User talk:Orangemike/Archive 1

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



Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Task Center for more details)

Fix spelling and grammar

More...Learn how
Fix wikilinks

More...Learn how
Update with new information

More...Learn how
Expand short articles

More...Learn how
Check and add references

More...Learn how
Fix original research issues

More...Learn how
Improve lead sections

More...Learn how
Add an image

More...Learn how
Translate and clean up

More...Learn how

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

  • You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
  • If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 20:16, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Bill Rotsler

<wave> It's a small Web, isn't it? I have been helping here and there, now mostly on the ISFDB side of things. Your list of contributions suggests that you haven't been idle either :) Ahasuerus 22:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

It seemed The Fannish Thing To Do!--Orange Mike 23:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, WP and other collaborative Wiki-like projects are every fan's dream come true :-) Ahasuerus 00:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Handmaid's Tale

I'm testing out this whole writing on your talk page... (this is your talk page, right?) I really haven't read that much feminist science fiction, but now that I've read He, She, and It I plan on reading more, as well as more cyberpunk novels in general... And to answer your questions, I haven't been to any science fiction conventions. Thanks for explaining how to do some stuff around here though! I'm starting to get the hang of it, I think. --Ms tinkleton 19:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Bay View Massacre

Hi.. I noticed that the article you created on the Bay View Massacre seems to be taken from the Wisconsin Laborers District Council website. On your user page you describe yourself as a writer, so I'm hoping that you own the copyright to that essay. :) If so, then I think a declaration needs to be made on the Wikipedia article talk page, otherwise it would need to be removed. Take care! Sulfur 23:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello again... I'm hoping you could address this concern? Thanks for your time! Sulfur 19:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The Plot Against America as science fiction

To quote the Science fiction article: "Science fiction is a genre of fiction in which at least part of the narrative depends on the impact of science, either real or imagined, to generate settings or events which have not yet occurred in reality" (emphasis added). Roth's novel has no speculative science in it, not even any non-speculative science. I don't know how it can qualify as science fiction without the science part. Much alternate history qualifies as science fiction, but there is much that doesn't. --dm (talk) 19:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Obernewtyn Chronicles as 'not' fantasy

Hi Orangemike, this series of novels is marketed as a fantasy series, is published under the fantasy imprint of Tor Books and its author describes it as fantasy. It does fall under the science fiction definition as well, but it is probably best described as a blending of both genres. Rigel 11:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)


Is there a specific reason you'd classify the series as sf? It's dragons and sailing ships, there isn't really anything I'd think of as science. Both the author's official website and her livejournal call it fantasy, or historical fantasy. Rokeon 00:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah! Interesting that when I go to post about it, somebody already has! And here I was going to congratulate you on picking up on the fact that despite the author referring to it as more of a fantasy work, it's really a mixture of SF and fantasy, since she actually bothers to explain somewhat how the dragons are capable of flight, and the acid-spitting that the Longwings are capable of was bred out of an ability to spit (according to her own notes in the back of the first book) "venom" which eventually became so strong as "to be properly termed acid". ;) I think that because of this, putting it in both categories is just fine. After all, my mother's already said she can tell that the author's read McCaffrey's dragon works (not to say that the Temeraire series is particularly derivitive, as it's frankly quite original from what I can tell, just obviously influenced by certain other authors, especially McCaffrey), and McCaffrey's Pern novels are generally seen as something in between or in combination of SF and fantasy (I haven't read them yet myself, but my mother's read a LOT of them, and I've read plenty about them, and that's what I've sort of seen thus far).
Anyway, I also figured you'd want to know that I've finally gone ahead and created a page for His Majesty's Dragon, and have linked it from Temeraire (series). Frankly, it's still more of a stub than anything else, but it's better than nothing. I'm leary of adding more plot and character information before I've figured out how to use spoiler tags, though.  :P But I will try anyway tommorrow. Feel free to contribute in the meantime, though. I've already started in on the dragons stuff, though frankly, I'm starting to wonder now if that portion might not be better modified somewhat and moved into the original Temeraire (series) article. What do you think?
Coincidentally, how do you add an image again? I'd like to add an image of the cover to His Majesty's Dragon. *is still a bit of a Wikipedia newbie in respects to "fancy" stuff like that* Runa27 05:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Moving existing articles to disambiguate from non-existant authors

Please stop moving pages, such as Kevin Smith, just because another person shares the name. Create Kevin Smith (author) (or whatever) first, then discuss whether the base name Kevin Smith should be a disambiguation page, or if the existing Kevin Smith page can remain and a new Kevin Smith (disambiguation) should be created. Thanks. -- JHunterJ 23:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Point taken. I've created a page for the scientifictional Kevin Smith; would you prefer to create the disambiguation page yourself?--Orange Mike 00:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Dab already exists (as I noticed when I saw my comment link wasn't red, and as you noticed because the editor is in it now). I'm not up on my Romainian soccer, but it could also be that Martin Gheorghe Tudor is not the right name for that article move either. The only English news reference I could find ("Cluj prepare all out attack on Lens", August 21, 2005 Agence France Presse -- English) calls him Martin Tudor. The base Martin Tudor probably should be the dab here, but the footballer should probably be Martin Tudor (footballer) instead. (And the things previously linked to the footballer as Martin Tudor should be updated so they don't link to the dab). I may get around to that myself later, if you haven't by then. Thanks for your own level-headedness too. :-) -- JHunterJ 10:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: "Commonweal" is not "Commonwealth"

Thanks. That was my last edit of the night, I guess I didn't stare at it long enough. --- Jagged 12:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


Hi Mike, got your comment on "mke." I placed the reference tag, because it had no links to any evidence supporting it exists, I'm not saying it doesn't, but as the wikipedia guideline says, a link to an existing source will make the article better. Perhaps a link to the official homepages of the mke magazine? Thanks a bunch.--sin-man 02:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, like this?--Orange Mike 03:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
ya, thx! great work. I also added an infobox. Please fill in any free spaces. Regards--sin-man 04:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

RE: fanzine:

Well done! Thank you! Icarus 23 02:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, having Ted White around to ask, and folks like Robert Lichtman, Andy Porter, etc. to clarify, sure helped!--Orange Mike 03:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Careful with that -- I can't point to the articles (I'm still new at this), but Wikipedia frowns on original research, conducting interviews JUST for Wikipedia purposes, and not citing PUBLISHED sources. That being stated, another clause says 'be bold'. Icarus 23 13:42, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

That's why I carefully cited printed sources (to which Ted and others pointed me).--Orange Mike 13:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

"Excess" links on D&D article

You've just removed most of the links I added to various other D&D items, for things like the group Dead Alewives and so on. Why do you deem these links "excessive"? I'd thought that they were highly appropriate, but I'm always glad to learn new things.--Orange Mike 15:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi. This is a disambiguation page, so in general it should be formatted according to the MoS:DAB guidelines. See the section on individual entries for the relevant guideline: "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link." For further discussion, see the related talk page discussion. Regards. --Muchness 16:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks; I'll know better next time.--Orange Mike 16:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Eastside Milwaukee

From a legal point of view, a merger only happens between two independent legal entities. UW-extension at Milwaukee was not an independent entity. So it is fundanmentally wrong to say UW extension is a party of the merger. The merger basically is UW took over that time Milwaukee college. As a result of this takeover, the Milwaukee College changed its name to University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and the former UW externsion at Milwaukee became part of UWM. Superficially, this may look to ordinary people that the merger is between UW extension and Milwaukee college. But it is just an informal ordinary people's point of view. To avoid editing war, please talk with me if you are unsatisfied with my explanation, because I think you wording put UWM at lower level than it should be. Miaers 23:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

UW did not take over anything; they fought fiercely and in all sorts of venues to prevent the infant institution being gestated from having their precious "University of Wisconsin" on it in any way; they even got the Attorney General to issue a scare advisory that it might be unconstitutional to have a "University of Wisconsin" anywhere outside the bounds of Madison. (And of course they continue to this day to deprive Milwaukee of as much funding as they can grab.) I am trying to give proper recognition to the hardworking people of the UW-Extension who were absorbed by the new entity, which in turn was firmly under the control of people like Dr. Klotsche who had been with the former Wisconsin State C.- Milwaukee/MSTC: not the other way around. Esoteric legalisms have no place in this venue. This article is not a legal brief, it's an explanation of what happened for a lay readership. All contemporary accounts described this as a merger of complementary peers. The new entity was combining the old, less-academically-prestigious undergraduate functions of MSTC/WSCM with the primarily graduate functions of the non-autonomous UW-Extension. This new, more prestitious entity, better funded than WSCM had been and no longer under Madison's thumb the way the extension had been, in turn would be able to expand on the East Side. The new entity would even be able to offer doctorates (eventually), although again Madison fought that and continues to fight that.--Orange Mike 23:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

UW took over a new campus at Milwaukee. Please be aware of the NPOV. This is an encyclopedia. Things should be based on facts not some people's feelings or personal point of view. By the way, the Milwaukee college had its graduate program before the merger. And UW-Extension is basically nothing. Since when UW-Extension became primarily graduate degrees functioning? Please be sure what you are talking about.  :) Miaers 00:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you don't seem to know any of the history of Milwaukee of that period. At that time, most of the UW Extension in Milwaukee was graduate and continuing education. The program had its own building and its own staff; it was not "basically nothing"! WSC-M was being blocked from adding any meaningful graduate programs because UW insisted that this should be their exclusive prerogative. Returning GIs were told that they should come to Madison if they wanted to get an engineering education past the freshman-sophomore, as UW would not allow the programs in Milwaukee to expand to an extent that would rival their own. The politics were annoyingly byzantine. This is all there in the newspapers of the time, which I read for a living. UW never had control of the new entity, and did not "take over a new campus"! The new entity was controlled by former WSC-M administrators such as Dr. Klotsche, who continue to be Chancellor of the new entity for almost two decades to come; it was part of the deal by which UWM was created, that we be autonomous and not subject to UW as the Extension was.--Orange Mike 00:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Are you satisfied with my explaination? I don't think all the people in Madison think the way as you do? Is it ok for me to revert your edit? Miaers 00:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Please do not revert. I have no idea what people in Madison think, nor do I care; I'm here in Milwaukee (room W197 of the UWM Union at the moment). The 50-year history of UWM is one of independence from and competition with Madison.--Orange Mike 00:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, do you know the NPOV policy? Things should be based on facts not your or other people's personal point of view. Miaers 01:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Certainly; I'm trying to keep to a NPOV on this subject. You seem to have a theory (based on original research or some legal principle I don't quite grasp) that UW "took over" the old WSC-M when UWM was established; and I'm trying to report dispassionately what the accounts of the event say took place. I wish there were other folks out there to tell the two of us whether either one of us has a true NPOV; but I believe (perhaps incorrectly) that I am keeping to one. At any rate, I only ask that you not revert anything farther. --Orange Mike 01:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

UW took over the campus at Milwaukee, which became part of the assets of UW afterwards. As simple as that, what can't you grasp? UW-Madison is also part of the assets of UW. Your wording "combine Milwaukee college and UW-extension to create UWM" put UWM at a lower level than it shoud in the merger, because UW-extension is not an independent legal entity. That's why I reverted your inaccurate edit. Is there anything POV or inaccurate in my previous edit "Milwaukee college was merged into UW to create UWM"? Miaers 01:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah-ha! I think I see part of our problem here! You are using "UW" as shorthand for "The University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents" whereas I see "UW" and think "the University of Wisconsin, Madison campus"! The new entity was under the Regents, same as the Madison campus was; but I don't think of that as what your phrase conveys to the casual reader accustomed to the claims of the Madison campus to sole possession of the initials UW. We've been talking past each other, I fear, generating more heat than light. I regret the confusion.--Orange Mike 01:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

UW is an ambiguous term. It doesn't only refer to UW-Madison. Does "UW-Milwaukee was created when Milwaukee college was merged into UW system" sound good to you? Miaers 01:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

"Milwaukee college" sounds ugly because there never was such an entity. Look at what I just did on the page and see if it seems sound and NPOV to you, ok? Then maybe I can go out and get a snack or something else more satisfactory than these dry syllables. I got a wife and child out there I haven't seen since 7 this morning :( --Orange Mike 02:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I definitely will use "Wisconsin State College-Milwaukee" in the article. But I don't think the thing you put in the parenthesis is necessary, because UWM is more commonly known to have a precessor as "Milwaukee State Normal School". UWM is currently at the orginal site of Milwaukee State Normal School. What kind of UW extension facilities are you talking about? Is there any building on UWM campus UW-extension's previous assets? Miaers 02:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

No big; I used the two more recent names, rather than the oldest name. UW Extension had two multifloor buildings downtown that UWM used for some time before abandoning them in the 1970s sometime. They were a block or two north of the current state office building, just past the freeway ramp (they were torn down and there are now parking lots there). These buildings were used for a lot of night classes, continuing education, etc. by the new school; the sort of things that are now housed in the Plankinton Building. When the new UWM was created, there was a parade from one campus to the other and then a march down Wisconsin Avenue.--Orange Mike 02:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


Hi there, I don't want to repeat this but could you take your crap somewhere else. Have you ever seen any University have its old names listed at the beginnig of the article or have a seperate article for its history? Miaers 20:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Huh? They aren't at the beginning of the article, they are buried deep in the article in the "History" section, as is appropriate. What are you talking about? I'm deeply confused by the occasional hostility you show in these matters. --Orange Mike 21:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you need to read Andrewa's comments in more detail. He actually listed and highlighted the old name at the begining not deep in the history section to conform to relevent Wikipedia rules for redirect. Miaers 21:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see that he did so at one time. But don't post to my talk page to complain about what a third party did!--Orange Mike 22:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


"rasseffer" does not compute, though I have my suspicions. I am a LASFSian (but only because death does not release you). Many pkms in fandom. - PKM 20:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, no, GEnie, not rec.arts.sf  :-) But we have acquaintances in common (TNH for one...) - paula kate

Re:user reads science fiction NOT sci-fi

This unsigned comment was left here:

I'd like to see a userbox for "This person enjoys reading Science Fiction" without a UFO "alien" graphic or the much-despised term "Sci-Fi" on it: a simple rocketship or planet graphic, perhaps. Can somebody more skilled in programming help me here?

I have desingned the userbox. If you were the one who posed this notice, let me know.

--Ignatzmicetalk 20:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Userbox for person who reads science fiction, not "sci-fi"

Code: {{User:Scepia/sci-fi1}}


Artist’s view of an exoplanet inspired by the discovery of Gliese 876 d.jpg This user reads science fiction.


Your signature doesn't link to your userpage. To make it link there, in "my preferences", check "Raw sig", add User:Orangemike and a | (shift+\) before your current sig, and enclose everythig with [[ ]]

--Ignatzmicetalk 15:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikilink to Wisconsin

I notice you've removed the wikilink from History of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee to Wisconsin. Is there some particular reason for this?

