User 7

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


Bill Oddie[edit]

Hi Rms: You've tagged the Bill Oddie article as being "too long" and have suggested it be broken into sections or split into separate articles. Can you please explain your reasoning for the tag? The article already has sections, and is certainly not particularly long! MeegsC | Talk 13:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply! I'll remove the length tag, but leave the citations one... MeegsC | Talk 13:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed addition to Frank Hanna III article[edit]

Guarding their privacy, there wasn't much in the press about the Hannas until the state's largest health insurer, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Georgia, was converted from a not-for-profit to a for-profit corporation. Georgia Blue Cross became a for-profit in 1996 under the umbrella of Cerulean, a holding company largely owned by Frank and David Hanna, according to the Savannah Morning News. Advocates for the poor brought suit claiming public assets were plundered without fair compensation. Blue Cross settled agreeing to create an $81 million endowment fund that would make grants to address public health needs. When Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Georgia merged with WellPoint Health Networks in 1998, one day after the lawsuit was settled, the Hannas cleared at least $54 million in profit.

Also of concern, Cerulean employed former Georgia politicians as lobbyists to shepherd the initial purchase through the Georgia legislature, including the former state democratic chairman and a former aide to the governor. Georgia Insurance Commissioner, John Oxendine, later approved the deal, even after receiving campaign contributions from the Hannas. Oxendine faces Democratic challenger Guy Drexinger in this year's election.

Drexinger told APN that Oxendine has an ongoing problem of supporting causes when those causes support his election campaign. In 1996, the Hanna brothers bought a controlling interest in CompuCredit Corp, joining other top executives who formerly worked at Equifax. CompuCredit markets their Aspire Credit Card to those who have bad or no credit, and who are unlikely to find a credit card with any other company.

At the end of 2005, CompuCredit had over 3.5 million customer accounts with an aggregate managed portfolio of $2.49 billion in receivables, according to the company's website. The company, which is located in Greater Atlanta, markets itself as part of the "New South's Economic Renaissance".

Duke lacrosse case[edit]

Hello. In cases where links have gone dead, they shouldn't be removed as sources. See WP:LINKROT. First, their presence indicates that there once was a source, even if it's no longer accessible. Second, the footnote may indicate a newspaper article's name, and an interested reader can look for a printed copy of the paper. Finally, sometimes newspapers re-organize their sites, and the story still may be available at a different URL, or at the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. Keeping the dead link allows an industrious editor to look for another copy of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Good to know. I wasn't aware of WP:LINKROT. (talk) 11:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


Please stop putting the }} for infoboxes at the end of the last parameter. They go on their own line so that people changing parameter values or removing them altogether do not accidentally break the template. -Rrius (talk) 21:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Date of birth of Isabel la Negra[edit]

Hi, you deleted the date of birth of 1901 I stated for Isabel la Negra, which I referenced to a scholarly source published by a university professor with a reputable Puerto Rican publishing house (López Rojas, Luis Alfredo. La mafia en Puerto Rico. San Juan, P.R.: Editorial Isla Negra, 2004, page 20, note 7. ISBN 1932271325). The source is available on Google Books. I'm not quite sure why you eliminated it.--Lawrlafo (talk) 08:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Restored year of birth (1901). (talk) 01:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Hollywood Walk of Fame[edit]

We had an edit conflict. Please verify the current version of this page for your edits. I was in the middle of cleaning up many citations when you made your edits - mainly the addition of Donald Sutherland, right? Thanks --Lexein (talk) 21:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I gotta edit quicker, I guess. --Lexein (talk) 21:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Never apologize! WP:BRD. I totally agree with your frustration, though. --Lexein (talk) 22:51, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Leopold Windsor[edit]

