User talk:Huon/Archive20

Two years ago ...
helping to "help yourself"
	... you were recipient; no. 850 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	You do deserve this not because you only defend me but also because you care. Ghazal Omid 17:11, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! I see what you mean.

Yikes! This did not seem nearly as complicated when I agreed to this!

Honestly, none of these issues even crossed my mind. The whole point of my doing this article was that I had no relationship to the subject! There are so many talented writers in her circle, but I was asked to do this because I did not know her from Adam. Sheesh. Any way, I read that I just ask for edits on the talk page and leave it at that...and that is what I shall do.

Thanks again! Sorry for the rant! I'm just feeling a bit shaken up. This is definitely a learning experience!

MelissBelle (talk) 22:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving issues...

Hey, came across a user page that isn't archiving and the editor is asking for help. I am not very familiar with how ClueBot III works and its syntax...could you please take a look and see if you could figure out what the archiving issue is? (You added the archiving code so I figured you would know what's what.) It's User talk:Chicbyaccident and the bot hasn't run a pass since February 2016 [1]. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 22:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I have no hand in running ClueBot III and can do nothing to re-start it if it has stopped. I'm pretty sure the issue is with ClueBot itself, not with the code on Wikipedia that used to summon it. Huon (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What every science student should know

Hello, Huon. You approved an article for the book What Every Science Student Should Know, but the book has not been published yet so the article is quite premature. I have PROD'd it, but wanted you to know. LaMona (talk) 23:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated complaint re "Claudia"

Hi Huon, not sure what is going on here. My AN/I complaint re "Claudia" was moved to the archive some hours ago [2] without any admin action against this IP editor. I then reinstated it to the AN/I page [3] seeking action. You have actioned and closed the case in the archive, but now my reinstated one remains at AN/I, appearing to be still awaiting action. Should I just delete it from there? BlackCab (TALK) 22:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was independently notified of the archived one and wasn't aware there was an un-archived one. Give me a moment to figure out what to do about that. Huon (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one else had commented on that thread in the meantime I have simply removed it from AN/I again. It's now closed in the archive, which should suffice. Otherwise it would likely have been archived twice, which I don't think would have been helpful in any way. Huon (talk) 22:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That'll do the trick. It seemed quite irregular that action was taken on a complaint after it had been archived. But many of us will greatly appreciate that IP editor being blocked again. BlackCab (TALK) 23:00, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	Thank you very much for correcting the error. You contribute to the task of making better the lemma and perfect the Wikipedia effort. Aris de Methymna (talk) 12:37, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hot cars

	A chrysler for you!
	You are very contributive to the wiki FixCop (talk) 15:15, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Bienvenido_Cruz

He is being linked to LHO / Camp street. HE was residing in NOLA at the time, no other credible name has been offered as person seen with LHO on still and motion picture and until such time as he gets a judgement against NAT ENQ my link should remain on the above page

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/ted-cruz-scandal-father-jfk-assassination/

I am not vandalizing this page, just updating with new credible info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edclass66 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments on that. Firstly, the National Enquirer is not a reliable source (no more for this story than for "Ted Cruz' five secret mistresses"). Secondly, the Enquirer article is devoid of any hard facts and itself only talks of "allegations". Thirdly, compare Snopes' take on the subject. Fourthly, even if it turned out that Cruz indeed had been hired to hand out pamphlets, that would be irrelevant trivia that don't improve our readers' understanding of Cruz. Huon (talk) 18:53, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

Wow, that was quick. Thank you. Found a few more similar product/company advertisements still floating around.

this and
this and
this and
this and
this and
this.

If I find more dirt and report, would you be kind enough to indulge ? Helps me learn what should stay and what shouldn't AM (talk) 17:23, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you think a page is blatantly promotional and should not be on Wikipedia, you can simply tag it for speedy deletion. See the criteria for speedy deletion on what makes a page eligible for that venue of deletion. You can also nominate pages for a deletion discussion (for less blatant cases or articles that shouldn't be on Wikipedia but do not fit the narrow speedy deletion criteria); see WP:Articles for deletion on how to do that. For some general guidelines, WP:SPAM and of course WP:Notability explain what we should have articles about, and what they shouldn't be. Huon (talk) 17:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you AM (talk) 02:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SAP SE Revenue Numbers

Hi Huon! Thanks for your help last month with the S/4 section on the SAP SE page. Currently, I'm in the process of trying to get the financial numbers in the InfoBox corrected. I've been dialoguing with the editor who made some of the changes, but have not yet heard back. Would you mind taking a look, and providing your input?

