Jump to content

User talk:Elektrik Shoos/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 < Archive 2    Archive 3    Archive 4 >
All Pages:  1 -  2 -  3 -  4 -  5 -  ... (up to 100)


Can you please remove the "speedy deletion tag" from article?

Hello! How are you? I need your help, can you please remove the "speedy deletion tag" from the Polyneon (artist) article? Thank you! Jamesallen2 (talk) 09:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't remove the tag at this point, as the article has been deleted, but based on the word of several other editors, including Alison (talk · contribs) (one of the most respected editors on Wikipedia), the tag appeared to be valid. elektrikSHOOS 16:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:The Bloggess.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:The Bloggess.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:07, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

Please Stop

All the pages of mine that you have marked to delete are not pages that should be deleted. I worked hard on a bunch of them for a friend of mine who's been making music albums since 1997. I'm sorry if you don't like the pages but they don't need to get deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 10:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only some of the pages were tagged by me, but I will attempt to clarify. They were tagged for various reasons. The two major reasons I saw were because they appear to be blatant advertising or promotion, and they don't credibly indicate the importance of the subject. If you're trying to add articles for your friends (or yourself), you have a conflict of interest and should cease attempting to add those articles. Note that attempting to use Wikipedia for promotion is expressly prohibited. In addition, Wikipedia has standards on notability which we must follow. The articles as existing added make no indication of notability. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 10:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am not trying to advertise for him or sell anything. There are plenty of bands out there on Wikipedia and he's written enough songs and made enough albums to get put on here too. I am not trying to sell anything I just want people to know something about him. He's made a huge impact on thousands of people — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 10:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If he has impacted people, you need to provide reliable, unaffiliated sources that back this up. Wikipedia's standard for all article content is verifiability, not truth. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 10:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[1], [2], [3], [4], [5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 10:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now we're getting somewhere. Links 1, 2, 4 and 5 are unusable on their own as sources because they're directly affiliated with the subject. In addition, links to social networking sites are prohibited. Link 3 might be usable, but probably not on its own as it's a smallish mention on the page. When I say "reliable and unaffiliated," I'm referring to sources such as newspaper or magazine articles, web pages (as long as they're not personal blogs), radio shows or TV reports. Here is our policy on what is considered a reliable source. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[6], [7], [8]. It's hard to find stuff online because he doesn't do a lot online that's why I created thease pages so people could find him — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 11:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The lack of online sourcing is a legitimate concern. That said, Wikipedia's an encyclopedia, not a directory. People find him, then the article gets written, not the other way around. I'm going to add the sources to Dean-O.
Also, as a note, your socking isn't helping your cause. (Don't try to deny it, it's pretty well obvious you're doing it.) elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:22, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, hold on. Dean-O is tagged as a copyright violation. Wikipedia cannot accept copyright text or images as a legal requirement. That article has to be rewritten using non-copyrighted content. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:23, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One what do you mean socking? ant two whats copy written?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 11:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the Internet, "sockpuppet" is slang for an alternate account of a person. On Wikipedia, it refers to creating alternate accounts to circumvent policy. This is a huge no-no, and usually results in loss of editing privileges.
Also, according to the Duplication Detector, the whole article is a copyright violation—hence the tagging. You appear to have lifted the article from their about page. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:31, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I only have one Wikipedia account. And as for copying the about page that all a lot of the pages on here are — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 11:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's simply not true. Nearly all content on Wikipedia is created by contributors to the site. All copyrighted content is deleted swiftly. Some of it may exist on the English Wikipedia, but only under limited circumstances. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright holders can donate material to Wikipedia, which some do, and some other content is pulled from sources in the public domain. Hence the "nearly." elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've read quite a few wiki pages that was just copy'd and pasted from the persons website — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 11:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Which ones? elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't remember at the moment and it's getting really late where I live. All I was trying to do was help out a friend by making it so people could find him easier and get all his info on one page and then you had to come and ruin it all. Do you like harassing people and being a cyber bully? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 11:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Any that are detected to have been copied in will be deleted, unless a copyright release has been made. That is not often useful, because websites (like the Dean-o one) are usually far too promotional in tone for an encyclopedia article, which requires a neutral point of view
Willstrom, do you seriously expect us to believe that WillStrom (talk · contribs) is not you? JohnCD (talk) 11:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I, like many other regular editors, am just trying to keep Wikipedia the reasonably well-running site it is. These policies, after all, do exist for a reason. I'm sorry if I came across like that. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Willstrom, please read WP:NPA. JohnCD (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I completely forgot about "WillStrom" I haven't used that account in forever and forgotI even had it. Sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 11:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
By "forever," you must mean "less than ten minutesan hour before I signed up for the next one." You are aware that all accounts have a public editing history complete with time and date stamps, right? elektrikSHOOS (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I must have typed my user name in wrong or something then because I didn't knowingly have more than one account — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 12:03, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. I'm not as worried about that account, as it wasn't used maliciously (and it is obviously you), though it is still a concern. The other two accounts still trouble me, though. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 12:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The other two are just random people that wanted to help (they sent me private emails)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 12:37, August 5, 2011
This is called meatpuppetry, and it is still not allowed. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 12:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how this is meatpuppetry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 12:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Read WP:MEAT. Willstrom, when in a hole, stop digging. We hear all the denials, but after all the above we find them hard to believe. In any case, there are technical means (WP:CHECKUSER) to see whether all these accounts are the same person, so let's wait and see the result of WP:Sockpuppet investigations/WillStrom. JohnCD (talk) 12:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
John, you've aptly stated what I was about to say, and a bit of what I wasn't. :) elektrikSHOOS (talk) 12:50, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How do I know you two aren't the same guy? You two could be the meatpuppetry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 12:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly, but likely not. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 12:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yet you accuse me of it with out any good evidence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 12:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That evidence is at the sockpuppet discussion page. I will not exacerbate that discussion here. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 13:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How is there any evidence of anything there? All there is is you falsely accusing me and two other people and then the three of us trying to tell you we don't even know each other — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willstrom (talk • contribs) 13:03, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser confirms they are socks, all blocked. Willstrom, if you read this, any unblock request will only be accepted on your first account, WillStrom (talk). You should first read the WP:Guide to appealing blocks, and I hope you have learned by now that lies are rather easily detected and do not help you . JohnCD (talk) 13:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