Why wouldn't Leopold Windsor, both of whose parents are Catholic, also be excluded from the line of sucession to the British throne as per the Act of Settlement? (talk) 18:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The consensus seems to be that some act is required (other than birth). This was throroughly discussed in [Archive 6]. There I said "Albert Windsor ... was born in 2007 and was baptised Catholic. His younger brother appears at position 27 (born September 2009) on the basis that he has not been baptised yet. Curiously the superscript for exclusion "XP" still appears next to Albert's name. The question is whether an infant is excluded from the line by being baptised Catholic. The actual words of the Act of Settlement 1701 provide "And it was thereby further enacted That all and every Person and Persons that then were or afterwards should be reconciled to or shall hold Communion with the See or Church of Rome or should professe the Popish Religion or marry a Papist should be excluded and are by that Act made for ever incapable to inherit". So there are five circumstances: (1) the person is "then" a Catholic (meaning in 1701); (2) "afterwards should be reconciled ... with the See of Church of Rome"; (3) "shall hold Communion with the See of Church of Rome"; (4) should professe the Popish Religion"; (5) "marry a Papist". My understanding is that these words have not been formally interpreted by the Courts. But I would suggest that Albert should be excluded under (2) - being reconciled with the See or Church of Rome." However, there has been no notice that Leopold has been baptised yet. Alan Davidson (talk) 22:54, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Lois Hole[edit]

Sorry for not getting back to you, I'll address that as soon as possible, I've been a bit busy lately. Thanks. Connormah (talk | contribs) 00:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Clare Imrie[edit]

II'm not sure that WIkpedia has a polcy on religous names. Persnally I'd go with the legall name every time, but in buildings the name in common use is used. It would be interesting to know what people ike HMRC use.--Kitchen Knife (talk) 14:40, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Pyne[edit]

So I'm a borderline vandal am I? Could you please cite that Christopher Pyne is a republican, instead of accusing and insulting. Are you a republican? Is that why you keep adding that Christopher Pyne is a republican without source? I whave never, ever even considered damaging a page, instead I am a user who works towrads all claims sourced. Thanks Kempsey11 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kempsey11 (talkcontribs) 15:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Brian Wilshire[edit]

It is a bit hard to source the radio, and I am searching for transcripts and sources. I am a new user, and a personal friend of Brian. He is proud of the fact that he is an atheist, and I will add sources ASAP. As for the Robert Borsak page I blanked out, I created the page, and was not aware at that time of the correct deletion process.

Thanks Kempsey11 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kempsey11 (talkcontribs) 15:26, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Found a refernece to Brian and atheism:

Reference to angry callers about his climate change denial:

And the most telling of them all, on his personal website, calling climate change a the great climate scare

I respect you for trying to decrease vandalism on wikipedia, and I am sorry for the misunderstanding —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kempsey11 (talkcontribs) 15:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


I have noticed that you have been consistently been deleting people's middle names names from the bolded lead and instead putting them in the second paragraph as "born as xxx". Please note that names should go into the lead and people's full names should be left as they are, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) - "While the article title should generally be the name by which the subject is most commonly known, the subject's full name should be given in the lead paragraph, if known". -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:14, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Please note that this also applies to women's maiden names, which should also appear in the lead and not the first paragraph. Also, postnominal letters should not be bolded and academic degrees and titles should not appear in the lead. Thanks. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:41, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Mavis Villiers[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your voluminous additions to the Mavis Villiers page, which I created by the way. I did the best I could but there was not that much info publicly available. Can you provide any kind of references or sources for the additions you made. It would be greatly appreciated as until then I have to place fact tags for unsourced info. Thanks. (talk) 04:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I will add references and sources in due course; I am new to this!. Can you expand on your objection the use of "Tragically" in my bio? I can see why you might object to the reference to the DVD's being available, but then, that might be 'useful' to the reader (inquirer); as other comments might be 'interesting' if not strictly biographical, eg. my references to her co-stars being Australian. Please comment.--Jacky Smythe (talk) 17:21, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Aleged copyvio in Django Reinhardt[edit]

Did you have any specific source in mind? N ote that material is often copied from WP into other sites, so resemblence between this article and other sites may be innocent 1Z (talk) 12:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Your username[edit]

Hi. Sorry to bother, but I think there is something wrong with your username. On "Wikipedia:Username policy#Internet addresses" says that e-mail adresses "are not valid usernames". According to that your username is not valid. If it's a policy I believe it have to be obeyed by everyone. Regards.--TeleS (T PT @ C G) 07:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