The 2015 revenue number is fine. The operating income is incorrect, however. It's 4,252 not 4,251B euros. Profit should be 3,056B euros. Total assets is correct. Total equity should be 23,295B euros. These are the definitive audited numbers for 2015, and have been filed with the SEC as well as in SAP's Form 20F. Finally, these numbers should reference the SAP 2015 Annual Report, which contains all of the data: http://go.sap.com/docs/download/investors/2015/sap-2015-annual-report.pdf. The InfoBox currently cites the 2014 report. Finally, the employee numbers are incorrect. If you go to the SAP Key Facts document: http://go.sap.com/integrated-reports/2015/en/performance/summaries/key-facts.html, you'll see our employee numbers have risen to 76,986. Any help/input you can provide is greatly appreciated! Harper70 (talk) 17:50, 26 April 2016 (UTC)Harper70[reply]

I have updated the figures, but my talk page isn't really a good place to make such requests; the article's talk page would be better suited. Huon (talk) 22:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huon, thank you so much for making those updates to the SAP SE InfoBox! I'll use the talk page next time. All the best. Harper70 (talk) 17:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Harper70[reply]

thank you

Thank you for letting me know that I am not blocked. I wrongly thought it was forever.

I also hope that Softlavender will not engage in stalker behavior. He is very hard to deal with. Just look at his User page and you can see how others are bothered. I don't want you to think this is a personal attack. It is only perplexing on how to deal with difficult people. Thank you very much wiki (talk) 21:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thanks (Location Maps)

Locations of the 2015–16 National League 2 North teams

Huon - thanks for your help. Will look at using map templates as this will be easier in some cases. Will also try Picture Tutorial for any case where these maps can't quite help me. Cheers.Jgjsmith006 (talk) 16:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huon - having some problems with the map - it is putting Bridlington (East Yorkshire) in the sea. Hope you can help. (talk) 09:30, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was a typo in Module:Location map/data/Yorkshire and the Humber that made the template believe that the eastern border was at 0.25 degrees West, not 0.25 degrees East. I have fixed that. Huon (talk) 20:29, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Huon that's much better. Jgjsmith006 (talk) 06:53, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Joseph

Regarding this interaction:[4][5] it sure looks like SJ didn't actually read and comprehend what you wrote. I am really trying to figure this out. I don't see any evidence of a language problem -- he seems fluent -- nor do I see any evidence of any sort of medical impairment -- he seems to be able to follow directions in other areas. I am starting to suspect that this is a case of someone Righting Great Wrongs and doing whatever it takes to "win". I don't have a lot of confidence that the problems will not continue after the block expires. If I am right, would you advise that I put together an ANI case? Arbcom? Or should I just assume that there are admin eyes on the situation now, do nothing, and see what happens?

@Guy Macon: For now my advice would be to disengage. If this behaviour continues after the block, ArbCom or a request for a much wider topic ban at WP:AN may be the way to go. Huon (talk) 00:33, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good advice, disengaging now. http://xkcd.com/386/ :) --Guy Macon (talk) 07:23, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Sorry, yes, typed keep instead of delete, thanks for the heads up. I've been doing too many AfD's today. Deathlibrarian (talk) 13:37, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SOI page

There are reliable 3rd party sources for this subject out there, I'm just not sure where to find them. (yet)MtgWizard (talk) 13:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Run this by

Just wanted to run this by you before I "jump in" and start on it. I think I should add some information to the Event decks on page List of Magic: The Gathering sets. Also, The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthologies_(Magic:_The_Gathering) page is poorly written, and I was hoping to correct it, and add some missing information.TheNerdisHere (talk) 21:57, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNerdisHere: That would depend on the sources for the information you want to add. The Anthologies article actually seems to cite some reliable third-party sources, so bringing it in line with what those sources report about the compilation set may help. Huon (talk) 00:52, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Huon: I just wanted to correct the information on the Event decks. I'm fairly sure that the deck listed is not the only event deck for Mtg.TheNerdisHere (talk) 02:38, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then find a reliable third-party source discussing those other event decks and cite them. Huon (talk) 19:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Howard Richards' bio picture

Dear Huon: sorry if I have not been in touch for some time, but it looks like I will need your generous assistance once more! My query concerns the bio picture in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Richards_(academic), a page which was created some time last year.