It may seem obvious to you what Wisconsin means, but English Wikipedia caters to all English speakers, including those who haven't ever studied US geography (how many of the counties of England do you know?), and those for whom English is a second or third language, and those who are in both groups. For them this link would be very helpful, and it does no harm. Andrewa 01:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

There were some duplicate wikilinks there, and in removing them I inadvertently removed that one as well; it's been restored. --Orange Mike 02:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Looks good! Thank you. Andrewa 06:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


Pardon my ignorance, but I have no idea what Flemish is... elighten me. --Illwauk 21:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The adjective Flemish refers to everything and everybody that has a relation to Flanders, in every geographical definition. It is also used for everything originating from Flanders, cultural, political, economical, etc. Specifically, Milwaukee's city hall is in the architectural style known as Flemish Renaissance. --Orange Mike 00:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fishing for pike

Could you clarify why you chose delete instead of Transwikification? The transwikification won't have any ill effects on the quality of the pike article and still removes the material from Wikipedia while putting it where it belongs (on WikiBooks). - Mgm|(talk) 11:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of the whole WikiBooks thing. This article is so blatantly not encyclopedic that I mostly want it gone. --Orange Mike 19:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Prechter Bio

Hello Orange Mike,

I noticed your comment on the Prechter bio AFD, and that you've made some clean up edits to the bio itself. I also see from your user page that you're an experienced writer. You probably noticed that I'm in an absurdly contentious revert war with another editor regarding Prechter's bio, and since it's just the two of us there I don't see an easy way out. Any neutral perspective will help. If you think it's a tar pit you can do without, fair enough -- or, if you give an open-minded reading to my comments on the Talk:Robert Prechter and conclude that I'm full of it, fair enough. Virtually anything you add to the talk page would improve what's there now. Thanks, --Rgfolsom 21:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the candid comments. I have read the COI guideline several times and I really did understand the risks, including the risk of not disguising my identity. FWIW, I wouldn't have waded into this mess if several of these pages hadn't already been overrun by editors with an obvious POV, and with no one to point it out. Thanks for your time. Rgfolsom 14:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


Hey, I'm really sorry. I was being an ass hole and I know it, and knew it. I don't know what gets into me sometimes, but for some reason I just feel like vandalizing Wikipedia sometimes. It's wrong and I know it, and it is unfair for you and people who use it. So I'm sorry. I'll try not to do it again, but honestly, I probably will despite my efforts not to.

Martin Luther King. The Womanizer.

I feel it's kind of unfair for you to decide that its not appropriate, when it's a pretty important thing to stress. Wikipedia has a policy of NPOV and telling me I cant put this intrigal part of his life in the article is your point of view. Several others agree with you, but should all your points of view stop users from writing the facts? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Olir (talkcontribs) 21:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

That's what the Wiki process is about: trying to reach a concensus on disputed issues. There has long since developed a concensus that this is not an integral part of his life, certainly not important enough to be in the opening paragraph. (And if this stuff is important to you, why don't you sign your name?) --Orange Mike 22:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
The wiki process isnt about not revealing facts because you and several others don't like them


Because this isn't a local Hawaiian wiki, and Standard American English spelling is "Hawaii." --Lukobe 23:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Blanking 'Mission statement'

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to Mission statement. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed.

diff in question --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Milwaukee Police Association

I think it is very relevant to mention in the article the fact that the current head of the Milwaukee Police Association was such an incompetent police officer that he didn't bother to run a background check on Jeffery Dahmer when he caught him and indirectly aided in the death and cannibalization of a 14 year old boy. But if you feel sympathy for the homophobe then I guess I can't stop you, I'm not in the mood for an edit war. The Fading Light 03:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I feel no sympathy for him. I just don't think it's appropriate to put the information in the MPA article. --Orange Mike 14:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Bus Stop intransigence

You're welcome Orange Mike! I kept adding examples of the visual arts, though it didn't seem to do any good. Now I notice that Bus Stop wants to eliminate the Nambassa photo too, because he says it appeals to "prurient interests." Now that's just silly!

Bus Stop's current change radically changes the meaning of the sentence. I have no taste for revert wars, yet reason seems to have no effect. I suppose we could at least change "visual landscape" (?!) to "visual arts."

It seems that Bus Stop has a problem with the visual arts in general--doesn't much care for them.

Any changes you want to make would be welcome. Apostle12 19:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

His page says he's a painter (abstract); I think he's some kind of academic/"high art" snob with a side of prudery. Please make the revert this time so he can't just blame me? --Orange Mike 19:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Milwaukee Police Association

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Milwaukee Police Association, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Milwaukee Police Association. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Brianyoumans 19:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

SF links

The links had already been slaughtered some time ago and were re-added, it seemed only right to slaughter them (again) - a link to the International Spamtastic Organisation has been left though - does that not suffice ;)? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for restoring some of Slimvirgin's cuts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pleasantville (talkcontribs) 22:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Not appreciated

Just to let you know that I do not appreciate your comments at Talk:Kathryn_Cramer. I care deeply for this project, and to be referred as a "harsh" person "who disdain expertise and carry on grudges" is, beyond being an incorrect assessment on your part, inflammatory, and insulting. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how else to characterize your attitude towards Cramer, however inept her initial blunders were. I really fear the inflammatory and insulting attitude you and SlimVirgin have displayed has done a great deal of permanent harm to the reputation of the Wikipedia project, about which I, too, care deeply. I will concede, however, the possibility that the two of you have somewhat blurred together in my mind and that you may have been a trifle less harsh and grudge-laden in your postings than he/she. This whole mess has distressed me a great deal. --Orange Mike 01:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
If that is the case, rather than escalating the issue (that will do no good), you can avoid making such comments, as these are indeed not helpful. Not to Mrs Cramer, not to her article, and not to our project. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
You may well be right. --Orange Mike 02:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

science fiction studies

Hi Orangemike -- you're one of the only other fans I know personally here at wikipedia. Someone has PRODded New York Review of Science Fiction, and you are one of the only other folks I can think of who would get SF studies enough to help work on this article. I'm very annoyed right now by this misunderstanding of academic journals. You can't run a google test on an academic journal to see if there are third-party articles -- on the Internet! -- about an academic journal. That shouldn't be the test. So annoying. Anyway, if you have time & inclination and can help improve the article, please do so. ... This has also spurred me to formalize my half-thought out plans to deal with an official SF studies portion of the Wikiproject on SF, and also to raise the issue of journals on WP:Notability for academics proposal. --lquilter 05:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Another sercon fan here. PRODding NYRSF is ridiculous. - PKM 17:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
At least that mess (induced by the Cramer controversy) is over with. I must say, though that, as a sercon fan but one with no academic credentials in the field, I do somewhat resent the use of terms like "fanboy" and "fangirl" as pure pejoratives. --Orange Mike 00:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Sorry Orangemike! I don't really mean them as pure pejoratives -- I'm a fangirl and sometimes a fanboi myself. I was just annoyed by the disproportionate favoring of pure (often media & game) fannishness over, you know, geeky/reading/academic fannishness. Actually I'm not even geeky enough to know what "sercon" means -- is it "serious con", a la Wiscon, Potlatch, and ReaderCon? Because if so, then that's me to a T. Anyway ... I just started Science fiction studies and Category:Science fiction studies, so if you've got relevant stuff to go there, please do. --lquilter 02:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Originally "sercon" was short for SERious CONstructive discussion of Science Fiction as a literature, and was a pejorative meant to mock certainly people who felt that fanzines were too, you know, fannish! --Orange Mike 02:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
And some of us wear that "sercon" banner proudly, by gum! Or did back in the '70s anyway.
If it's not in fanspeak I really must add it - running off to check. - PKM 04:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
The people to whom it was originally applied were fuggheads and cranks, and the original use thereof in fandom reflected that. Indeed, I know a few Olde Phartes of Phandom who are still disconcerted at the fact that people like you and I accept the term with pride. So if you're gonna put anything in fanspeak, make sure that it reflects the complex history of the term. (This is not one of those things like 'Quaker' and 'Methodist' where the labelled group accepted the term and made it their own. The original sercon people just ignored the silly fannish types and wished that they would go away.) --Orange Mike 15:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Grand supercycles

Dear OrangeMike,

Very good to run into you again. Hopefully this time will be more relaxed than last. Please tell me if you think I'm stepping out of line.

I'm sure you realize that I'm trying to put the entire Robert Prechter Elliott wave complex onto a reasonable basis. Grand supercycle is really a mess and I don't know where to start. I've thought about putting a {{nonsense} tag on it.

Nikolai Kondratiev and Kondratiev wave have less connection than meets the eye. NK is an interesting, if barely notable historical figure in economics (business cycle theories), K wave is about predicting financial market prices.

Smallbones 18:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Elliott wave claims to be about similar topics. If there's a Template:Cleanup-this-mess, I'd support it. --Orange Mike 18:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Public Utilities

If you think they're such a problem, then go ahead and delete them from all the city articles that list them. Don't just sit there and complain and prevent other people from making contributions. And don't ever tell anybody to "cease and desist" ever again. Yes, you ARE one of the reasons I'm leaving wikipedia. I was a good contributor to philosophy articles before User:spamreporter1 made it his mission to drive me away because of the cable company references I added, then proceeded to clean up and de-commercialize as best I could, all completely voluntarily.

Cable TV spamming issue

Thank you for weighing in on this Cable TV spamming issue. In my view, this is not a close question! Spamreporter1 19:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

indy in chipitts

oh, thanks for the heads-up . . . the link was misleading, so I thought the person who put it up just chose three cities. :-p


Thanks for the important addition to white flight futurebird 17:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Milwaukee Panthers athletics section

I'd honestly love to, but am afraid I don't quite have the User skill and know-how needed to create a new page, or move that section to one. I could do the content editing, etc. once it's there, but that's it. On my last few edits to the section, I did try to update and add to the section value-wise w/o actually growing it content-wise. I could try to parse it down a bit to only the more meaningful stuff, like axe the club sports details, etc., but otherwise I think it's no more "bloated" than many other D-I schools w/successful athletics programs (Marquette University's athletics section comes to mind). There's gotta be someone knowledgable than I who could give it its proper section, and hopefully that will solve any issues you may have with it. Sorry I can't be of more help, but I thank you for asking! CollegeSportsGuy 07:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Chester Counties

I agree, although Im not surprised that there isnt a place called Deanburg in the UK, the ending (burg) is very uncommon in Britain, although it is common in Scandanavia. I was expecting to have to call it Deanburg tennessee, but seeing as there was no other deanburg, I just called it that. To be honest, it is just coincidence that I came across an uncreated Deanburg link on the Chickasaw State Park (Tennessee) page as I was Random Articling! ~ JFBurton 18:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

There are three Chester Counties in the States; the one in Tennessee is named after a person, but the other two may be named after the ancient County of Chester, where you live. What an odd coincidence!


No, just got sacked! No, I deleted it because I dont really want people knowing my REAL job. I just put it there because it can mean anything. Also, I've had a few people come to me and say 'are you a labourer, thats a crap job!' (or something like that). So now Im just nothing. I started the Jacks Creek article but it is very sparse. Mabye you could 'do it up' a little like you did with Deansburg. I looked you up on google and you seem like a well known and interesting man. Mind telling me more about yourself? ~ JFBurton

As a fierce trades union man myself, I'd say "labourer" is a fine and honourable title (regardless of what one thinks of Blair). I've got family in Deanburg, some of them buried by the side of Deanburg Road/Lowery Road; no such connections to the Jacks Creek end of the county. As to myself: more than most folks would want to know is on my user page; more can be learned by googling Google Groups (or Google Images) for "Orange Mike".--Orange Mike 19:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Platform (Scottish politics)

Thanks for the comment on the Scottish Socialist Party talk page on the above. Its not really a particularly distinctive use of the term in my experience and would be understood across the UK. It is probably akin to political factions, however that has somewhat negative and pejorative connotations.

In the SSP we think that debates should be held openly, that there is no "one true brand" of socialism, and recognise that people come from different traditions, have different experiences, different priorities and outlooks and those affect the "favour" of their politics, while still being identifyably socialist (/progressive/radical/left-wing/Marxist). So within the party people are encouraged to form factions/platforms with others of similiar approaches. The term "platform" is more acceptable than "faction" and comes from the idea of "sharing a platform" (ie speaking on the same issue/at the same event etc) as someone else.

I dont think that its a particularly unique concept, what is perhaps more unusual is that the SSP welcomes this kind of dissent, and platforms (generally) behave fraternally to one another, as opposed to more traditional parties where platforms/factions are highly antagonistic.

The SSP's attitude to factions is covered in the Political_faction#Effects_of_factions element of the political factions page, I'm not sure that it merits an entry of its own.Ms medusa 01:49, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


The (Ware County Health Department) has all the birth records for Waycross, I misquoted the name as Waycross Health Dept. And yes they do offer the service for a fee of $10,00 but only to family members. Rogue_Gremlin

Independent proposal for WP:CAL and WP:SOCAL tags

User Spamreporter1 has made a proposal for the tagging issue. He was not previously involved with either project before seeing this discussion, and I belive that his opinion therefore is NPOV. The suggestion is that articles that have no state-wide scope be tagged only locally. Please go to this section on the SoCal page to provide input. —ScouterSig 18:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


I have NO idea how that happened. Thanks for pointing that out though, it's fixed now.--Wizardman 16:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


If you ever need anything just let me know. PS. you are AWSOME. futurebird 06:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

University of Wisconsin

Hi there, I actually think redirecting University of Wisconsin to the system article is a better solution than a disambiguation page.Miaers 05:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

That's not an option. The only alternative being offered to the current Madison-centric system is the restoration of the disambiguation page. If you vote to kill the disambiguation page, as you did last time, we'll be stuck with the Madison-as-center-of-the-universe situation we have now. --Orange Mike 05:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

"The other Andy Porter"

I only removed it because the article about the team didn't reference him. If he comes up in Google searches, though, he probably can get on the team's article, which means the disambiguation page would need to disambiguate to the team's article... Anyways, feel free to revert me, and sorry for the slow reply. Logical2uReview me! 14:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


No problem. I am just confused as to what CRCulver's deal is. Unless I am missing something its pretty clear that only British publications would use a British accent. What do you think about RP being in the dialects navigation box? -Ravedave 05:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think he's just from the "only English English is real English" school of thought. To heck with that noise; we Celts always make the language do more glorious things than the Teutons ever could! --Orange Mike 05:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

List of Dungeons & Dragons popular culture references links

Would you be willing to discuss the CreativeJuices link on the Talk page? Wyatt Riot 14:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


So it seems, but I thought it would be worth giving him one more chance. Blocked for a month now. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Trebor 15:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The Incomplete Enchanter vs. The Incompleat Enchanter

I'd like to question your reasons for the renaming of the article. I have several bibliographic references that list the title as The Incomplete Enchanter (the Laughlin and Levack de Camp bibliography and Bleiler's Checklist of Fantastic Literature). My own paperback reprint as well as the two cover scans in the article seem to agree.--Rtrace 20:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Reasonable question. As I have always understood it, the "Incompleat" spelling was the original, in tribute to Isaak Walton's Compleat Angler; publishers seem to have felt a compulsion to "correct" it ever since, as the two cover scans testify. The correction to "Incompleat" appears in the errata for John Clute's 1993 SF encyclopedia, for example, which used the "Incomplete" spelling at first.--Orange Mike 21:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. I've got Clute's Fantasy Encylopedia, but not the SF one amd while it does mention The Incompleat Enchanter as a later variant title, it doesn't go into the deatail you mention. I'm going to paste this thread into the talk page lest others ask you the same question.--Rtrace 22:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, guys, Orange Mike is wrong on this one. The correct title for the 1941 collection (and later reprints) is The Incomplete Enchanter. "Incompleat" was never used for any Harold Shea story or book! The source of the confusion is the fact that the later omnibus of The Incomplete Enchanter and The Castle of Iron was called The Compleat Enchanter (this was the book that was named in tribute to Walton, Mike). And of course the even later omnibus that combined The Incomplete Enchanter, The Castle of Iron and Wall of Serpents was called The Complete Compleat Enchanter. The title of this article needs to be reverted. BPK 04:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
And now has been. BPK 05:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for reverting my user talk page! :-) -Mschel 16:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


You're being a little ext ream, i hardly consider my edit vandalism, hippyism has hits on goggle and i have heard it used by hippies myself, i suggest you calm down and stop threatening to block me for justified actions such as changing the title to a word who's root will etymologically make it mean "the teachings of a hippie". "Nonsense" is a little harsh don't ya think? Im sorry if my edit was more destructive than constructive, but it's no reason to get upset :-). Randy6767 02:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That drastic a change of a major article (and one subjected to daily graffiti and other attacks, so that we are always having to monitor it) should not be done without consulting cooperatively with your comrades, fellow worker. You're an anarchist, you can understand that! The word "nonsense" was generate by the template I was using; but that big a change, without consultation, did seem to me to smack of vandalism. Still, assume good faith and all that, brother. The change has been reverted; feel free to argue for such a move on the Talk:Hippie page. --Orange Mike 02:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Not an anarchist anymore, just so ya know. Randy6767 16:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Hokay. I was going by your old userpage. --Orange Mike 16:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Peckhams

wee! :) thx a lot, i could not find out anything more about them, even when i asked gb edwards, the editor of peckhamia. do you have a reference you could add to the article? that would be like the sugar on top ;) cheers --Sarefo 11:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That new stuff is the product of long hours with regular Google, Google Book, Google Scholar, and WorldCat. I'm a freelance writer, and almost embarrassed at how much (unpaid) time I've spent on them already; but of course, they were Milwaukeeans! --Orange Mike 18:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikilinks (Pamela Dean)

