User talk:JamesMLane

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

Click here to start a new section. (The edit summary will be created automatically; it will be the same as the heading of the new section.)

Archives: Archives tables of contents, Archive1, Archive2, Archive3, Archive4, Archive5, Archive6

Contents

Know any law book about interlocutory appeals?[edit]

Could you please refer me to a law book which confirms what you were saying in the interlocutory article:

"In many legal systems, interlocutory orders are not appealable, except in a few extraordinary cases. When the case is concluded, any aspect of an interlocutory order that has not become moot may be challenged in an appeal from the final judgment."

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.248.173 (talk) 19:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

In the federal courts in the United States, the general statement of the "final judgment" rule, which bars interlocutory appeals, is found in 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which reads in part: "The courts of appeals (other than the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) shall have jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the district courts of the United States . . . ." Other provisions of the law allow interlocutory appeals in limited circumstances.
If you're looking for a general statement of the law in the United States, not based on any particular court system (state or federal), one source is Corpus Juris Secundum, a legal encyclopedia. The text in CJS is: "Except where a statute, rule, or constitutional provison provides otherwise, an appeal lies only from a final judgment or order." I've edited the Interlocutory article to add a citation to this passage. JamesMLane t c 23:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


I might not have expressed myself clearly enough because your answer does not really respond to my question.

I repeat once again the part of your quote which interests me the most, namely: "when the case is concluded, any aspect of an interlocutory order that has not become moot may be challenged in an appeal from the final judgment."

Once again what you wrote does not seem to support this kind of statement. So, please clarify on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.237.110 (talk) 18:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't understand you. I cited only the first part because the second seemed to me to be obvious. If you can't take an immediate appeal from a particular interlocutory decision, then it must be appealable at the end of the case, otherwise you could never get judicial review of that decision. Nevertheless, I suppose the principle of the availability of judicial review isn't self-evident, so it should be cited. The relevant passage in CJS reads: "Any right of appeal from an interlocutory ruling terminates with the entry of final judgment in the action, whereupon the issues raised in the interlocutory ruling are considered on appeal from the final order." I've edited the Interlocutory article to add a citation to this passage. JamesMLane t c 00:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for clarification. I find the main problem with law is that not always common sense are what one would consider elementary fairness is what is observed in the legal system. For example, there is principal that appeal lies from the order and not from reasons for the order. Why would it be so? Isn't it obvious that the order, even in my favour, can be made in such a way that though it looks like I won, while in fact, I lost. And I cannot appeal it because it looks like I won (it comes from the case of a wife who was declared unfaithful in the judgment which she won against her husband and which she could not appeal). Does this make sense?

Or yet another example - res judicata. Suppose a judgment is entered that snow is black, then Court of Appeal supports that snow is black, then somebody proves scientifically that snow is in fact white and one cannot change the judgment because it became res judicata. Does this make sense? Are you aware of any exceptions in civil law which allows to challenge res judicata? Where can I read about it?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.235.198 (talk) 14:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Res judicata applies only to holdings that were necessary to the decision. If the wife was declared unfaithful, but won, then you're right that she could not appeal. Because she couldn't appeal, though, it wouldn't be res judicata. If someone stated in another context that she was unfaithful, she could sue for defamation, and wouldn't be precluded from establishing the falsity of the accusation.
As to changes based on subsequent evidence, Rule 60(b)(2) in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a party to seek relief from judgment based on newly discovered evidence. If the scientific report on snow came out within a year after the initial decision, this rule would be available. (I think that most states in the U.S. have similar rules.) Beyond that, courts can always overrule themselves on matters of general import (such as what color snow is). For example, compare Plessy v. Ferguson ("We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority") with Brown v. Board of Education ("separate educational facilities are inherently unequal"). The latter decision was based in part on scientific knowledge that had been developed since Plessy was decided. The scholarly authorities are summarized in the decision's famous footnote 11. JamesMLane t c 21:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

thanks[edit]

You're right - I did not see that the McCain disability stuff was being deleted when I made that change - thanks for catching it. Tvoz/talk 05:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, JamesMLane. I've responded at my talk page.Ferrylodge (talk) 02:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

John McCain article[edit]

Please discuss the edits you have been adding in the talk page for Political positions of John McCain. Trilemma (talk) 23:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I pointed out in my edit summary that the passage you wanted to add (the pro-McCain spin about what a "maverick" he is) was unsupported by the cited source. You restored the passage without addressing that point. I didn't respond on Talk:Political positions of John McCain because there was nothing to respond to; my prior edit summary was still valid as to your former source and applied equally to the new one you added. I've now commented additionally on the talk page. JamesMLane t c 23:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I read your edit summary; I disagreed with it. That's why I asked you to explain it on the talk page ;) Trilemma (talk) 01:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
What I find odd is that you still haven't cited any language in either of your linked sources that actually supports the assertion you added. JamesMLane t c 00:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The language is very clear, particularly in the second article. But since you're persisting, I've found another: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10637.html. Trilemma (talk) 04:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The point I made in my ES about the first article you cited applied also to the second and applies to this one as well: "rm claim unsupported by articles, which mention only one environmental issue (global warming)". The Politico article talks about the capital gains tax and McCain's promise to appoint more conservative judges. Would you mind pointing me to the specific language in that article that shows him breaking with Bush on an environmental issue other than global warming? JamesMLane t c 18:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Political positions of John McCain[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Political positions of John McCain appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. JCDenton2052 (talk) 09:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, although as it happens I've already heard of the NPOV policy. The edit I made is both neutral and factually correct. I'll elaborate in greater detail at Talk:Political positions of John McCain, which is where you should have taken the trouble to explain whatever NPOV problem you saw with my edit. JamesMLane t c 21:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Your edit whitewashes the important fact that he wants to effectively repeal the federal minimum wage. Just because McCain holds a fringe position doesn't mean that it should be left out of the article. JCDenton2052 (talk) 23:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Your edit asserts falsely that he wants to repeal it. My edit makes clear what you now state, that he wants to effectively repeal it. Our readers aren't idiots. JamesMLane t c 23:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Apology[edit]

It appears I lumped you in a with a troll at the Fox News talk page, and had some apparently unnecessary harsh words for you specifically. After doing some research, at the behest of Gamaliel. I see my initial reaction to you was in error. Therefore, I apologize. I stand by my words, but I do not believe you are the proper recipient of them, so once again I'll say that I'm sorry for directing them towards you. Perhaps our paths may cross at sometime in the near future, and we can collaborate peaceably. Ramsquire (throw me a line) 21:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Apology accepted, with thanks. I've been off-wiki for the holiday weekend or I would have responded to your gracious comment earlier. JamesMLane t c 19:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

re Rfc[edit]

Thanks for the heads up on the template error. Hopefully it's corrected now. I'm not sure what you find to be misleading about my representation. The specific 2004 survey appears to be in regards to proposed renegotiations of NAFTA and other trade agreements. We can provide any additional McCain philosophies regarding future trade agreements without the usage of those types of surveys. Trilemma (talk) 21:18, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You write, "The specific 2004 survey appears to be in regards to proposed renegotiations of NAFTA and other trade agreements." That interpretation explains (as you had not previously done) why you saw his opposition to renegotiation as subsuming his opposition to labor and environmental protections. The hole in your argument is that your interpretation is purely your spin on it. The cited source doesn't contain the word "renegotiation" or any of its variants. As I've shown you, in the real world the question of labor and environmental protection is actually raised in the context of whether to grant initial approval to a trade agreement. One POV (a fairly widespread one) is that the proposed agreement should be assessed purely on economic grounds. An opposing POV (also widespread) is that labor and environmental impacts should be taken into account. McCain has aligned himself with the former camp.
You also write, "We can provide any additional McCain philosophies regarding future trade agreements without the usage of those types of surveys." Your objection to surveys is quite selective, given that other passages in the article rely on them. Nevertheless, I'm not wedded to this source. If you find some source that you regard as more reliable, and it conveys McCain's position on this specific point, we could certainly consider citing that in addition to or instead of McCain's response to the survey question. JamesMLane t c 07:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to revise primary usage guidelines, would affect Worcester[edit]

Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Propose_change_in_guidelines_for_primary_usage: I've proposed a change in general guidelines on primary usage that would result in a move for Worcester.--Loodog (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Trilemma's recent edit[edit]

What do you think of this edit by Trilemma? I don't think he's given nearly enough justification for the amount of information he's deleted. I started a section on the talk page. AzureFury (talk) 04:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of NLP Modeling[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated NLP Modeling, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NLP Modeling and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.

Second Annual WikiNYC Picnic[edit]

Greetings! You are invited to attend the second annual New York picnic on August 24! This year, it will be taking place in the Long Meadow of Prospect Park in Brooklyn. If you plan on coming, please sign up and be sure to bring something! Please be sure to come!
You have received this automated delivery because your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC[edit]

Dear JamesMLane, If you have time and are willing to share your point of view. Can you give your comment arguments about the current discussion in the bates method article. Paragraph : The American acadamy of opthalmology link listed in the external link section ? appreciate your comment, Seeyou (talk) 20:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm inviting your comment[edit]

Here (and also, if possible, here?)   Justmeherenow (  ) 05:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding SS fraud in Texas[edit]

James, Thanks for the feedback. I agree: "My thought is that we should move your material to a daughter article on "Janitorgate" (or whatever) and leave behind only a couple sentences in the main article." But, I am a newbie and not sure how to doe this. Can you do it, or else tell me how to do it? And, in fact, I am not sure that I am responding to your comment in the proper way (by posting to your discussion page). Nicholas007 (talk) 18:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC[edit]

Dear JamesMLane ,If you have time and are willing to share your point of view. Can you give your comment arguments about the current discussion in the bates method article. Paragraph : Elwin Marg was an optometrist  ! appreciate your comment, Discussion is about whether or not the profession of Elwin Marg should be mentioned in the external link section. Seeyou (talk) 21:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

YouTube as RS?[edit]

We've moved the discussion here, if you want to add your two cents. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 02:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yo[edit]

Yay election season. I'll be checking up on Palin's page, you coming? --kizzle (talk) 20:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah James, I miss your ability to wiki-p0wn, i.e. Palin. --kizzle (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Glad you have an interest in lead sections[edit]

Perhaps you'd like to look at the lead section for Controversy over an Obama–Ayers connection:

The controversy over an Obama–Ayers connection arose during the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign of the significance and details of Presidential candidate Barack Obama's contacts with his constituent Bill Ayers, a former leader of the Weather Underground Organization who later became a professor of national reputation at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a "very respected and prominent" member of local society."[1] Obama served on two nonprofit boards with Ayers and lived near him, and both Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn had hosted a small campaign meeting for Obama at their home.[2] The matter was covered by news organizations and brought up by the campaign of competing candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton in February 2008, revisited during a debate between Clinton and Obama in April 2008, then subsequently picked up by Republican presidential candidate John McCain as an issue in the general election campaign. Obama condemned Ayers' past through a spokesman,[3] and indicated he does not have a close association with Ayers.[2]

There's a discussion about the lead at Talk:Controversy over an Obama–Ayers connection#Establishing proper context in the lead -- Obama's response, defense of Ayers. Noroton (talk) 02:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin[edit]

Regarding the Kopp information, I'm fine with putting it at the end of the section, because the section has gotten bigger. But may I suggest an alternative: deleting it from the main article. The Monegan issue really is now far more about the investigation, Palin's (lawyer's) proposal that the legislature drop the investigation, and whether or not the legislature will resort to a subpoena to try to force her to provide information. The Kopp stuff was (proportionately) important when it was first added, but I don't think it is any longer, as the situation has evolved. Deleting it, of course, will deal with any confusion. And it still will be in the daughter article, with all the details. (I note that it's not - or wasn't, last I looked - in the lead section of the daughter article, indicating relatively less importance.)

(And re the code, I don't remember where I copied it from, but it can be helpful, as you note.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

RfC on Weathermen, Ayers, Dohrm, Obama, and "terrorism"[edit]

Please note that I have created an RfC to discuss the matter of whether, how, and where we should use and cover the designation "terrorist" describe the Weathermen and their former leaders. It is located here: Talk:Weatherman (organization)/Terrorism RfC. The intent is to decide as a content matter (and not as a behavioral issue regarding the editors involved) how to deal with this question. I am notifying you because you appear to have participated in or commented about this issue before. Feel free to participate. Thank you. Wikidemon (talk) 20:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

You commented on the Bill Ayers page about this, so please see the RFC on "terrorism" and the Weathermen[edit]

Please take a look. Your opinion would be appreciated at Talk:Weatherman (organization)/Terrorism RfC. Thanks! -- Noroton (talk) 00:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Alaska_Public_Safety_Commissioner_dismissal[edit]

Thank you for what you did here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alaska_Public_Safety_Commissioner_dismissal&diff=237857474&oldid=237854079

Your approach is much better than what I put in there. I was mostly motivated by an objection to what was there earlier: a statement that Wooten was "disciplined … for making a death threat." This was incorrect, since Grimes' letter doesn't even mention the alleged threat. Anyway, thanks for your helpful edit. Jukeboxgrad (talk) 05:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Palin[edit]

FYIFerrylodge (talk) 00:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope we can discuss the Stambaugh matter a little bit before you reinsert stuff.[1]Ferrylodge (talk) 06:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Please take another look at Weatherman/Terrorism RfC[edit]

This is a message sent to a number of editors, and following WP:CANVASS requirements: Please take another look at Talk:Weatherman (organization)/Terrorism RfC and consider new information added near the top of the article and several new proposals at the bottom. If you haven't looked at the RfC in some time, you may find reason in the new information and new proposals to rethink the matter. -- Noroton (talk) 02:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan[edit]

Wikis Take Manhattan.png Wikis Take Manhattan


Next: Saturday September 27
This box: view  talk  edit

WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.

LAST YEAR'S EVENT

WINNINGS? Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!

WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, September 27th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.

WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!

REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.

WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's West Village office. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:

349 W. 12th St. #3
Between Greenwich & Washington Streets
By the 14th St./8th Ave. ACE/L stop

FOR UPDATES

Check out:

This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.

Thanks,

Pharos

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Nutrition[edit]

I always look forward to your inclusions to Talk:Sarah Palin. In your discussion w/fReid, in a plain-spoken manner, you encapsolate what is happening there. Some editors are more perceptive than most and, additionally, they can vocalize their perception clearly. Thank you for clearing my mind. It seems that the Talk has drifted to specifics and minutiae so I'm gonna busy myself elsewhere. But, I will watch for your inclusions with an apt manner. Until the debates begin, editors at Sarah will just be dancing around the Maypole. However, feel free to "wake me up" if an issue requiring non-partison support arises. Thanks again.--Buster7 (talk) 06:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Palin Pic[edit]

Hi, After taking into consideration the feedback from other editors regarding the Carson City image at Sarah Palin (I agree with your suggestion for a tighter crop), I have created a new version with the intent of pleasing those who have contributed to the discussions. The quality of the image has been significantly improved. I would appreciate your opinion here: [[2]]. Thanks, IP75 75.25.28.167 (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan rescheduled for October 4[edit]

Wikis Take Manhattan has been rescheduled for next Saturday, October 4, due to the rain predicted for this weekend.. I hope you can make it to the new time, and bring a friend (or two)!--Pharos (talk) 23:28, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

My apologies...[edit]

The more I read what I wrote, the more I regretted my tone. My frustration built with every detail I learned about this Stambaugh character, and I saw your gun issue as a red herring. Personally, had he been my subordinate, I'd have canned him two weeks into my tenure. Regardless, you're entitled to your opinion, and I shouldn't be so adamant to force my own on you. Truce? Fcreid (talk) 19:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't think you have anything to apologize for. We had a difference of opinion. You expressed your view but you didn't call me an idiot or anything.
I practice law in New York City. I have a pretty thick skin.  :) JamesMLane t c 01:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad, because one never knows when he'll need a good lawyer!  :) Fcreid (talk) 03:01, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on Palin[edit]

This whole thing is getting extremely frustrating. I really appreciate your support for having both sides represented on the bridge and not just the pro-bridge arguments.