Yesterday I got a communication from Wikimedia administrator ‘Magog the Ogre’ saying, among others: “Thanks for uploading File:HowardRichardsjpg.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear”.

However, when clicking the Howard Richards Wikimedia picture it is accompanied, among others, with the following notice “This work has been released into the public domain by its author, Universitas Nueva Civilizacion. This applies worldwide. In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so: Universitas Nueva Civilizacion grants anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

I have posted Magog the Ogre, but there is no response. What to do? Many thanks (again!) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:59, 12 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Hello Pronacampo9, there is currently contradictory information about the image's copyright status on the file page at the Commons. On the one hand, it's marked as "Standard YouTube license", which is not a free license by Wikipedia's standards. On the other hand, the file page says the copyright holder has released that image into the public domain, which would mean it's no longer subject to any copyright restrictions. The YouTube video this image is taken from indeed is released under the standard YouTube license, but if either the video or the image has been released into the public domain we'll need evidence of that. WP:Requesting copyright permission explains how you can ask the university to clarify the image's copyright status; the easiest way forward probably is to ask them to contact permissions-commons

wikimedia.org and confirm that the image is indeed in the public domain. Huon (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Huon, for your prompt reply: very helpful advice indeed. It is indeed I who took the original screengrab from the Universitas Nueva Civilización ‘public domain’ video. I think it can be arranged for the video picture to be sent by Universitas to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org to confirm that the picture, indeed, is public domain. This may take some time. If only ‘Magog the Ogre’ could 'hold his fire' and not take the picture down before then. I did post him but there has been no reaction. Kind regards. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:28, 13 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]

PS

Magog the Ogre's original message said that I had to contact him on Jarekt1. This seems to be incorrect (see correspondence below) I am a bit confused now.

Copy of the message I thought I had been sending to Magog:

Your Wikimedia message 11 May 2016 @ File:HowardRichardsjpg.png. (Pronacampo9)[edit] Thank you for your message filed under 'Magog the Ogre'. The article Howard Richards (academic) [19] was approved for publication(with picture) by Rathfelder on 20 September 2015. The source of <HowardRichardsjpg.png.> is: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhHyZ2khzes> Ética y Vocación Empresarial - Howard Richards Universitas Nueva Civilización Published on 18 Nov 2013 and is stamped: Licence: "Standard YouTube Licence". Please advise. Thanks (Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:07, 11 May 2016 (UTC)) Pronacampo9, "Magog the Ogre" is a different user. Standard YouTube Licence is not compatible with COM:LIC. A file would have to be released on Youtube under CC-BY or CC-BY-SA to be usable on Commons. --Jarekt (talk) 11:38, 11 May 2016 (UTC) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 09:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]

@Pronacampo9: Sorry, I didn't look closely enough into the issues. There are two messages on your Commons talk page. One is old, from 2015, by User:Jarekt, about commons:File:HowardRichardsjpg.png (which has since been deleted and which, according to the deletion rationale of "no license and request by the uploader" you wanted to be deleted. I assume it was a duplicate of commons:File:Professor Howard C. Richards.png with a strange file name; the latter currently is not tagged for deletion, but providing some evidence that it's indeed in the public domain (or that the video is) would help.

The other deletion message was from Magog the Ogre about commons:File:WOWOpeningCeremonyOct2015.png, tagged on May 11. That image currently only says it's released under the "standard YouTube license" which is not sufficient for Wikipedia's (or the Commons') purposes. If that image (or the video) has been released under a free license such as the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license (which allows everybody to re-use and modify the content for any purpose including commercial purposes as long as the original copyright holder is credited and any derivative works are released under a compatible license), we will again need evidence. A representative of Chronicle Digital will need to clarify that the video, or just that still, is indeed freely licensed or released into the public domain. Huon (talk) 21:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Huon:"Chapeau" (hats off) for your wiki sleuthing skills again, Huon. It is I would should apologize for having assumed, too quickly, that the Wikimedia admin messages I found, one early morning, on the same page in my inbox, had also been sent on the same date and by the same person. Mystery solved. Thanks for putting me to rights! (Pronacampo9 (talk) 07:52, 14 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Vandalism by user:mavrick20

I have been experiencing some problems from this user: Mavrick20. Please give him a warning before he does more damage FixCop (talk) 16:44, 12 May 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Suppression of a section in Topology optimization

Hello, You did delete an entire section that I've written without further searches on the subject nor saying anything to me. So I did revert your edit, and added some references. Please read them at least.