Hi. Your edit summary when you removed a wikilink to Tam Lin (novel) from Pamela Dean says, "wikilink the first appearance of a term, and only the first, in an article". Erm, why? When I'm wikisurfing I almost never read whole articles but skim through to the subsections which interest me. If I saw a bibliography with no wikilinks then I'd assume there were no articles and surf on by. This is one of the reasons why the Manual of Style suggests sometimes re-wikilinking relevant articles in subsequent sections (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Overlinking and underlinking: what's the best ratio?). I won't put the link back but I suggest that you might like to think about the variety of ways people use Wikipedia and reconsider the appropriate use of subsequent wikilinks within articles. :-) Random Passer-by 23:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, Random! I've been chided in the past for "excessive links" and deduced, from the tone of the chiding, the rule I put in the summary. I am duly corrected and chastised; thanks, genuinely, not only for the advice but for the helpful way in which you expressed the gentle correction. --Orange Mike 00:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Reasonable quantities of wikilinks are a matter of personal judgement so any two editors are rarely going to agree 100%. *cough*Does this mean you wouldn't mind if I snuck that second link back in?*cough*. I notice you've completed a college degree in the U.S. so I wanted to take this opportunity to pick your brains. I used the word "lecturers" to describe the teachers at Blackstock College in the Tam Lin (novel) article and I think that's probably an inappropriate Britishism and, if so, which word should I use to replace it? Are all/most college teachers in the U.S. called "professors" or is that only senior teachers? Random Passer-by 19:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


Uh... I'm not sure thats vandalism that was my own post and she move the discussion elsewhere. The info in the post itself was wrong so it was removed, vs incorrect info about orlady staying on her page. Again the discussion was moved elsewhere and I stand corrected in my original post so I corrected it. Please be careful before jumping to conclusions.--Lettruthreign 01:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

None of us is allowed to edit another user's page. We can add stuff; but it's not kosher to take stuff off. That made it vandalism. If something is incorrect, put information in saying so; but don't blank things that are there! --Orange Mike 03:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


Sorry about the revert. I didn't notice your edits except the photo, which is "ALL RIGHT RESERVED" as indicated from the source. It is not a free photo. The building is also terribly old. Miaers 02:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I went to the photographer's page, and you are right about that. However "the building is old" is no reason not to show it. I am very glad that we have some old buildings on this campus! --Orange Mike 02:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

You need to ask the photographer to change the license type. Otherwise it is still a copyvio. I think this photo fits into the history article better. Miaers 02:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

As far as we can tell, the photographer did not put the picture into our database, so it would be a copyvio (we are agreed on that). The photo is not historical, it is of a current building, and was put into the article in a place which is describing the part of campus where the picture was taken. If it were not a copyvio, this would be exactly the place for it. --Orange Mike 02:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Goofed-up Template Problem

I don't know how to fix the SharedIPEDU|University of Wisconsin Maddison template. The name is spelled wrong, and lacks a hyphen. It should be University of Wisconsin-Madison. --Orange Mike 18:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand your question, sorry. Is this regarding one of SelketBot's edits? Please provide a link. -- Selket Talk 18:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the bot edit to User_talk: (and others). --Orange Mike 18:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
This has been fixed in the bot. There is no easy way to fix the old templates, but it should not make this mistake again. I have fixed User talk: If you find others, feel free to do the same. --Selket Talk 19:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


Hey Mike - I appreciate you coming to my defense at Milwaukee. It seems like Miaers tends to respect you more than the rest of us, so is there anyway you can help him to understand why people get offended at some of his edits? (UW-Madison aside b/c I usually act like a jerk there - and I'm sorry about that.) Anyway, I think a lot of people are sick of the revert war taking place for such trivial issues, but I don't remember there being a serious problem before Miaers took unilateral control.

OK, I'm just rambling now. Hope you're prepping for a fun weekend. Cheers, PaddyM 20:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Miaers is a man with a strong ego and is (seemingly) impervious to criticism or advice. If you watch closely, you'll see that he seems to "respect" me only when I agree with him or appear as a potential ally. (And speaking of when I do agree with him, I must say, I'm no fan of the way Marquette and its graduates traditionally through the weight around in Milwaukee - especially the Three M Club politicians. His attitude on the whole MU/UWM issue may [or may not] be flavored by that.) I also suspect English is not his native language. I don't think I can get through his armor any better than you have. For example: I posted a mild criticism on his talk page earlier today, and within something like three minutes it was "archived" out of visibility! --Orange Mike 22:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC) (who probably won't do anything interesting on the 17th)
Thats fair enough (regarding Miaers). I agree that English is definitely not his first language, and I'm getting tired of being called "delutional" and a woman, but those are the breaks.
Regarding the "Three M Club", are you refering to MUHS to MU to MU Law/Business? I'm personally not a big fan of MU either; however, I think it ends up getting more respect outside of Milwaukee than it gets from Milwaukeeans. Later, PaddyM 03:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Yep! Kind of hard to be a political person in this town without making your peace with that crowd! And I'm not sure that M.U. is interested in showing Milwaukee respect, either. I'm angered sometimes by the mindset revealed in such antics as the bulldozers' predawn raid on Milwaukee history so M.U. could get a shiny new dorm; the busting of the union at Catholic Knights; stuff like that which shows no regard for the rest of the city. --Orange Mike 03:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Renaissance Bookstore

I have been in that store in the past. It is a great store for finding unusual books and manuscript that can hardly be located anywhere else. However, it could use some drastic organization and cataloging. Just my two cents for a better business.  :)

It may be true, but it's not relevant to Wiki. You ought to tell the owner there what you think, just like any other business. --Orange Mike 01:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Don't you work there anymore? You at least used to though, right? Then you probably know the owner better than I do... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rarefly45 (talkcontribs) 03:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC).
Very part-time, yeah; but customer feedback is always more heeded than employee suggestions. --Orange Mike 14:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Userpage vandalism

Not a problem, furthermore I love the hat! --Xnuala 15:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Quiet good taste is the key; once I learned to avoid that, I could find a look that worked for me! I got that hat to wear as a delegate to the 2004 Democratic National Convention; I wore a similar one when I was on Win Ben Stein's Money. --Orange Mike 15:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

book spammer

One of them is :, a S.F. address.. I left a warning, . I came across the bookstore chain article while reverting his additions. One or two were good edits. He's been working on inserting, a blog. DGG 21:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

"Brush up on the culture"?

According to your user page, you weren't even born when I attended my first science fiction convention. (Helpful hint: I see you were home-schooled; but unless you're as rich as Shrub, you need to learn to spell words like "Republican"!) --Orange Mike 23:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

  • And your point is what? That I have an advantage because I was home-schooled and you weren't? Obliviously you should follow the advice for real instead taking as a joke --The Matrix Prime 23:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
    • As far as "the culture" is concerned, I was simply pointing out that I am considerably better versed in science fiction, its history and traditions, than you are likely to be at your young age, and you should not presume to lecture me on one of my fields of expertise, any more than I would presume to challenge your assertions about details of the children's shows into whose articles you have clearly put a lot of sincere hard work. As far as the spelling error: I was saying that home-schooled students should be expected to conform to normal conventions of spelling, unless they do not expect to have to work for a living. I apologize if I implied that home schooling was an advantage in any way. --Orange Mike 23:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
      • That's better and I can accept that, although I wasn't "lecturing" you on anything. Age does not always mean someone is better versed in something then someone younger, similar as just because some one went to public school doesn't mean they're dumber then some one who had the advantage of being home-schooled. Age and education certainly factor in, but the difference is in the person. --The Matrix Prime 00:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
        • It definitely came across as lecturing, so I fear I reacted to my perception. [And you really do need to brush up on your spelling, punctuation, and grammar, if you actually intend to do any professional writing (as your user page indicates you do).] --Orange Mike 00:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
            • Unfortunately I can’t help you there but if you are as old as you say you are I’m sure you will learn to rein that in--The Matrix Prime 19:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


Is there ever a conflict between being orange and having Irish ancestry? I'm not trying to score or make a point, it's just that in certain parts of Ireland, orange is a rather controversial colour Bill Tegner 13:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Believe me, I'm painfully aware of that! I had to tone down my usual wardrobe when I visited the republic (and the six counties, where my family came from) in 1990. But there's a reason the republic uses the tricolor: the orange, and the green, and the white for peace between us. I am a Protestant, in that I'm a Quaker; but I don't wear the color to make any kind of politic, ethnic, religious or ideological statement: I just like it for the brightness and the way it makes me feel. To quote a LiveJournal posting I read this morning: "Orange is jolly and nutritious. Purple is for goths who can't commit to black." --Orange Mike 13:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

You are so right. I get a bit sad when I read that the Irish tricoleur might offend northern Protestants. It could well do, but as you say, it's got their colour on it. I suppose their reply might be that the Union Jack has the flag of St. Patrick on it, but that no longer means much to people. Bill Tegner 22:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

1) I've been told that unionists (in the Irish sense) refer to the tricolor as gold and green, in an effort to deny what the orange is meant to represent; 2) from my studies in vexillology and heraldry, I understand that the "Cross of St. Patrick" was made up almost out of whole cloth (unlike the St. Andrew's Cross and St. George's Cross) in order to represent Ireland in the creation of the Order of St. Patrick (see Saint Patrick's Flag). --Orange Mike 23:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


what test sr? I cant rember doing a test! I think you got the wrong person/editor! it happens to everybody! goodluck finding the test person!--Akemi2.0 16:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm talking about the inane remarks you are sticking into the Anime article. --Orange Mike 16:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
What? im doing what im here to do! Improve the artical! first someone says edit and now you say stop editing or it will be removed!

im not doing anything!--Akemi2.0 16:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The two edits you made were both useless: inane and ungrammatical to the point of near-illiteracy, just like what you are putting on my page here. --Orange Mike 16:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Can you stop being so damn mean devil man! I know dang well those edits were useful! Its useful info! ITS INFO! You want info i give you info! Hop of my foot already im new!--Akemi2.0 16:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Escúchame, ese! Material added to this encyclopedia must be clearly stated, in the appropriate place, properly documented, and in clear grammatical English (or whatever language whose encyclopedia you are editing), properly spelled. Your two remarks met none of these criteria. --Orange Mike 16:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

thank you ornage sr--Akemi2.0 16:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, we all gotta start somewhere! You just jumped in a little too early. You need to learn to use your shift key, for one thing! :) Standards here are intended to be as high as those one would use if writing for a print encyclopedia, not the casual style used for texting to one's posse. --Orange Mike 16:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


I understand. I wasn't trying to say you couldn't or shouldn't help him, but based on his edit history (and the time that Akemi2.0 was created) it's a near certainty that they're the same user. Just wanted to give you a heads up. Hopefully he's not, and we can net a constructive user. Leebo T/C 17:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

No recent warnings

Thank you for your recent posting of an anonymous editor to Administrators intervention against vandalism. In the future though, when reporting IP addressed to WP:AIV, please make sure that they have had a final warning in the recent past. Due to the nature of IP addresses, spans of time between edits may indicate different users. Being it is possible that the currently vandalizing user did not get a true final warning they are often not be blocked. To remedy this, please make an effort to ensure that all vandals reported to WP:AIV have an appropriate, and recent, final warning. The most common final warnings are {{test4}} or {{bv}}. If you have any questions regarding this, please do not hesitate to ask me on my user talk page. Thanks again!-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Prechter's bio

Hey Orangemike,

I'm glad that you want to contribute to Prechter's bio -- I know that you will be a neutral editor. About the Colvin quote, my read of of WP:BLP is that ridicule is out of bounds. This came up repeatedly in the Arbitration case that just closed, and the ruling was decisively against that type of invective. Please see here and here. I look forward to working with you. Rgfolsom 19:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

However: the arbitration ruling did not say that no harsh criticisms of Prechter may be quoted; and that seems to be the stance you are taking. That is a POV stance, and must be avoided. --Orange Mike 15:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, I trust that you realize that I'm also trying to keep a neutral stance, and I'm aware how important it is for me to do so. Can I ask if you read the links I included? Rgfolsom 15:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
You bet! (And I do wish to point out that while you dislike the Colvin quote, you did not delete it as I feared, displaying restraint which is worthy of note.) --Orange Mike 15:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Whoops, I see that you did read it. There's a difference between ridicule and harsh criticism -- you yourself noted the "ridicule," which the Arb Com did say is not acceptable. Rgfolsom 15:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely will show restraint with an editor working in good faith, which is more than clear in your case. If I find a tough criticism that doesn't cross the line into ridicule, are you okay with me putting such a quote in place of Colvin? Rgfolsom 15:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Colvin is not ridiculing (if that's the right verb) Prechter, he is ridiculing the entire genre of wave theorists (in the original article, he identifies this as less foolish [by his judgment] than other such theories). I think that if their theories are sound, a little rough criticism is not going to kill them. The Colvin quote is rough, but within the boundaries; and keeps the article from being criticized as a puff piece. I'd advise you to let it go and concentrate on other matters. --Orange Mike 15:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC) does OK on paper himself
I had the impression that you did see Colvin's remark as ridicule, especially since that was the word you used to introduce the quotes. I can't go along with the "laughably terrible" phrase about Prechter's forecasts, not only because it's ridicule but also because it invites a reply showing Prechter's numerous excellent forecasts since 1987 -- but I would prefer to avoid that. Can you please answer my question about a replacement quote? Rgfolsom 15:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Colvin is not Prechter's (or E wave theory's) harshest critic by any means; it was the even harsher ones I was referring to. I think you should let this go and go on to make other articles better, rather than thrash about looking for a less harsh quote. To do otherwise could suggest that you are acting in a partisan manner, possibly due to COI. --Orange Mike 15:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I've given you no reason to bring up COI, Orangemike. I've identified what I believe is a real problem and I'm suggesting a real solution. That's not thrashing about; it's what one editor does out of respect for another editor. The Aaronson quote that's on the EWP, for example, is tough indeed. Would you find that acceptable? Rgfolsom 16:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd say they are pretty much of a muchness, the Aaronson and the Colvin, either one would do as well; and I still say you should let it go. --Orange Mike 16:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough, I'm going to put the Aaronson quote in place of Colvin. Please know that I appreciate you bearing with me on this, I do not wish to try your patience. My reasons are grounded in the guidance I took from the Arb ruling, but I'll not burden you with the particulars unless you want me to spell it out. Thanks again. Rgfolsom 18:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


Irish clover.jpg This user would like to wish you a happy St. Patrick's Day.

Trampton 01:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC) .

Lonergan play and Frank Zappa

Hi. You mentionhere that Zappa's music had influence on Lonergan's play This is Our Youth. When going to the article for the play, one does not learn this. Could you please be more specific if possible (and source the info)? This would greatly improve the article on rencerences to Zappa in popular culture (and prevent deletionist forces to gain momentum again :-) ). Cheers! --HJ 06:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Zappa and his music are pretty pivotal in the play. I'll have to dig up some reviews, etc., before working on the play's article. --Orange Mike 12:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC) (sometimes called "Chunga")


Orange Mike, I think your comment to Sposer came close to biting a newbie. Poser is a respected technician and author. In his case a little good-faith guidance about Wikipedia can probably do more good than warnings about unfounded suspicions. Rgfolsom 04:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... I genuinely don't think I was biting the noob. I was warning him about the attitude that prevails on this topic, so that he wouldn't get bitten by the real piranhas. --Orange Mike 16:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Understood. Thanks for making sure that he knows he'll be welcome here. Rgfolsom 17:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Edward Freeman

Orangemike said: If you google for "Edward Freeman" cricketer, you will find at least one article which seems to conflate an Essex cricketer of the early 20th century and a Tasmanian of the mid-19th, both named Edward Freeman! Just thought, if you are going to continue working on cricket as your sandbox indicates, that you might want to watch out for that.