May I ask you to revert Hobartimus' edit which he still refuses to defend on the talk page more than an hour after I called him on it? Unfortunately, I've found you usually have to revert back before Hobartimus will come to the talk page to join in discussions about his own edits. He's still online commenting on my talk page and complaining about my "personal attack" here but I doubt he'll get into discussions of substance as long as his mass deletions remain.GreekParadise (talk) 15:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Already done. Thanks for watching the article closely enough to flag this latest incident. JamesMLane t c 15:31, 3 October 2008 (UTC) Addendum: There was another such edit re the email hack, which I'll now address. JamesMLane t c 15:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Your comment[edit]

After reading your comment on "Obama is evil" argument and "FBI investigation of a fairly minor incident" I feel that you should refrain from editing the talk page or the article. I know you will probably not do so but my opinion is that you feel extremely strongly about Obama (I can't read your Obama is evil comment any other way) and that can be a problem when evaluating the actions of your fellow editors. Hobartimus (talk) 17:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The issue is not whether an editor is biased but whether an edit is biased. You and I have divergent edits here -- you inserted into the Palin bio material that relates only very tangentially to Palin but that seeks to cast a bad light on a Democratic politician from Tennessee, and I removed that addition. I would be happy for our respective edits to be evaluated by any fair-minded Wikipedian.
By the way, my political bias is disclosed on my user page. What is yours? Do you feel extremely strongly about Obama, or for that matter about Palin? or do you believe yourself to be unbiased on these subjects? Wikipedia allows editing by biased editors, so you're not required to answer; I'm just curious. JamesMLane t c 17:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

"That One"[edit]

I was truly shocked. I wonder if it was some deep seated "feeling" that McCain has that just bubbled to the surface. The climate is changing...[3]... I pray for the best. Both McMain and Palin are obligated to stop this "mob response" before it localizes in one lone psycho. When Obama announced, all American's "thought" the same fear. It was too tragic to voice. (It still is) WHen does it deserve mention in Palin's article? If the link doesnt work...google "kill him". second or third page..Wasington Post article is mentioned at www.nytimes.com...--Buster7 (talk) 06:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Palin didn't say "That one" so it certainly doesn't belong on her page. At this point, I think what's appropriate for her bio is the overall observation that she's stepping up the negative campaigning, and specifically the personal attacks on Obama. The details belong in the McCain campaign article. That's also the place for reporting about the unseemly conduct at the campaign rallies. Even if the words are coming out of Palin's mouth, there's no doubt that it's part of the overall campaign. (I just received an email that John Kerry sent to his mailing list, in which he writes, "McCain allows his running mate to make outrageous charges that only a few years ago would have disqualified someone from serious consideration for national office." He points the finger where it belongs -- McCain, not Palin.)
Of course, even to put something in the McCain campaign article, we need a published observation, such as from Kerry if he's been quoted somewhere verifiable. Your link doesn't work for me. Tell me who wrote the piece and I can find it on the Times site. JamesMLane t c 21:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Wasington Post site...Dana Milbank...10/05 or 10/06...--Buster7 (talk) 23:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Dickinson and Rolling Stone[edit]

Dickinson and Rolling Stone constitute a perfectly respectable source despite not being to the extreme right of the political spectrum. And your desire for an accurate article is admirable and totally in line with WP core policy. But I fear you're wasting your time. As you know, your opponents there tirelessly pass all prospective McCain material through a political filter to prevent informed judgment by the article's readers. Old hands at the filibuster, they will simply parade one bogus argument after another to keep the material bouncing around in Talk and prevent it getting into the article. Ultimately, when this becomes just too obvious, they will claim "consensus" for exclusion—or failing that, covert politicization—of the material. I must say I admire your tenacity. And forcing discussion of material that runs counter to the McCain mytholgy at least enters it in the record, for which all who live in what the neocons dismiss (!) as "the reality-based world" should be grateful to you. — Writegeist (talk) 20:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words. My opinion is that, currently, Sarah Palin is biased but is better than John McCain -- both articles being far too solicitous of the subject. I don't accept the view that no negative statements may be included unless certified as true by the bio subject in an interview published in National Review Online.
On the other hand, tenacity is worth something in Wikipedia. For example, while Palin has been running around with her "thanks but no thanks" lie, the Wikipedia article does record that the Congressional vote revoking the earmark came before she was Governor. That simple fact, although rather buried in the article, does make clear to the discerning reader that her statement is false. The Palinistas can't very well argue with an objective report of a Congressional action. Thus, although the article is still biased, I console myself with the thought that it's somewhat less biased than it would be if people like you and me had abandoned it.
I also console myself with the thought that, after November 4, this article will be of considerably less importance.
Incidentally, by coincidence the use of Rolling Stone as a source is also being discussed at Talk:2004 United States election voting controversies#Kennedy article, concerning RFK Jr.'s article. JamesMLane t c 05:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

You opinion on NPOV Sarah Palin?[edit]

Please post at talk. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 03:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Dispute at John McCain presidential campaign, 2008[edit]

You may want to take a look at Talk:John McCain presidential campaign, 2008#RfC comments. We're debating whether or not to include jihadists reaction to a McCain presidency. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 16:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: You are invited![edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday November 16th, Columbia University area
Last: 6/01/2008
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, finalize and approve bylaws, interact with representatives from the Software Freedom Law Center, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the June meeting's minutes and the September meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikis Take Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wikipedia Loves Art! bonanza, being planned with the Brooklyn Museum for February.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:21, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:JamesMLane/George W. Bush substance abuse controversy[edit]

User:JamesMLane/George W. Bush substance abuse controversy, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:JamesMLane/George W. Bush substance abuse controversy and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:JamesMLane/George W. Bush substance abuse controversy during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshellsOtter chirpsHELP) 22:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Threshold (online game)[edit]

Hello, I'm writing because you were at one time a significant contributor to Threshold (online game). Some issues have come up regarding the article's contents, and I'm at an impasse with a possibly-COI affected editor. I would greatly appreciate your participation at Talk:Threshold (online game). —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Ponzi scheme split[edit]

I have just made formal your proposal. - Anxietycello (talk) 05:25, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

pan blue coalition[edit]

"restore ext link -- notability is a requirement for a Wikipedia article but not for an ext link; this link is apparently related to the article's subject matter"

this link is "apparently" related to the article's subject matter: NO WAY...

Pan blue coalition refers to a Republic of China (taiwan) stub, and ull find plenty of references to the members of the coalition just googling the term, or readning some taiwanese media... The chinese guys, well... I guess I dont have to remind u that China is a dictatorhip... I just dont see how a web page designed by a chinese (PRC, not ROC) has anything to do with taiwanese parties...

Just read what the page says... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.40.115.180 (talk) 11:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

You're invited![edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday January 18th, Columbia University area
Last: 11/01/2008
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, look at our approval by the Chapters Committee, develop ideas for chapter projects at museums and libraries throughout our region, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the November meeting's minutes and the December mini-meetup's minutes).

We'll make preparations for our exciting museum photography Wikipedia Loves Art! February bonanza (on Flickr, on Facebook) with Shelley from the Brooklyn Museum and Alex from the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

We'll also be collecting folks to join our little Wikipedia Takes the Subway adventure which will be held the day after the meeting.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:15, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

"Too descriptive?"[edit]

What is an encyclopedia about if not mere description? Is it your intention to revert every single edit I make, no matter how small? Explain to me please how changing "History" to "A history of environmental conservation" is POV? Your edits, and edit summaries, seem a bit over the top to me. Assume good faith? Or is "control" your operative goal? Mervyn Emrys (talk) 15:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Material userfied from Talk:Chuck Missler by User:Hrafn[edit]

The following is an attempt by this user to argue that an AfD is required for redirects, in direct contradiction to WP:AFD which states "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD." It has therefore been userfied per WP:TALK#Others' comments "Deleting material not relevant to improving the article".

JamesMLane's revert[edit]

JamesMLane has reverted the redirect with the edit summary: "redirecting as nn is improper when the article has survived AfD". I would point out that:

  1. AfDs have repeatedly disavowed control over merges and redirects as being under their purview (with 'redirect' consensuses often closed as 'keep's).
  2. AfDs quite frequently result in 'keep's for NN articles: WP:ILIKEIT & WP:IAR appears to override WP:NOTE more often than not there. In any case a two year old AfD is hardly controlling over redirection, which does not require AfD approval.
  3. The second AfD on this article was ludicrously superficial (and the first was "no consensus").
  4. Missler is clearly a case of WP:ONEEVENT (at least as far as sourced information goes), so an article on him seems to be inappropriate.

Unless anybody can come up with a strong countervailing argument, it is my intention to restore the redirection. HrafnTalkStalk 08:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

If you think Missler is nonnotable, you should list the article on AfD on that basis. The incessant relisting, as happened with Daniel Brandt for example, is abusive and improper, but I agree with you that a two-year-old AfD can reasonably be revisited. Until there's a new AfD, however, the question whether there should be a separate article on Missler has been resolved in favor of keeping one. Your personal opinion that the previous AfD was "superficial" doesn't give you the right to override it. Your edit had the same practical effect as if the AfD had been closed as "delete". If there's a policy that allows that, please give me the link. You could reasonably make Chuck Missler a redirect only if, for example, you were moving the article to a different title.
As to the merits, I don't see him as a one-event figure. The article lists him as the article of two books published by Thomas Nelson. I just Googled this search: "Chuck Missler" -wikipedia -plagiarism (to screen out most Wikipedia mirrors and at least some of the articles about the plagiarism incident) and got 134,000 hits. Neither of those facts is dispositive but they're indications that we should have an article about him. JamesMLane t c 09:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
  1. "If you think Missler is nonnotable, you should list the article on AfD on that basis." No! An AfD is not required for a redirect. And, even when the consensus is for redirect, it is not uncommon for the closing admin to kick the issue back to article talk as a 'keep (as in not-delete), you settle the rest yourselves as it doesn't require Admin involvement'.
  2. The second AfD was clearly "superficial": the first keep !vote was on the basis that he was a "published author" (insufficient per WP:BIO#Creative professionals), the second was WP:GOOGLEHITS, the third was bare assertion and the fourth was based on his books being listed on Amazon (which quite frequently lists self-published books of little or no notability). It was closed (after only 2 1/2 days) as a 'speedy keep' as an administrative matter (the nominator was a banned editor), not on its merits. Therefore the original no consensus AfD is controlling.
  3. Your "I don't see him as a one-event figure" is likewise WP:GOOGLEHITS. If you think that there is WP:RS beyond this WP:ONEEVENT then the WP:BURDEN is on you to produce it.

HrafnTalkStalk 10:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I would further point out that the cited sources do not establish Missler's notability as "an author" (other than as a plagiarist), "conservative Bible teacher", "founder of the Koinonia House ministry", "former businessman", "minister" or "biblical fundamentalist". So unless we change the lead to read "Charles "Chuck" Missler is a plagiarist", there is no notability established here (WP:ONEEVENT or not). HrafnTalkStalk 10:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I repeat my previous request for information about policy. There were two previous AfD's, each based on a nominator's assertion that the subject was nonnotable. Each resulted in the article being kept despite this objection (the first through "no consensus", the second through a direct "keep" result). You now contend that you, as one editor, may effectively overturn the result of those processes, because you personally deem Missler nonnotable, even though several other editors who expressly considered and addressed the point concluded that he is notable. What policy authorizes such an outcome? Please provide a link.
It's just no answer to say that AfD doesn't apply to redirects. When an AfD results in "delete", the article will often be replaced by a redirect to some broader article. That's why I said that your edit effectively reverses the AfD result. The precise issue of notability has been considered by the community. Your view has not been accepted. You can't proceed unilaterally; you must initiate a third AfD. What's the problem with doing that? The way deletionism is running rampant these days, I'd bet on the AfD to succeed. JamesMLane t c 11:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


  1. The guideline applying to redirects is WP:REDIRECT. Please note that this guideline makes no mention of an AfD being needed.
  2. WP:AFD likewise states "For problems that do not require deletion, including duplicate articles, articles needing improvement, pages needing redirects, or POV problems, be bold and fix the problem or tag the article appropriately."
  3. Incidentally, if you don't know what the policy is then please read the relevant policy first, before reverting and before making demands. Failing to do so simply puts others' backs up, and make you look foolish. It is hardly rocket science to work out that WP:REDIRECT & WP:AFD would be the appropriate policies.
  4. A 'no consensus' keep + a curtailed speedy-keep-because-nominator-is-banned provides no basis whatsoever for requiring that the article remain un-redirected. Neither resulted in a finding that the article to be unambiguously "notable".
  5. You are incorrect to state that "When an AfD results in "delete", the article will often be replaced by a redirect to some broader article." A "delete" close results in a WP:REDLINK.
    • Your previous statement that "Your edit had the same practical effect as if the AfD had been closed as 'delete'" was likewise incorrect. A delete results in a redlink and the loss of the article-history, a redirect does not. A "delete" takes an admin, and an admin to reverse it -- a redirect takes neither.

Now that I have completely demolished your 'AfD first' argument, do you have any WP:RSes demonstrating WP:Notability beyond WP:ONEEVENT? If not, then I'll return the redirect. If you still object to this, then I suggest that the appropriate forum is WP:BLP/N (as WP:ONEEVENT is part of WP:BLP). HrafnTalkStalk 12:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice that I read the policies. I will reciprocate with the advice that you reconsider the tone of your comments. I am indeed familiar with WP:Redirect, and, because it provides no support whatsoever for your interpretation, I thought there must be some more specialized policy that you had in mind.
Under the heading "What do we use redirects for?", you'll find the section Wikipedia:Redirect#Sub-topics and small topics in broader contexts, which discusses making a redirect "to a 'list of minor entities'-type article which is a collection of brief descriptions for subjects not notable enough to have separate articles." That's what you've done. You'll note that it expressly incorporates the assumption that the subject isn't notable. If the AfD discussion had concluded that Missler wasn't notable, I doubt that his name would've been left as a redlink; no one would've objected to a redirect to where he was listed. Nonnotability is a basis for deleting an article but is not a basis for deleting a redirect; in fact, the quoted excerpt from the redirect guideline makes clear that redirects of this particular type are appropriate only if the subject is nonnotable.
So, Question One is whether Missler is notable, and Question Two is what process Wikipedia should use to arrive at an answer to Question One. My answer to Question Two is that our process is the AfD. In some instances, including the first Missler AfD, that process does not result in a finding that the article is unambiguously notable. You are quite correct on that score. In such instances, however, the policy directs that "no consensus" defaults to "keep". Furthermore, the second Missler AfD produced an unambiguous "keep". Five users responded, with four favoring "keep", all on the basis of Missler's notability. One of the four then supplemented his comment by adding that the nomination was by a banned user. The editor closing the AfD made no reference to the nominator's status. Nevertheless, you contend that the AfD result was "a curtailed speedy-keep-because-nominator-is-banned" -- a position unsupported by the record. Furthermore, even if that were true, your remedy would be to re-list for deletion or to request a deletion review (which is usually done to contest a "delete" result but which, according to Wikipedia:Deletion review, "includes ... appeals to delete pages kept after a prior discussion)".
The difference between us is that your answer to Question Two is apparently along these lines: A lone editor who decides that the subject is nonnotable may treat it as nonnotable, even though several experienced editors in two prior AfD's have opined that the subject is indeed notable, even though both AfD's resulted in the article being kept, even though no additional AfD has been commenced, and even though no deletion review has been commenced. In my opinion, such a process would be a recipe for chaos.
There's no reason that the burden should be on me to go to WP:BLP/N or anyplace else. If you still disagree with the results of the prior AfD's, then I suggest that the appropriate forum is WP:AfD or WP:DRV. The discussion could also include whether Missler's self-published books should be included in the article (clearly they should), and whether they relate to his notability (that would depend on what kind of sales and/or critical notice they received). JamesMLane t c 23:19, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
JamesMLane: your claims are directly contradicted by policy. Per the passage quoted above, WP:AFD explicitly disavows responsibility for "problems that do not require deletion"', a category in which it explicitly includes redirects. Your statement that "My answer to Question Two is that our process [for determining notability] is the AfD" is therefore inaccurate. AfD is the process for determining notability only in the context of deletion. WP:AFD actually gives an exhortation to "be bold and fix the problem" -- clearly giving justification for "a lone editor" doing something about it. That the article stood unrestored for six months rather indicates that there was little in the way of a consensus against my WP:BOLD move.
As you have provided no legitimate policy basis why my original redirect was illegitimate, nor any WP:RSes establishing notability beyond WP:ONEEVENT, I am restoring the redirect. If you revert this without providing such RSes, I will immediately bring this article to WP:BLP/N's attention. HrafnTalkStalk 03:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry to learn that I have failed to provide a basis that you consider legitimate. As you know, my view is that you are not the ultimate arbiter who's empowered to unilaterally overrule the position of the numerous other Wikipedians who considered the matter and decided that Missler was notable, so your view of what's legitimate isn't dispositive. You, however, persist in treating it as such, so there's evidently no point in my continuing to attempt to explain Wikipedia policy to you.
You write, "If you revert this without providing such RSes, I will immediately bring this article to WP:BLP/N's attention." I'm not going to revert it again because I don't believe in edit warring. In any event, as I've stated, I don't see this as a matter for WP:BLP/N. There are no issues here that are unique to BLP's. This could just as well be an article about a long-dead medieval nobleman, whom some Wikipedians considered notable and some considered non-notable. What's at issue is following the proper process for resolving such differences of opinion.
Unfortunately, after I rule out an edit war I have no bright ideas about how to proceed. It seems to me obvious that, given your multiple denunciations of the prior AfD's, you should begin a new AfD, but you're apparently unwilling to do so -- a refusal that at least reflects your consistent position that other editors' opinions on notability don't matter if those opinions conflict with your own. I thought about starting an RfC, but I have to fear that comments you don't agree with would simply be met by, "you have provided no legitimate policy basis why my original redirect was illegitimate". It comes back to that fundamental process disagreement -- that you edit based on your personal view of the merits (in this case, your view that Missler isn't notable enough for an article), regardless of what anyone else believes.
That seems to leave WP:AN/I as the only option. I would hate to do that, because you're certainly no vandal and you believe in good faith that Missler is non-notable, but you are contravening our established process. In favor of going to WP:AN/I is that your override of two AfD's, if allowed to stand, would set a bad precedent, which provides some justification for bringing a petty dispute to that page. Do you have any other ideas? JamesMLane t c 06:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Continued WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT[edit]

"Do you have any other ideas?" Yes!