This has been addressed about a million times already. Rms is grandfathered in. -Rrius (talk) 09:40, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Reading over the page, I wouldn't put it that way, I'd say this is a case of WP:IAR, not a change in policy. Based on what I've read so far, I support Robert keeping this username if it's important to you, Robert, but please understand that checking for "bad" usernames is one of the easiest and most effective ways we have of dealing with promotionalism, so a lot of people aren't happy with seeing emails as usernames, they're concerned it gives the impression that promotionalism is okay. I know that isn't your intent, and I'm not asking you to change your username ... but at least be aware that if you keep it, the subject is going to keep coming up. - Dank (push to talk) 13:16, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
His username was created before the policy was created and is allowed to remain for that reason. Why wouldn't you put as "grandfathered in"? -Rrius (talk) 20:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Because there's no policy that supports a general concept of grandfathering prior policy rules in general ... because we don't need it, since we've got IAR. I know some people think IAR is a "last resort", and a weaker policy ... I don't see it that way. To me it just means, do what's best for the encyclopedia at all times. What's best for the encyclopedia is not to hassle this guy, so we don't. If his name were User:ObamaSucks, and if that username had been okay under previous policy (I doubt it, but let's assume), I wouldn't hassle him either, but if later, the effect on the community because disruptive, it wouldn't be helpful at all to claim some kind of grandfathering "exemption". - Dank (push to talk) 21:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. I didn't know it was already discussed. Maybe it's because I'm a 'newbie' here, but I'm not agreed with this privilege. Surely you don't have any intention of using you name promotionally. But the promotion is a fact. The presence of "" can be seen as a propaganda (even if not intended) of the web-mail and consequently of Microsoft, Windows.
It also would be weird if one day you had to point to a sysop this kind of 'incorrect' username or explain to a new user why his username with an e-mail adress cannot be accepted, since we have to lead by example. I'm not strongly opposing you to keep with this username, but I don't see as a reasonable argument only by saying that it was created before the policy. Everyone got to have same rights. If your name was created after the policy it would not be accepted. What is correct do not depend on the time when it was written here. Well, I probably wont bother you anymore and that is just a point of view of a new user. Regards.--TeleS (T PT @ C G) 00:50, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Reverting Alan Mulally[edit]

I rv Category:American Roman Catholics as unsourced. I could not even find any confirmation (pardon the expression) via Google search, except on some wacky conspiracy theory sites where he is mentioned in passing. I mean he may be Catholic, but where's the proof? (talk) 21:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

This is a fair point and it should be very easy to remove one category. However, please do not revert to a very old revision that otherwise disrupts the article to make a point. KimChee (talk) 04:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I looked up the subject and found information from reliable sources that should hopefully address this matter. KimChee (talk) 02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

J, KY[edit]

Not at all. Your edits are well appreciated. Mine were mainly to get rid of some POV sensationalism. Best regards. --S. Rich (talk) 21:11, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Brett Kirwan for deletion[edit]

Icon delete yellow.svg

A discussion has begun about whether the article Brett Kirwan, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brett Kirwan until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sottolacqua (talk) 21:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Samantha Lewes listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Samantha Lewes. Since you had some involvement with the Samantha Lewes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bbb23 (talk) 23:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


Concerning this edit,   isn't vandalism. See WP:NBSP for more explanation. Art LaPella (talk) 17:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

If you don't like WP:NBSP (which specifically applies to dates: see MOS:NUM#Non-breaking spaces), my philosophy on such guidelines is at User:Art LaPella/Because the guideline says so. Art LaPella (talk) 18:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:NBSP says "See also: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Non-breaking spaces", which is a guideline even if you don't define it as part of WP:NBSP. The latter link says: "Use a non-breaking space ... between the date number and month name (e.g. 19 April or April 19);", so it applies to dates (it also mentions years). You are correct to say this guideline is seldom observed, but if it's a bad guideline it should be removed (hence my essay). A bot sounds like a better idea, although I haven't had much success organizing such efforts; User:Art LaPella/AWB explanation#More automation. Art LaPella (talk) 19:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

As computer savvy as me? Well OK, pre-Internet computer programming like COBOL has been important to me for most of my life, but do you know where there is a bot programming manual, with examples of how to connect it to Wikipedia? Art LaPella (talk) 19:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Googling "Craig's Place" came up with Craigslist; I didn't know they had software. Anyway, I take it you haven't figured out bot programming any better than I have. Art LaPella (talk) 20:08, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Not POV[edit]

Efrem Zimbalist was certainly world famous. That is not POV. So was Alma Gluck, Stephanie's grandmother. Wallie (talk) 20:35, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Your Question[edit]

Hello, I initially reverted your edit because you added an unnecessary disambig to her name. Feel free to add your changes. again without that, and it'll be fine. Thanks, SteelIronTalk 01:29, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