Indeed, I hadn't banked on there being another famous cricketer with that name. My current interest, however, as per my country of origin, lies with English domestic cricket, particularly the teams of Derbyshire, Essex and Glamorgan.

Why these? Simply because they are three of the earliest in the alphabet and it was considerably easier for me to start with Derbyshire simply because their cricketers were extremely poorly represented before I started work on them. As I'm sure you can imagine, there is one reason and one reason only for this.

As for the other Edward Freeman? Well, there's an oddity! A onetime cricketer in a miscellaneous setting back in the early 1870s. As I say, I rely on my links to English domestic cricket to get names, such as Cricket Archive - Derbyshire.

Freeman II certainly wasn't on my current alert list for names, but in time, Australian domestic cricket will hopefully be up there. Bobo. 02:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Template change to my archive

I had never done one of these before, so I'm not sure what was wrong with what I did. What you did looks fine, though, so I'm not gonna worry about it much. Thanks, I guess. --Orange Mike 17:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a case of adding {{talkarchive}} to a page when you want to use the template, rather than copying and pasting the code of the template from Template:Talkarchive. Otherwise, all sorts of strange things happen like your archives get categorized into Category:Protected templates when they aren't templates at all. Nothing to worry about. Thanks – Qxz 17:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mike

My edits to Tammy Duckworth weren't vandalism. I explain my edits in my edit summaries. Kzq9599 04:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Mike, I would agree with him after reviewing the edits in question. This is someone getting into a content dispute. Daniel Case 06:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Mike, please remove your warning from my talk page. It wasn't vandalism, and Daniel Case is a veteran editor who recognizes that it wasn't vandalism. If anyone feels it is a content dispute, then I feel the dispute needs to be resolved in my favor. I removed an unpublished synthesis of published material that violated WP:ATT, and I removed editorial opinion in the "dirty tricks" statement. Neither one of these belongs in an encyclopedia article. I respect everyone's right to have an opinion, but it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. Present the facts and allow Wikipedia readers to decide for themselves whether it was a "dirty trick." Let's try to trust one another, WP:AGF and work together to make these articles better, Mike. Kzq9599 13:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The charismatic Dr. M.L. King, Jr.

You need to read the category definition more carefully. "This category contains religious leaders whose main basis of authority was or is based on charismatic authority." [emphasis added] While somewhat charismatic, Dr. King did not fit that definition. --Orange Mike 19:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

It's obvious that King was indeed a charismatic religious leader and thus belongs in the category. Dr. King is, in fact, often described as one of the most charismatic religious AND political leaders of the entire 20th Century, at least in America. That category definition was written by a layperson/novice, and needs to be changed (I'll do that). Also notice that he is sourced as a charismatic leader over at the List of charismatic leaders page (Sutton, John,Law/Society: Origins, Interactions, and Change () p.112, Pine Forge Press, ISBN 0-7619-8705-3). --WassermannNYC 19:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Threatened rewrite

When I removed the (unjustified) addition of Dr. M.L.King, Jr. to this category, User:WassermannNYC not only re-added him, but said he was going to re-write the description of this category because

"That category definition was written by a layperson/novice, and needs to be changed (I'll do that)."

I thought anybody interested in the topic should know that before it happens.--Orange Mike 19:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

What makes the addition of that category to Dr. King's article "unjustified" as you claim? Also, there are no "threats" here, so please check your inflammatory rhetoric. If you would, please take a quick look at the massive reference/further reading list that I've been building over at the charisma page: it's here. Yes, I built that ENTIRE list by myself and am currently in the beginning stages of writing a scholarly book on this very topic. So, I will rightfully say that I am a bit more well read (just a bit...) when it comes to this particular topic than most people, hence the (very minor) re-write of the category description. Hope this clears things up a bit for you. Tschuess! --WassermannNYC 20:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Category: Charismatic religious leaders

There's a guy out there re-writing this category definition because he says it was written by a noob or non-expert, and he knows better, so he'll just fix it. I don't think he's even heard of Weber. --Orange Mike 20:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

My friend, the entire theory/idea of charisma is not based entirely on Weber as it pre-dates his life by many-many centuries (please see the etymology of charisma on its page; it's a word with ancient Greek roots). Also, please see the reference/further reading list that I've been compiling at the charisma article and then get back to me. --WassermannNYC 20:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Obviously you and I interpret Weber and the purpose of that category, as well as Dr. King's ministry, in entirely different ways. While I believe you are wrong, I do not believe you have ill intent. I see no point in getting into a revert war with you. --Orange Mike 20:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Please note that the Category:Charismatic religious leaders says NOTHING about Weber in the NAME/TITLE of the category (unlike the List of charismatic leaders as defined by Max Weber's classification of authority). Possibly this is where the misunderstanding lies? I was adding those that displayed both the Weberian (quasi-religious?) aspect of charisma along with the definitely religious/Greco-Roman/Christian-Evangelical/Hindu-Guru/etc version of charisma, along with religious cult leaders, messianic figures in history, and such. Again, Weber wasn't the first person to write about charisma, as I'm sure you are aware. So, I suppose that I misinterpreted the "Category:Charismatic religious leaders" as very BROAD (and added too many names), while the manually compiled list I interpreted as strictly Weberian because of the article's/list's title and didn't add anyone to that list/article, except on the talk page. --WassermannNYC 23:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, yeah! :) The category (to the extent it has any use, a question on which I remain unconvinced due to the inherent subjectivity) is useful only if defined in the narrower, Weberian sense. Otherwise, it becomes a catchbin full of preachers, gurus, shamans, etc. Your re-write takes away that specificity and therefore struck me as wrongheaded. No ill feelings, I hope. --Orange Mike 23:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


Sorry about that warning tag. I thought your edits were vandalism, but I rechecked them and found out that they weren't. That seemed a little odd, since you were in good standing. Sorry about that, and I removed the warning tag. Good luck editing! BlackBear 15:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


Hi, you have been editing the wiki of Patricia Gras. I don't mean to put spam in there, could you be more specific when you say I am putting "spam" or that it resembles a "fan" site. it seems to look just like any other celebrity or tv personality. so what's the problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tvguru2006 (talkcontribs)

  • I've left a comment on this user's talk page as to what's wrong here. You may wish to add to it - Alison 18:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Florence Reece

I appreciate your patching in the name in the cats I'd started for this new page. Not only am I rather inexperienced with that—I'd copied the syntax of a couple of them from the nearly twenty (!) cats on the Pete Seeger page. Guess what? - I didn't find his name included in any of those, so of course didn't think to use FR's! Now, thanks to you, I know better (and I'm going back to fix the PS page too). I'm also always delighted when someone comes along (and so soon! :-) to work on a page I've created or on which I've done a major edit. (My favorite, I must admit, is when these get translated to another language, especially since I'm a multilingual interwiki worker myself.) As for FR's surname - though I'd been reading about her for the better part of an hour while I was working on the initial text, damned if I didn't misspell it when I created the page! Did a Move right away, but still it's a bit embarrassing (or humbling, at least) in the page's History. So I'll be keeping an eye on that for a while. -- Thanks again, Deborahjay 21:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm a country boy and a union man; always glad to help, ma'am. --Orange Mike 21:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, we've got something in common indeed - though my particular patch of Earth is in the rural Western Galilee! And I surely do like Pete Seeger's quote: "I want to turn the clock back to when people lived in small villages and took care of each other" -- though let it be said, we're evidently contempo enough to be finding our virtual place in the Global Village, as far as this is expressed in Wikipedia activity and the volunteer community here. I find this a harmonious sort of existence that's compatible on a micro/macro scale, and am cheered that others such as yourself are "here" too. -- Deborahjay 22:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
My home patch is West Tennessee, but I've been in schöne Milwaukee since 1977. (No change you're related to Dr. Gregory Jay here at UW-Milwaukee, is there?) --Orange Mike 22:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
'fraid not -- the "Jay" is the spelled-out initial of the surname I've taken on (by marriage and convention). When I opened my User account, I opted for accountability by choosing a name resembling my own, as my WP work is somewhat related to what I do in real life. At times I do wish it were something more clever and imaginative, but folks will have to take me for my rather square self :-) -- Cheers, Deborahjay 22:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Tropikal Magik

It's gone, and the user is blocked. Thanks, NawlinWiki 19:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

What test?

To what "test" do you refer on the following page? I have made a number of purposeful edits over the months, but I'm afraid I don't understand your message. 03:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... looking back at the edits you did that day, I don't see anything in particular to be bothered by, and nothing I had to revert. I may disagree with you about the "put in the name change" thing on Dr. King, but you didn't change the article! I am as puzzled by it as you are. Do you want me to delete the "test" notice? --Orange Mike 03:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Reversions in "Affirmative action"

Some anonymous editor keeps changing the article to say that AA only helps blacks in the US, and that castes in India compete for increased backwardness so they can get more reservation in India help. You reverted these at least once before; could you undo this crud, so I'm not violating the WP:3RR rule? --Orange Mike 20:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. I'll keep an eye on it. Jvbishop 11:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Mike, well done for catching a vandal quickly. May I point out that you only reverted their last edit; it's worth checking the history on vandalised pages, as there were more bad edits before that one. Best wishes, Fayenatic london (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that one when it slid by me. Don't know why this article draws the vandals like it does; it's worse than Jeffrey Dahmer for their fiddlings. --Orange Mike 21:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Correcting spelling

It's a little thing, and I don't mind, but I thought I should let you know that, while correcting spelling, grammar and everything else is a fine thing for articles, it's not considered the done thing for talk pages. Some people do get quite upset about it [1]. Notinasnaid 13:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I was aware of that principle, and wasn't aware that I was doing it. Thanks for giving me a heads-up; I've been an editor for so many years in that Wikimyth called "Real Life" that I must be doing it automatically as a reflex! --Orange Mike 14:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


I am not interested in "spamming" wikipedia. If you disapprove the link i added to the incest article then please tell me why you think it doesen't fit and I will stop posting it. Please review the article i linked and tell me wether it's content is valuable enough or not. I know you guys are putting a lot of work into wikipedia and I really want to appreciate that. Thanks for taking your time again. --Melinda73 18:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

As another editor already told you, if the information is relevant to the article, put it into the article, with references to primary sources. A blog is not a reliable or encyclopedic source. If the blog article provides reliable, encyclopedic sources for its statements, then go to them and extract information to make the Wikipedia article better. Continuing to insert and re-insert a link to a blog instead makes you look suspiciously like a spammer, possibly the creator of that blog. --Orange Mike 18:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

SciFi Science Fiction

Eek, sorry for any cringing I may have induced. I've had a few friends correct me on the importance of referring to science fiction as science fiction rather than some demeaning, childish acronym, but they're also the same friends that lecture me about the differences between Tolkien's numerous elvish languages, so I usually just tune them out.  :) María: (habla conmigo) 18:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

No biggie; but that particular term, even though I know the guy who created and popularized it, has cringeworthy associations with the very worst of what Hollywood thinks is 'science fiction' (space explosions and special effects for morons). I won't bore you with discourse about the history of Sindarin, Quenya, etc., unless you ask me to! --Orange Mike 18:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC) (who didn't have to look up how to spell those, either)
Ha! Those are the only two I can pronounce. María: (habla conmigo) 18:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
¡Elen síla lúmenn' omentielvo! --Orange Mike 18:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


I am not sure what you are talking about concerning the UW System article. Also if you want to create a disambig for University of Wisconsin, it should be at "University of Wisconsin" itself not something (disambig). Every UM campuses has a bunch of colleges and schools, and has numerous entities, orgazations with University of Wisconsie as part of their names. Everything associated with any of the UW campuses can be listed in the disambig. I really find it hard to understand you. At last, you should not be influenced by misperceptions, if you think University of Wisconsin should redirect to the system article, please don't be afraid to point it out. Not everyone in the world thinks that only Madison is University of Wisconsin. Miaers 20:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at your changes. You introduced several misspellings that other people had corrected while you were blocked; you put the category tags out of alphabetical order; that sort of thing. Don't just do a massive revert to your preferred version of the page. --Orange Mike 20:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Jeffrey Dahmer

Hi Orangemike. Well, you're a Southerner, Irish, Cherokee, science fiction fan, and a hippie, so there's not much I can disagree with you about. But I was curious why you deleted "Because of the nature of his crimes he has become one of the most notorius serial killers in American history" (which I did not write, BTW). I realize Dahmer's article has been heavily vandalized, and I've done quite a bit of reverting myself. But before I add that sentence back in I was wondering if you could give me a rationale for removing it. Thanks. Ward3001 21:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I know you didn't write it. Somebody inserted it, apparently on the theory that we wouldn't know he was a notorious serial killer. The most problematic part (other than the bad spelling, punctuation, etc.) is the OR assumption that he is one of the most notorious in American history. How many today remember Leopold & Loeb? H.H. Holmes? The Scandinavian mail-order-bride murderess? Such bald assertions are, IMHO, unencyclopedic and to be avoided. --Orange Mike 21:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I see your point, even though there seems to be a sizeable gray area as to how "notorious" is defined. I suppose almost ANY serial killer by definition is notorious. I can accept your edit if, for no other reason, than the recency of Dahmer's handiwork makes a historical judgment about him impossible at this time. Thanks for your reply. Ward3001 21:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm sure there are obscure serial killers; but Dahmer's case was more colorful, and at the time acquired considerable notoriety, just as Starkweather, Gein and DiSalvo (to cite three relatively modern examples) did in their days. --Orange Mike 23:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

White Unicorn Books

Awesome. Let's keep an eye on this person to make sure he/she doens't vandalize more and add more spamlinks. :) Rockstar915 04:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Kind of a shame, really; he created a stub article on a legit topic back in September, worked on it for a while, then nothing: until bang, he created this ad page of his. --Orange Mike 04:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
And he just tried to add the ad link back to the indie bookstore article while not logged on! --Orange Mike 05:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Ha! Good job reverting it. Keep it up! Rockstar915 05:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Talk: Science Fantasy and Comix

Excuse me, but I just read your additions to the Science Fantasy talk page and I believe I have a problem. Call me dated but I am from the generation who explicitly used the term "comix" to refer to revolutionary propaganda. R. Crumb and Gilbert Shelton did comix, yes, but so did Rius and The Situationists. If we're going to use comix to discuss Science Fantasy what are we going to call Los Supermachos?Jplatt39 23:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a dog in that hunt. If you prefer to use a more generic terminology like "comic strips" or just plain ol' "comics" for material more or less from the mundane/mainstream/non-underground tradition, that's fine with me. The problem with assigning a separate meaning to "comix" is that nobody has ever settled on what that distinct meaning is. Me? I'm an underground fan from way back, but in print I just use it as shorthand, like thanx for thanks. --Orange Mike 13:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


please dont forget to subst templates left on user talk pages. For example. this edit, the template should have been substed. thanks! (btw, to subt a template,. just {{subst:uw-spam}} ) -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Chris. --Orange Mike 17:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Fred Thompson

Howdy Orangemike! Saw your comments on the last edit for Fred Thompson, and I'd like to let you know that I'm currently putting together information that will help me create a more comprehensive, fact-centered article. I'm pro-Thompson, but DO NOT want to use the site as a campaign tool for him. I truly think this site should represent facts, and readers can make their own decision. Since you mentioned in your edit that you are not a Thompson fan, I was wondering if you'd help me construct something neutral? I'll compose it all, and if you'd review it to look for bias, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nibblesworth (talkcontribs) 17:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

United States dollar

That wasn't "experimentation" per se. The original had "pegged by." That is extremely misleading. It reads as though the dollar is pegged to those currencies, rather than those currencies being pegged to the dollar. Furthermore, the yuan should be listed there. It is probably the most prominent currency that is pegged to the dollar. Flag of the United States.svgChiss Boy 20:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