You can read the following passage which you have repeatedly failed to address from WP:AFD:

For problems that do not require deletion, including duplicate articles, articles needing improvement, pages needing redirects, or POV problems, be bold and fix the problem or tag the article appropriately.

This is what I did. My actions therefore are NOT "contravening our established process". I was doing exactly what the relevant policy exhorts us to do as an "appropriate" and "efficient alternative" to listing the article as an AfD. HrafnTalkStalk 11:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I would further point out that throughout the above you have never cited a specific (page and section please) policy (or set of policies) that my initial redirect violated. You complaints have ubiquitously been based upon vague and nebulous claims about "established process" and similar -- without citing the policies that establish the specific "process" that I am purported to have violated. This will make it rather difficult for you to report me to WP:AN/I -- as you have no policy basis for a complaint. HrafnTalkStalk 11:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree that there's a strong element of "I didn't hear that" in this discussion. You and I have apparently been talking past each other, with each naturally considering the other at fault.
Believe it or not, I had read the AfD policy even before this discussion began. The policy states, in your quoted excerpt, that an issue like a POV problem isn't a basis for deletion. By contrast, however, nonnotability is a basis for deletion. I never cited a policy to that effect because I thought it was fairly well known. Given that I was evidently mistaken, I apologize for the omission. Here you go: "Reasons for deletion include ... Articles whose subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline (WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP and so forth)". That's from Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Reasons for deletion, seventh bulleted point. Therefore, nonnotability is not among the "problems that do not require deletion". For a final citation, I'll document that your action was expressly based on alleged nonnotability, because your edit summary described it as "redirect of article on non-notable topic".
In this instance, alleged nonnotability is an issue that has already been considered twice in the proper forum, namely AfD. You've stated your grounds for disputing the decisions that were made in those AfD's. Wikipedia policy sets forth the method for resolving such disagreements: "Wikipedia:Deletion review considers disputed deletions and disputed decisions made in deletion-related discussions and speedy deletions." That's from the opening paragraph of Wikipedia:Deletion review.
I don't know if there's a page somewhere that states expressly, "When Wikipedia policy sets forth a procedure for resolving a dispute, and the prescribed procedure involves soliciting opinions from the entire community, and such a procedure is employed, then it's improper for one editor to unilaterally act on his or her contrary conclusion merely because he or she disagrees with the Wikipedians who participated in the prescribed process." That's probably just an implicit policy -- implicit in the policy of having policies, which would otherwise be mere essays. JamesMLane t c 16:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


  1. I have been ignoring much of what you have said because you have been raising unsubstantiated irrelevancies.
  2. Case in point, it is irrelevant that "nonnotability is a basis for deletion" -- as WP:AFD makes no assertion that it is the forum for all determinations to do with notability, but to the contrary explicitly disavows any responsibility for questions where a deletion is not on the table. As a matter of fact, merger discussions frequently raise notability questions, with non-notable articles often being merged into related topics, in part to avoid the possibility of an AfD resulting in deletion. I think this is an example of a fallacy of the undistributed middle.
  3. WP:AFD further states: "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD." (my emphasis) Is that explicit enough for you? Redirects do not require an AfD! (I didn't previously read this far down, as the box at the top already clearly supported my position.)

As WP:AFD explicitly supports my position, I think this matter is closed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrafn (talkcontribs) 17:35, 15 January 2009

I'll take that as confirmation that, if I went to the trouble of presenting the dispute via RfC, and twenty other editors showed up and unanimously agreed with me, you would simply dismiss the lot of us as uninformed. In sum, Hrafn Has Spoken, hence you "think this matter is closed." I think you are wrong. JamesMLane t c 18:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
No! WP:AFD "Has Spoken" and has clearly and unambiguously stated that redirects don't require AfDs: "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD.", but you still WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Your complete and utter unwillingness to acknowledge explicit policy is both tendentious and disruptive. Enough! HrafnTalkStalk 18:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
At first I found your tone irritating, but you've graduated to being amusing. In this discussion, if such it can be called, I've made the same points repeatedly. You've made the same points repeatedly. In my view, that means we disagree and we're talking past each other. In your view, it means that I'm being tendentious and disruptive, presumably by my failure to acknowledge your omniscience. Anyway, I agree with your "Enough!" if it means that I've spent enough time trying to explain my position to you, and I'm now ending that effort. The question will have to be addressed through other means. JamesMLane t c 20:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: review of Hrafn's actions[edit]

The two foregoing subsections are the ones that Hrafn improperly userfied to this page and removed from Talk:Chuck Missler. This was the last straw in a series of actions by him that prompted me to initiate Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests#User:Hrafn. My side of the story is set forth there, with some additional comments back at Talk:Chuck Missler subsequent to Hrafn's userfication. JamesMLane t c 08:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

JamesMLane, you seem to be too focussed on attacking Hrafn, instead of putting your efforts into improving an inadequate article. As I've said on the talk page, the article hasn't been deleted, a biographical stub which fails WP:V and WP:BLP has been made into a redirect. Go thou, look for good sources and base the article on them. If it saves you typing, the previous versions of the article are all there in the history, and clicking on the "edit this page" tab will give you all the text to amend. The essential thing is to ensure that all statements are properly backed up by reliable sources. WP:CITE gives useful advice, and if you've any further questions I'll do what I can to explain. . . dave souza, talk 09:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I've responded to you at Talk:Chuck Missler#Report of editor assistance request concerning Hrafn. All I'll add here is my response to your comment about my allegedly "attacking Hrafn". I invite you to read the full discussion with these hypotheses in mind: My comments were directed to the merits of Hrafn's action, with no personal attacks; Hrafn's general tone toward me was far more belligerent and contemptuous than mine toward him. I admit that the tone of his comments irritated me, so I was primed to react when he removed my comments from the talk page -- a serious breach of Wikiquette, IMO. It is not, however, a personal attack for me to say of a particular edit that it was improper. Love men, slay errors, as St. Augustine said. JamesMLane t c 10:15, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Could you help with Mark Dybul[edit]

Hi,James. I am in over my head on the Mark Dybul page. I explained on its talk page where I am coming from and why I ventured to edit the page, but it's been through lots of contortions since then -- some interesting, some of questionable fairness, etc. I think it could make for a very interesting page with good editing. I don't have an axe to grind except to make it a sound, interesting page. hugs, CeliaCelia Kozlowski (talk) 12:51, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: You're invited![edit]

Wikimedia New York City logo.svg New York City Meetup—Museum Extravanganza


Next: February 6-7, at the Met Museum and the Brooklyn Museum
Last: 01//2008
This box: view  talk  edit

Join us the evenings of Friday February 6 and Saturday February 7 around Wikipedia Loves Art! museum photography events at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Brooklyn Museum.

There will also be a special business meeting on Saturday dedicated to discussing meta:Wikimedia New York City issues with guests from the Wikimedia Foundation.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Hrafn-bullshit[edit]

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on User:Hrafn-bullshit, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because User:Hrafn-bullshit is pure vandalism; this includes redirects created during cleanup of page move vandalism.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting User:Hrafn-bullshit, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot (talk) 07:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted per request, thanks for undoing the vandalism. . dave souza, talk 07:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, James[edit]

I do want you to know that it was not I who spelled pathophysiology with an I for the Y, but it was I who saw it and didn't fix it these many times I read and re=read the LBD page. Hmmm, now I see Wikipedia has redlined pathophysiology. I wonder if it will do that for pathophisiology. Yes, it doesn't like that either. I'm sure pathophysiology is correct. hugs, cεlἴα, with no tildes on my keyboard —Preceding unsigned comment added by Celiakozlowski (talkcontribs) 17:22, 17 February 2009

On my screen, at least, Wikipedia has even redlined "redlined", which seems somehow inconsistent. Anyway, before making the edit, I did double-check an online medical dictionary to confirm "pathophysiology". JamesMLane t c 03:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Vandalism at Barney Frank article[edit]

Understood; if you look at the edit sequence, I was trying to remove a separate piece of vandalism, but either TW or I undid the wrong one and I immediately corrected the mistaken revert. —EqualRights (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You're invited![edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday March 29th, Columbia University area
Last: 01/18/2009
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, sign official incorporation papers for the chapter, review recent projects like Wikipedia Loves Art and upcoming projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the January meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:24, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Some meta weirdness and an observation[edit]

I brought this here, because it's not appropriate for Talk:Sarah Palin, but it's interesting in a rather bizarre, interconnected way.

After seeing Al Gore III brought up again, I went to the New York Times, since they have their entire archives online. I found 17 articles about him, although several of them are covering the same event (his fourth arrest for driving violations). What I found interesting is who represented him--a lawyer named Allan Stokke. He is the father of Allison Stokke, whose article was (correctly) deleted and salted, without a redirect. It's almost surreal.

FWIW, there are 324 articles on Levi Johnston, but a lot of them are Times blogs, which skew the numbers (a lot).There were no blogs on the NYT for Gore's first three arrests, and apparently none of the bloggers noticed the fourth one (since Gore is no longer a politician, this is not altogether unexpected). Going to advanced search pulls up only 15 articles on Levi Johnston, two of which are opinion columns by Maureen Dowd and Gail Collins; all of the rest were either duplicate hits or blog posts. Make of that what you will, but at least as far as the Times is concerned, there's not a whole lot of difference between the two young men. Horologium (talk) 03:16, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Dawn Johnsen[edit]

Thanks for your kind words and thanks for adding those wikilinks, JamesMLane! I really appreciate it. I do pride myself on taking stubs and expanding them into all-grown-up, ready-for-prime-time articles; Dawn Johnsen clearly is notable enough to warrant something larger than a stub, as we both recognized. Like you, I also enjoy knocking things off my (ever-expanding!) to-do list. Thanks again! User talk:Jarvishunt.

Cabal[edit]

I have evidence of a Liberal Cabal. Mark your door with a white X and I'll meet you in the parking garage. --kizzle (talk) 04:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget the dark glasses and trench coat.--Buster7 (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

WP Geniuses?[edit]

Your snarky "we Wikipedia geniuses" comment on Sarah Palin smacked of admonition to anyone except you, James (and specifically to me!) Just thought I'd point out the transparency. Fcreid (talk) 23:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

No, my comment applies to anyone who thinks that an encyclopedia article is a place for resolving disputes, as opposed to reporting them. My point is that none of us (myself included) should be taking sides in the various controversies that arise over article subjects. In particular, the comment applies to you to the extent that you were arguing for downplaying the bridge controversy on the basis that you personally considered the detractors to be misguided -- which is the impression of your position that your comment left with me.
I'm not excepting myself. If I considered myself a Wikipedia genius who could determine and announce The Truth for the benefit of the readers, then the Sarah Palin article would look very different. "Palin was the most unqualified candidate for national office in recent memory" would be just the start of the facts that the article would report. JamesMLane t c 00:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
The difference in this case is that you are manufacturing the dispute from thin air, and your position represents a fringe view that emanated only from Campaign 2008 partisan camps. The campaign's over. It is inaccurate, of little interest to the public and irrelevant to Palin. The inclusion of the KAB project in this manner that implies it was conjoined with the Bridge to Nowhere does not achieve article neutrality or accuracy, but rather dupes the uninformed reader. I'm not going to get in a prolonged debate about this, as this bridge nonsense concerns me very little, but I did want to point out your methodology is transparent, appearing only to champion the cause of someone willing to attack the subject of this biography. That is further reinforced by your objectivity on the subject above. Fcreid (talk) 00:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Opinions differ about the merits of the bridge. Opinions differ about Palin's qualifications. Neither dispute is manufactured. On such disputes, Wikipedia editors are not required to be objective (and, unlike some, I've never pretended to be objective); all that's required is that the edits to the article space be objective. (By the way, would "snarky" be an accurate characterization of your phrase "your objectivity on the subject above"?) If I really were willing "only to champion the cause of someone willing to attack" Palin, then I would be trying to edit the article to give a great deal more prominence to the numerous criticisms of her. From the point of view of a liberal Democrat, the current article is a whitewash. JamesMLane t c 04:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry[edit]

Dear Mr.James M Lane,

I am truely sorry for my recent edit on Joe Lieberman. It's just that I got a little carried away with my anger and hatred for him being a so-called "Democrat", but still supporting Bush's stance on the Iraq war, which proved to me that the truth is that Joe is just a Jew trying to controll America.

Still, I admit the action(s) I did was/were wrong. For those who don't know,this is what I did:

I replaced Joe Lieberman's "Foreign Policy With Israel" section with this blasphamous comment:

"Joe Liberman is the smelliest dog on Earth."

Once again, I'm vorry serry.