RE: Jan Karski[edit]

You rv Category:Catholic Righteous Among the Nations from Jan Karski's article using WP:HOTCAT. This is a mistake. That category is not redundant in any way and is integral to the Karski article. (talk) 01:51, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Please provide a reliable source according WP:V, then feel free to restore the category. Cresix (talk) 01:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for sourcing that he was a practicing Catholic as an adult. There continues to be one major problem and one minor problem. The minor problem is that the statement about his self-identification as a Catholic belongs in the text of the article rather than a footnote. The major problem is that you restored the category "Catholic Righteous Among the Nations", but there is no statement in the article supporting an association between Karksi and that category. His being a Catholic per se does not necessarily indicate that association. I have removed the category. Again, feel free to source appropriately (in the article, not a footnote) and restore the category. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 16:05, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Religious denomination categories[edit]

On Wikipedia a person must self-identify with a particular denomination before being categorized; and the only way to know if they self-identify is a source indicating that the person is self-identified as Catholic (or Baptist, or atheist, or whatever) as an adult. That standard is frequently violated because many people think they can put anything about a person's religous beliefs in an article without reliable sourcing. That is what is unsourced in the article. If someone grows up an atheist but is now a Christian (see William J. Murray), do we put that person in the "Atheists" category?" This is a simple matter of following one of the very cornerstones of Wikipedia: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." Julien Green may very have converted to Catholicism, but that statement is not sourced in the article. If you want to restore the category, please find a sourced statement to that effect. And remember, the responsibility for sourcing is on the person who adds or restores information. Thank you. Cresix (talk) 03:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

External links[edit]

I saw your generally helpful edit to Las Vegas Review-Journal. One small point that you may not be aware of. While it's possible to have an external link in the text, they are discouraged. Normally, external links that a source should go in a citation, and those that aren't should either go in the "external links" section or be omitted. So instead of this:

We should have this:

  • ...adopted a new business plan based on copyright litigation.[1]

For more information, see WP:ELPOINTS and WP:ECITE.   Will Beback  talk  21:11, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Deleting sourced material[edit]

We should normally avoid deleting sourced material that's relevant to the topic. When we do we should give an explanation on the talk page or, at a very minimum, in the edit summary. It should never be marked as a minor edit. I see you deleted reference to Brynner's affair with Dietrich in this edit and marked it as minor, with no explanation.[1] Was that an error?   Will Beback  talk  21:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree that every affair isn't noteworthy. But relatively long-term affairs among famous people that have been widely reported seem to meet the threshold.[2][3][4] This biography of Dietrich indicates the affair was significant and publicly controversial.[5]   Will Beback  talk  22:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Actually, Karski was just a coincidence. I didn't notice it was you until I'd made the edit. I've got a over-long watchlist.   Will Beback  talk  22:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Here's an excerpt from a review of a family history written by Brynner's son: His well-known affair with Marlene Dietrich began when she was 41 and he was 21, and "their romance, which would continue off-and-on for two decades, was relentless and passionate," Rock writes.
So it was lengthy and well-known.   Will Beback  talk  23:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Marian P. Opala[edit]

I noticed that you added several "citation needed" tags to the article I created on former Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Marian P. Opala. In response, I have restored the sources I had previously cited when adding the information in question. --TommyBoy (talk) 12:37, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

CongLinks template[edit]

Please don't remove currently-unused fields in the CongLinks template. They are used as place-holders in case the information later becomes available. We also use the spacing for readability. Flatterworld (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

YouTube links[edit]

Hi. I see you have re-inserted YouTube links into the article after they were removed. There is a discussion on the talk page about those links. Could you please explain your reason for re-inserting them there? Thanks much, Xenophrenic (talk) 12:21, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Howdy, Rms. In this edit of yours, you remove the word "Murder" from the title of one of the references. Could you tell me why? Also, you added a '/' character to the end of a URL address for citation, which broke the link -- in that same edit. I've fixed them, but I was curious as to what happened. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 07:54, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Iowa politicians[edit]

Thanks for helping out with the Iowa politician articles. Would you please leave the empty infobox parameters in place, however? Several of these should be filled in eventually, and leaving them in place makes it more likely for editors unfamiliar with infobox parameters to fill them in with useful information. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:12, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jakiw Palij[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The-Pope (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