See my response on your talk page. (I didn't design the template, but I don't find it confusing in the least.) --Orange Mike 20:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
The yuan is still pegged to the American dollar. Just because it now also pegged to other currencies (to a lesser extent than the dollar) and can float a little bit doesn't make it no longer pegged to the dollar. Flag of the United States.svgChiss Boy 20:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Look up the meaning of "pegged to"!!!! If a currency's value is not defined solely in terms of a second currency, it is not "pegged to" that other currency. It correlates with it, or trades in a narrow band around, but it is not "pegged to" in the meaning of the words. You will also note that with the changes you made from the original template, the information doesn't even display any more! --Orange Mike 20:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Dear orange mike

Many thanks for the message you sent me about my post on anime...............i see why they call u orange mike lolDr.b&t 01:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

2008 Presidential Bids

Ya dude, maybe you should get out of the renissance period and into modern American History, you should pay attention because as I said on the Fred Thompson site, "he has announced his bid for the 2008 Republican presidential candidacy." Pay attention to the news hippie. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aldog2007 (talkcontribs) 02:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

Sorry, Aldog, my ignorant and would-be anonymous "friend," but as of the latest news reports, Fred Thompson (unlike Tommy Thompson, my ex-governor) has still not announced. You need to learn to distinguish between the right-wing Thompsons! (You also have made no such claim on the Fred Thompson site, unless you were doing it while not logged in.) --Orange Mike 02:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


No problem, I've re-added the dmoz link though - didn't realise I'd culled it, that's probably a more appropriate place for them to add links. Really though I don't understand why people would want to insert that AOL link within the article. Matthew 17:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Somebody calling himself something like "JoeTheTVGuy" added those AOL links to about twenty shows' articles, including masterpieces like F Troop; I followed along behind him, purging 'em, and was only challenged on B5. Dunno if he was a COI for AOL or just a misguided enthusiast who doesn't understand the spam rules. --Orange Mike 17:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC) of the Worker Caste

April 2007 / Wisconsin

The edit at Wisconsin wasn't a test, actually. Hmong is not an English word since the consonant cluster hm cannot begin a word in English. I read about the Hmong on the linked page and replaced it with what I believed to be the correct English term for them rather than a Chinese word or English neologism. Now, having reexamined the matter, it seems that even though it is a neologism and not a word, it has gained widespread use. If you know, though, what is the English word or phrase for these people? It seems to me now that it is Miao or Miao Chinese / Laotian (refering to their national origin rather than their ethnicity as they straddle the Chinese / Laotian border). 21:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, according to every Hmong I've ever met, including the gentleman at the Hmong American Studies office a few dozen feet from where I'm typing this, the English word for these people is Hmong. Like many other linguistic innovations, the word has become a naturalized citizen of American English. We have thousands of these people here in Wisconsin and Minnesota, and they are every bit as much a part of our landscape as the Poles, Danes, Somalis, Gujaratis, and everybody else; and we call them Hmong. (There are even government publications for Hmong citizens and residents, in the Hmong language; and posters on the sides of buses, etc.) Given that they ended up in the U.S. because they took our side during the Vietnam War, they are actually among the more welcomed non-white immigrants here.--Orange Mike 21:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I see. The Oxford Unabridged (the authoritative dictionary of English) doesn't include the term Hmong. While it may be that the term is locally used, it doesn't seem to be an actual word. Since the article Hmong uses that spelling, it makes no sense to change it here and, as such, it was right of you to revert it. Nonetheless, if you're able to inquire of the gentleman you mentioned, does he know what the term for his people used in Standard English is? There must be one as they have surely been called something before they anglicized their own name as Hmong. Thank you. 21:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I discovered the answer. I can now add the information about why the term Hmong is used rather than a normally constructed English word. It does seem that Hmong is correct even though there is no corresponding word in proper English. 21:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Hmong is now the proper English word for these people (it appears several times in the online version of the OED, by the way). At one time they were also called Miao or Meo, from Chinese words; but the proper English word for them is Hmong. --Orange Mike 22:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I discovered it is the correct English term for them. Although it could not be called a proper English word since it is not an English word, it is a foreign word used in English. As such, if proper form were to be observed, it should be italicized every time it is used. However, this is neither a proper encyclopedia, so that rule would seem null in this case, nor is that the point of our discussion. I did find the answer, however, and concede that it was used correctly in all cases online here. 22:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
This is where I quote my friend James D. Nicoll:

The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and riffle [sic] their pockets for new vocabulary.

--Orange Mike 22:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, certainly that's so in a way. Yet, there are standards of English that were developed in academic, governmental, and ecclesiastic circles beginning in the 17th century. It isn't a matter of defending English; it's about ad(a/o)pting words into it. English speakers simply can't create the hm phoneme in Hmong with the linguistic tools provided them by the language. 22:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
For you and me, maybe; but for my little girl it's just another word, like horchata or filk or bratwurst or anaphyllactic, that happens to start with a rare consonantal cluster. It's certainly more common and easier to pronounce than, say, phthisis, which is in all the dictionaries. --Orange Mike 22:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
So is Hmong in the dictionary, as you've pointed out. It's still a foreign word used in English and not an English word. Phthisis is used in English because much of the standard language as it was constructed drew from Greek and Latin for specialized fields. Consider, though, phrases like coup d'etat and noblesse oblige which have been used in English for over four centuries. They are still considered foreign phrases and are properly italicized in observant literature. I suppose, though, we'll have to wait and see how the term is eventually incorporated into the body of English words. Or our grandchildren will. Or someone will. Haha, best regards. 23:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion on "Truth in Science" article

Hi, Orange Mike!

I've appreciated your editing work on Fred Dalton Thompson. Your commitment to unbiased writing--even on subjects you personally don't like--is commendable. I'm wondering if you could help me out with a dispute I'm involved in on Truth in Science--a UK organization which seeks to introduce Intelligent Design concepts into school science lessons. I don't support their goals (although I am more sympathetic to ID as a concept than most scientists), but it seems as though this article was written to discredit rather than describe the organization.

You can see my current dispute with another editor at Talk:Truth_in_Science#Influence_vs_subvert_or_reform. If you have time, I would appreciate your comment on the matter.

Regards, Eseymour 15:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


Thank you for leaving a message on my talk page, but you are obviously a stuck-up Astrolobean. I'm trying to let people carry on here buddy, isn't that what it's all about? Nawlin has ruined it all for us, and i think it's about time someone stuck up for everyone who's page has been deleted. Don't forget about this conversation! You only care about yourself!.

No, that isn't "what it's all about"! When you participate in a project like this, you are expected to act like a grown-up. Oddly enough, adults don't find such a restriction too burdensome. I hope you can do the same. --Orange Mike 15:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Whats the deal?

Well excuse me i didnt know I couldnt delete ignorant crap that is of no use to me, really do you not have anything else better to do, and your last piece about Fred Thompson made no sense in common English, actually my facts came for watching the news where they had announced his candidacy, or perhaps it was an exploratory committee, regardless don't be a giant douche about it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aldog2007 (talkcontribs).

If you cannot distinguish a candidacy from the creation of an exploratory committee, perhaps you should refrain from editing articles on that particular topic, and concentrate on areas where you have greater depth of expertise. (I am sorry if my use of good grammar, spelling and punctuation in my edits confuses you.) --Orange Mike 17:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Dude im a teenager I couldnt give a flying fuck, enjoy living in mommys basement and chillin with batman, blow me im goin out with my girlfriend, o and sex, relationships and anyhting that has to do with the opposite sex maybe you should refrain from editing articles on those particular topics, and concentrate on areas where you have greater depth of expertise.

Thank You

Thank you for undoing the edits on my userpage. It becomes more and more vandalized as I take on vandalism and newpages. Thanks again! Cool BlueLight my Fire! 00:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Boxing Rebels

Orange Mike,

Thanks for your input on my talk page regarding my Boxing Rebels article. I do understand what you are saying, the piece was written in my own style, which is some distance from the style required for an encyclopedia.

I suppose my point was, it was removed because it was seen as an attack, when in fact it was a fairly accurate portrayal of the forum, at least as we see ourselves. But of course this isn't a neutral point of view, it's the view from within, rather from without.

I wasn't criticising wiki when I said "very straight, very dull"; as you pointed out, this is only in comparison to what I'm used to. I may well try to write the article again, and this time try to keep everything balanced and neutral, though this style of writing goes against a lifetime of what I'm used to. Cheers.

YuriG 10:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Illustrated guide to dressing like a hippie

okay put it back if you want. By the time I was a hippy the dress code was somewhat different (mostly just scruffy and hairy, both of which I was good at), SqueakBox 03:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

And did it myself. Good to see other editors pursuing the good old path, lol, SqueakBox 04:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Stanley Weinbaum

Nope, don't really know, though I assumed that since the infobox was incomplete, there was little notability of the author; generally, notable authors' pages are more developed. However, I am no expert in science fiction; if he is notable in that field, then I felt he should have a proper infobox. Homagetocatalonia 18:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

He is; and you gave him a right proper infobox, too, for which I genuinely thank you. --Orange Mike 18:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC) (who also ganked the Social Democracy userbox you used to use)

Personal attack

Your obviously false insinuation that I have not engaged in discussion on film noir's talk page is verging on a personal attack, and arguably over the line. I have reverted the image sizing twice: once twenty-three-and-a-half hours ago to restore the long-established style and once recently, accompanied by my input in the discussion, which is supported there by another long-time contributor to the article. Your inappropriate warning tag has been removed from my Talk page. Please be more careful in the future about your acccusations of "edit warring." There's really no excuse for self-appointed wikilawayers to be so sloppy.—DCGeist 20:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for not noticing that one of those reversions was by RedSpruce, not you. --Orange Mike 20:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Apology accepted. Best, Dan.—DCGeist 20:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Kennet Comprehensive School

Please could you make some suggestions as to how the article can be improved/cleaned up on its talk page? Thanks, CR7 22:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your addition to the talk page, I've attempted to remove as many honorifics as I could, but I don't have the first names for quite a few of the teachers. Thanks for your help, CR7 15:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Apple Inc.

A request for mediation for a dispute regarding Apple, Inc. has been posted on Mediation Cabal. You can see the full listing at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-04-20 Apple Inc.. You have been listed as an involved party to the issue. I am offering my time and services to assist with this issue. Please let me know if you are willing to accept my offer for mediation, I have posted a notice on Talk:Apple Inc., please reply there. Thank you! Arkyan &#149; (talk) 17:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Jerry Garcia

I'll remember the "--" :) --UWMSports 23:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've definitely got the Touch of Grey! --Orange Mike 23:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Haha, good stuff. Question- How do you get your username a certain color to automatically be recognized into your 4~ code? UWMSports 15:51, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

It's the HTML coding under "my preferences" that sets that stuff. The "Raw signature" box has to be checked, and then it's just code, like this User:Orangemike|Orange Mike in double brackets If (as I assume) you're shooting for black and gold, then you'd have to code each word or letter separately. I've seen it done. --Orange Mike 15:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Metro area

Because the article is in a category of its own name and that category is in the Metropolitan area category. Both an article and its category should not be in the same higher level category. This is double level categorization. Thanks Hmains 00:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Detroit Lakes Page

Point taken. I am new to Wikipedia, and meant no harm in my edits to the page. I simply saw the dull page that was created for what I believe to be a town many Wikipedia faithfuls may be interested in learning more about. I appreciate your corrections and will change the page accordingly. Any further suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks Kingkoin 09:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

The Road (novel)

As to the words "haunting novel" being unencyclopedic, you may wish to become more familiar with this matter. Look, for instance, at the Encyclopedia Britannica, in the article on Existentialism. In the section on "Historical survey of Existentialism > Emergence as a movement," you will see that Kafka's novels are referred to as "haunting novels." I think you will be aware that the Encyclopedia Britannica is a recognized encyclopedia.

But just to make this perfectly clear, I have cited a source. It's inelegant to hang a footnote in an opening paragraph, but unfortunately at times it is necessary.

As to the genre, this novel, as has been opined to you now by three different users, is not in the sci fi genre. I would suggest that you ptovide a source indicating that it is such a novel. Larry Dunn 03:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Alan Cheuse of the Chicago Tribune and NPR, and Alan Warner of The Guardian, among others. And if you will listen to bloggers, try this, which starts out, "Shhhh, don’t tell anyone, but a science fiction novel just won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction. --Orange Mike 03:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Finally, the reference that almost all plant life is dead is inaccurate. There is no reference to living plants in the novel. Thank you for trying to contribute to Wikipedia, however (and your other contributions). Larry Dunn 03:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't know who you're talking to here, but it ain't me! --Orange Mike 03:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


I realize that now. I was frustrated because I'd never done an article and didn't expect the actions that took place. I'm realizing now that it's the status quo to rapidly delete anything that doesn't fit the standards, but that doesn't mean I have to like the way in which it was done. I'll happily still use Wikipedia as a source of information of varying reliability, but I won't try to make any more articles, as I don't like its hasty deletion policies and I especially dislike the lack of courtesy for new users. Uberlegit 04:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I can see your point of view, Jessi, but I hope you will reconsider. We really do have a "don't bite the newbies" policy. It's just that there is such a history of "two kids get together and build a website, and as soon as they get mentioned on their cousin's blog they create a Wikipedia article about themselves" that some of our editors are highly aggressive about deleting what appear to be incomplete or ill-thought-out "articles" that are not yet ready for the harsh light of day, or articles that seem to boil down to "well, I like it, and my buds online like it, so it's rilly notable, man!" --Orange Mike 04:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


If you continue to harrass Politics rule you will be blocked from editing wikipedia!

  • I warned you early but i told a wikipedian admin. i take it back. I am just curious what i did to Joe Lierberman. By the way, I like your name.

God Bless America,

Politics rule 08:36 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You changed his political affiliation, which is the one officially listed by the United States Senate. This has been the subject of endless rounds of vandalism and edit wars, and not to be messed with, regardless of how you feel about him. Politely warning you about that does not constitute harassment. Please be civil. --Orange Mike 14:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


Sorry 'bout that, won't happen again. THOMASNATOR 15:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

No big. --Orange Mike 15:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm really sorry I broke the connection

Dear Orange Mike: I'm really sorry I broke the connection in the article. "Place d'Italie" should in fact have an apostrophe, but nonetheless I should have checked more carefully. Thank you for informing me of my mistake. I appreciate your criticism. Writtenright 18:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)Writtenright

That's what makes this a cooperative, not competitive, venture. Read this page and you will see some legitimate criticisms of my foul-ups (as well as some stupidities). --Orange Mike 18:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC) ("We humans! When are we gonna have a meeting?" - George Carlin)

Page Creation

Hey could you give me a few links on a template for creating an artist page, and general creation of a new page. Thanks. Maurauth (...) 17:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Craig Ferguson at User talk:

Hello Orangemike! Would you mind posting your comments from my talk page to the talk page for Craig Ferguson? If I copy them over, there are some frequent followers of mine who may delete them because, well, I didn't write them originally and that's what those two like to spend their time doing. Here is a link to the article's talk page discussion. Thank you! 21:10, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Ordinal numbers (first vs 1st)

We had a discussion on User talk:Daggoth S about proper usage guidelines. User:Potatoswatter and User:Daggoth S think there is no need to make an explicit statement at MOS:NUM. Anyway its not such a big deal I guess, if both convey the same information and are equally easy to read. :) - TwoOars (T | C) 14:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


Good comments... Thanks. I wouldn't mind removing some of the other links as well, like you suggested. And certainly there should be a way to find real, solid encyclopedic-quality links on the topic. (Do you happen to know if Mermaid happens to run one of the sites whose links got deleted? He sure seems protective of it?) DreamGuy 00:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

UW Colleges

Orangemike, I find your revert on University of Wisconsin Colleges part weird. These 2-year colleges together account one unit of the University of Wisconsin System. Each local location is a subordinate unit of this entity. They are funded by the state. Of course, they are also funded by local governments as other UW campuses do. There is also nothing wrong if they receive additional fundings from the private sectors.Miaers 01:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

They are each a separate institution, like each of the Universities, unlike the constituent colleges of UWM, UW-Madison, etc. Their funding is primarily from the local government, not the the state, although their employees are state employees. --Orange Mike 13:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

No. They share the same website and administration. They are quite different from other 4-year universities. I don't think the local governments pay state employees. Anyway, you don't make any sense at all. University of Wisconsin Colleges, which lists them all is already wikified in the page. Miaers 21:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

You know that, and I know that, but the casual querent for whom a disambiguation page is designed DOES NOT KNOW THAT! That's why they need to be individually listed here (and those which don't have articles, need articles written). --Orange Mike 22:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

University of Wisconsin Colleges is wikified. It explains all to readers. Miaers 23:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Tired of all of this...