Love,

Hadi Al-Shiddazi (Yahya's sorry younger brother) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.26.12.34 (talk) 06:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

By The Way, Here's The Link[edit]

For anyone interested, here's the link of my silly social edit:


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Lieberman&oldid=283724267


Thanks,

Hadi Al-Shiddazi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.138.47.13 (talk) 06:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the link you gave goes to the article after you vandalized it. A better link is the diff showing your exact change. You've already been blocked once, for a short term. If you make any more edits like that, you can expect a longer block and ultimately banning. JamesMLane t c 12:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

RfC Collect[edit]

Could you give your impressions of Collect at his RfC based on your interaction with him at Rick Warren (include other if there is any thnx). The RfC is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Collect Soxwon (talk) 15:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Bar Refaeli[edit]

I've changed the source of the criticism about the plane in the article, and I hope it's satisfactory to you, but if you don't mind: could you offer your opinion on the amount of detail concerning her evading the draft (this versus this)? I would like to get another opinion.  Mbinebri  talk ← 18:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

You're invited...[edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday May 17th, Columbia University area
Last: 03/29/2009
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus[edit]

I changed the title because I felt that "Religion and homosexuality" was much more appropriate than "Religion and gays". It is a title (Or whatever you wish to call it), and does not require the same wording that Miley Cyrus used herself. The word gays has, at least to me, a very negative connotation. Okazakiakane (talk) 05:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

To many other people, however, it's "homosexuality" that has the more negative connotation. I agree that we're not absolutely required to use the same word Miley Cyrus used, but on a subjective matter like this, using her word seems like the most accurate and the most neutral approach. JamesMLane t c 06:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Levi Johnston[edit]

FYI: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 May 7#Levi Johnston.   Will Beback  talk  20:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

"I'll favor keeping it, because we must also consider the sequelae of the original event. "

I have to say, James, I rarely agree with you, but you are always a joy to read. ;-) Bonewah (talk) 16:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll take that as a compliment, pending further analysis.  :) JamesMLane t c 16:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD[edit]

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck Missler (4th nomination). Thanks. Steve Dufour (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Pretzel incident[edit]

i wasn't able to respond to you in the AFD for the Bush drug controversy article [4] in time. however, i would like to reply that i completely disagree with your assertion that the claim that Bush passed out drunk and didn't choke on a pretzel is "properly encyclopedic." i hope you respond on the talk page to my reasoning for this. [5].Anthonymendoza (talk) 01:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

George W. Bush GA Sweeps: On Hold[edit]

I have reviewed George W. Bush for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 21:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thanks for thoughtfully considering and accepting my suggestion. I really admire people who are willing to be intellectually honest and are willing to publicly reconsider their position. I strive to try and always be honest and fair in thoughtfully considering points, and I'm always glad to work with other good faith editors. I'm not really into the barnstar thing, but consider this my medal of respect.  :) //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 22:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks! I'm also not into barnstars. A personalized note like yours is much better. JamesMLane t c 22:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at Star Mississippi's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

StarM 01:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

could i get you opinion[edit]

Just wondering if I could get you opinion on something Talk:Manchester mayoral election, 2009 (New Hampshire) is where the discussion is. So there is an disagreement between me and another editor on what the page should be I believe it should be the one posted above and he thinks it should be Manchester, New Hampshire mayoral election, 2009 just wondering if you could contribute thanks Gang14 (talk) 22:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm flattered that you'd solicit my opinion, but I must disappoint you -- I think you have the worse of this dispute. "Manchester, New Hampshire mayoral election, 2009" seems more natural to me. JamesMLane t c 08:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Ricci_v._DeStefano#Frank_Ricci_background[edit]

Hi,
I'm sorry you've been given a hard time about integrating Frank Ricci background into Ricci_v._DeStefano. It may be that people are reacting negatively to the source -- i.e. Slate -- which I understand to be more partisan than, say, the Washington Post. (I don't follow these things closely). Without staking out a position on the Ricci_v._DeStefano question, I do sincerely think that this info is relevant to the Sotomayor hearings, which anyway are in the news and deserve more attention by Wikipedia.

I'm at work, so I can't practice what I preach, but here's what I envision -- there should be sub-headings in the "hearings" subsection of the sotomayor nomination page, with sub-sub-headings for each person testifying. One of these subsections will be "Frank Ricci". The info can go there. At that point, it may or may not be appropriate to extend the content into a "Frank Ricci" article. (My instinct is no -- it seems unkind to the man's private life -- but whatevs.)

If you can find sources that are less partisan than Slate, that would be great.

Regards,
Agradman talk/contribs 15:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

PS will I see you at the NY Wiki meetup this month? I'm a rising 3L at Columbia Agradman talk/contribs 15:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Your suggestions about relating Ricci to the Sotomayor article(s) seem sensible, but coverage there wouldn't replace having some information in the article about the case. As for the meetup, I probably won't attend. JamesMLane t c 17:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Changes in citation data[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at Alarics's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

more editorial help requested: Michael Shall, origami maven[edit]

Hi, James, How the heck are you doing? Could you give me a hand? No one asked me to create this page, so I don't really have a natural editor for it, but could you do the honors and then move this page from my sandbox to the real wikiworld when you deem it ready? User:Celiakozlowski/Michael Shall love and hugs, --Celia Kozlowski (talk) 16:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Commas[edit]

Thank you for your correction regarding Wikipedia's use of commas. JEN9841 (talk) 02:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Gene Robinson hatnotes[edit]

At your request, I expanded the hatnote at Gene Robinson to include the football player, and I also went ahead and converted the hatnote you'd inserted at Eugene Robinson to use the otheruses4 template. Propaniac (talk) 19:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Great! The way you did it looks like the way I remember trying to do it, except that mine didn't work. I was messing something up somehow. Thanks for correcting the situation. I agree with you that I've often seen the journalist referred to as "Gene", so your hatnotes may help some readers who are confused. JamesMLane t c 20:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Palin and Health Care[edit]

In the interest of full disclosure, this philosophy closely matches my own with respect to health care. For 35 years, I have participated in only a government-administered, single-payer system (TriCare). While I don't have any perspective or basis for comparison with private models, I can tell you the hyperbole of the benefits and the problems of a single-payer system (on both sides of the debate) is outrageous. In summary, it's cheap and it works. Fcreid (talk) 23:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Palin[edit]

I feel the wiki-blood coursing through my veins again. No Rex this time though to make things interesting. ;) --kizzle (talk) 01:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back! If you insist on editing pages relating to Palin, you'll find Palinistas who are just as zealous as Rex was, but are more sophisticated about how to fight for their POV. It makes it interesting, just in a different way. For my part, I admit that I've cut back on the effort I expend concerning Palin. Including the slightest thing that might reflect badly on her takes way too much work. Glad to see you're a better man than I.  :) JamesMLane t c 10:03, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

You're invited...[edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday September 13th, Columbia University area
Last: 07/25/2009
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wiki-Conference New York, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia Takes Manhattan and Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the May meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Wilson[edit]

Sensei, your level-headedness would be appreciated on a few matters. --kizzle (talk) 19:04, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I just posted something on Democratic Underground, chewing out the people who thought the "douchebag" vandalism of Joe Wilson's page was funny. Are there serious disputes about our treatment of his heckling of Obama? I'll try to take a look. JamesMLane t c 20:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
That's like this one infantile bastard I once knew who thought it was funny to change the picture of George Bush to an image of a pierced penis. What ever happened to him? --kizzle (talk) 00:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Last I heard, he was hanging by his heels from the ceiling of the dungeon in Jimbo's basement. Or maybe he was on-air "talent" for some cheesy TV station. I forget which. JamesMLane t c 01:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
If you have a moment, sensei, [7]. We are leaning towards a consensus and have a few stragglers. --kizzle (talk) 18:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

POV problems, Soapbox-ing at Death panel[edit]

The lead section of Death panel, which you created, currently contains content that misrepresents the origin of the term "Death panel", and provides a misleading summary of an article by Nangia and Wilson in Foreign Policy. Most of the problematic content appears to have been added by an editor or editors at IP 209.6.238.201, possibly in violation of WP:SOAP. I am calling on contributors to the page to revisit this issue and either come to a consensus on the proper content, or propose it for deletion. Cnilep (talk) 16:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I don't think the page should be proposed for deletion, because the topic is a notable one, but it's best served by a simple redirect to where it's already discussed. I agree with you that the additional material by the anon IP was soapboxing. JamesMLane t c 17:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Woolworth Building[edit]

Ooh, sorry about that. -- RG2 20:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I appreciate your spam reversions. JamesMLane t c 02:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Question about the Palin thing[edit]

You indicated more than once that Palin's death panel comment had little to do with Ezekiel Emanuel. Please explain what TIME, ABC News and the Atlantic are missing when they indicate otherwise.Jimmuldrow (talk) 15:17, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

As TIME said,

Within days, the Post article, with selective and misleading quotes from Emanuel's 200 or so published academic papers, went viral. Minnesota Representative Michelle Bachmann, a fierce opponent of Obama's reform plans, read large portions of it on the House floor. "Watch out if you are disabled!" she warned. Days later, in an online posting, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin attacked Emanuel's "Orwellian thinking," which she suggested would lead to a "downright evil" system that would employ a "death panel" to decide who gets lifesaving health care.[4]

As Palin said,

Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives.[5]

Palin posted a link to a YouTube video of the Bachmann speech at the bottom of her facebook page.

As The Atlantic said,

Reading the post, it's hard to see what Palin actually meant. Her political spokesperson later confirmed that Palin was referring to the principle of "community standards," which she linked to a New York Post piece about Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel.[6]

As ABC News said,

Palin refers in her statement to Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., who in a speech on the floor of the House, Palin said, described the "Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff. ... I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors."

Bachmann's speech was based on an op-ed article in the New York Post, titled “Deadly Doctors,” by the former lieutenant governor of New York, Betsy McCaughey, that took a number of leaps of fact when discussing the academic writings of Ezekiel J. Emanuel, health-policy adviser at the White House’s Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.[7]

You've devoted a lot of effort to refuting a position I never took. What I've actually said is that the Political positions of Sarah Palin article should present her positions on major issues. It can't, for reasons of space, include all the arguments that she presents in support of those positions; if it did, it would become just Collected speeches and writings of Sarah Palin, which is not a proper Wikipedia article. For that reason, her mention of Emanuel isn't worth including just because it's one of the arguments she makes in support of her position on a political issue. Her mention of Emanuel also isn't worth including for its own sake, because whether one particular doctor is evil or not isn't a significant political issue on which readers will be seeking information.
Of course, the presentation of the position goes somewhat beyond just "No on H.R. 3200". It's reasonable for us to elaborate that, according to her spokesperson, the basis for her charge was the section about reimbursement for counseling about living wills. That identifies which part of a huge bill she was criticizing. We have to draw the line somewhere, though, and not include everything she says about public issues. JamesMLane t c 16:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference bddm418 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference pswp418 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference Scheiber was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ TIME, August 12, 2009, Ezekiel Emanuel, Obama's 'Deadly Doctor,' Strikes BackEzekiel Emanuel, Obama's 'Deadly Doctor,' Strikes Back
  5. ^ Cite error: The named reference PalinFacebookAug7 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ The Atlantic, Marc Ambinder, August 11, 2009, Zeke Emanuel, The Death Panels, And Illogic In Politics
  7. ^ ABC News, Jake Tapper, August 7, 2009, Palin Paints Picture of 'Obama Death Panel' Giving Thumbs Down to Trig, Palin Paints Picture of 'Obama Death Panel' Giving Thumbs Down to Trig

Hola Lawsmith[edit]

Can you take a look at Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific and Slaughterhouse to make sure it doesn't read like it was written by a non-lawpenter? --kizzle (talk) 02:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan[edit]

Wikis Take Manhattan.png Wikis Take Manhattan


Next: Saturday October 10
This box: view  talk  edit

WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City.

LAST YEAR'S EVENT

WINNINGS? The first prize winning team members will get Eye-Fi Share cards, which automatically upload photos from your camera to your computer and to sites like Flickr. And there will also be cool prizes for other top scorers.

WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, October 10th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.

WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!

REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.

WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's fantastic new event space nestled between Chinatown and SoHo. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:

148 Lafayette Street
between Grand & Howard Streets

FOR UPDATES

Please watchlist Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan. This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.

Thanks,

Pharos

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Connecticut for Lieberman[edit]

You might consider including information from this article

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/17/connecticut-for-lieberman-not-so-fast/

when you revise Connecticut for Lieberman entry in Wikipedia. Also, considered the comment regarding Wikipedia self-reference made recently.

Tschuss! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.55.62.58 (talk) 21:48, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan 3 photos[edit]

Hi James. The photos are currently being processed in our drop.io box off-site. I'll keep you updated when we import them here!--Pharos (talk) 16:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW, I hope you can make it to our Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC event on Sunday November 15!--Pharos (talk) 17:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Weigh in on an article deletion???[edit]

Hello, James. Could you weigh in on whether this article (which I wrote for the reasons stated on the delete page) should be deleted? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2009_October_27#Peter_Hedge It is about a horrible crime, a horrible person, but I don't think that should make him immune from inclusion on Wikipedia. I certainly do not think this is 'run of the mill.' Celia Kozlowski (talk) 18:06, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for having a look James. I suppose I could resuscitate the page as something like "sexual abuse in the Church of England". There are some other cases that were infamous, widely covered, noisily commented upon by the powers that be in the church etc., and so that would really be the way to go. Sexual abuse has had such a profound effect on the credibility of the church as a whole ... and financial impact as you point out for the RC church. I should think the RC experience with sexual abuse is a contributing factor to their shortage of priests and this in turn a reason why the Pope has said COE priests and now congregations who want to come over to the RC will be welcomed into that church.

Meanwhile for the rest of society at large, child-abusing priests have to be one of the main reasons they've gotten so draconian about police checks for any adult having any sort of contact with children. I was shocked when I had to have on file with my church in Bethesda a statement swearing that I had no criminal record or incidents of child abuse in my background. That was to teach one Sunday school class with 3 other adults present -- 5 years ago! I got over here and learned that I would need a police background check in order to lead an origami paper-folding exercise in church if we were located any place except where the parents were. I couldn't even go to the bell tower at the back with the door open so everyone could see and hear what we were doing! Sheesh. Before this year you had to apply every year for this check, and had to have another check if you had contact with children in some other setting, for example, babysitting for hire. This year they made the check more exhaustive, put it all in a database, so you only need to do it once for all purposes, and they update it automatically (which of course means you are now Big Brothered and god forbid they might make a mistake and enter someone else's misbahavior on your record...)

There was a huge row when people in the U.S. anglican church tried to delete a wikipedia page about an anglican priest over there who abused kids...

At any rate, I still think it's a story and Sexual Abuse in the Church of England is the way to go on Wikipedia... but at this point I just don't care. I put in my two cents' worth. I did my best writing a wikipage about that moron and a force that is undermining a major institution that once shaped how people lived their lives. I've lost the will to fight any more on this sensitive subject. Easier just to put my head back in the sand and get back other, more appreciated volunteer efforts. hugsCelia Kozlowski (talk) 21:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Joel4wiki.jpg[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on File:Joel4wiki.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ZooFari 04:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at ZooFari's talk page.
Message added 04:59, 2 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ZooFari 04:59, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at John G. Miles's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at LarRan's talk page.
Message added 08:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You're invited![edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday November 15th, Columbia University area
Last: 09/13/2009
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia at the Library and Wikipedia Loves Landmarks, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects, for example particular problems posed by Wikipedia articles about racist and anti-semitic people and movements (see the September meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Project Runway 6.[edit]

I was searching WP:MOS, but I couldn't locate any mention of a requirement to use a surname in episode summaries. In bio pages, it's most definitely common, and proper, practice. But on reality shows, there's a familiarity with the hosts, and it seems to be standard practice in all Project Runway, Top Chef, Survivor, etc. articles to call the hosts/mentors by their first name (particularly because it's constantly repeated). What are your thoughts, considering my input?