It is an automated message when you nominate a "negative page about a living person that is completely unsourced". See WP:CSD#G10 for the criteria. I know that it is not an attack page, but that's the CSD group that negative, unreferenced BLPs fall under. I probably should have read the message that the automated program left and edited it. By all means remove the tag, but you MUST source the article from a verifiable and reliable source. I am simply patrolling unreferenced biographies of living people.The-Pope (talk) 16:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
@ Rms - The-pope looks like he used the standard template for an attack page, which is technically valid (tho I would have hoped that he would have written you a non-templated message). It is unsourced, and does paint the subject in a negative light. I don't think it reflects badly on you in any way, but someone else should make that determination. Since I reverted to the G10 notice, I don't feel I should make that determination in my role as an admin. Syrthiss (talk) 16:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't think I've done many G10s before, mainly A7 or G3s, so I should have checked what message was left... but it was only 4 minutes between my tagging and the response on my page, so it wasn't much time for me to check what was written. In future, for G10s like this (negative UBLPs, not attack pages) I'll definitely manually leave the message or at least edit away the automated one. The-Pope (talk) 16:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Yep, its not a problem (at least on my end). Typically what I do for established users is still use the template, but write a quick message before I subst in the template. Syrthiss (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd personally prefer you supply the sources (even in a general sense, for the moment) on the talk page. Yes, blanking in the last 10 minutes after the page has been up for 2 years really isn't going to do much to protect him from possible libel but I'd rather err on the side of caution. Its not like people can't look into the history. Syrthiss (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh I see it now. Well, lets go and put a message on his / her talkpage instead. :D Syrthiss (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks like HJ Mitchell has deleted it. I was unable to view your link because when you cut and pasted it, it has a ... in the middle like the browser thought it was too long. I'll do a search in a minute. Syrthiss (talk) 17:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Jakiw Palij[edit]

Hi, please don't take offence, but I'm afraid I've had to delete that article as an unsourced BLP that makes negative claims (ie, being a concentration camp guard) about its subject. The source you provided on the talk page was a dead link and I'm afraid I can't leave that kind of thing lying around. That said, this isn't an assumption of bad faith and I'm not questioning the factual accuracy of the statement, it just needs a reliable source attributed to it. If you can find one, I'll be happy to restore the article or you can start it again. Similarly, if anybody accuses you of creating an attack page based on this, let me know and I'll try to set the record straight, since this was deleted under the second half of G10 (negative BLP, not attack page). Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Here are full URLs to the NY Times articles that bracket the time (there were 2 more on my search, one of which was mostly a rehash once he had been stripped of citizenship). I don't know how much of this was or wasn't included in the article. Syrthiss (talk) 17:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Userfied to Palij. Please add those sources to it now, then you can work on it there at your leisure. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I did a first pass. I don't have a source for the birth date or name, but everything else seems supported by the article I have linked. Syrthiss (talk) 17:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Paul Ryan Rudd[edit]

Thanks your your help on Paul Ryan Rudd. I am just letting you know that I had to partially revert your edits on the page since the some of the references were messed up in the process. Basically I had to go back to the version before you made your first edit, but manually re-added what you did without changing the references. —CodeHydro 15:59, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Good Call[edit]

On Hector's name TY! my bad! LOL DocOfSoc (talk) 14:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Another good call[edit]

You're right on Kit Hoover--thanks for catching that. Now I'm off to get reading glasses. Drmies (talk) 19:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Elaine Paige[edit]

Hello. Just to clear up why I wanted to keep the original wording;

This quote from this source backs up that her theatre commitments kept her from having children, as stated by Paige herself; "Yes, I regret in a way not having my own family, not having kids. I never imagined I wouldn't have a family. But I wouldn't have had this career if I had done that. I am quite single-minded. I love the idea of waking up and having breakfast over the newspapers, rather than making idle conversation with someone. Is that such a crime?"

And responding to a question about reading reviews on her shows;

"Do you read your reviews?

No. I don't find it helpful to hear too many people's opinions."