...yet? Madmaxmarchhare 22:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Ayup. --Orange Mike 22:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


Your edit on UW disambig is vandalism. Please contribute constructively and use discussion to solve dispute. Miaers 23:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC) What NPOV are you talking about? Miaers 23:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

You are cramming a lot of items which don't have "University" and "Wisconsin" in their names onto University of Wisconsin (disambiguation), a disambiguation page, apparently to give more attention to UWM (a place I, too, love well). In the meantime, in what appears to be a fit of pique you have tried to conceal a long list of institutions which do have "University" and "Wisconsin" in their names, on the grounds that people should know that they are part of the UW Colleges system. You are undermining the purpose of a disambiguation page, since your motions to delete the page aren't going anywhere this time either. In doing so, you are doing disruptive damage to the page and the Wikipedia project. --Orange Mike 23:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Disruptive editing

Orangemike, as far as I'm concerned a content dispute is never vandalism. Disruptive editing is just that, disruptive editing, and if you're at the point where you want to do something about this behavior, I suggest that we follow the steps in that guideline. We're at the point where we open a user conduct RfC. What do you think? --Akhilleus (talk) 23:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid you are right; but I don't want to do something like that if I'm the only one who feels that way. --Orange Mike 00:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I got a "vandalism" revert today, as well [2]. So, no you're not the only one who feels that way. I've been tired of this whole thing for quite some time. I'm not sure how some of the other editors such as Paddy, etc., feel about it, but you're not alone. Madmaxmarchhare 00:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm tired of you too. But there ain't any smart enough heads who can agree with me. Miaers 01:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Orangemike, maybe the best thing to do is to look at a couple of user RfCs, like Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Martinphi. Basically, we need to collect examples of Miaers violating policies (e.g. his 3RR violations and persistent incivility), starting inappropriate requests on WP:RM and WP:RFAR, and editing against consensus (like this and this). Not to mention creating articles to prove a point--[3]. Collecting the evidence is going to be pretty time-consuming, unfortunately. --Akhilleus (talk) 17:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I find administrators here are pretty lame. What's wrong for someone to make a wrong request? You are supposed to waste your time doing nonsense administrator's job. Miaers 00:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Ben Nighthorse Campbell

I looked at the Ben Nighthorse Campbell article. I did not delete it. I made only one or two editing changes, nothing more. It seems like the article may have frozen up. Billy Hathorn 01:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

That's why I put a "test1" tag on it; I suspected it was a well-intended effort to edit something, and got messed up somehow. Glad to see I was right. --Orange Mike 02:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


You've reverted my edit 3 times. Please be aware of 3RR. Also you know how to construct a sentence? Miaers 03:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you've just made your fourth revert; but I'm not looking to pick a fight, so I'm not going to report it. The editors who have been paying me to write professionally from 1984 to the present are aware that I can construct a sentence in English quite well. How about yourself, at least in your native language? --Orange Mike 03:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


Stop putting stupid warnings on other peoples pages, when all they have done is make good faith edits. Kindly be less pugilistic, and address the edit you feel was problematic instead. 11up3down

Good faith edit? You added Jeffrey Dahmer to a category of "Deaths by rectal trauma"! Where is the "good faith" in that? :And I see that you created and populated the category, too! --Orange Mike 03:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I thought that was how he died. If I am mistaken, then this is a CONTENT DISPUTE, not vandalism. Kindly assume good faith. 11up3down 03:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
You didn't read the article before you edited it? He was beaten to death with a blunt instrument. --Orange Mike 03:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I was populating the category Deaths by rectal trauma. I had heard that that was how he died. If I was mistaken, I apologize. It still doesn't justify you putting a warning on my page, as it was an honest error, and my edit history clearly shows I am here to contribute, not vandalize. 11up3down 03:51, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm still a little weirded-out by the idea of editing an article that way without reading it first, but AGF: I've changed the posting I put on your page from vandalism to test. --Orange Mike 03:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


you want to help me with the

dark princess article i tried to start up? i truly suck at image formatting.Karaveks voice 04:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'll try (on your talk page). --Orange Mike 04:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Miaers

Hi Orangemike just came across that Afd for University of Wisconsin (disambiguation) page and your comment about Miaers. I don't think your over reacting to Miaers's behaviour by calling it disruptive. There is a serious WP:GAME issue with this user. I fell across an RfC for Talk:University_of_Wisconsin and found their previous beahviour there (and in calling a needless RfC) extremely disruptive. I commented to that effect on the talk page[4], backing up User:Akhilleus's earlier warning that Miaer's was being disruptive[5]. I think its time for either WP:AN or WP:CN, it looks like this behavour has been going on for months--Cailil talk 22:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
PS I just saw your earlier discussion with Akhilleus. I have some experience of reporting long term vandalism and I'd be happy to help stop this disruption. I'm opening a report page in my userspace, I'll make sure it's neutral and kept in accordance with WP:AGF I have only limited information on Miaers but I will begin a report. I'll also drop a line to Akhilleus--Cailil talk 23:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised to see you are so interested in me. Could you let me know What's the POV I've been pushing? Why I didn't edit articles with good faith? Shouldn't you also assume good faith before making false accusation of others? Miaers 00:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
In case you're interested a CN report about Miaers was filed here--Cailil talk 18:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


What do you think of my modifications? this page had LOTS to it back in the day,... i checked, then salveaged what seemed slavageable.Karaveks voice 04:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


Why are you being accused of vandalism (again?)? Madmaxmarchhare 14:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, maybe I should't have said anything, just figured you knew.
16:28, 9 May 2007 (hist) (diff) User:UWMSports (Remove vandalism. Welcome message should be at the talk page.)
Madmaxmarchhare 20:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess PaddyM already weighed-in on this--to the usual response Madmaxmarchhare 20:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC) - - Except that what you did was actually vandalism since you know better. UWMSports did not have a user-page, per se, and so OrangeMike left a message there which would be seen. Also, please notice that you reverted it after it was left there for a month, making it likely that UWMSports did not consider it vandalism. Please refrain from vandalizing my user-page in the future. Cheers, PaddyM 15:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

It was Miaers who did that, Paddy, not Madmax! And Miaers was right in moving my comment from where it had sloppily been put, to the right place, other than the fact that it was carelessness, not vandalism, which was to blame. (And we still don't know whether UWMSports actually works there or not.) --Orange Mike 00:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, that was Paddy's response to Miaers, not to me. I didn't think it should have gone there, either, but the continuing accusations of "vandalism" are a bit over the top, IMHO. Madmaxmarchhare 15:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Long hair article

Hey, I just gave the above article a major overhaul. I saw your name on its talk page, and wanted to invite you to check it out. Wrad 11:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


You might want to look at what's going on at Ayn Rand Institute. ThAtSo 16:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for entering the fray. I made another edit trying to say that the ARI came after the NBI. ThAtSo 18:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


"Wonder" is Wonder Stories, one of several titles published by Hugo Gernsback after he lost control of Amazing Stories. Thrilling Wonder Stories is a later version under a different publisher. Dunno about Posthumous Press; I just copied that from the preceding list. RandomCritic 21:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Category: SF Fans

There has been a call for discussion for the deletion of the Science Fiction fans category. Shsilver 15:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


Mike, I didn't remove Advent:Publishing from the fan category because it isn't fannish (it is, and in fact, I suggested George Price as Fan GoH for Windycon this year), but rather because the category is for specific fans (individuals), not for fannish organizations. If Advent were to be included in the Science Fiction fans category, then NESFA, NESFA Press, ISFiC, ISFiC Press, LASFS, etc. should also be included. Those, and Advent, would be better served in a Science Fiction Fan Organization category. Shsilver 14:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Either that, or rename the current one to "SF fans and fannish organizations"; I favor the first. --Orange Mike 14:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I concur.Shsilver
There is a category for Science fiction organizations, which already includes most fannish groups.Shsilver 14:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


Why did you revert the page in this edit? The user in question was impersonating Jimbo. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 17:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Amateur press association

Greetings Orange! That color is so yummy. I changed it because I was under the impression that it was an organization of writers/publishers/zinesters, not a magazine itself. Please feel free to re-cat it, as I can see you are better versed in this area. Cheers! Her Pegship (tis herself) 22:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Btw, I have just discovered Category:Magazine people; would that be helpful as well? Her Pegship (tis herself) 00:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Nope. It's for individual persons involved in the creation, etc. of zines. --Orange Mike 21:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I, Robot: the movie

Ok, thanks for the heads up, Orange Mike. I updated the wording a bit, but you are right that it should stay in the article. Fairsing 20:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the advice...i'll do that...

how did you find me btw? --Huper Phuff talk 21:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

A discussion on related topics you were having led me to your page; then I saw the problems you were running into, and thought I'd give you some pompous, well-meaning advice like the graying old hippie I am. --Orange Mike 03:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Tammy Duckworth's editing of her page

Hey, I noticed you already dropped Ms. Duckworth a note on her talk page about the removal of those personal details. As I volunteered for Roskam, and the letters "GOP" are in bold print across my user page, I thought I might want to talk to you first. I think it may be beneficial for everyone if we left her a note talking about Wikipedia:Autobiography and encouraging her use of the talk page. I was thinking something like this:

Hello, Major Duckworth, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I noticed you recently edited your biography on Wikipedia, Tammy Duckworth. Generally speaking, such actions are discouraged on Wikipedia. The edit you made removing parapalegic however, was a good example of when such actions are okay: they satisfy Wikipedia's policies on autobiographies which state that you can remove unambiguous errors of fact. In the future, if you see something that you think might be controversial, or you want to bring to other editors' attention, you can go to Talk:Tammy Duckworth and leave a comment where other editors interested in your article can provide feedback and implement changes. Again, we value your contributions and hope you will collaborate with us to make the best, non-baised article about you we can.

It's sorta verbose, and not extremely friendly, but I was wondering what you though of it? --YbborTalk 02:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for trying to find some sources. I only wrote what I did because I just finished a harrowing experience trying to save an article I wrote recently from the big, bad AfD police. My article was tagged for AfD due to lack of notability. It was eventually spared after supporters found two newspaper articles, a magazine article, a mention in a book, and plans to make a movie about my subject. My initial references which included the subject's own website and an IMDB entry were deemed insufficient. Anyway, I'd hate to lose the Minicon article when one of those guys finds it. It seems to be much easier to get good sources before an AfD discussion is begun, rather than scramble to find them and have to defend them within a few days. I doubt if the Smithway sources would cut it; I'll try to find something too.--Appraiser 19:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, there was a guy who back in May was tangling with some fans and apparently out of sheer spite put a "no references" tag on the article for every SF con on Wikipedia. I just finished killing the last of those I could find. Like much of fandom's history, Minicon is documented in lots of places, like fanzines, that are not online (unless some are at --Orange Mike 20:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Glad you took the initiative to zap those "no references" tags. I did a few edits on a few of the articles to put in additional references shortly after the tags appeared. I'd hope other, perhaps more-knowledgeable, editors did the same for other of the affected articles. While I certainly didn't agree with the position that the articles qualified under "no references," there is always room for improvement. Mikek999 17:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


For the tidying on my talk page. Much appreciated :) Douglasmtaylor 00:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


Since the link you provided leaves it up to the reader to decide 'why, yes, that does sound the opposite of what I just read.' (ie, it mentions nothing about being the opposite of the Relaxacon). That's rather WP:OR; you say they're opposites, but your cite doesn't actually mention relaxacons). Also, consider that the Arisia relaxcon is definitely a relaxacon, though it has the annual meeting during it, so it is also sercon, which means that though your addition says they're opposites, it is in fact possible to be both.

I'm leaving it for now, but please find something that actually mentions them as incompatible/opposite types (the nippon page just lists them as differing types[6]), or it will need to go. On the other hand, there's enough out there and enough internal refs to sercons[7] to justify it having its own page, if you wanted to create it and link up those internal refs. --Thespian 16:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

A little clearer, yes. As for Readercon, it had a pile of guests there, and was interesting for that, but sales were flat (I was working the dealer's room for Pandemonium Books & Games), and the panels were sort of blah, and often unmoderated, which meant, aside from Barry Longyear's one-man writing panel on Sunday morning, they meandered and rarely discussed what they set out to do. All in all, I think I'd much rather do the Wiscon thing; friends of mine who went there were absolutely thrilled with most of the panels and content. --Thespian 16:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Removal of content on Restless (Buffy episode)

I saw you removed the note about the First Slayer in the article on "Restless". I guess I agree with you; that content should probably be placed in the article about the First Slayer. However, there has been a mass deletion of television episodes going on in the last couple months, and the Buffy episodes need critical outside commentary or they face the same fate. Kweeket 05:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your motivation, but there is no way that critical analysis about a given program should be posted to articles about the individual episodes thereof. A link to analysis about the First Slayer might be appropriate in that article, but definitely not in the article about Restless. That stuff will have to come out of all the articles you've been putting it in.--Orange Mike 16:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Can't stop the signal!
I agree, that's why I moved that analysis from Restless into the First Slayer. What do you mean, "all the articles you've been putting it in"? Kweeket 20:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not wikistalking you, but I get the impression from your contributions in recent days that you have been rather enthusiastic in adding material to articles about individual episodes. I just wanted to caution you about only adding material which contributes to the readers' understanding of that particular episode, to avoid the problem we had here. --Orange Mike 22:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Yes, I did go on a bit of a roll putting stuff from interviews and essays into the Buffy articles; honestly I think much more needs to be added. Right now the episode articles are little more than plot summaries, inexcusable given that Buffy - unlike many television shows - actually has a good amount of out-of-universe analysis already published. That being said, I'll try to ensure future additions are specific, and looking my past contributions over I think what is left is specific enough. Thanks for taking the time to wikistalk me :) Kweeket 23:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


Dear Orange Mike,

You wrote: “However exciting you may have found the news, it had no place in Wikipedia, which is not a news venue. I know, you were excited, but it was still out of place. Somebody else has already yanked it out.” in User_talk:Dan_Dassow#Great_Maker_news on 23:38, 29 July 2007 (UTC).

I am trying to figure out what I did that prompted this reprimand. I reviewed my contributions and I cannot find any contribution that would fit. I am assuming that you are referring to contributions to the article J. Michael Straczynski, since he is known as "The Great Maker" to Babylon 5 fans. However, my only contribution on 29 July 2007 to J. Michael Straczynski was to Talk:J._Michael_Straczynski#JMS.27_First_Play. My previous contributions to J. Michael Straczynski were to add citations.

Is it possible that you intended your message for someone else? I would appreciate clarification, so I do not repeat the transgression.

Sincerely --Dan Dassow 12:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

My profound apologies. The gushing remarks in question were from another editor entirely! I got mixed up with your edit, which followed his. Again, I regret the error. --Orange Mike 18:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Socionomics (2nd nomination)‎

As you recently edited Elliott wave principle, you may be interested in the related discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Socionomics (2nd nomination)‎. THF 21:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


Actually, I think we can delete the tag that was used. The tag used stated: "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason." and goes on to state: "If this template is removed, it should not be replaced." Now the person who tagged it can list it at AFD if s/her wants. Shsilver 15:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

And besides, I've expanded the article.Shsilver 16:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Ellen Kushner

Hi, OMike! I took the LGBT tag off 'cuz it's not sourced and not clear. Got any sources? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 16:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, knowing them for twenty years doesn't count, I know, WP:V. It's tacit rather than explicit in most of their interviews, etc. because they also write YA and don't want problems. Lambda Book Report ran an interview with them back in 2003. As I noted, the lede of the article mentioning that Delia is her wife (a fact nobody has challenged) seemed to me to be sufficient. They were married back in 1998, and I've found at least one fanzine mentioning the wedding in passing Devniad #40, p. 10). --Orange Mike 17:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


Just a shout! BenBurch 19:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocked again, this time for three days. Daniel Case 13:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again.