Thanks. R3sJAP155M (talk) 19:39, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@R3sJAP155M: I have reverted your edit too. Please see wp:BRD. You better take this to the article talk page and try to get some kind of consensus. Thanks. - DVdm (talk) 20:01, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll comment on the article talk page. Huon (talk) 20:12, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered on the talk page. R3sJAP155M (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your help on WAFred Talk page. Thanks. WAFred (talk) 00:16, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Webhost block

Hi Huon, I noticed you've been responding to two different users who use the same IP I hard-blocked. Just a heads up that I am consulting with another CheckUser on the issue. Not sure, though, when I'll have a response. Thanks for helping out.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the note, and thanks for your efforts.

Huon (talk) 18:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock

Hi Huon, with regard to your lifting of this autoblock, I believe it was actually working correctly. The editor caught in the autoblock is clearly either the same user or closely connected to them. I've asked for clarification on their talk page.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:22, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I missed something, but the one requesting the unblock seemed to be editing in good faith. The commonality was an interest in a specific school, which I took to mean that they probably both edited from the school IP, incurring the autoblock. I'll take a closer look. Huon (talk) 17:25, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The autoblocked account has a variation of a username that was used by two other editors who the blocked NOTHERE account identified as his own. Also, the school wasn't the only common ground as Marikina–Infanta Highway/Marilaque/Marilaque Highway) also includes significant topic overlap. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:33, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the autoblock, I'll just reblock the account directly until they can explain duplicate user pages.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:37, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that should have tipped me off. Sorry. The more recent edits by NeilvsJ did look good to me, though. Huon (talk) 17:42, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed it now myself, the more I started digging the more blatant the socking became. We've had good hand accounts with tens of thousands of edits get caught out by autoblocks, it's unfortunate because we potentially lose an editor who has the potential to be productive. If NeilvsJ agrees to stick to a single account he can likely be unblocked if the reviewing admin can get past yesterdays Starofthiscentury vandalism. We shall see!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:51, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stalk

Hello Huon! Hope everything is ok. I see you've been watching my contributions in order to go and delete all my article, to then propose I'm a paid editor and get blocked? Seems like a fair history. I will proceed to improve the article, since I am not supposed to I though this was a free encyclopedia and hoping to get support from other writers. However I thank you for the WP:HOUND (which will be WP:STALK but let's thanks god it's not). Let me cite something.

"If "following another user around" is accompanied by tendentiousness, personal attacks, or other disruptive behavior, it may become a very serious matter and could result in blocks and other editing restrictions."

But since this is a power fight, or editor to editor fight, I will say let the WP:WAR (I hope it gets created) begin! How many others are you tagging, instead of helping? Just a civil and thankful question. Thank you. --OGfromtheGut (talk) 18:43, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a war at all. I did take a look at your contributions and saw that many of the articles you wrote were not based on reliable third-party sources. I proposed some of those I found particularly problematic for deletion. You are welcome to address the issues I pointed out. It's not hounding either: Correct use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) [...] correcting related problems on multiple articles. If you think there's something objectionable about my conduct, you are of course welcome to raise the issue at WP:AN/I. Huon (talk) 19:17, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Komal_Jha

Hello Huon, As per your suggestion, I have updated all the sections with sufficient references citation from most reliable sources available, such as popular newspapers. Please review and get it through to publishing.
Thanks ! Ch.th (talk) 23:27, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I would prefer to leave reviewing that draft to someone with a better command of Indic languages than me. Huon (talk) 23:40, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There, There is only one reference link which is in Indian language. All other are in English. Still, if you don't want to review it, in case you know somebody who could review, please suggest me. Thanks Ch.th (talk) 06:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brendan Dassey