Would you therefore concur with the revision to the original wording? With the paragraph concerning her never having children, I wanted a way of linking the two sentences (her career and subsequent lack of children) together. Thanks. Eagle Owl (talk) 15:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I can see your points. We may aswell leave the article as it is for now. Thanks. Eagle Owl (talk) 18:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

September 2010[edit]

Information.svg Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Maude Farris-Luse. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 19:05, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

After a mere 32,000 edits, it's about time you got edit-summary-templated...! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Barto and Mann[edit]

Thank you for your edits. Are the changes in format on the edit page the correct way to format? I'm still learning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradford Smith (talkcontribs) 21:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Fort Caroline[edit]

The information was perhaps sourced to the actual paper book mentioned? Did you read that book to verify that it wasn't. Wikipedia does not require that only online sources be used as references. Also historical information is not subject to the libel-based concerns of BLP. At any rate it took me about a minute to run a two word google search and find another and online source for the material in the first non-wiki result returned - which you could have done yourself and so improved the encyclopedia. Removing information should never be the first step - at least a minimum effort at verification or disproval should be. Rmhermen (talk) 00:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Flora MacLeod of MacLeod[edit]

I notice you added the coat of arms to the article Flora MacLeod of MacLeod, but I think it's incorrect. See Talk:Flora MacLeod of MacLeod#Arms. Opera hat (talk) 01:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

No need to be rude[edit]

I worked on it for a few hours today. You're welcome to it.Cadwallader (talk) 19:18, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Morgan Griffith[edit]

The HPV thing is a very minor issue. It's not necessary.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Cathy Harvin[edit]

Hi Cathy Harvin succeeded her husband Charles Alexander Harvin in the South Carolina House of Representatives. It makes sense to start an article on Alex Harvin also. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 22:51, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Sir Shane Lesie, Bt.[edit]

Re your edit revisions to the above. Baronetcies cannot be disclaimed (there is no equivalent provision of the Peerage Act 1963) and, additionally, have to be registered for the holder to inherit - they do not pass automatically. Shane would, therefore, have been required to register with the Standing Council of the Baronetage. Counter-revolutionary (talk) 09:47, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Gerrittsen Beach Volunteer Fire Department[edit]

The proper name of the fire department is the GerriTTsen Beach Volunteer Fire Department. Here is their website: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blarg56 (talkcontribs) 08:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, This is an image of the fire departments sign, spelled with two t's[[6]] Blarg56 (talk) 20:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

em dashes[edit]

I'm curious why you keep changing the em dash style in Emma Goldman back and forth. Kaldari (talk) 21:01, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyedit, BTW. Kaldari (talk) 21:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
First you changed "daughters—Helena" to "daughters — Helena", then you changed it back to "daughters—Helena", finally you changed it back to "daughters — Helena" again. Either is acceptable I think, but the article needs to be consistent. Previously all the em dashes used the "no space style", so I would prefer it if we stuck with that. Your other edits to the Emma Goldman article look great though. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 21:15, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


Rms: I was born in Berkshire, but now live in the US, and my family is from Sligo. I have family in Bogside as well (and most of Western Ireland). Yes, you can ask me questions if you like regarding Ireland. My point was one of perspective. At some point, you just have to let it go, the ethnically Irish Catholics of NI will always call the city Derry, and the Protestants of NI will always call it Londonderry. In other words, this is not only a religious fight, but a tribal, natioanlistic fight as well, and it's a no win if you jump in. You tend to learn that such symbolic expressions depend entirely on the perspective of the speaker, and their own background. You just go with the flow in this area. If you took a breath, it means you saw what I meant, on that score I am glad. Let me know if you have any other questions, and I am glad to answer any questions you may have.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 18:44, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


The 168 figure listed in the infobox is already specific enough not to need the clarification. Technically there were 167 that died from the effects of the blast, one during the rescue efforts, and possibly another due to the discovered leg. Adding the extra note could cause confusion for readers who may wonder if there was actually a larger variance of additional deaths that were not confirmed (instead of the one possible). You're right about the parameter, it looks like it was removed. I don't know if I added it or someone else, but the point's moot if the infobox template doesn't use it. For the act, I don't believe guidelines require the bold formatting (I haven't run across it anywhere). --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 04:48, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


Handshake icon.svg
The Good Friend Award
Its not often an editor has the insight and strength of character to say they were wrong and then apologize. It is an admirable quality and has now, in my eyes, made us good friends! KeithbobTalk 19:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Social Security Death Index[edit]