Edits of Don Sahli wikipage

Referring to Don Sahli page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Sahli

I understand some of your editing and realize the long version bio came off advertising and promotional, but did want to inquire and explain some of my edits. First, under WORK you had edited the below sentence to include the word "the" before Sahli Studio. I removed that as it is not correct. SENTENCE: Sahli’s work is currently represented in galleries around the country, including Sahli Studio of Evergreen, Colorado.

Second, the beginning of this sentence: When painting plein air. You had editing it to "in plain air". Plein air is a common term among painters, French for "in the open air". So I editing it to "en plein air" See link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En_plein_air

Last, I just wanted to figure out why you deleted so many reference links? I did review the one you pulled and see one was dead due to a newspaper closing its doors and apparently its website. This one, http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20110223/SPECIALA1701/110229968, from notable newspaper shows a Don Sahli image and includes him in article. (If too small a reference, understand that one.) But this one: http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20100701/AE/100709994, is very much about Don Sahli included in and associated to a major movie release. This one should surely be included as it shows his association and how the art/movie industry is aware of and considers him. Now if the other few were to associated or direct links to Don Sahli's personal website(s), I under those edits. These three: http://www.saksgalleries.com/artists/sahli/bio.html http://www.westernartandarchitecture.com/artist/334/sahli-studio-sahli-school-of-art-llc-sahli-publishing-llc.html http://www.cvent.com/events/weekend-with-the-masters-plein-air/custom-21-e768678adab64ab591e4021506cb3e13.aspx#Sahli were added to show credibility by being listed on reputable websites.

But the two from Vail Daily surely should be included as creditable online resources to show his notability and establish him as known artist and teacher. Also, I reviewed all of the links and found just one that was dead end, the one to Vail Mountaineer, I did find that they have closed their doors and apparently deleted their website & content.

In closing, I appreciate your assistance and apparent expertise. I have numerous sources of hard copy articles on Don Sahli for past 20 years, have been a follower of his since then. But I can not find them online to reference, can I scan them to include somehow or still reference them with article name, publisher, date?