On a random note: Hello, fellow James.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 05:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

You're right that the rules about names are stated in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) page, but I've always seen the same rules applied across the board. I edit many political articles, and, even in non-bio articles, we routinely remove "Mr." and "President" and the like when inserted by people who find it disrespectful to refer to "Bush" or "Obama" by surname only. The only exception I've seen is that fictional characters are often referred to as they're called in the work being discussed. Real people, though, are governed by the "Biographies" rules, even in non-bio articles.
There are many pop-culture articles that are written in a fannish style. That includes bio articles. In writing this response, I thought about where I might find an example, and for whatever reason the first name that popped into my head was Joni Mitchell. Sure enough, there were several references to her as "Joni". I fixed those in one section but I think there are others remaining.
So, as to reality shows, I don't think there's an exception to Wikipedia's general rule on names; rather, I think the editing of these articles tends to attract fans, and they tend to write in a fannish style, as do some of the fans of Joni Mitchell and other musicians. (Also, it's understandable that they're influenced by the common usage on the show, but that doesn't enter into our policies.) You and I agree that using the given name is an error in the Mitchell bio. It seems to me that it's an error in all cases. As you point out, it's a prevalent error, but error it remains.
Now, having said all that, I'm not going to get into an edit war about it. I'll leave it to you and the regular editors of the Project Runway articles to decide how to handle this momentous issue. If there's an RfC about it, ping me.  :) JamesMLane t c 06:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Heh, you won't get an edit war from me. Oftentimes, an editor, even an esteemed one, when reverting such edits would tend to do it in an obnoxious way--which, of course, ignites my inner twatwaffle into battle mode.
But alas, your edit wasn't provocative, so I was able to analyze it from your perspective and in basically anything I've written, even so much as comments on blogs, I've used the last name for most people. So, the guidelines should apply unilaterally. I guess it's difficult for some, because saying "Gunn" or "Klum" seems strange. I'm actually intending to edit it so that I can avoid names as much as possible =P.
You're definitely spot-on about fantards flocking to these articles. And they occasionally make their own rules along the way. You've swayed me, so I feel that from now on, the only time first names should be used are for reality contestants, because they're never referenced by their surname (except with AI or SYTYCD, because they're more popular). So I shall integrate this into my editing mindset for the future and modify past articles where necessary.
And lastly....That's amusing regarding Joni Mitchell. It must be a hippie thing. I'm kind of a neo-hippie, but I wash my hair, so perhaps that explains my capability of seeing the alternate side of an issue ^_^.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 06:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad you can see both sides now.  :)
I really was going to let this thread die, but you set me up with that straight line, and I'm just a slave to temptation. JamesMLane t c 07:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Somehow I can't see referring to you as anything but James. You are going to have to change your last name. Kozlowski ha ha haCelia Kozlowski (talk) 12:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


radar[edit]

so ... the article on the magazine is wrong? per it, there was no magazine that month.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Good question. All I can tell you is:
  1. I was the one who added the original citation to the Jeffrey Goldberg article, and I wrote "date = January 10, 2007" in the citation template, so that must have been the date that was displayed on the Radar website.
  2. The Internet Archive has the article here with "2007/01" in the URL.
  3. At that Internet Archive link, there are readers' comments on the article, with the earliest being dated January 12, 2007.
I wasn't familiar with Radar. Maybe the magazine posted some articles as they came in, instead of dumping a whole bunch at once onto the site? Maybe an issue was deemed complete when enough articles had been posted since the last one? I'm not sure what constitutes an "issue" for an online magazine. JamesMLane t c 07:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
You may want to take a look at it. (you may be surprised by two things; 1) it looks like the National Enquirer; and 2) the first thing you read on the page is a solicitation for tips -- call or write, day or night.). Second, if you take a look at the Radar article on Wikipedia (and since you know how to get underlying articles, you will more easily than I be able to see if the refs support this), "the magazine folded after publishing only three issues in November 2005. ... Roshan ... The relaunch issue of Radar, dated March/April 2007, appeared on newsstands on February 14, 2007"--Epeefleche (talk) 08:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Alas, I have no special technique for getting underlying articles. I happened to pull the article about Iraq War commentators while it was still on the Radar site, so, for that particular article, I had a URL to plug into the Wayback Machine. Still, the passage you quote seems consistent to me. The Iraq article was presumably completed on January 10, 2007, and posted on the website that day or within a day or two thereafter. It was then included in the dead-tree issue that appeared on newsstands on February 14. That scenario seems plausible enough to me that I don't think our Radar (magazine) article is clearly in error. JamesMLane t c 23:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Robert Byrne[edit]

It was just a personal opinion change. If you like it better with the space you can put them back in, no big deal to me. Wizardman 04:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Talk:California Proposition 8 (2008)[edit]

Hi there. You added some material to Prop 8 that I think should be removed, and I've started a thread at the talk page explaining why. You might like to add your thoughts. Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 22:18, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Information.svg Hello JamesMLane! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2,727 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Robert Jackson (scientist) - Find sources: "Robert Jackson (scientist)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day NYC[edit]

Wikipedia 9th birthday coin

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 9th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Sunday January 24, 2010 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

User:DegenFarang[edit]

Please take a look at this ANI notice. User:DegenFarang has a long history of abusive edits, particularly BLPs like John Roberts, and has stated that the only rule he will abide by is ignore all rules. He violated 3RR today, and abused another BLP. His abusiveness needs to finally be dealt with. 2005 (talk) 00:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Democrat/democratic, capitalization of senate[edit]

Hello James- Just wanted to let you know I didn't make those changes willy-nilly to Scott Brown. I changed the adjective Democratic to the noun Democrat because I think the latter makes it more clear, especially for non-American and non-anglophone readers, that we're talking about the American Democratic party and not the type of government. As for senate, I looked in a few style guides and dictionaries to verify my sense of when to capitalize the term. Those sources aren't unanimous, but I generally fall on the side of restraining the recent American tendency toward over-capitalization. Regards, Eric talk 18:07, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I agree about making the reference clear, but I would think that the best way to do that is to wikilink the first use to Democratic Party (United States), and to wikilink subsequent uses if they're far enough away from the first that the link might be missed. Some people would just go whole hog and wikilink the first occurence within each section. I haven't checked where the links are in this particular article. In general, neutral sources tend to say "all-Democratic" or "Democratic-lead". The frequent use of "Democrat" instead of "Democratic" is a distinctly right-wing meme -- see Democrat Party (phrase) -- and Wikipedia should avoid it.
As for the capitalization, I don't think this is a recent tendency. I went to elementary school in the 1960s and I was taught that a reference to a specific body should be capitalized ("Brown spoke in the State Senate") but that lower case is appropriate for a generic reference ("in most states, the state senate is the smaller house of the legislature"). I think that's standard Wikipedia practice. Without doing a thorough search, I checked the bios of my state legislators, Liz Krueger and Jonathan Bing, and in each the name of the body is capitalized. JamesMLane t c 18:21, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't like that the right-wingers tainted "Democrat" that way, but they have successfully put the English language on the defensive in many ways. Liberal meant open-minded before masters of the dark arts took gleeful advantage of the ignorance of our proudly illiterate citizenry.
I had the same schooling re capitalizing the legislative body when it's in name/title form, and I agree with that, though I err on the side of Massachusetts Senate but state senate, while not passionately. My over-capitalization comment was general, e.g. Government, Federal, and rampant use of title case instead of sentence case, etc. My work gives me way too much exposure to bad usage and grammar in U.S. government documents, and I see it spreading out like a virus everywhere I look.
Note: it should be Democratic-led, not -lead.Eric talk 18:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
As to your last point, that occurred to me also, but this is a fine point of usage where I have a blind spot. My guess was that this could be -lead or -led, but I wasn't sure, so I decided I'd just leave it alone and defer to other editors who don't have my problem with this one. JamesMLane t c 20:28, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Tea Party move/editing[edit]

Hello JamesMLane, there is a substantive edit/merge discussion occurring over at Tea Party protests, 2009 and Tea Party movement. Given your significant contributions in the past, I thought you might want to drop by and check out what's going on over there. Many thanks for any help! --Happysomeone (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Could you help revert an article?[edit]

Hi, James, and how are you? Could you revert the Mark R. Dybul page, maybe to the last "bot" visit. People have been using mark-through on the page, first on some references and then on the body of the text. cheers and hugs, Celia--Celia Kozlowski (talk) 14:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. It wasn't "people", though, it was just one newbie, who's made no other edits. I've left a first-level vandalism warning at User talk:Heretic536. JamesMLane t c 22:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

thanks xxx Celia Celia Kozlowski (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

RFC[edit]

If you have any thoughts on this matter, you might want to participate in this RFC. Gamaliel (talk) 02:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of William Rivers Pitt[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is William Rivers Pitt. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Rivers Pitt (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:12, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

social security[edit]

Are you going to edit the article like you said? The deadline is today.174.3.110.108 (talk) 05:33, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

NYC Wikipedia Meetup Sunday, March 21[edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday March 21st, Columbia University area
Last: 11/15/2009
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikipedia Day NYC, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia at the Library and Lights Camera Wiki, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects, for example User:ScienceApologist will present on "climate change, alternative medicine, UFOs and Transcendental Meditation" (see the November meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back. And if the weather is good, we'll have a star party with the telescopes on the roof of Pupin Hall!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:23, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Punctuation Changes[edit]

I am belatedly responding to reversions that you made to my punctuation changes. It is my policy to never revert another user's material without first communicating with them, which did not occur in this case. In any event, I am surprised that you would take the time, and potentially generate ill will, just to change punctuation which was accurate, in order to revert to a punctuation method that cannot be found in any style manual. Despite the fact that Wikipedia policy may favor leaving such material unchanged, I see no harm in making corrections.

I am sure that you are occasionally irritated by grammatical errors, such as the use of the objective case when nominative is appropriate, or nonstandard terms like "ain't." I am mildly irritated when I see quotation marks positioned before periods, commas, question marks, or exclamation points. Moreover, it is helpful for me to correct such solecisms, since as an attorney I know that my pleadings might go unread if I were ever to punctuate in the manner which Wikipedia apparently tolerates.

Perhaps Wikipedia policy should be changed so that: (1) Nonstandard positioning of quotation marks (e.g., (1) ". (2) ", (3) "? (4) "!) would be acceptable, but (2) changes to standardized form (e.g., (1) ." (2) ," (3) ?" (4) !") would be tolerated, and not subject to blanket reversion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LAlawMedMBA (talkcontribs) 02:18, 21 March 2010

I have responded on your talk page. JamesMLane t c 08:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

Apparently you're a Marxist thug. User:Magnus Johansson is apparently a supporter of Orly Taitz, and has informed her about the article. She's specifically targeting you in this blog post. (www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=9047) I'm not going to link to it because of possible malware associated with her website, but I thought you should know. There's also a delightful followup (www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=9158). If you need any help dealing with this, let me know. I'm not sure being attacked by Taitz is necessarily a bad thing. You're in some pretty distinguished company. AniMate 23:17, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

AniMate, many thanks for this heads-up! You've made my day! I don't think I've been this giddy since 1/20/09. (I remember how jealous I was when my friend Joe Herzenberg was attacked by name by Jesse Helms. This isn't quite in that league, but it's up there.)
Trusting to my protective software, I ventured to Orly Taitz's website. For those not willing to take the chance, here's a summary. AniMate's first link is to a blog post by Dr. Taitz in which I'm named, in the headline no less: "One of my supporters tried to post truthful info on Wiki. The answer can be seen first. Help me find out who is James M. Lane. We need to identify all responsible." It goes on to quote a message to her from User:Magnus Johansson about the editing of the Orly Taitz article. He certainly is a supporter of hers. Nevertheless, his message is about 90% fair and accurate, seeking the kind of information that could actually help improve the article. She responds by characterizing me as "[t]his criminal Lane" and "[t]his Marxist thug Lane", charges she backs up by imputing to me a raft of edits to the article, most of which I had nothing to do with. She concludes by mentioning her complaint to the U.N., so I suppose I'll soon be summoned to appear before the Security Council and defend myself. (My defense will invoke the information that I included in this edit to Talk:Orly Taitz.) The second link is to a further exchange between her and Magnus Johansson, which, in terms of comedic value, falls short of the high standard set by the first one. JamesMLane t c 04:38, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

On a much much more mundane level...[edit]

Could you fix the references 25 and 26 in the treatment section of the Rheumatoid Arthritis page for me? I'm hopeless at these. And how are you, by the way? cheers and hugs, Celia Kozlowski (talk) 15:37, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on MUFON. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Twinsday 14:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your welcome message. It's a bit late, though, as I've been editing here for more than six years. I'm familiar with the AGF principle. An assertion of a violation is generally more constructive if it includes specifics. I made two substantive edits to the Mutual UFO Network article. In both cases the evidence was sufficient to overcome any presumption of good faith.
  • By this edit an anon inserted an unsourced statement about "The Legendary Danny O'Doul". The same anon had inserted similar silliness about this person in other articles (see, e.g., this edit). The edit referred to the nonexistent town of Wemphis on Long Island. A quick Google search found no support for any connection between MUFON and O'Doul. I removed that text.
  • The text at one point said that one of the predecessor organizations to MUFON of Ohio was founded in 1990. By this edit an anon changed that to 1890, without citing a source. I'm assuming the good faith of the original contributor, rather than assuming that a UFO organization was founded in 1890. If you have a source for the rather surprising assertion about 1890, feel free to revert my edit and cite your source.
I must conclude that you were a little quick on the trigger with your accusation of an AGF violation. JamesMLane t c 17:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi I understand that you had contributed to the George W Bush page. I would like to add to the section that GWB withdrew from the ABM treaty by adding that he also signed a treaty that reduced the deployed warheads from 6000 to 2200. Follow the link http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/USRussiaNuclearAgreementsMarch2010 which was the largest reduction of any signed treaty.


Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfisgd (talkcontribs) 17:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

NYC Wikipedia Meetup Saturday, May 22[edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Saturday May 22nd, OpenPlans in Lower Manhattan
Last: 03/21/2010
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikimedia Chapters Meeting 2010, plan for the next stages of projects like Wiki-Conference NYC and Wikipedia Cultural Embassy, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 12:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Wiki-Conference NYC (2nd annual)[edit]

Our 2nd annual Wiki-Conference NYC has been confirmed for the weekend of August 28-29 at New York University.

There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session. Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up here for on-wiki notification. All are invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:23, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

About the article "Duvet"[edit]

Hi. I'm the author of Duvet Cover Kings and although it resides on a .co, I sell no merchandise on the website. There are only articles describing useful information related to the subject of duvet covers. Thank you.

Carlc23 (talk) 00:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's not all that's on the site -- there are the advertisements that I immediately saw when I went there, and which supported my initial conclusion that this was commercial linkspam. Upon looking at the site more closely now, though, I see that you're correct that nothing is directly for sale. The Google ads give it a commercial appearance. Nevertheless, I think our policy is that Google ads alone don't render a site inappropriate for external links. The informational content on your site could be of value to some readers of our Duvet article. Therefore, I'll restore the link. No need, I see you've done so. (You might have a better chance of making it stick if you'd waited.) JamesMLane t c 08:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

BOR RFC[edit]

Best of luck with those two. I suggest that you go ahead and call the RFC yourself, or you'll end up with a poisoned well. By the way, you have my complete support regarding the policy and content points you've raised. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 22:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Good Faith Notice: Removing Comedy Central section on Talk:Gretchen Carlson due to NPOV BLP[edit]

You are one of the two people who opposed removing the section I cited as violating NPOV for a Biography, Living Person. After two days, the consensus was three supporting removal, two opposing removal. In the spirit of protecting the principles of BLP, I am moving the text of that paragraph in the article to the talk page pending further discussion or location of more sources indicating more significance. I have notified the other opposing editor as well. Veriss (talk) 01:43, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia NYC Meetup Sat Oct 16[edit]

NYFreiheitsstatue2.jpg New York City Meetup


Next: Saturday October 16th, Jefferson Market Library in Lower Manhattan
Last: 05/22/2010
This box: view  talk  edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wiki-Conference NYC 2010, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia Ambassador Program and Wikipedia Academy, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the May meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:09, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Alexander Pete Grannis[edit]

I have added more information and citations. Can you add more? I think this is good enough for WP:DYK. What do you think? Bearian (talk) 23:10, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

You've made several of the changes that occurred to me but that I didn't have time to tackle. The article is much better now. Good job!
I'm not very familiar with DYK but I think that a substantial expansion like this qualifies, so I'd say go ahead.
The major change that occurred to me that you didn't do was to move the article. I would favor Pete Grannis but even Alexander Grannis would be an improvement. The current title is like saying "William Bill Clinton". JamesMLane t c 23:22, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
I moved it per your suggestion, and sent it to Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_October_26. Bearian (talk) 00:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

BLP[edit]

Please review WP:BLP and WP:RS; blogs are not an acceptable source in BLP articles.[8]- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 20:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

ThinkProgress is edited, not self-published, so it's more of an online magazine than a blog. In any event, the purpose for which I cited it was to report a criticism of Alito. We don't need a reliable source to establish that the criticism is sound; all that's needed is reliability as to the point that the criticism was expressed. Please review WP:NPOV -- we report facts, including facts about opinions. JamesMLane t c 22:14, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Don't mistake it for a suggestion, James. Vandalize the article with this blog-sourced liberal cant again and administrator intervention will sought.- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 04:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Please don't mistake this for a suggestion, either: I would welcome administrator intervention. I'll begin by pointing the admin to the actual language of the guideline you cite, which reads in part: "'Blogs' in this context refers to personal and group blogs. Some news outlets host interactive columns they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professional journalists or are professionals in the field on which they write and the blog is subject to the news outlet's full editorial control." As I pointed out to you, ThinkProgress is edited, not self-published, so it could be used as a source for the truth of a factual statement contained in it. As I further pointed out to you, though, it's not being used that way here; it's being used as a source for the proposition that a particular opinion has been expressed, a proposition that we can report per WP:NPOV ("It is expected that articles will contain information about the significant opinions that have been expressed about their subjects...."). JamesMLane t c 06:45, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Oh snap. --kizzle (talk) 04:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Robert Abbott[edit]

I noticed that you added some stuff to the article when it was first starting out, and I wanted to let you know that I am trying to get the article to a point where the argument could be made that it is complete. I've written a bunch of stuff for it, and I wanted to let you know that if you have anything that you can add, it would be greatly appreciated. ~~ Hi878 (Come shout at me!) 03:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Bell of Chersonesos[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_bell_of_Chersonesos - that's an article you requested on Wikipedia. I have also uploaded there some of my photos from my trip to Crimea. :) This thing is part of Taganrog's history, which is why I am very interested myself. If I can be of any assistance - please let me know - there is a lot on this in Russian sources. ISasha (talk) 09:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: Saturday, December 4[edit]

We meet outside by the trees at 5:00 PM.