Thanks, yet again, for watching my user page! Into The Fray T/C 17:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Long hair

Could you please say on this article's talk page why this article is unencyclopedic and should be deleted? I am very confused. I can't respond to your template until you give a reason. Wrad 20:32, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Art Workers' Coalition

Well, I wrote or rewrote most of it, so I'm insulted. But, the article has been prodded three times, and the first editor told it was inappropriate without anyone checking the content, so what's a little salt in the wounds. I checked all some scholarly articles and searched the news and google books and the group appears quite notable. I suspect there may be a copy vio, but haven't found it yet. Let's try to refrain from insulting or attacking this editor without a little more exactness and evidence, please. Most of my copy does get edited for being a bit stiff, but, still, this is a bit much. KP Botany 20:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Your English is usually much more fluid, less stilted than this; maybe it's the rewrites that are the problem. I certainly didn't mean to give insult or rub salt in the wounds, and do apologize for any offense given. --Orange Mike 20:53, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
The article is poorly written, but I think it's because it's cut and pasted from elsewhere. I'll accept your apology, but could you please tell me if there is something else going on here that I walked into the middle of and don't know about? The group looks not only notable but important, and I would like to see a good article, but don't really have time to do much now. KP Botany 20:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I saw that it had been prodded unjustly, and went to see what the fuss was about. If I get a chance, I may take the buffer and saddle soap to it. --Orange Mike 21:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Please do saddle soap it, it's been prodded three times, in spite of which the group sounds very important. I get irritated at prods that do nothing but lower the level of content on Wikipedia--and this one has been overeagerly prodded, and the editor adding scolded. I won't be the least bit insulted if you change my prose, either, as my posse only works on my science articles, rarely touching the art stuff. Thanks. KP Botany 04:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
If you look carefully my English is always rather stilted, but I have a posse that polishes it. KP Botany 20:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


"It is considered highly incivil to remove information from a talk page. That is what these pages are for"

Ok, well I removed it because I thought it was completely unnecessary to add a comment over such a minor issue. It wasn’t vandalism, it was an error. Hozombel 17:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I didn't use a vandalism template, for that very reason. And believe me, if you read this page, you'll see that a number of my own errors (and the warnings I received) are enshrined in it! --Orange Mike 18:01, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi Mike. Many thanks for your condolences, it's much appreciated. It comes eventually to us all, and Mam was 85; although I'm devastated to lose her, at least she's at peace now - she could have died any time in nearly the last 5 years, and she pretty much didn't want to go on in the last couple of months. I think the doctors were rather surprised that she lasted as long as she did, she was on about seven different types of medication and it was always understood that there would come a time when they just wouldn't work any more. We were told (though she wasn't) back in the middle of April that there was nothing more that they could do, so we supposedly had plenty of time to prepare ourselves, though of course you can't. One regret is that she didn't last long enough to see her first great-grandchild, who is due to arrive next month; still, life goes on... -- Arwel (talk) 23:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Knock off the vandalism

First, the fanboy page, now you are tearing up the Rich Apuzzo page. You have been reported to a moderator. Furthermore, it seems kinda strange that TPIRFanSteve just happened to redo my undo almost immediately. I'm going to put a checkuser on you as I think you are a sock of Steve.Hdayejr 23:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know, Mike, Hdayejr thinks everybody he doesn't like on the internet is me in disguise. This has been going on numerous websites for a good number of years now, and I'm sorry you wound up caught up in it. -TPIRFanSteve 23:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello Orangemike. I am not sure if you are aware that concerns have been raised about some of your edits on the WP:ANI board. Just wanted to let you know.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 00:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
I am the writer of the article in question, and even though I have just about BEGGED for any feedback, you seem content to tag it and leave it at that. In fact, it seems like you just want it to be deleted and have no interest in fixing it. I am a reasonable person, and am willing to work with others on this article to make it less controversial. But I cannot do that if you are unwilling to work with me. So, please work with me, or quit tagging it. - Angelika 23 01:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
As you can see, I'm doing just that. Please read WP:BIO for instructions on how a proper biography article should be structured. --Orange Mike 01:57, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
JUST NOW you are doing it. This has been going on for hours. Also, you are referring me to an article. That isn't exactly feedback. I want to know why YOU personally have such a problem with this page. I mean, to tag it so many times, you must really find it offensive. Do you have a problem with the subject? Do you have a problem with the content? This information will help me make the article better. You seem disinclined to think that I am trying, and I resent that. - Angelika 23 02:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
The article as originally written was a cross between a press release for the guy, and a resume. It is the kind of advertising-like material that gives the word "biography" a bad name. It is structured like a resume; it is full of folksy irrelevancies; it almost totally lacks wikilinks; need I go on?

I have a life, and cannot spend a lot of time trying to turn it into something more suitable for an encyclopedia article; so I did a bit (restoring some information a prior editor removed from the wrong place for it), and offered a place where you can find further help, since the article matters so much to you. I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings. I just want the article to be good, or be gone. --Orange Mike 02:09, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not asking you to fix it for me. I was asking you to answer some questions, which you did answer in your last post, kind of. Are you always so rude to new people asking for validation and help? You seem extraordinarily condescending towards me and I'm not quite sure what I did to deserve it. I am trying to learn the ropes and do the right things. - Angelika 23 02:24, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Hdayejr

What on earth are you doing! Please stop.If he deletes your message, then that is an indication that he has read it. It's bloody rude to delete messages from one,s talk page but it is not prohibited. Edit warring OTOH most definately is. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 12:06, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

New Edits to Apuzzo Article

Hello Orange Mike, I have made changes to the Rich Apuzzo article. I would appreciate it, when you have time, if you would look at it and see if you are willing for me to remove the advertisement tag. If not, I am open to any suggestions to make it so. Please note, I am not asking for you to do an edit to the article yourself, nor am I asking you to write it for me. Thank you - Angelika 23 15:32, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

As can be seen on the article, I've removed the advertisement tag (no longer appropriate) and replaced it with a plain ol' vanilla cleanup request. I've also done some editing myself. Glad to be working with you here. --Orange Mike 02:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Orange Mike, I appreciate it. It is nice to be working with others. I'm sorry we got off to such a bad start. I intend to keep working on the article, and welcome any input, editing, etc.
Incidentally, it seems there is an IP address that keeps changing things. Is there a way to find out who that is? I certainly don't want people thinking that is me removing your tags. I intend to keep working on it until we agree it is worthy of no tagging, and let you remove the tag (as I did earlier). Thanks Again - Angelika 23 21:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
It's probably a certain banned party, refusing to log in. Report the IP for vandalism using the usual procedures. --Orange Mike 02:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I added links

I added to my band articles third-side links. P.S. Your style is cool! M.V.E.i. 14:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

"Quiet good taste is the key. Once I learned to avoid that, I could find a style that worked for me." (me to Ben Stein while winning his money) --Orange Mike 14:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I dont agree with him that you look like ZZ Top. you remind me more John Lennon (who was also Irish, by the way, like you). M.V.E.i. 16:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The Uncivil IP User...

Just ignore this nonsense Orangemike ;): 1. Let this uncivil IP user spin their own web. If they continue to personal attack, my finger is already fully on the block button.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 17:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, that last remark (in this talk page's history) shows he/she's clearly just here to troll, so I'm afraid I've beaten Persian Poet Gal to it this time. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 17:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


Information.svg Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When using certain templates on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:uw-test1}} instead of {{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. Cheers, Lights 13:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi Orangemike, thanks for the heads-up. I'm opening an RFC on Talk:Violence Against Women Act to build a consensus that these edits are POV. I brought this to ANI back in June but it got no attention so I asked Seraphimblade about it, after L4j's last reverts and he recommended the RFC route. Thanks for the heads-up--Cailil talk 13:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Alan Lowe

Regarding the statement that Alan Lowe spends three days a week interning with a film studio in New York, the issue has nothing to do with notability — it's whether the statement is even believable without a proper source behind it. Admittedly it doesn't quite rank right up there with "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction" in the list of the world's all-time credibility-stretchers, but it is enough to fail WP:BLP if there isn't a valid source. Bearcat 16:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi, read your comment "I've read the debates, and I still feel that your edit misrepresents the original 19th-century progressive movement. They were always very blatant in their advocacy of a non-Socialist position, and were not above redbaiting in many areas." on Jack's page and am wondering which edit you are referencing. Read your bio, you sound like a well rounded individual with a passion for sci-fi; something in certain contexts we share. I personally like Star Trek: Next Generation and the Star Wars saga. Lord of the Rings (the book and movies) are also excellent. Well, with the tangent out of the way...Wondering if you'd like to take a swing at the Progressive article linked above. Your input, whether agreed or not, would help greatly. I see you are a "social democrat" if I read your user boxes correctly. Although I am not, I feel the social democracy people have their hearts in the right place compared to some political movements. Best Wishes, --Northmeister 21:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

My objection was to the deletion of the clarification that the Progressive movement in its original incarnation was an explicitly non-Socialist one, offering what would now be termed a "Third Way": reform of the capitalist system from a distinctly bourgeois, reformist point of view without any support for the disreputable radicals. Progressives occasionally allied with the left, but were not above redbaiting, particularly in rural areas and among the middle class. --Orange Mike 13:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC) posted on Northmeister talk page.
Good point. I actually agree with you here. I'd suggest you move to re-include the deleted material. --Northmeister 13:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC) posted on Northmeister talk page.--Northmeister 14:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi Mike, thanks for your help on the PATCO page. The editing dispute around the two different unions may be heating up again, as the second editor has finally started talking (User talk:Bookandcoffee#PATCO again). I'm going to try and work through this, but I would really appreciate if you'd keep an occasional eye on the conversation if you have the time. I don't do this 'mediation' thing very often, and it's always nice to have more than one opinion about things. Cheers. (Oh, nice start on the Union bug article by the way)--Bookandcoffee 18:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

speedies in general

See WP:Deletion policy and WP:CSD. Speedy is normally used for incontestable deletions where no reasonable person would think otherwise, and is kept to certain narrow categories. Categories of things which require judgment or which are likely to occasion debate are not appropriate, since a speedy is looked at by only 2 people and this shouldn't really be assumed to represent the community. In general articles about software do occasion debate, and so do special types of articles like lists and tables. Additional classes are proposed every month or so at WP:CSD, and are almost always rejected--there are serious problems with people using it for things that really need a wider discussion. So the procedure for anything not in the specified classes is to use PROD if you think it will not be opposed, and afd otherwise. with prod, anyone can remove the prod tag, so you have to follow it up to check that it is not removed without the article being improved or the objection answered. If anyone does remove it & you still want to delete, then it has to go to AfD. But prod is very often worth the try. I use it a good deal. Any valid deletion reason will do for PROD-you specify whatever you want to say. You also notify the person--it is not yet automatic like it is for speedy. 20:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Your comments on my AFD

Are offensive, and patently ridiculous. You have no inkling of the motivation behind my edits. In 11,000+ edits, over the course of nearly 2 years, maybe a handful have come across SF topics. To think that I have some sort of vendetta against Cramer is ridiculous, and to insinuate that I have such, in an AFD is offensive, and incivil. Not to mention, administrators do not have special editing powers, nor do WMF staff. I would appreciate a retraction. SWATJester Denny Crane. 21:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I will point out that I did not mention your status as an admin (indeed, was not aware of it) or as WFD staff; another editor did that. I did not mention Cramer by name, or you by username, in an effort slightly to ameliorate acrimony.
That said: it still seems to me that your attitude towards Cramer (a widely-respected professional in her field) and (seemingly) all Cramer-related articles oftimes goes beyond a healthy skepticism or the level of deletionism within the realm of acceptable behaviors in Wikipedia, and does indeed seem to approach vendetta status. I may have been wrong; but I flatly deny that my comments were "patently ridiculous."
It may well be that I have misjudged you; if so, part of the blame must fall on your somewhat immoderate wording and frequent charges of "piling on" and the like. It is possible, as well, that being a lifetime member of a community which has been the target of scorn and vituperation makes one oversensitive towards perceived slurs and prejudice. (There is certainly a widespread impression in the science fiction community that Wikipedians, or at least certain editors here, harbor a deep prejudice against the field.)
I shall AGF, as all good editors should. If I have in fact wronged you as an editor and human being, I apologize. If you choose to regard this as a retraction, well and good. I fear I can go no farther. Peace be on you and on your house. --Orange Mike 21:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
If I was attributing another editors comments to you, I apologize. Your comments are appreciated. SWATJester Denny Crane. 07:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

fan fiction

Your edit looks good. Rick Norwood 18:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


I wonder if the article is encyclopedic at all, and I tend to be more of an inclusionist or at least non-deletionist. The article had been deleted once before when it appeared to be completely made up. What do you think about the merits of the article as it stands now?

You have a fascinating bio and you must be an interesting person! I always enjoyed watching "Win Ben Stein's Money" (except I didn't care for Jimmy Kimmel)! Royalbroil 14:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I just caught your comment at User talk:Madmaxmarchhare. Do you think that a term specific to a specific college is encyclopedic? Royalbroil 14:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
The tone sure ain't encyclopedic. It strikes me as more for Wiktionary than for here, but as a "Sconnie" myself I hesitate a bit to put it in for an AfD. --Orange Mike 14:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


I started to add the "clarification" section as you were editing it! I did not mean to revert your changes. Feel free to take out "Pro-choice" today. I will make the case to add it in tomorrow. Please see the talk page concerning the characterization of "pro-choice." --IronAngelAlice 20:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


You just accused me of adding nonsense to the corset article. How can you call this edit a nonsense? This edit is only one made from my IP address before you posted on my talk page, so I suppose you had this one in mind.

And it is very unlikely coincidence that you posted this message on my talk page just after reverts made by Eyrian. How can you explain it by not having sockpuppet(s)? -- 21:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't find a template for "embarassingly pointless and silly fancruft that degrades the article"; so I used the one for "nonsense"; I apologize if that offended you. There is no place in this encyclopedia for a meaningless list of every time somebody in a movie or TV show wears a corset, any more than there would be for a list of every time somebody in a movie smokes a pipe or eats an artichoke! As to sockpuppetry: I don't know Eyrian, but I am an established editor, well known to many even if not ripe for an RfA; I invite you to view my edit history. (For that matter, if you google for "orange mike" you will get references to me, my IMDb listing, even some photos and a drawing; my existence is no secret.) --Orange Mike 15:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Ccsears not blocked

Information.svg Thank you for making a report about Ccsears (talk · contribs · block log) at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you.