Thanks Again

Kat KatForeman (talk) 18:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of painting en plein air, so I will concede that. I removed the first reference because it imparted no useful information for the article, being a photo gallery. The second and third references were verbatim copies of the bio on Mr. Sahli's website, which also added no other useful information.
I don't remember exactly why I removed the Vail Daily links. They may have been dead at the time. In any case, they're good now, so I'm readding both.
Using offline sources is also perfectly acceptable, but it's advised that you use a template such as {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}} or {{cite newspaper}} as they will help standardize format. It's also highly preferable to include ISBN or DOI reference numbers where applicable, as these help to pinpoint the exact reference used.
As a final reminder, you can link to pages on Wikipedia simply by putting double square brackets around the words you want to link, [[like this]]. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 18:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elektrik Shoos,

Hoping I can implore you for assistance in a matter regarding this article: Don Sahli. There has been a request for quick deletion due to question about copyright. I had previously loaded this article and battled this issue. I contact Wiki via email and conversed regarding the issue, they told me to upload as donated content and add the Creative Commons License to the content on another website, which I did. There is a sentence or too that is the same/similar on anther website (they recieved the bio from me, the author who holds the copyright license). How to avoid this issue again and avoid deletion!? The other website that has the copyright content in question will not update their website (they haven't for many years) or add the CC to the page of info.

Should I add the Creative Commons license to the wiki article? Will this help? Thanks for any advice! :)— Preceding unsigned comment added by KatForeman (talk • contribs) 17:51, August 22, 2011

It appears as though that issue was resolved a few months ago; see the article's talk page. The OTRS tag confirms the text, and the image, are suitable for use on Wikipedia. That said, it may need to be cleaned up to address possible promotional tones, as Wikipedia is a neutral source. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 18:02, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

Steve Jobs

Why do you remove that section? The impact this will have is big as Steve Jobs pretty much = Apple. That section is not bugging anyone except you . --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 23:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's too soon. Also, it was empty. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 23:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing wrong with that, allow other editors to build that section. I am working on that myself jeez! --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 23:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will defer further discussion on the matter to Talk:Steve Jobs, which is where you should also go per WP:BRD. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 23:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did hot shot. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 23:09, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No need to be snippy. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 23:10, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fausto Fernós

Hi, I have edited the article titled Fausto Fernós, including adding sources. Please reconsider the notability and cleanup tags you placed.--Lawrlafo (talk) 04:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

Proposed deletion of Joaquim Alberto Ferreira Machado

Hi Elektrik_Shoos! I set in order the article of Joaquim Alberto Ferreira Machado. Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonynando (talk • contribs) 02:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding sources! Especially for articles about living people, this is very important. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 02:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Participating in Interviews in Chicago

Hi EletricShoos. Thanks so much for your interest. I somehow can't find your email address to get in touch. If you can shoot me a quick email, I'd love to get you connected to our partners at AnswerLab. Thanks!--Parul Vora (talk) 23:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can use Wikipedia's user-emailing feature to get in touch with me. I don't publicly release my email address for privacy reasons. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 23:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Did that work? --Parul Vora (talk) 00:19, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bill Owen (writer and announcer)

Hi Elektrik Shoos! I am Dayglored, contributor since 2005. I created the page on "Bill Owen (writer and announcer)" very recently, mainly using information that Bill gave to me personally. (I am a close friend of Bill and his family.)

Thank you for your reminder that biographical pages on living persons must be sourced. Bill and I are researching the sources for the information presented on the page, and I will be adding references and source information in the coming week. If you have further advice or suggestions, I welcome them, and thank you in advance.