Huon

I am writing in my sandbox and trying to do this correctly - i take on board what you've said and thats not what I am trying to achieve - I am trying to achieve a factual account of the trial and transcripts of Brendan Dassey and his case

Im not going to give up and will perserve until I have it right Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 12:36, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content should neutrally summarize what reliable third-party sources such as newspapers or reputable magazines have reported. This is particularly important when living persons are involved. The draft you wrote alleges serious professional misconduct based on rather flimsy referenes which are blown up for effect. For example, "Recent court documents have shown documented jury tampering." - what the reference actually reports is that a deputy was reprimanded for not logging that her husband brought the jury pizza and drinks. The source is reliable enough, but it does not mention "tampering" and does not say that the jury was inappropriately influenced. So the draft misrepresents the given source. Court records explicitly should not be used on biographical articles; compare WP:BLPPRIMARY. Huon (talk) 17:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		for your patience on IRC helping a difficult helpee --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 22:17, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please evaluate

You deleted M. Lupis di Santa Margherita based on WP:CSD#G4. Since I can't find the original deletion discussion for this subject, can you please evaluate M. Lupis MP di Santa Margherita to see if it still meets WP:CSD#G4? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. The latest deletion discussion (of which I'm aware) is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marco Lupis (3rd nomination), and the content is still basically the same as back then. G5 would also apply. Huon (talk) 17:08, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See also M. Lupis M.P. di Santa Margherita, M. Lupis MP di Santa Margherita, and Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Villa Tatti. Crow^Caw 19:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

M. Lupis M. P. di Santa Margherita... Might be time for an edit filter? Crow^Caw 21:11, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

...wow. I've salted that one, but it may indeed be edit filter time. Huon (talk) 21:15, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Continuous deletions and bans: why?

Good Morning, I'm triyng to create some articles in Wikipedia from about a week, but every voice I write has been deleted and every time i create an accout to write articles, all accounts has been banned... May I know why? Many articles has been deleted and banned by you, so I'd like to know the reasons. Apparently, as far as I understand, you think that I should be a person/user named "Giovanni Giove", tha has been banned from wikipedia many years ago. I tried to understand who was this person and I found this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Giovanni_Giove where I read that this user apparently live in ex Yugoslavia, should write in some languages like Serb or Croat language and write in wikipedia about articles concerning people and/or thing on the ex-jugoslavia, specially Dalamatia region. I am italian. I live in Italy and can prouve it. I never meet or known this "Giovanni Giove", I'm not him. I have no idea how I can convince you that I'm not him, maybe can check my IP address, prouving that I'm writing from Italy? The aricles I'd like to create in en-Wiki have nothing to do whit ex jougoslavia, dalmatia etc. They are about history in South of Italy. Could you please help me? If could be useful, I can send you the copy of my ID document (passport?) I wait your reply. Thanks a lot. PS As actually it seems I cant have an account here, because you immediately block it, please reply here in your same page, to be able to read it. If you prefer, I can give you an email address or telephone number Thanks again--151.57.34.106 (talk) 10:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting your kind reply. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.37.60.186 (talk) 11:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:SOCK. You are blocked from editing Wikipedia. That includes all future accounts you may create; continuing to do so will be held against you and will make it ever more difficult to regain the community's trust. The sockpuppetry case may conflate two different sockpuppeteers, but it's obvious that you have edited since at least 2007 or so, and have been blocked numerous times. User:Tntgroup, for example, is undoubtedly you. Huon (talk) 19:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're wrong, I'm not him. I just (tried to) create a voice about an historical building in Italy. You can check my IP. If you allow me, I'm sure we can find a way to prouve it. Thanks.--151.37.63.156 (talk) 20:09, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of following this absurd path searching non-existent "sockpuppetry", why don't you take a moment to read and evaluate the voice I proposed? Thanks--Letsdanceof (talk) 20:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"every time i create an accout to write articles, all accounts has been banned" - that's an admission of sockpuppetry right there. If you disagree with the block rationale(s), you are welcome to contest the blocks; see WP:Guide to appealing blocks (and please pick one of your accounts). I rather don't expect any admin will, based on the behavioural evidence, believe this is anything but a ceaseless campaign of self-promotion. Huon (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is why I'm asked you to check the voice I wrote - about the historical building - and publish it, if you agree. I'm sure you, as wiki admin, take care of wikipedia contents, more than to "punish" me or someone others! The main point should be the content, not the name or the nickname of the person who wrote it, doesen't true? I told it because it is more than evident to me that I'll never be able to convince any of the wikipedia "guru" (aka: admins) that I'm not anyone else than me. I'm smart enough to see that, when a witch hunt has begun, continue to proclaim his innocence will only get the result of increasing the fire... So, please, I ask you again to examin the voice and publish it. I can copy the text here. Thanks--151.37.13.148 (talk) 07:51, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh... and thanks for your reply, really! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.43.55.101 (talk) 20:17, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two comments: Firstly, you are blocked, and you should not continue to evade that block. That will be held against you. As I said above, you should pick one of your many accounts and request an unblock on its talk page. If you cannot convince us that the block should be lifted, any attempts to write articles will continue to be deleted without much ado. Secondly, I think "ceaseless campaign of self-promotion" covers the situation well. I will not restore the content I deleted. See WP:SPAM and arguably WP:COATRACK too. Huon (talk) 21:17, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