Our next Wikipedia NYC Meetup is this weekend on Saturday Dec 4 at Brooklyn Museum during their awesome First Saturdays program, starting at 5 PM.

A particular highlight for the wiki crowd will be 'Seductive Subversion: Women Pop Artists, 1958–1968', and the accompanying "WikiPop" project, with specially-created Wikipedia articles on the artists displayed on iPads in the gallery.

This will be a museum touring and partying meetup, so no excuses about being a shy newbie this time. Bring a friend too!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:21, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Article probation[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Sarah Palin, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Sarah Palin/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- Kelly hi! 07:51, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

This is a reminder that Public image of Sarah Palin is a protected article. Please stop edit-warring disputed material into that article. You mentioned recently that you're upset about how John Kerry was "swift-boated", and I hope this is not a game of tit-for-tat. I didn't edit the Kerry article, I have no idea if it was edited poorly, but in any event that was a long time ago, and remedies were available to deal with it. Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your helpful little note. Like you, I've been editing the Sarah Palin bio since even before McCain picked her, so I'm quite familiar with the multiple controversies that resulted in the probation. I've never seen an article with such a fierce set of editors who fight tooth and nail against anything that might reflect adversely on the subject. In this instance, in the BLP/N discussion, there were, believe it or not, those who wanted to keep the subject out of the Palin articles entirely. When that position became untenable, they wanted a sanitized version that would omit any of the serious bases for criticizing Palin. They had to abandon that view as well, but that didn't diminish their editor for including every conceivable bit of pro-Palin spin, while objecting to anything (no matter how well sourced) that cut the other way. Under such circumstances, edit warring is inevitable.
I'm guessing that, from your point of view, it's perfectly OK for you to add the statement that, when it comes to campaign imagery and rhetoric, there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans. When I add a properly sourced sentence asserting the contrary opinion, and you remove it, and I re-insert it with an explanation on the talk page, then I'm edit warring and you're not. By that logic, if I had removed your initial addition, instead of presenting more information to our readers, then any re-insertion of it by you would have been edit warring. Somehow, though, I doubt that there's any set of circumstances in which you'd admit that you're edit warring. Anyway, this particular hypothetical didn't arise, because I don't follow the Palinista philosophy of relentlessly deleting anything that might support a political viewpoint I don't share. Instead, I simply provided the other side of the story.
As for Kerry, you quite misunderstand what I wrote. Of course I was "upset about how John Kerry was 'swift-boated'", but that was in my capacity as an American citizen. In my capacity as a Wikipedian, I didn't try to expunge information about the mendacious attacks on Kerry. They were lies, and deplorable, but Wikipedia describes the world as it is, not as we wish it would be. I'm just applying that same principle to Palin. We saw especially in the BLP/N discussion that you and others kept arguing that the criticism of Palin was ill-founded, and that therefore it shouldn't be mentioned inWikipedia. The example of swift-boating is merely to show that the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. Naturally, I picked an ill-founded but important attack on a liberal, in the hope that principled conservatives would thereby have an easier time understanding the general principle. My optimism was misplaced. JamesMLane t c 03:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
If and when you find a reliable secondary source that reports as fact that Palin's type of imagery and rhetoric are not common in both parties, then I'll be interested to see it. Nice chatting.Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
We report facts about opinions. There is no policy, guideline, or common-sense principle that imposes the requirement you support. You'll see Wikipedia articles citing opinions (properly attributed, of course), with regard to many controversial public figures not named Sarah Palin. JamesMLane t c 04:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Scalia[edit]

I'm starting to think the Bachmann thing has taken on enough of a life of its own to deserve inclusion, but why not start a discussion at the article talk page? I do oppose the reaction to it, I could find you five law professors to support, oppose, ignore, waffle, and say that Scalia violated the Treason Act of 1789. Thanks for your contribution.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

My edit isn't limited to "the Bachmann thing" -- the whole subject of Scalia's right-wing activism off the bench was omitted from the article, except for his membership in the Federalist Society. I don't think it should be necessary to have a talk-page discussion over every substantive addition to the article. I was tempted to simply restore my edit, because you stated no substantive objection to it, but in the interest of averting an edit war I've laid it out on the talk page. If you want to add a quotation from a prominent law professor who disagrees with Turley, I would of course have no objection. JamesMLane t c 19:45, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't edit war, I am an admin and am above such things. I am singularly unimpressed with law professors, having had a few in my time. I think we should mention the Bachmann thing when it occurs (today or tomorrow isn't it?) and perhaps brief partisan reaction on either side. But having a whole section on, er, right wing activism just isn't on.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
No point to continuing this here -- see further discussion at Talk:Antonin Scalia#Scalia's activities off the bench. JamesMLane t c 21:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

You're being discussed at WP:AN3[edit]

Hello JamesMLane. See the complaint about your edits at WP:AN3#User:JamesMLane reported by User:Jæs (Result: ). You may reply there if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 18:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

LOL, this is too funny. Jæs and his or her allies want the Public image of Sarah Palin article to present only one side of a disputed issue. They keep deleting the countervailing viewpoint. Then Jæs accuses me of edit warring, and, contrary to the express instructions at the WP:AN/EW page, doesn't notify me of the complaint. Well, I guess that's one way to reduce the danger that unwelcome opposing viewpoints will clutter up a beautiful presentation.
Props to EdJohnston for doing what Jæs should have done and notifying me. Perhaps WP:AN/EW needs more rigorous policing against ex parte accusations. That charge against me shouldn't have sat there for 23 hours before I found out about it. JamesMLane t c 06:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
My apologies for not notifying you, it wasn't an attempt to get anything done "behind your back," but an unintentional oversight on my part. Nonetheless, article probation requires no further notification before remedies or sanctions are implemented. That being said, I have no "allies" at the public image article, and have taken no position on whether or not the other content should remain, simply that the Manchin content is irrelevant to the public image of Palin herself.
That being said, you, frankly, should know better than to repeatedly reinsert content over a number of days, especially at an article subject to probation. You can make any number of secondary points, but that fact remains. jæs (talk) 10:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I find it hard to accept that a veteran editor, working at one of the most contentious articles at WP, can forget such a simple step as notification. Forgetfulness seems like an inadequate but convenient excuse. I don't know what do about it more than share my observation with you. Just last week, I too was being discussed at WP:AN/I (re:SP, of course) (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Allegation of administrator abuse) without being given the courtesy of a notification. Thanks to Horologium (the subject of the AN/I who courteously let me know, I was able to defend myself.
Congeniality is a fragile thing. Requests for Administrative intervention are not conducive to remaining congenial, especially when common courtesy is forgotten. My guess is we need to grin and bear it for the sake of the customer, the visitor to Wikipedia. Buster Seven Talk 15:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Asa "veteran editor," my recollection is that there once was a time when notifications were not required for wp:an/ew, specifically because of the fact that the content dispute then gets dragged over to there (which it should not be). Whether my recollection is correct or not, again, the point stands that edit warring is unacceptable, whether you've been notified about it every time or not. jæs (talk) 20:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
O! I agree! We should slap Editor:Lane's little pee-pee for his boldness and send him to his room without dinner for even considering edit warring. What a vile and nasty thing to do...to remove a fellow editors submission with only a edit summary. Of course, if other editors had been more congenial and not undone Lane's edits he would not have edit-warred. But, I guess that depends on the working relationship between editors. We need someones Mom to teach us how to play nice. Buster Seven Talk 22:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
That was really weird and upsetting. Please try to keep your personal issues off Wikipedia. 24.177.123.74 (talk) 19:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Anyone who wants to see my refutation of the attack, including specific diffs showing the falsehood of the allegations, can find the whole thread here. The denouement was that, in the course of the ongoing discussion on the talk page, I had suggested a compromise, before I even knew that Jæs had taken it to AN. That compromise met general acceptance and was implemented. Overall, though, I've largely stopped editing Palin-related articles. There are just too many Palinistas here who are ferocious in their protection of Palin. Making the slightest improvement to an article tends to take way too much effort. JamesMLane t c 07:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

You're invited to the New York Wiknic![edit]

You could be having this much fun! Seriously, consider coming.

This message is being sent to inform you of a Wikipedia picnic that is being held in your area next Saturday, June 25. From 1 to 8 PM or any time in between, join your fellow volunteers for a get together at Norman's Landscape (directions) in Manhattan's Central Park.

Take along your friends (newbies permitted), your family and other free culture enthusiasts! You may also want to pack a blanket, some water or perhaps even a frisbee.

If you can, share what you're bringing at the discussion page.

Also, please remember that this is the picnic that anyone can edit so bring enough food to share!

To subscribe to future events, follow the mailing list or add your username to the invitation list. BrownBot (talk) 19:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:NPA[edit]

JamesMLane, first "pusher" and now "disingenuous". 3's a charm. Please desist with the ad hominems. The rancor over this article is already excessive. Please don't add more to it. JakeInJoisey (talk) 14:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know why you're concerned about my comments, given that, according to one of your sometime allies, I'm one of the editors who should never be taken seriously again, and according to another I'm not a thinking human being. Turning to the specifics, I didn't say "pusher", which I suppose might have a connotation of a heroin dealer. You shouldn't put a word in quotation marks unless it's a verbatim quotation. What I actually said was "people pushing 'vulgar'", which meant "people who are advocating a text that characterizes the subject with the word 'vulgar'." That should be clear from the context. (Granted, getting the context is a little daunting given the size of the discussion, but you've been involved enough to know it.) As for "disingenuous", I didn't say that about you as a person. It was about the specific statements to which I applied it. This is a very important distinction -- love men, slay errors, as St. Augustine said. For example, you argued for the importance of Savage's intent, an argument that on its face seemed to assume that I disagreed with you. As a corrective, I pointed to the language in my comment that rejected the position you were apparently attacking. If I misunderstood your comment (your analysis began with an ungrammatical sentence fragment so I had to do some interpreting), I apologize, but on reviewing the thread it still seems to me to be a fair reading of your comment. JamesMLane t c 17:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

"santorum" consensus - Meta Discussion[edit]

I've noted your comments related to the "santorum" consensus process appended to your comments on the question. Please consider refactoring them to the newly designated "Meta" discussion above where they are more appropriate, less distractive to the question feedback and can be more properly addressed. I waited several days for you to respond in that section but nothing further was forthcoming so I posted my intent to move on, then did. Thanks for your consideration. JakeInJoisey (talk) 15:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I had commented in that section before you redesignated it as "Meta". I don't know which of my other comments you're referring to, but I'm happy with them where they are.
I appreciate your taking the time to attempt to structure the discussion productively. You need to recognize, however, that not everyone will necessarily find your structure to be the be-all and end-all. Other people will continue to make comments that disagree with your opinions about what should be in the article, and even comments that don't fit into your ideal organization of the talk page. For example, while you're redesignating sections, my previous proposal for specific language (toward the bottom of this section) has now been archived, even though it received more support than opposition. Maybe it should be resurrected. JamesMLane t c 13:31, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate your measured response.
You need to recognize, however, that not everyone will necessarily find your structure to be the be-all and end-all.
Well recognized already as reflected in "Meta Discussion". I've made a concerted effort (short of canvassing) to foster editor input (including your own) and I think I've been pretty above board in that regard.
Other people will continue to make comments that disagree with your opinions about what should be in the article,
My attempt to both facilitate and encourage the expression of those opinions is, hopefully, evident.
...and even comments that don't fit into your ideal organization of the talk page.
Which is why I requested your consideration privately. You are, of course, free to post wherever you desire and to discuss further, if you're so inclined, my suggested process...wherever you desire. However, I'm simply not inclined to comment on that process within the designated "question" space as it's, IMHO, distractive. Should others wish to engage the subject there, that's fine too.
As to the archiving of prior content, I did nothing, to the best of my knowledge anyway, that could have somehow impacted the archiving parameters already in place. If I did so inadvertently, then my sincere apologies (and I would be most appreciative if you might advise me of just where and how you believe that occured). As to resurrecting archived content that you feel warrants further discussion, just fine by me. JakeInJoisey (talk) 17:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

FYI - "santorum" consensus[edit]

JamesMLane, FYI I've posed Question #2 here. I would appreciate any consideration you might care to offer. Any credible resolution will require significant editor input and your observations would be appreciated. Thanks for your consideration. JakeInJoisey (talk) 19:16, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

"Province" vs. "Voivodeship"[edit]

You have previously taken an interest in the question of using "province" on Wikipedia in lieu of "voivodeship." The matter is again under discussion at "Talk:Voivodeships of Poland," in case you would like to participate. Regards, Nihil novi (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Deficit crisis[edit]

You wrote "Wikipedia should certainly report the right-wing view. We should not, however, adopt it as fact, and we should also report the opposing points of view -- including the view of most economists, that all the debt-reduction provisions being discussed would have contractionary effects at a time when unemployment is already far too high." I've seen the contractionary effect point in the article. Why not propose a new lead or other specific changes? -- Jo3sampl (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

David Beckham[edit]

Is a global phenomenon - Santorium is not, its a localized partisan and activist slur. Is it used a lot at the Sierra club? Off2riorob (talk) 00:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Budget Control Act of 2011[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 08:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The Musical in NYC Oct 22[edit]

You are invited to Wikipedia:The Musical in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and lectures that will be held on Saturday, October 22, 2011, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and here!--Pharos (talk) 04:27, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Fox[edit]

There is potentially an(other) editing conflict brewing at Fox News Channel controversies related to your last edit/addition there. So might want to take a look and possibly comment (see [9]).

regards

--Kmhkmh (talk) 22:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I no longer watchdog each edit's fate as carefully as I once did, so I might well have missed this. I've now weighed in. JamesMLane t c 21:10, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Might be of interest for you too, that there is currently an edit war/argument whether the FDU poll should be included in the Fox News Channel‎. Personally I'm somewhat neutral as long as it is mentioned in at least one of the article, but the "fox friends" are out in force, so it might a good idea to keep both articles under observation.--Kmhkmh (talk) 04:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
GMTA -- I just happened on that one and was writing my contribution when I saw your message here. JamesMLane t c 04:33, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

BLPN[edit]

There is a discussion at the BLPN about your edits about Roger Ailes.[10] Niteshift36 (talk) 00:48, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