Best regards, Dayglored (Dayglored (talk) 05:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks. Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people was designed primarily to protect the privacy of individuals, so you can understand our need to ensure it's sourced. You can use the reliable source guideline to help determine what is considered an acceptable source by our standards. (The gist of the guideline: we allow both online and offline sources. Sources published by non-authoritative voices such as blogs are generally not considered acceptable; and sources published by the subject of the article can be used, but not by themselves. Wikipedia also can't be used as a source for itself. All sources should be cited as clearly as possible so that other editors could verify them easily if they felt the need to.)
Also, if you're affiliated with Bill, you might want to read our conflict of interest guideline. Because all Wikipedia articles should be neutral, if you have a connection to an article's subject, it might be difficult to write about it objectively. Thus, most editors stress that you exercise great caution when writing article about things you're related to, so as not to give an impression that you're trying to use this site for promotional purposes, which is forbidden.
Navigating Wikipedia's policy can sometimes be a bit of a mess, and there's a lot of editors on this site who are frankly very hostile to newcomers, so if you have any other questions feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll do my best to help. Thanks! elektrikSHOOS (talk) 05:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice. I understand your comments and cautions regarding neutrality and avoiding promotion.

Many of the facts in the new bio article will have references from elsewhere on the web (e.g. some of the radio stations that Bill worked for long ago have websites with relevant history, and his books are still in publication so I can refer to the publisher's site). But some things that support the bio are from decades-old newspaper clippings. We are contacting the newspapers to get access to any available online archives, but some of these are quite old and aren't on the web. Do you have advice for this situation, where the only source is hard-copy?

Thanks in advance, Dayglored (Dayglored (talk) 06:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Aha! Should I use the Template:Cite news template for old hard-copy newspaper articles? (Dayglored (talk) 07:21, 8 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Absolutely. Use {{Cite book}}, {{Cite web}} and {{Cite journal}} too where necessary. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 16:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Elektrik Shoos! I have started adding references for the bio page, starting with a few easy ones (his work with WABC Radio, and his more recent books). I will continue adding, of course, and plan to have many more in a few days. If you have a chance, please let me know if/when it becomes sufficient to modify the deletion warning.

Thank you again for your help and encouragement. (Dayglored (talk) 05:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my mistake, it's appreciated :) Draft URLs seem to bring out my stupidity. MusicLover650 (talk) 07:08, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! elektrikSHOOS (talk) 07:25, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


Rum Ham, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_It's_Always_Sunny_in_Philadelphia_characters

The rum ham has only been in one episode so far, yes. I hold out hope it will return. Should I made a "single episode appearence characters" subheading for the ham? Also I don't think it being a prob precludes it from being considered a character. I can think of a few examples but most notably wilson. From the cast away wikipedia page:

"In the film, Wilson the volleyball serves as Chuck Noland's personified friend and only companion during the four years that Noland spends alone on a deserted island.[4][5][6] The character was created by screenwriter William Broyles Jr. "

Thanks for your advice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.177.97 (talk) 21:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

Wikimedia Stories Project

Aloha!

My name is Victor Grigas, I’m a storyteller at the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco working on collecting unique and interesting stories from Wikipedians that can be used to compel donations for the 2011 fundraiser.

I found your user name on this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_in_Chicago

If you are interested in participating, and would like to schedule a telephone or Skype interview with me, please send me an email (vgrigas@wikimedia.org) along with any questions you may have.

Thanks for your time!

Victor, User:Victorgrigas Victor Grigas (talk) 22:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS If you know of anyone with whom I should speak please let me know :)

The Signpost: 7 November2011

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

One Time India

I PRODed the article before your unwitting PROD. The creator removed both the tags; what do you want to do about it, since the article doesn't meet WP:GNG? --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 10:34, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted as a blatant hoax, so that settles it. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 20:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

Country Squire Diner-Restaurant

While it probably is CSDable, I'm not sure it should be tagged a such as one CSD tag has already been declined (albeit by someone who doesn't understand CSD). I'd avoid procedurally closing the AfD until after the CSD tag resolves. If it's accepted, then the AfD can be closed as speedy delete. If it's declined, we can just go on with the AfD Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 19:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to close the AfD, as I'm an involved party. It was intended more as a vague suggestion to an unrelated administrator than anything. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 19:41, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, your CSD was declined Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 20:20, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is needed on the SOPA initiative

Hi Elektrik Shoos,

You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.

Thank you.

Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The Helpful Bot 16:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC) [reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Comparison of major staple foods

Hi Elektrik Shoos, I noticed that you moved the subject page (while I was building it - quick work!). For future reference, are all transcluded pages on Wikipedia considered templates belonging in the Template space? Sparkie82 (t•c) 06:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's there they go. Happy editing! elektrikSHOOS (talk) 06:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Sparkie82 (t•c) 06:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who made it: Template:Comparison of major staple foods? It's marvelous!!!! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

Please Advise: Feb 4 2012

There have been repeated attempts by Njkaters on the Boom! Studios article page to remove Andrew Cosby as a co-founder of the company, despite dozens of online articles, websites, press releases, etc., that clearly establish Mr. Cosby's long running status as the company co-founder. These edits, which I believe to be malicious, are apparently based on a few recent posts by Mr. Richie, the company's other co-founder, proclaiming himself as sole founder, which is patently untrue, as can be proven by a simple google search of "Andrew Cosby co-counder." Or one could look at the Boom comics themselves printed prior to Mr. Cosby leaving the company in 2010, which all list him as co-founder. Even his own wikipedia page says as much, which, if you'll check the page's history, you will see was actually establish by Mr. Richie himself. It's fairly obvious Njkaters has some sort of agenda with his edits, and it has turned into an edit war, which I do not wish to continue. Your help and/or advice in this matter would be greatly appreciate. I have requested page protection. Thanks. Truthsayer2012 (talk) 09:20, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to get involved in this, but from what I've seen, it sounds like a content dispute, considering you both claim to have reliable sources attributing your opposing points of view. I'd urge you seek dispute resolution with a reminder that edit warring, even if you think you are right, is disruptive and achieves nothing. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 04:37, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

RfA

Hi. Thanks for these two edits to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jeff G., but I was really busy when you made them. Would you please consider renominating me based on User:Jeff G./2011 RfA? Thanks again!   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 04:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, but I don't have time to write something up formally tonight. I'll get something up by Thursday at the latest, if that's fine with you. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 05:07, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I've written up something. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 03:01, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fun Size

I invite you to take another look at the article. I dislike when something with potential gets the bum's rush, and so took it upon myself to begin expanding the sorry stub that was nominated, making it into something that can continue to grow to serve the readers. One of the first articles I found in my serach for sources was a lengthy on in The New York Times that addresses the topic directly and in detail. Then one by one I found others with which to expand it. Your initial "keep" was well made. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 06:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And in a follow-up: Based upon improvements to the article, the nominator has withdrrawn.[9] Might you also reconsider? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Santorum vs santorum

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Santorum vs santorum". Thank you. --The Gnome (talk) 07:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

QI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to John Lloyd, Robert Webb, John Sergeant, Alexander Armstrong, John Bishop and Brian Cox

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Your input request at RfC

As a previous contributor to the discussion, I wanted to let you know that a motion has been made to close the recent RfC and implement some of the ideas with regards to labeling and usage. Your inputs would be greatly appreciated at Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights#Wrapping_this_up. Buffs (talk) 01:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

New Page Triage engagement strategy released

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyes@wikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Happy Birthday (2012)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Desert Crocodile Edits

Hi Ryan,

Thank you for your comments on my desert crocodile edits. I realize that there are no "sources" for some of the changes that I made, however, the changes are justified for a couple of reasons. First, in science English common names for most taxa (basically all except birds) do not actually have a taxonomic reference or standard publication to cite against. You will notice that the original entry using the names desert and North African crocodile, etc... are not actually cited either because the citations for English names do not exist. Second, this is a species that has really just been diagnosed, therefore there is really very little published basis for most of the information on the page anyway. Finally, I am the actual scientist whose work this entire page is based off of, therefore if there ever was an unpublished work source to go from it would be me. In light of these arguments, I would appreciate it if you would let me know how I can go forth with the changes that I have proposed?

Cheers!

Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mecistops (talk • contribs) 02:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability, and not truth, is one of the fundamental requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia; truth, of itself, is not a substitute for meeting the verifiability requirement. That said, this is admittedly one of those tricky areas that may not necessarily have direct sourcing with which to attribute it to. I'm also not knowledgeable in the field, so I'd prefer not to dig too deep into areas which I have no expertise in. WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, a community group of Wikipedians, would be a great place to find people who are. I'll leave a note on their talk page for you, and I'd encourage you to join the discussion there. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Elektrik_Shoos/Archive_3&oldid=1136190465"