João Vale e Azevedo

Actually there was no dispute in the article. 95.93.220.31 (talk · contribs) was adding unsourced content for three days now. I complained and user was blocked. Then ThePlatypusofDoom (talk · contribs) reverted me with "No sources, a quick search seems like this isn't true." after I reverted the unsourced changes made by the now blocked IP. SLBedit (talk) 22:00, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When multiple editors revert back and forth, that's a dispute to me. On second thought it does seem, however, that ThePlatypusofDoom reverted you only by accident. I'll un-protect the article. Huon (talk) 00:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

jun hong lu page nominated for deletion

Hi Huon, Thank you for taking time editing jun hong lu page.

if you could appreciate that we are not trying to extremely promote jun hong lu, quite contrary we have been battling against Vandalism as you may aware of that different IDs try to post the same comment relentless .All we have been doing just to make a statement about who he is and what he has been doing. i dont believe it is fair to be nominated for deletion. if the article has violated any rules, please fo let us know and we will make the amendment asap. Many Thanks Zyw333 (talk) 20:13, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline violated by that article is the one on notability; there simply is no indication that Wikipedia should have an article on Jun Hong Lu in the first place. Huon (talk) 20:36, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the followings as I strongly believe the page should not be nominated for deletion at all

New Release:

1.Beverly Hills Courier- At Museum of Tolerance, Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for global ethics (IPCGE)- a worldwide peace organization awards its Inaugural Peace Prize to Three renowned recipients : Prof.Jun Hong Lu, Gerald Levin( Former CEO of Time Warner), Gianni Picco former UN Secretary General of the United Nations,

Page 5,-Line 15,news title: Inter Parliamentary Coalition for global Ethics awards Inaugural Peace Prize.

Link: https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Beverly+Hills+Courier+jun+hong+lu,

what is IPCGE: http://www.ipcge.org/index.php?en

2. Arabic News Link: http://www.arabtelegraph.com/2014/05/22/4295/

3. International Symposium on Cultural Diplomacy & Religion 2014-ICD

what is ICD: http://www.cd-n.org/index.php

"The Promotion of World Peace through Inter-Faith Dialogue & the Unity of Faiths”A Lecture by Master Jun Hong Lu (World Renowned Chinese Buddhist Leader)

Link: http://www.cd-n.org/index.php?welcome-address-3

4. Television Interview: World renowned Chinese Buddhist Leader.

Link : http://en.a9.com.tr/watch/185115/World-Leaders-Discuss-Peace-Religion-and-Politics/Master-Jun-Hong-Lu-World-Renowned-Chinese-Buddhist-Leader

5. Justice of Peace On April 2016, Lu was awarded as Justice of Peace in New South Wales Australia. Registration No. 215281 Link: http://jp.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/public/welcomePublic.do( database)

6. British Community Honours Awards Promoting community cohesion and social integration

In October 2012, he received the 'British Community Honours Award' at the House of Lords, United Kingdom.[2] This award is recognised and honoured by Her Majesty the Queen Elizabeth II for members of the British Community for their contribution to British Society.

