitur.

Hope this helps to clarify,

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalfro (talkcontribs) 20:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Unfair competition[edit]

[[Unfair competition]] has become a disaster. Do you feel up to fixing it up? PraeceptorIP (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I have removed some material lacking any reference. --Edcolins (talk) 07:33, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


Please see Talk:Exhaustion PraeceptorIP (talk) 23:36, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

I've replied on that talk page. --Edcolins (talk) 07:23, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi. You added ["sic"] to the title of a newspaper article cited in the O family (North Korea) article. I'm a bit baffled by this, as I can't see why this is needed, so I've reverted it: the title given is the correct title, as it is given in the source article, and I see no need to correct it. -- The Anome (talk) 19:37, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Amy Goodman[edit]

Hi. You thanked me for my edit. However, it was just rephrased by an IP address from Tyler, Texas. Usually I would revert it, as it was done by an IP address as opposed to an established editor, but they seem to be rather informed--they know what "NPOV" means. Can anyone really argue that it is not pure censorship to arrest journalists?Zigzig20s (talk) 23:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, this edit appears to be irreproachable. Linking "doing her job as a reporter" to Censorship in the United States –although a good-faith attempt at informing the reader– might be regarded as slightly biased indeed. --Edcolins (talk) 15:32, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
OK, I guess you unlike it now. Anyway, on second thoughts, I tend to agree with you that we should wait until reliable third-party sources use this specific phrase. It was not part of the text, just a wikilink, but I agree with you. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:01, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Primary Source concerns on Hot Swapping[edit]

Discussion moved to Talk:Hot swapping#Primary sources.

User talk:Piotrus[edit]

I've left a comment explaining the rationale behind the PROD even with the CNN article, pinging the original contributor. I imagine that's the best course of action to explain GNG for the original contributor. Your thoughts? (sorry for incorrectly pinging you). Best, Nicnote • ask me a question • contributions 01:46, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Ford Foundation/Carnegie Corporation of NY funding of Pacifica's Democracy Now show in 1990's info[edit]

If you check out annual reports and form 990 financial filings of Carnegie Corporation of New York and Ford Foundation you'll find that grants made to either Pacifica Foundation or the Institute for Media Analysis or Deep Dish TV by these foundations indicate that the grants are given to fund Democracy Now! show. Hope you restore the info about Democracy Now's initial financial backers to Wikipedia's article. Following is excerpt from a 2002 Alternative Media Censorship/Left Gatekeepers article that was reposted on Where's The Change? blog, with more specific info about Democracy Now!'s 1990's foundation funding:

"In 1996, the Carnegie Corporation of New York gave Pacifica [Foundation] a $25,000 grant to launch its DEMOCRACY NOW show. In 1997 came a $13,000 grant from the J.M. Kaplan Fund to Pacifica to provide support for DEMOCRACY NOW. And in 1998 came a $25,000 grant to Pacifica from the Public Welfare Foundation "to report on hate crimes and related issues as part of its `DEMOCRACY NOW!" public-affairs radio program and an additional $10,000 grant to support DEMOCRACY NOW from the J.M. Kaplan Fund. That same year the Ford Foundation gave a $75,000 grant to Pacifica "toward marketing consultancy, promotional campaign and program development activities for radio program, DEMOCRACY NOW." In 1998 and 1999, two grants, totalling $22,500, were also given to Pacifica by the Boehm Foundation, to support its DEMOCRACY NOW show.

"In early 2002, an additional Ford Foundation grant of $75,000 was given to Deep Dish TV "for the television news series, DEMOCRACY NOW, to continue incorporating the aftermath of the September 11th attack into future broadcasts."

Midwest Gaming Classic 2013 listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Midwest Gaming Classic 2013. Since you had some involvement with the Midwest Gaming Classic 2013 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:26, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

human mediated search and replace[edit]


Is there any way to do a human mediated search and replace in Wikipedia? In many articles (about 30?) the phrase "expatriated" (i.e. naturalized) is used when "extirpated" (i.e. locally extinct) is meant when referring to the conservation status of a species. To be honest, I'm really not up for manually going through and making all of the changes, but the changes should be made. I found the user making the mistakes and left a note on said user's talk page User talk:Asarelah--Nowa (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).


Administrator changes

added Muboshgu
readded AnetodeLaser brainWorm That Turned
removed None

Bureaucrat changes

readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Copyrights and related rights listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Copyrights and related rights. Since you had some involvement with the Copyrights and related rights redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 09:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-notice.svg This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 13:31, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of Laurent Picard content on the premise of conflict of interest[edit]

I can understand your sensititvity concerning conflicts of interests, but there was no material which was conflicting, I believe. I there is the appearence of conflict, then you should adress the concerns and not simply delete the material. I have been working 20 hours and am creating links to all the references and links which are available on the internet. This is difficult because much of the material concerning my fathers life has not been digitalized. You hope we use news paper sources as reference and internet available sources, it is very difficult when much of the material dates from back before 1990. I have many articles which i have to digitalize, photos also...I have to upload them on wiki commons (I found out today), it will take a while. But where is the conflict of interest. Is anything that i have written already disputed. Every link I have put yet is either internal links from wikipedia or from government websites, universities, etc for the most part. The newspaper clippings I will upload are from reputed Canadian newspapers. Children write biographies of their parents all the time. I am respectful, disciplined and honest. If some opinions appear excessive, I can correct them, like in some few instances, for exemple, where I qualify,Jeanne Sauvé as the greatest Govornor General Canada ever had; is this bias, maybe, is it damaging to the perception of the facts, I don't believe so, but I could retrract it...but otherwhise, I don't understand this action. I have 15 boxes of documents that are not available in a digitized form. How is someone else supposed to create a biography if they don't have the materiial for it. The actual "Biography" you have re-edited is inexact, with the first thing that it states my father as still alive. My name is there, in full view if people want to know who created the page. If people question some facts I can verify all of them until I finally get to digitalize everything. Please further your expllanation, and let me recuperate the work I have done, even if you don't want to publish it. I see more conflicts of interests on your webpages with pedople that don't hold apparent relations to the subject they cover than from those who do. Denys Picard

Thank you for your message. Your work is still here. You can get it back at any time. Otherwise, I would say please read WP:POV before editing further the article. Any statement must be backed by a reliable source. Statements such as "Laurent Picard was a prominant [sic] Canadian who dedicated his professional life both through the public and private sectors to the betterment of Canada." may be true, but we need a reliable source to support such an assertion. Feel free to mention any source you are aware of on the talk page. I will try to have a look at them. Thanks! --Edcolins (talk) 21:02, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Grenz, Egon listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Grenz, Egon. Since you had some involvement with the Grenz, Egon redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:18, 12 February 2018 (UTC)