  • User:JamesMLane, stop expressing personal opinions on Wikipedia, including articles, talk pages, user pages, etc. In particular, these opinions you should keep to yourself. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 05:24, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Your request is noted, but I decline to grant it.
There is no Wikipedia policy or guideline prohibiting users in general from expressing their own personal opinions on talk pages, user pages, etc., where those opinions are relevant to the goal of improving an article. (Indeed, if you look at the thread that sparked this, you'll see quite a few expressions of personal opinion, including those by NiteShift36, my accuser in this matter.) Wikipedia does permit, indeed encourages, the reporting of facts about personal opinions in articles under certain circumstances, although in general a user's own personal opinions would not qualify. (See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Explanation of the neutral point of view.) If you believe that my conduct has been so abominable that I should be singled out for a permanent blanket prohibition on the expression of personal opinions, that bolt will have to come from another quarter. JamesMLane t c 10:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Go ahead with an arbitration request. But you are totally misreading just about everything: you are not singled out for a permanent blanket prohibition on the expression of personal opinions. None of us have the right to "express" ourselves when that intervenes with our BLP policy, and you called a living person a liar. Wikipedia is not a free-speech zone; God invented Facebook for that purpose. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
No, I did not call a living person a liar. I said that one particular statement of his was a lie. There is a huge difference.
As for arbitration, you misunderstood me. I was not intimating that I might bring an arbitration request. I meant that, if you think I should be restricted in the way stated in your first post here, then you should bring such a request, because you as a lone admin do not have the authority to ban me from all expressions of personal opinion on Wikipedia. (Note that your first post stressed "these opinions" (with link) but didn't limit the purported ban to such opinions.)
In the parallel thread on your talk page, you've begun to attempt to justify your position by invoking something more substantial than personal preference. Your argument thus far is unpersuasive -- oops, I meant to say that your argument thus far is unpersuasive in my opinion -- but I'll pursue it there to keep the discussion in one place. JamesMLane t c 12:04, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Dear JamesMLane, I have reverted your latest addition to my talk page. Your walls of text, in this case a wall with some hypothetical case, is not of interest or concern to me. I have no interest in wikilawyering either; I am sure that you would win a wikilawyering contest with just about anyone. You have seen what I think our BLP policy allows and disallows, and you have seen that another administrator agrees with me. That is all. We are not laying down the law; we are stating our opinion, and I have no interest in pursuing this with you on my talk page anymore. You are free, of course, to test the boundaries and see if your hypotheticals will lead to a block: I truly don't care. I can only give you one piece of advice: don't. That's not a warning, a directive, or an ukase, it's a piece of advice. Feel free to engage me anytime, but please be brief. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 23:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
My now-deleted addition to your talk page (copied below to preserve it) did not, contrary to your statement, deal with "some hypothetical case". As I thought I made clear, it dealt with actual text currently found in Wikipedia article space concerning three actual named living persons. Nor is it correct to say that I have seen what you think the BLP policy allows and disallows, because what you have said is inadequate to convey that (at least to my limited intellect), and you have, as is your right, declined to take the time to elucidate your view.
On your talk page, you asserted that similar questions had come up often and had been answered as per your interpretation. I wrote, "I would greatly appreciate it if you would refer me to the discussions you have in mind." You responded with only one example, which was vastly different. I remain open to being persuaded by rational argument. Links to such alleged prior actions, provided by you or by anyone else who cares to, would be a start. The reasoning might or might not persuade me, but I would read it with interest.
Below, for the benefit of any passersby who are interested, is the (non-hypothetical!) question that you chose to delete from your talk page, except that in this version I've boldfaced the specific question so that it's easier to find in what you call the "wall[] of text":
OK, here's a comparatively brief question for Drmies, EdJohnston, and anyone else who supports this novel interpretation of BLP. Right now, in article space, Wikipedia has the following text about a study by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA):

In response, Fox News frequent guest Ann Coulter characterized the PIPA findings as "misperceptions of pointless liberal factoids" and called it a "hoax poll."[57] Bill O'Reilly called the study "absolute crap."[58] Roger Ailes referred to the study as "an old push poll."[59] James Taranto, editor of OpinionJournal.com, the Wall Street Journal's online editorial page, called the poll "pure propaganda."[60] (from Fox News Channel controversies#Tests of knowledge of Fox viewers, wikilinks omitted)

The footnotes provide links for the quoted deprecations but no other support for them.
Earlier text has described the PIPA study, with a link, so that the footnote (note 55 right now) names the study's authors: Steven Kull, Clay Ramsay, and Evan Lewis. On the PIPA website, all three are still listed as staffers and so are presumably still alive.
The indented passage makes negative and contentious statements about living persons and is not supported by any factual information. Does the indented passage violate BLP as you interpret it?
I'm not posting this on BLP/N because, in my opinion, the indented passage is clearly proper under BLP, but I raise the question because the passage seems to be improper under your version of BLP. JamesMLane t c 01:53, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at Sitush's talk page.
Message added 03:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sitush (talk) 03:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Yukon Green Party[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Yukon Green Party. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

National Archives ExtravaSCANza[edit]

You are invited to the National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success!

This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions1 as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic·t 01:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

1 Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited.

National Archives ExtravaSCANza.png

Please comment on Talk:Thanksgiving[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Thanksgiving. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of George W. Bush substance abuse controversy for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George W. Bush substance abuse controversy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George W. Bush substance abuse controversy (2nd nomination) 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. —Ryulong (竜龙) 09:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:South Asia[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:South Asia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ely, Cambridgeshire[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ely, Cambridgeshire. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Periyar (river)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Periyar (river). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/24 October 2011/Battle of Tali-Ihantala[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/24 October 2011/Battle of Tali-Ihantala. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Taliban[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Taliban. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:16, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:History of Azerbaijan[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:History of Azerbaijan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Christmas Eve[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Christmas Eve. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Dick Morris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles D. Baker (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Burning of Washington[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Burning of Washington. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Georgia (country)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Georgia (country). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Palestine[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Palestine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Metro Walk[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Metro Walk. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ulster Defence Regiment[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ulster Defence Regiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Schiavone[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Schiavone. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Recreation of Seamus article[edit]

Thanks for contacting me. I have reviewed the arguments and closed it as no consensus - although as I am about to leave for work, I cannot move the article back, etc (although I have update the AfD result on the article's talk page). Regards, PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:08, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. I am going to recreate the article because there was no consensus, and no consensus on an AfD is supposed to give the same outcome as keep.Debbie W. 18:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
The Seamus (dog) article has been restored.Debbie W. 18:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of John Kerry VVAW controversy for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Kerry VVAW controversy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Kerry VVAW controversy 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Gamaliel (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Occupy Marines[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Occupy Marines. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Louis (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Can you comment ?[edit]

Hi! Can you comment in Talk page of "History of Azerbaijan" ? Thank you --Alborz Fallah (talk) 12:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Romanians of Serbia[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Romanians of Serbia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Newt Gingrich presidential campaign, 2012[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Newt Gingrich presidential campaign, 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 00:16, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:7 World Trade Center[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:7 World Trade Center. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

FYI - Courtesy Notification[edit]

As I was intent on changing my position to a simple Keep in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Kerry VVAW controversy petition, I have asked the closing admin to consider re-opening the AfD to accommodate that position change. JakeInJoisey (talk) 04:58, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Berlin[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Berlin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gopalanand Swami[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gopalanand Swami. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ushuaia[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ushuaia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Perambalur[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Perambalur. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Miloš Obilić[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Miloš Obilić. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Palestinian people[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Palestinian people. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Texas Revolution[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Texas Revolution. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Northern Ireland[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Northern Ireland. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

RfC input needed[edit]

Hi. Input would be appreciated at an RfC regarding Foley Square trial. I randomly selected you from the History section of the RfC feedback request list. Please disregard this request if you are too busy or not interested. --Noleander (talk) 15:11, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of kings of Iraq[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of kings of Iraq. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:September 11 attacks[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:September 11 attacks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Carlingford Lough[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Carlingford Lough. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Radical Right[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Radical Right. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pakistan[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pakistan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sri Lanka[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sri Lanka. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Controversies relating to the Six-Day War[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Controversies relating to the Six-Day War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey[edit]

Peace dove.svg

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite


Hello JamesMLane. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.


You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Taipei[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Taipei. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Balochistan conflict[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Balochistan conflict. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sri Lanka[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sri Lanka. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mount Everest[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mount Everest. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:25, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Three-dimensional chess[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Three-dimensional chess. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

You're invited to Wiki-Gangs of New York @ NYPL on April 21![edit]

Wiki-Gangs of New York: April 21 at the New York Public Library
New York Public Library Lion May 2011.JPG
Join us for an an civic edit-a-thon, Wikipedia meet-up and instructional workshop that will be held this weekend on Saturday, April 21, at the New York Public Library Main Branch.
  • Venue: Stephen A. Schwarzman Building (NYPL Main Branch), Margaret Liebman Berger Forum (Room 227).
  • Directions: Fifth Avenue at 42nd Street.
  • Time: 11 a.m. - 5 p.m. (drop-ins welcome at any time)

The event's goal will be to improve Wikipedia articles and content related to the neighborhoods and history of New York City - No special wiki knowledge is required!

Also, please RSVP!--Pharos (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States war crimes[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States war crimes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Georgian[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Georgian. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pogrom[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pogrom. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Seamus (dog)[edit]

I noticed that you have made edits to the Seamus (dog) article. There is a survey to determine whether the Seamus article should be kept, renamed, merged, or deleted. Thank you. HHIAdm (talk) 16:38, 24 April 2012 (UTC) Talk:Seamus (dog)#Consolidated survey

Please comment on Talk:Mexico[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mexico. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Institute for Cultural Diplomacy[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Institute for Cultural Diplomacy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Chernobyl after the disaster[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Chernobyl after the disaster. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Azad Kashmir[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Azad Kashmir. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Pashtuns[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Pashtuns. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Монголын хаадын төр барьсан жилийн жагсаалт[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Монголын хаадын төр барьсан жилийн жагсаалт. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pakistan[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pakistan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Taiping Island[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Taiping Island. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 18:47, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Correlates of crime[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Correlates of crime. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Murasaki Shikibu[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Murasaki Shikibu. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mitt Romney[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mitt Romney. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Greek genocide[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Greek genocide. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Lower Babur[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Lower Babur. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Khosrow Sofla[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Khosrow Sofla. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jerash[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jerash. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 01:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Australia[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Australia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Same-sex marriage in Quintana Roo[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Same-sex marriage in Quintana Roo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Right-wing socialism[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Right-wing socialism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 06:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bronyetransportyor[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bronyetransportyor. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 21:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Yugoslavia[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Yugoslavia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Germans[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Germans. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Confederate States of America[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Confederate States of America. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 23:23, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cigarette holder[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Cigarette holder. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Christian sentiment[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Christian sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Srebrenica massacre[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Srebrenica massacre. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sino-Indian War[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sino-Indian War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 03:59, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Republic of Ireland[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Republic of Ireland. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pakistan Zindabad[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pakistan Zindabad. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Darrell Issa[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Darrell Issa. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Perth (disambiguation)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Perth (disambiguation). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Murujuga[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Murujuga. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mali[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mali. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Orleigh Court[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Orleigh Court. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mitt Romney dog incident[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mitt Romney dog incident. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gilgit–Baltistan[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gilgit–Baltistan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2012 Pacific hurricane season[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2012 Pacific hurricane season. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Srebrenica massacre[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Srebrenica massacre. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Macclesfield Bank[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Macclesfield Bank. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bloody Christmas[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bloody Christmas. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Flag of India[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Flag of India. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 07:16, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Olympic Committee[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:International Olympic Committee. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gulf War[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gulf War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of fixed crossings of the Hudson River[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of fixed crossings of the Hudson River. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Burma[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Burma. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:White people[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:White people. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kosovo[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kosovo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at Eustress's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please comment on Talk:List of Tea Party politicians[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Tea Party politicians. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 12:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at Boing! said Zebedee's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JamesMLane. You have new messages at Boing! said Zebedee's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please comment on Talk:Byrne[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Byrne. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited True the Vote, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scott Walker (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved![edit]

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

  • The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
  • If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC this Saturday Dec 1[edit]

You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!--Pharos (talk) 07:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Indigenous peoples[edit]

You are being contacted because you participated in this RfC in February about the scope of the article on Indigenous peoples. The discussion has now been revived at Talk:Indigenous_peoples#Scope_of_article.2C_Definitions.2C_etc and your input would be appreciated. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Celebration and Mini-Conference in NYC Saturday Feb 23[edit]

Doing the "Open Space" thing at one of our earlier NYC Wiki-Conferences.

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or at bit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!--Pharos (talk) 02:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Harold Simmons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bob Perry (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Your deletion of Jerrold Nadler coin minting position[edit]

Please see Talk page of Nadler article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.191.5 (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

2012 House of Representatives elections Gerrymandering[edit]

Hi Do you have any plans following you comment on talk page about inserting new details etc about this issues. --Crazyseiko (talk) 21:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Trump[edit]

I modified slightly your comment so that it didn't break the carriage return. Hope you don't mind. Arzel (talk) 01:30, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Meetup NYC this Sunday April 14[edit]

Hi JamesMLane! You're invited to our next meeting for Wikipedia Meetup NYC on Sunday April 14 -this weekend- at Symposium Greek Restaurant @ 544 W 113th St (in the back room), on the Upper West Side in the Columbia University area.

Please sign up, and add your ideas to the agenda for Sunday. Thanks!

Delivered on behalf of User:Pharos, 18:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

NYC Wiki-Picnic: Saturday June 22[edit]

Wiknic logo.svg Great American Wiknic NYC at Prospect Park WikiNYC-picnic-ragesoss.jpg
You are invited to the Great American Wiknic NYC in Brooklyn's green and lovely Prospect Park, on this Saturday June 22! We would love to see you there, so sign up and bring something fun for the potluck :) -- User:Pharos (talk)

Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn! Saturday September 7[edit]

Brookln Public Library
Please join Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn scavenger hunt on September 7, 2013!
Everyone gather at the Brooklyn Public Library to further Wikipedia's coverage of—
photos and articles related to Brooklyn, its neighborhoods and the local landmarks.
--EdwardsBot (talk)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup! Saturday October 5[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join the Wikimedia NYC Meetup on October 5, 2013!
Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for education, museums, libraries and planning WikiConference USA.
--Pharos (talk) 21:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter[edit]

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon! Saturday November 2[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join Wikipedia "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon on November 2, 2013!
Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for Greenwich Village articles on the history and the community.
--Pharos (talk) 21:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon" at Queens Library! Friday December 6[edit]

Queens Library
Please join Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013!
Everyone gather at Queens Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for borough articles on the history and the communities.
Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

The Wikipedia Library Survey[edit]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 14:56, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Saturday: NYC Art And Feminism Wikipedia Editathon[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join Wikipedia "Art and Feminism Editathon" @ Eyebeam on Saturday February 1, 2014,
an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles covering Art and Feminism, and the biographies of women artists!

There are also regional events that day in Brooklyn, Westchester County, and the Hudson Valley.
--Pharos (talk)

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon[edit]

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon
ArtAndFeminismNYC-Generations.jpg

You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March:

I hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Saturday June 21: Wiki Loves Pride[edit]

Upcoming Saturday event - June 21: Wiki Loves Pride NYC
Wikimedia LGBT outreach logo.svg

You are invited to join us at Jefferson Market Library for "Wiki Loves Pride", hosted by New York Public Library, Metropolitan New York Library Council, Wikimedia LGBT and Wikimedia New York City, where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on this theme:

11am–4pm at Jefferson Market Library.

We hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Sunday July 6: WikNYC Picnic[edit]

Sunday July 6: WikNYC Picnic
Wiknic logo.svg

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Central Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck.

1pm–8pm at southwest section of the Great Lawn, north of the Delacorte Theater.

Also, before the picnic, you can join in the Wikimedia NYC chapter's annual meeting.

11:30am-12:30pm at Yeoryia Studios, 2067 Broadway.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 16:51, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Your comment in the "Talk" section of the F-35 article[edit]

I thought your comment on the Talk page there under "Criticism as a separate article?" to be valid and very timely. I hope you'll continue to keep an eye on this topic. Though I'm new to editing the F-35 article I'm concerned there may be an ongoing effort by the people who've edited it most recently to obscure criticism of this weapons system, as I believe I've experienced with my attempts to include commentary on the recent engine explosion.BLZebubba (talk) 10:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share[edit]

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

2pm–5pm at Yeoryia Studios at Epic Security Building, 2067 Broadway (5th floor).