Link: http://www.bcha.info/?s=LU+JUN+HONG Link: http://www.bcha.info/awards-events/bcha-awards-dinner-2012/

7.The Denmark Royal Press Reporter Mr Peng: Reporting about Master Lu Link: http://loong.dk/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=34390

All the above references have been embedded into the article unfortunately the unwanted attention and vandalism have always come back and broke or delete the link which by the time you come across it may not be a whole picture. Hence the page should not be nominated for deletion at all.

Please review all the aboves Zyw333 (talk) 00:28, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I (now) know that the article is considered for deletion. Previously you had stated that the information I have is poorly sourced and hence you had the information removed. I think that is quite valid. However most of the information were in Chinese and as such there is very limited amount of English resources to work on. Instead, I had to use sources from the Chinese websites now, and in order to improve on the reliability, I had used the government press release articles from China instead. I seek assistance as the pro-Lu followers will undoubtedly attempt to remove the information in order to create a wholly untrue image of the cult Guan Yin Citta. Guan Yin Citta's activities in China is already prohibited, which will explain why they do not have any public activities in China even though they had given talks in other parts of the world. I had included the official press release from the Malaysian Buddhist Federation (in Chinese as well) though the government had not considered them illegal yet. As for Singapore, there are official release from the Singapore Buddhist Federation, but in the form of a facebook post so I doubt it can be used as a reliable resource. Given that all major Chinese Buddhist communities has given advisories against Guan Yin Citta and Lu Jun Hong, I seek assistance to provide a more reliable view on Lu, instead of the biased view that his followers have given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccctttttt (talk • contribs) 11:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just as unimpressed by your references as by the others. Wikipedia is not the place for a battle between "pro-Lu followers" and those opposing him. Press releases - no matter whose - are not reliable sources. Has the South China Morning Post reported on Jun Hong Lu? How about People's Daily? Or - if we're talking Singapore - the Straits Times? Those would be reliable sources. Huon (talk) 18:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 22 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Michael Woods (footballer) page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Brian Hook?

If so, please read the Wikipedia policy regarding editing the biographies of living people. Furthermore, regarding your combative nature, please see WP:Battleground. --140.32.16.51 (talk) 18:40, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not Brian Hook. I removed unsourced, arguably derogatory content - content which you edit-warred to get into the article in clear violation of WP:BLP (which I'm familiar enough with, thanks). Consider yourself lucky that I just gave you a standardized warning and didn't block you outright. You seem rather familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies - do you have an account? Huon (talk) 19:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The content actually was sourced. Forgive me for being so forthright about this, but you're being incredibly rude and insulting, friend. Don't be a jerk. I can't help but wonder whether you've forgotten WP:IPs_are_human_too, as in addition to your aggression, you're failing to assume good faith.

To threaten me with a block corroborates my position that you are acting emotionally and aggressively as opposed to the standpoint of Wikipedia policy, because I didn't engage in an edit war: I never violated the WP:3RR. --140.32.16.52 (talk) 15:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So which source, precisely, discussed the quality of Hook's marriage? Not the one explicitly cited for that paragraph. Besides, you're engaging in block evasion - while I didn't block you, one of my colleagues had less scruples. You should address that on your talk page instead of switching IPs. Huon (talk) 16:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Username change

Hello Huon. Thank for accepting my unblock request. So I attempted to change my username through Special:GlobalRenameRequest link. Is that correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pasha insurance (talk • contribs) 18:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Special:GlobalRenameRequest is probably the simplest way to ask for a username change. The people dealing with those requests are volunteers too, so there may be a little delay, but usually they do it within a day or so. Huon (talk) 18:32, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I reblocked them. They didn't put in a username change request and went back to editing PASHA Insurance. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:09, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion - why don't you be constructive?

If you spent as much time being constructive and adding references etc to these articles you're essentially vandalising, I would actually have time to get on with life. See Miss Ohio Teen USA and the hour I've lost of my life today. References exist, you're just being lazy. PageantUpdater (talk) 02:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So removing unsourced personal information on living persons is now "essentially vandalism"? The burden of evidence is on the editors who want information included. Reinstating unsourced personal information as you did here violates core content policies, namely WP:V and WP:BLP. Huon (talk) 17:23, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]