Note: Just because you disagree with someone else's point of view, it does not make their edit automatically vandalism. Please see Wikipedia:Vandalism for the official definition. A WP:NPOV or WP:V warning such as {{uw-npov}} would have been far more appropriate and in line with Wikipedia:Assume good faith. --  Netsnipe  ►  13:45, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Category Space Opera

If you go to the Space Opera page it lists serenity and firefly as examples - thats the only reason i added the category.--88wolfmaster 19:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I figured that ended up being the problem. Have fun with your culling. And thank you for correcting me, or else neither of us would have noticed this.--88wolfmaster 23:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Yellowcard link

I don't see a rule against the unofficial french website link. Tim Y 02:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

From WP:EL:"Links normally to be avoided:
  1. Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority." --Orange Mike 12:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for your (anonymous) help yesterday removing some of Mayleaf's spam. I wondered why the rather long list was shrinking so fast! Kelpin 07:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I may not have an official mop and bucket, but cleaning up messes is everybody's job; and I think at least three editors had the same idea. Thanks for noticing. --Orange Mike 12:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Twilight Zone

Agreed that TZ is properly classified as science fiction. I was just using the sci-fi short form when correcting a user's edit that had labeled it as fantasy. Thanks for the clarification, though. -- Claygate 00:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm one of those active members of science fiction fandom, and like many of that ilk dislike the skiffy term, using it only as a pejorative for bad films and television shows. If you must shorten "science fiction" or "speculative fiction", just call it SF or even sf. --Orange Mike 00:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Chamonade or whatever

I agree and that's why this sort of thing must be very solidly sourced. --Rocksanddirt 16:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi: I have no wish to be offensive by removing your spam tag from Makeoutclub -- I don't make a habit of removing them -- and I hope I have met your objections by removing a large amount of material. If there are still things in the article to which you object, by all means remove them... but I do think that the subject is sufficiently notable to have an article in Wikipedia, just on the strength of reference [1] alone. I spent half my day removing objectionable new pages, so I don't think anyone could accuse me of being inclusionist <grin>... but this user, although new, showed a willingness to improve the article with solid references when I tagged it as non-notable, and I'm pretty sure he will continue to work within Wikipedia's boundaries as long as he knows what they are, and I'll help him stay within sensible boundaries. If you have any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page. Accounting4Taste 04:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

OMG, when I saw your picture on your talk page, I think I've just seen your episode of Win Ben Stein's Money! (They rerun older ones here in Canada.) Well done to take $2K! Accounting4Taste 04:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee merger

You seem to be an active contributor to University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, so I'd like to invite you along to a special talk to be held here as soon as you're ready. It concerns the proposed merger of University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and History of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. In my opinion, the main page (University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee) contains enough History information to overlap too much with the history page. So why do we need two? You are invited to share your views. Thanks, Auroranorth 11:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Review of Category:Esperantists deletion

You beat me to it, I had intended to challenge the descision later tonight. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 18:39, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Saga Petroleum LLC

Hi. Sorry, but I don't think it's speediable. There are assertions of notability. I suggest you take it to AfD. --Dweller 16:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Space Opera page & its lists

I've been combing the books lists on the sapce opera page. There is a vast and probably inappropriate list of space opera related games. Do we have someone around who can weed through that mess and cut it down to maybe 10? Ideas? --Pleasantville 19:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi im new and i heard u were an important editor like flowerpot and runningonbrains or whatever

i like orange too. i like orange koolaid. yea i know... im a geek Lord of the Ringssee ya!¡!*walks off* Elves dont eat bacon 22:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The above statement brought to you by the letters WTF. Into The Fray T/C 01:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Mark Warner (Canadian politician)

An article that you have commented on in a speedy deletion process, Mark Warner (Canadian politician), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Warner (Canadian politician). Thank you. 13:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

List of newspapers in Illinois

As a Bostonian, I plead relative ignorance... :-) I actually reverted because of the "MORNIBG" edit, and did not realize I rolled back 4 edits on the same user until now. My Vandal Proof had some issues over the past few days (hence the reason I laid off it today!). Feel free to add any of those back. Hiberniantears 03:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: Point of interest spammer

Argh, I know. Hopefully we can get him a nice long block eventually. GlassCobra (talkcontribs) 19:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's how I saw it too. Do you think a Checkuser is in order? GlassCobra (talkcontribs) 19:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Martin Tudor (science fiction activist)

Hey Mike. While I was surfing through some AfD's, I came across this one. You appear to be the article's original author and I didn't see a notice here, so I thought I'd give you a heads up. Cheers. Into The Fray T/C 23:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


hi! thanks for your email and for being willing to wikify the page. i do not have the know-how or the right software to bring the presentation up to the required standard and i agree with you that it needs a lot of work (although the information is accurate). i am the co-author/editor of the 2001 book and the research/drafting/editing phase ran for 4 years. if you would be willing to continue bringing the page up to the usual wikistandard i will pleased to help as necessary. i looked at your user page. i am originally from scotland, am a presbyterian, studied mod.hist. at (uk), born 1941 and married to my french wife nicole for 40 years and we live in france. my email is: best wishes, bruce. bruce condellBruce Condell 09:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Pleasant discussion about Jo Walton reference tag

Orange, my thanks for the kind words. It is always nice to engage in pleasant discussion - of which this was one! Cheers! Victoriagirl 14:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Wilhelm scream

You'll have to excuse me for being irritated at people who think that adding "extremely strong" to their recommendation of keep/delete/merge and putting it all caps is going to make their recommendation particularly appealing, 'specially the lack of in-depth arguments after such word choice and format. —Erik (talkcontrib) - 17:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I concur; but the "weirdos" bit was still over the line. Too much acrimony flowing as it is.--Orange Mike 18:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


Hey, I saw that you are a Your the first Quaker i have seen on wikipedia. It is a great religious movement:) Have a nice week and God bless.--SJP 23:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

In other science fiction news . . .

I am looking for some good science fiction novels to read and am willing to bet that you're probably a wealth of information. I have diverse reading habits (though I'm pretty limited to fiction), but haven't explored science fiction as much as I would like. If it's not too much trouble and you could recommend a few titles for the relatively ignorant, I'd appreciate it. Into The Fray T/C 01:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Mike! I appreciate it. I generally like to read things on recommendations and am coming up short on them lately. Into The Fray T/C 02:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm batting .500 at least. I found myself playing hoookie from work this afternoon and wandered to a bookstore. I couldn't remember much from your list other than Le Guin and Heinlein. So I started perusing titles, thought The Left Hand of Darkness sounded vaguely familiar and was sure that Friday was what you had recommended for Heinlein. Harhar. Oh well.  :) Into The Fray T/C 19:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


Agree with your edit at Walter Tevis, but not its summary. "Sci-fi" is not a pejorative, it's simply an abbreviation. :-) — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 10:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

BSFG Cites and reference

Hi - I notice you added some cites to the BSFG article. I'm trying to figure out how to update it further, with correct referencing as per request of user GlassFET, but have to confess I'm a bit of a novice editor so would appreciate some advice! Could you point me to some articles with good example of referencing and I'll have a go at updating the BSFG article in similar fashion. Thanks! VJDocherty 21:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Did you not read any of our reference materials?

I'm assuming not based on your comments.

Dagorhir, Amtgard, Markland, and dozens of other organizations have been feeding the SCA new members for the last thirty years. More than a handful of kings in the last 10 years (at least east of the Mississippi) started their medievalist careers in Dagorhir. Not to mention that a goodly number of the professional jousters in the region have, at one time, been regular attendees of Dagorhir, Darkon, or Amtgard events.

I'd like to know what you classify as related.

In case you were wondering where I get my facts, this is who I am:
Brutilus of Rome
Member of Unsterblichen
The Army of King Andreas of the East

I'm a 10 year participant in multiple battle games, 4 time Pennsic vet (missed 3 with injuries), and I've been recruiting members for the SCA in Maryland, DC, and Virginia for 5 years now from these "unrelated" organizations. I know that, as a culture, the SCA does not WANT more members. It also doesn't wish to be associated with any other organizations... ever. That doesn't mean that they aren't related and they aren't getting new members from there. There is a direct relationship that can be established. (Call it a minor league system, if you will... NFL / NCAA relationship)

No... You're not trying to make the article better. People who try to make articles better post information in the Talk pages. At best, you're coming off as someone speeding by in a car past a group of smokers shouting, "Smoking is bad for you!" (A wiki drive-by?) At worst, you are coming off as the stereotypical Wikisnob that makes people not want to work on this project. If you have suggestions, make them in the discussion page or the Sandbox.

I'm not an "Experienced and Established Editor". I have my niche on Wikipedia that I am attempting to maintain as being strictly factual and relevant. Frankly, I do this all at the request of the leadership of said organization. The article is getting changed regularly in an effort to make it meet with my standards first and Wikipedia's to follow. What I expect from someone with that title is more than a passing glance at a complex article and issue. To say the least, I found your comments lacking substance.

If anything the recruiting possibilities have been downplayed as much as possible. Point me at the language you find objectionable and we'll work on how to fix it so you find it less objectionable. (I work at a college, for crying out loud. If the English department can't find better language for it, the poli-sci folks can.)

You want references, click the "Dagorhir in the News" link.

While I'm pretty sure that the "Renaissance Magazine" claim that "Dagorhir is the oldest LARPing organization" is correct, it is fairly easy to get a hold of that issue if you want to see it for yourself and can do further research.

Look at the Washington Post article. You'll find what is, sadly, the best picture of me ever taken. (I still think it looks goofy.)

Numbers of attendees are published by local newspapers. I have a stack of Daily and Sunday Jeffersonian issues (Cambridge, Ohio's local paper)in my "Dagorhir" scrapbox. (Too much crap...)

You can find multiple copies of Dagorhir's Manual of Arms in the Library of Congress. (Current edition LOC number: Txu 1-102-610. Original edition LOC number: TXu 50-026.)

We also maintain receipts from all locations of major events. These include fees paid to the sites per attendee. They are maintained by a Budget Analyst for Homeland Security and an Analyst for the IRS.

We have our sources. They are verifiable and reliable. We were tired of having them vandalized by Wikisnobs and trolls so we simply put them on our organization's website and linked there.
—- Brutilus 17:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

My full SCA name is Basilus Rutilus. However, I usually go by B. Rutilus or just Brutilus for short, and most people find me tall and goofy.

I too am sorry that we've gotten off on the wrong foot. I should have given you the benefit of the doubt and not treated this like another drive-by or cheap publicity stunt.

The news links are on our organizational website, as I said, because we have had many difficulties with members of a splinter group defacing not only our Wikipedia entry, but also many other sites. One domain name was purchased by a member of said group and specifically redirected to a scat porn site to spite us.

As we are in the process of upgrading the article things such as links to specific news articles will be added back in, but we have not felt comfortable putting said information in as it has been vandalized in the recent past.

Dagorhir does not like to be considered a LARP either. It is as much of a LARP as the SCA is, however. There are role-playing aspects to both societies even though they both prefer to be considered a battle game rather than have the stigma of "LARP" attached. Most SCAdians would rather eat their helmet through a straw than have that comparison made.

As for the reference to this as a fan site...

You still haven't addressed what about the wording implies this. Is it your issues with verifiability?

What is AS? I'm really only familiar with the larger national events and our regional events.--Brutilus 18:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Defrag software articles

The tone of the articles in question is not encyclopedic. It reads somewhere between an ad and a section out of a software guide in BYTE or somewhere of the sort. If you wish to retain these articles, this must be addressed. --Orange Mike 18:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Citicism is all well and good, but constructive criticism is actually helpful. A few concrete examples would be more useful. Actual rewriting would be even more beneficial RitaSkeeter 20:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
How about some edits then? --Donn Edwards 07:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


Yo ho! ANy chance of you comin' down for Windycon in November? Shsilver 21:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Alas, no, matey; the fair Cicatrice and I (and the lass) be right short of doubloons in these parrrrts! We will be descending upon ICON on the first weekend of November, and one con per month is the most we can afford (barring a GoH-ship). --Orange Mike 21:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Plan ahead, then, matey, for Ol' Chumbucket and Cap'n Slappy be GoHing at Capricon in FebruARRy and plan a sign-along with Tom Smith of "Talk Like a Pirate Day." Shsilver 22:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
D'ye ken Tom's fine chanty, "Hey, It's Can(n)on!"? 'Tis the tale of the bonnie lass whose birthday this is: Hermione Granger, pirate queen, the Pride of Gryffyndor! --Orange Mike 22:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Aye! But I won't play that one fer the wee 'uns. THey've been listening to Tom's other Pirate songs, like "Pirate Ninjas from Dino Planet".Shsilver 23:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

John M. Ford

Just wanted to point out my reversion of your reversion on the John M. Ford article. It's my belief that WP:SELFPUB doesn't apply because it's not his blog. There is no way to be sure that Mr. Ford is actually the person who posted the information. Anyone could have used his name to post those answers. --OnoremDil 16:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

That's simply not true in this case. Mike Ford was a frequent contributor to Making Light, one of the most cherished and well-known people there. If he had been impersonated, it would have come out in mere moments, and the scandal would have spread throughout the community. A Mike Ford post on Making Light is pretty much the gold standard for stuff coming from John M. Ford. --Orange Mike 16:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of Rajaa Alsanea

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Rajaa Alsanea. I do not think that Rajaa Alsanea fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because there is a mild assertion of notability. I request that you consider not re-tagging Rajaa Alsanea for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. You are, of course, free to tag the article with {{prod}} or nominate it at WP:AFD. If you nominate the article at AFD, you may wish to consider nominating her book which claims to be a bestseller without sourcing. Carlossuarez46 18:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Neris and India's Idiot-Proof Diet


An article that you have been involved in editing, Neris and India's Idiot-Proof Diet, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neris and India's Idiot-Proof Diet. Thank you. Carlossuarez46 18:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


Pardon me? --ElKevbo 22:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I thought somebody was removing your notice of allegations, so I reverted it. My apologies. --Orange Mike 22:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Chaminade High School

Thanks, I didn't think to look for other spellings. Corvus cornix 16:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm subject to misspellings all the time, so I look for them; the guy sounded likely to be notable enough. Then I spotted that the cite included the word "Reilly" in it.... --Orange Mike 16:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

SF fandom

Do you read Halo fanfiction? ~ S0CO(talk|contribs) 18:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

No. I'm a fan of actual written science fiction, the literature of ideas. To the limited extent that I game, it's either role-playing games (my first commercial sales were to Dragon) or board games; plus sometimes Civilization: I despise FPS games. To the extent I read any fanfiction, it's usually someplace like Twisting the Hellmouth (or anything by Marcus Rowland, of course). Why do you ask? --Orange Mike 18:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Just curious. ~ S0CO(talk|contribs) 18:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


Information.svg Thank you for making a report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you.

Specifically, the user made only one (deleted) contribution to Lexicon Branding (he did not create the article), and received no warnings. Thanks! — madman bum and angel 20:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

It's not about me, It's about the copyright

I don't think you know enough about the situation. I reverted two of GlassFET's edits and now he is trying everything in his power to get one of my pictures deleted. The picture has been stable on the article for a very long time. After reverting GlassFET's edits, he went to my contributions log and started making various changes to articles I recently visited. I understand if GlassFET feels it is his legitimate duty to make sure the picture is properly attributed, but it's being fueled by some personal vendetta against me.

I went to the linked page, but I can't find where it says I have to send the permission letter to the appropriate wikipedia administrators. I received the permission email a long time ago and deleted it once given permission. I don't think GlassFET would believe any letter I may provide, so you might want to contact the site yourself. Just let me know what you want to do. Thanks. --Ghostexorcist 20:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

So I don't have to submit a letter of permission to wikipedia like GlassFET claims? I know about the whole "third party" limitation on photos. I originally told the website I couldn't use the photo if it's use was limited only to wikipedia. They gave me permission to use it as long as I added added a link to their website on the picture. I had problems finding the correct tag for similarly attributed photos on another article. A more experienced editor directed me to the correct {{attribution}} tag instead of {{permission}}. --Ghostexorcist 05:11, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
No, GlassFET is right: the permission has to be submitted to Wikipedia, not to you; and it has to meet the specifications listed in the link I put on your talk page, so the link to their website may be a dealkiller. --Orange Mike 13:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
The {{permission}} tag states "images licensed as 'for non-commercial use only' or ' used with permission for use on Wikipedia only '" should be deleted (please see the tag below). So a picture can't be licensed solely to Wikipedia. That's why I told the website I can't use the photo if it is limited only to Wikipedia. The photo meets the requirements. If I truly have to submit some kind of letter, where do I send it to?


--Ghostexorcist 16:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
The copyright holder, not you, has to submit a license that meets the requirements. If it's a person with a Wikipedia account, he/she should go here. Otherwise, it will go to

Wikimedia Foundation Inc. 200 2nd Ave. South #358 St. Petersburg, FL 33701-4313 --Orange Mike 16:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)