Afterwards at 5pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 15:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

BLP Violations[edit]

Those are BLP violations. Show me where Crooks and Liars is a reliable source. Why do you feel the need to trash a living person? Arzel (talk) 22:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

I must point out to you, O enforcer of rules, that your use of my Talk page to attack me with a non-neutral section heading violates Wikipedia rules. As to the substance, I've explained my edits at Talk:Sharyl Attkisson.
Your post is also an impermissible personal attack in that, instead of assuming good faith, you assume that I "feel the need" to trash poor Ms. Attkisson. I note that she has trashed quite a few living people. Wikipedia properly reports the facts about her opinions, but where others dispute her attacks, NPOV requires that we also report those responses, instead of letting her smears stand uncontested. Regardless of whether I believe her to be a liar, I don't believe that Wikipedia should say she's a liar. JamesMLane t c 08:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been here quite some time, and know quite well that a source like Crooks and Liars is not acceptable. That source basically caller her a liar and you included language that would indicate she is a liar. You put in a BLP violation. But as you say it has been discussed on the talk page, and as has been indicated your source has backtracked as well. Please be more careful in the future about including sources and language of such claims. Arzel (talk) 14:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Attkisson is calling the DoJ people liars, based in part on what she alleges she was told by a computer "expert" whom she won't name and whose exact qualifications and conclusions we can't review, and you have no problem with that.
As for Crooks & Liars, it certainly has a political orientation -- as does the New York Post, which is relied on heavily in the article, and as do many other right-wing outlets that get cited. Whether C&L is reliable enough to cite depends on the statement. If C&L asserted that an anonymous source told them that Attkisson had hacked C&L's computers, I'd be dubious about including that. In this instance, however, C&L was asserting only that the video showed a particular episode of DWTS and that that episode aired in September. Those are objective facts that can be checked. If C&L had been making stuff up to support its political agenda, it could be busted in short order. Of course, the latest clarification from C&L confirms that its assertions about the content of the video were completely true. The only inaccuracy was that C&L relied on Politico for its information about what Attkisson was alleging about the video, and either Attkisson didn't make things clear to Politico or Politico bungled its reporting of the video.
The latest piece by the left-leaning C&L is like the article I added by the right-leaning Kyle Smith: A notable, non-self-published source has read the book (which I have not) and reports on what's in it. That's not a situation where the report should be quickly discounted based on the reporter's bias, unless it says something extraordinary or opinionated about the book. C&L is a good source for clarifying what Politico omitted -- that Attkisson presented the video as evidence of September 2013 hacking, and that she is therefore alleging a further hacking incident that occurred after her original charge. JamesMLane t c 18:09, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vote Climate U.S. PAC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gary Peters. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share[edit]

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop in Manhattan's Greenwich Village.

6:30pm–8pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Afterwards at 8pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon[edit]

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg
Schomburg-center.jpg

You are invited to join us at New York Public Library's Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of the Black WikiHistory Month campaign (which also includes events in Brooklyn and Westchester!).

12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St

The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Sunday March 22: Wikipedia Day NYC Celebration and Mini-Conference[edit]

Sunday March 22: Wikipedia Day NYC 2015
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg
2014 Barnard College Barnard Hall entrance facade.jpg

You are invited to join us at Barnard College for Wikipedia Day NYC 2015, a Wikipedia celebration and mini-conference for the project's 14th birthday. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatory unconference, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

10:00pm - 9:00 pm at Barnard College, 3009 Broadway, by W 118th St

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 21:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

April 29: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday April 29, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our inaugural evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month on Lady Librarians & Feminist Epistemologies! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 19:28, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

June 10: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting[edit]

Wednesday June 10, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our next evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month will also feature on our agenda: recent and upcoming editathons, the organization's Annual Meeting, and Chapter board elections.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

July 8: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday July 8, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month will also feature on a review of past and upcoming editathons, including Black Lunch Table Editathon @ MoMA on July 13.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 05:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

The Wikipedia Library needs you![edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services


Sign up now


Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Sunday August 2: WikNYC Picnic[edit]

Sunday August 2, 1-7pm: WikNYC Picnic
Wiknic logo.svg
Prospect Park Bartel-Pritchard Circle Columns.jpg

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Brooklyn's Prospect Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck.

1pm–7pm - come by any time! @ Bartel-Pritchard Square entrance (Prospect Park West and 15th St), immediately on the lawn to your left as you walk through the lovely lotus columns.
Subway: NYCS-bull-trans-F.svg NYCS-bull-trans-G.svg to 15th Street – Prospect Park (IND Culver Line)

We hope to see you there! --Pharos (talk) 03:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

(Bonus event: WikiWednesday Salon @ Babycastles - Wednedsay, August 19)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

August 19: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday August 19, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

September 16: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday September 16, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project!

We hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Bonus events, RSVP now for our latest upcoming editathons:

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Saturday October 3: WikiArte Latin America Edit-a-thon @ MoMA[edit]

Saturday October 3: WikiArte Latin America Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Black Lunch Table Editathon MoMA July 2015 105.jpg

You are invited to join us for a full Saturday (drop-in any time!) of social Wikipedia editing at the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) for our upcoming "WikiArte" Latin America Edit-a-thon, for Wiki Arte y Cultura Latinoamericana, a communal day of creating, updating, improving, and translating Wikipedia articles about Latin American art and culture.

11:00am - 5:00 pm (drop-in anytime!) at MoMA Cullman Education and Research Building, 4 West 54th Street

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required. We will provide training sessions and resources for beginner Wikipedians, WiFi, reference materials, and suggested topics, as well as childcare and refreshments.

Please bring your laptop, power cord, and ideas for articles that need to be updated, translated, or created. You are welcome to edit all day or drop by to show your support, and to follow #WikiArte on social media!

Trainings for new and less experienced Wikipedia editors will be offered (in English) at 11:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 3:30 p.m. Tutorials and resources in Spanish will be available online, and participants are also encouraged to work on the Spanish and Portuguese language editions of Wikipedia.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 10:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Next event, October 15 - Women in Architecture editathon @ Guggenheim

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!)[edit]

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim
Women in Architecture Guggenheim Logo.jpg
NYC - Guggenheim Museum.jpg

You are invited to join us for a full afternoon and evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles covering the lives and works of women in architecture.

noon - 8pm (drop-in anytime!) at Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Garrett Lobby @ 1071 5th Ave by E 88 St

In conjunction with Archtober and New York Archives Week, the Guggenheim will host its third Wikipedia edit-a-thon—or, #guggathon— to enhance articles related to women in architecture on Wikipedia. The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of Ada Lovelace Day for STEM, and Art+Feminism for art, in a field that, by its nature combines both.

The Guggenheim will work alongside ArchiteXX, the founders of WikiD: Women Wikipedia Design #wikiD, the international education and advocacy program working to increase the number of Wikipedia articles on women in architecture and the built environment. New and experienced editors are welcome.

Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global partnerships page to discover an edit-a-thon in a city near you or simply join remotely.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!)[edit]

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim
Women in Architecture Guggenheim Logo.jpg
NYC - Guggenheim Museum.jpg

You are invited to join us for a full day and evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles covering the lives and works of women in architecture.

noon - 8pm (drop-in anytime!) at Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Garrett Lobby @ 1071 5th Ave by E 88 St

In conjunction with Archtober and New York Archives Week, the Guggenheim will host its third Wikipedia edit-a-thon—or, #guggathon—to enhance articles related to women in architecture on Wikipedia. The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of Ada Lovelace Day for STEM, and Art+Feminism for art, in a field that, by its nature combines both.

The Guggenheim will work alongside ArchiteXX, the founders of WikiD: Women Wikipedia Design #wikiD, the international education and advocacy program working to increase the number of Wikipedia articles on women in architecture and the built environment. New and experienced editors are welcome.

Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global partnerships page to discover an edit-a-thon in a city near you or simply join remotely.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Oct 28: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday October 28, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project!

We will also include a look at our annual plan and budget ideas, to see if the chapter is able to fiscally sponsor more ongoing projects tied to our core mission of expanding and diversifying free knowledge.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 17:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Bonus events, RSVP now for our latest upcoming editathons:

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Sunday Nov 22: Soviet Jewry Edit-a-thon & Women In Science Edit-a-thon[edit]

Two options for this Sunday: Soviet Jewry Edit-a-thon & Women In Science Edit-a-thon
Metal pin from the Papers of Jerry Goodman, “Free Soviet Jews”.jpg
Women scientists- standing.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for one of two edit-a-thons this Sunday, just bring your laptop and an interest in participating!

No special knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia knowledge is required, and there will be Wikipedia training workshops for new folks.


Soviet Jewry Edit-a-thon @ Center for Jewish History

  • 15 West 16th Street, New York, NY
  • 11:00 am - 4:00 pm, Sun Nov 22

Join at the Center for Jewish History (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to the American Soviet Jewry movement.


Women In Science Edit-a-thon @ NY Academy of Sciences

  • 7 World Trade Center - 40th Floor
  • 1:00 pm - 5:00 pm, Sun Nov 22

Join at the NY Academy of Sciences, during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to the lives and works of women scientists. Note that seating is limited for the Women in Science event, as well as signing up on-wiki, please RSVP by email.


Bonus event:

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Dec 9: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC; Dec 12: Art & Law editathon + Dec 13: Black Film editathon[edit]

Wednesday December 9, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project!

We will also include a look at our annual plan and budget ideas, and welcome input from community members on the sorts of projects the chapter should support through both volunteer and budgetary efforts.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One talk this month will be on use of Wikipedia press passes for photographers.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 13:38, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


Bonus events, RSVP now for our upcoming editathons:

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Saturday January 16: Wikipedia Day NYC Celebration and Mini-Conference[edit]

Saturday January 16: Wikipedia Day NYC 2016
Wikipedia15 Animated Mark - English.gif
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join us at New York University for Wikipedia Day NYC 2016, a Wikipedia celebration and mini-conference as part of Wikipedia 15, the project's global 15th birthday festivities. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatory unconference, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

10:00am - 7:00 pm at NYU ITP Tisch School of the Arts, 721 Broadway (between Waverly and Washington Place)

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dickinson's Real Deal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Real Deal (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Saturday February 6 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon[edit]

Saturday February 6 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg
Schomburg-center.jpg

You are invited to join us and the AfroCROWD initiative at New York Public Library's Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of the Black WikiHistory Month campaign.

12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St

The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

(Bonus upcoming event: WikiWednesday Salon @ Babycastles - Wednesday, February 17)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Feb 16: Art+Feminism Training / Photo-Poetics @ Guggenheim
Feb 17: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
[edit]

Tuesday February 16, 5:30pm: Art+Feminism Training / Photo-Poetics @ Guggenheim
NYC - Guggenheim Museum.jpg

You are invited to join us for an evening of social Wikipedia training and editing at the Guggenheim, with a workshop given by the Art+Feminism project to prepare for next month's major campaign, and a tour and edit-a-thon of Photo-Poetics: An Anthology.

5:30pm - 8:30pm at Sackler Center Media Lab, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1071 Fifth Avenue; enter through 89th Street staff entrance
Wednesday February 17, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project!

We will also include a look at our annual plan and budget ideas, and welcome input from community members on the sorts of projects the chapter should support through both volunteer and budgetary efforts.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One talk this month will be on use of Wikipedia press passes for photographers.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 00:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Saturday, March 5: Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon @ MoMA[edit]

Saturday March 5, 10am-5pm: Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
AF Mark 2.svg
Moma-1-logo.jpg
2015 Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at The Museum of Modern Art, New York.JPG

You are invited to join us for the MoMA Art+Feminism edit-a-thon on Saturday, to support the expansion of Wikipedia's coverage of women in the arts.

We encourage both people new to Wikipedia, and people who have experience editing online, or have joined us for past edit-a-thon events.

This is by far our biggest event of the year (over 200 participants in the last edition), and every extra hand counts, so please join and volunteer to help us engage new communities!

10:00am - 5:00pm (drop-in anytime!) at The Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building at the Museum of Modern Art, 4 West 54 Street - between 5th/6th, New York, NY 10019
Please note that this entrance is one block north of the main 53rd Street entrance, closer to 5th Avenue.

And bring your interested friends and colleagues!

For those outside of the city, or unable to join on Saturday, check out Art+Feminism regional and global events as well. --Pharos (talk) 21:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

March 16: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday March 16, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
ArtPlusFeminism19.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

We will also vote on nominations for the global Wikimedia Foundation board.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One likely talk this month will be on the Wikidata project.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 18:11, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

April 13: WikiWednesday Salon NYC and Mini-Video Opportunity[edit]

Wednesday April 13, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC and Mini-Video Opportunity
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Statue of Liberty 7.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Special this month, a Mini-Video opportunity for individuals to share their Wikipedia experiences (during pre-meeting, 6-7pm, and in side-office during regular meetup). A videographer will be present to record 1-3 minute Mini-Videos of folks informally speaking, sharing anything about their Wikipedia-related projects, whether an edit-a-thon they joined, an article they edited, or a class project they were a part of, etc.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

We will also place our chapter's votes for the global Wikimedia Foundation board.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

6:00pm - 7:00pm Mini-Video and social hour
7:00pm - 9:00pm Regular meeting: Introduction for new participants, Noshing, Chapter projects

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 14:20, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Saturday April 30: Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim[edit]

Saturday April 30, 1-6pm: Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim
NYC - Guggenheim Museum.jpg
Monir Portrait-exh ph021.jpg

On Saturday April 30, 2016, in conjunction with a global campaign, the Guggenheim will host its fourth Wikipedia edit-a-thon — or, #guggathon — to enhance Wikipedia's coverage of modern and contemporary artists from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, and to counter geocultural systemic bias on Wikipedia.

The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of the Guggenheim UBS MAP Global Art Initiative, and build on the model of campaigns like the Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Guggenheim: Women in Architecture, Wikipedia Asian Month, and Art+Feminism.

New and experienced editors are welcome. The event will include a training session for participants who are new to Wikipedia and Wikipedia specialists will be on hand to provide basic instruction and editing support.

Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global MENA Artists Month partnership page to coordinate international and online events as well.

Time: Presentation: 1:00 pm - 2:30 pm, Edit-a-thon: 2:30pm - 6:00pm
Location: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1071 Fifth Avenue (88th Street), New York City, New York 10128
Guests should enter using the 88th Street entrance via the ramp at 88th Street and Fifth Avenue

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Mark Grossman listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mark Grossman. Since you had some involvement with the Mark Grossman redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

May 25: WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference[edit]

Wednesday May 25, 6pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference
MediaWiki-smaller-logo.png
NYC - Washington Square Park - Arch.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon.

This month's WikiWednesday Salon, we'll meet and share with the MediaWiki software development community, through a community learning night at NYU on May 25.

6:00 pm: Introduction, pizza
7:00 pm: MediaWiki tutorial, community involvement and extension ideas, novel uses of wiki technology
8:00 pm: State of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia / Wikimedia community
9:00 pm: Monthly WikiSalon in San Francisco video-link, casual bicoastal chat

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2016 (UTC)


(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Sunday June 5: Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon[edit]

Sunday June 5, 12-5pm: Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon
Women in Jewish History 2016 Wiki Logo.png
1 CJH Women in Jewish History Editathon May 4 2012.JPG

Join us for a full Sunday of social Wikipedia editing at the Center for Jewish History (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to Women in Jewish History.

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required.

Expanding coverage of Jewish women on Wikipedia makes these women and their creations discoverable, addresses the gender bias on Wikipedia in a positive way, and works to correct imbalances archival collecting practice and institutional projects that have historically silenced women's narratives.

A training session on editing Wikipedia will be held at 12:30 pm. Experienced Wikipedians will be on-hand to assist throughout the day. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand.

Light refreshments will be provided.

Make edits! Ask questions! Be bold!

Time: 12:00 pm – 5:00 pm
Location: Center for Jewish History, 15 West 16th Street (between 5th and 6th Avenues), New York City, New York 10011

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our June 15 WikiWednesday and other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

June 15: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday June 15, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Featuring special guest presentations on Wikipedia Asian Month and Wikipedia Club at Ohio State University.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism! AfroCrowd!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 01:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our AfroCrowd June calendar, June 29 Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA, and July 15 Wiknic @ Central Park, among other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Wednesday June 29: Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA[edit]

Wednesday June 29, 6-8:30pm: Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
Wiki Loves Pride 2015 WikiNYC.png

Join us for an evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Museum of Modern Art Library's second annual Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon, during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to LGBT art, culture and history.

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required.

Also featuring a lightning talk by CUNY students at the La Guardia and Wagner Archives on a project to document local 1980s HIV/AIDS activism on Wikipedia.

Experienced Wikipedians will be on-hand to assist throughout the day. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand.

Time: 6:00 pm – 8:30 pm
Location: Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building at MoMA, 4 West 54 Street - between 5th/6th Ave, New York, NY 10019
Please note that this entrance is one block north of the main 53rd Street entrance, closer to 5th Avenue.

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our Sunday July 10 Wiknic in Central Park and other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Sunday July 10: WikNYC Picnic @ Central Park[edit]

Sunday July 10, 3-8pm: WikNYC Picnic
Wiknic logo.svg
Group finale Wiknic NYC 2015 jeh.jpg

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Manhattan's Central Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck.

3–8pm - come by any time! The picnicking area is the southwest section of the Great Lawn, north of the Delacorte Theater, just inside the park at Central Park West between 81st & 82nd. Enter the park at West 81st St.
Look for us by the Wikipedia / Wikimedia NYC banner!
Subway: 81st Street – Museum of Natural History, C Line NYCS-bull-trans-C.svg

We hope to see you there! --Pharos (talk) 14:55, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)