Yes, people can be recorded in the SSDI even if they died overseas. If someone with a US social security number moves overseas, they can notify the SSA to send benefits to the nearest US embassy/consulate in the foreign country. When they die, their deaths can be reported to the consulate which in turn reports the deaths to the SSA. In such cases, the "last residence"/"last benefit received" columns may display a three digit number which represents where the death was reported. For example, "732" means the death was reported to the US consulate in Frankfurt, Germany. A (not quite comprehensive) list of foreign country codes used by the SSA can be found at [7]. (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

ANI discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/ regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. IZAK (talk) 04:42, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The ANI discussion was closed marked as resolved as it is clear that the relevant policy exempts your user name under "grandfather rights". Once the discussion is archived at ANI, maybe you could add a note re your user name on your user page and link to the archived ANI thread. That way, in future other editors who may be thinking of raising your user name at WP:UAA will be able to see why your user name is apparently in breach of WP:U. Mjroots (talk) 08:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Following further discussion overnight, I feel that the issue has been thoroughly thrashed out, and it is clear that you are restricted to using this username. Therefore, I've closed the thread at ANI with a final comment that if you wanted to change username, it would probably need to go via ARBCOM. I may be wrong on the last point, as WP:AE could possibly be the correct venue, but that is immaterial. As I understand it, you are restricted to using you current user name, which gives you an exemption to the username policy. Mjroots (talk) 06:58, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

COI discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaim Rabinowitz regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 05:53, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Ridiculous! Which noticeboard shall we see next? WP:UAA? WP:BN? WP:WQA? Seriously! - Alison 06:58, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
    • Actually I was thinking of contacting User Jimbo Wales (talk · contribs) to find out if there is such a notion on WP that users can be granted "exceptions" to updated current policies per Wikipedia:Username policy#Internet addresses: "E-mail addresses and URLs are not valid usernames" that does not have a clause or asterisk "exempting" anyone, especially when other users have no clue that this user has such an "exception" and can count on your unbridled defense of his status and actions. I am very disappointed in you Alison for your mocking tone and ongoing defense of policy violations by this user. IZAK (talk) 08:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
      • I'm actually quite disappointed in your persistent hounding of an editor who's done little wrong other than AfD the 'wrong' article, nor your increasing finger-wagging in my direction. Jimmy Wales = who next?? :rollseyes: - Alison 08:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

M'el Dowd[edit]

Hi. I thought that most of your changes were very helpful - I just changed a couple of them to the more usual style that we have been using at the musical theatre project, and I put back in a brief reference to a newspaper review of a recent role. I am usually reluctant to delete referenced information. See WP:MUSICALS - feel free to join the project if you like musicals. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:58, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

BTW, check out WP:OVERLINK, which notes that we should not usually link to well-known place names, like Washington D.C., because the reader knows what it is, and you don't want people clicking away from the article they are reading, unless it is to give them access to more information that they might not otherwise be aware of. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. Of course, we'd be happy to have you at the project, since we have a few thousand articles, and only a few active members. You don't have to be an expert, just a good researcher!  :-) -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


You can be sure that IZAK will now be under scrutiny. Per AGF, I'm going to assume that he wasn't fully aware of the underlying issue with your username. The situation has now been made crystal clear to him. Per WP:STICK the matter should now drop. If IZAK refuses to drop it, then the issue should be brought back to ANI.

Re my suggestion earlier, maybe you could add a short note to your user page linking to the unblock restriction as the reason as to why your username is not going to change. I'd say that ARBCOM/AE would probably look upon a username change request from you favourably, but you cannot be forced to change it if you don't want to, and I'm certainly not going to force you to change it. Mjroots (talk) 14:25, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

List of people who adopted matronymic surnames[edit]

I owe you an apology for my rudeness, my behaviour fell well below that of what I expect from others. Regardless of the merits of the article (much improved now), I should have behaved better and used less intemperate language on my talk page and the AfD rationale. E. Fokker (talk) 17:49, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Jackie Coogan[edit]

Hi there. I have reverted a series of your edits regarding Coogan's birth name because you did not provide a source for it. John Leslie "Jackie" Coogan, Jr. may very well be incorrect (I haven't researched the matter), but it currently has a source - a source that you inexplicably didn't remove when you changed his birth name. If you can find a source that contradicts the current source then perhaps the content can be changed but a hidden note isn't a reliable source. Thanks. Pinkadelica 21:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't clean up your mess :), I simply consolidated the reference you provided and did some clean up while I was at it. I apologize if my edit summary indicated that in any way and I thank you for providing a reference for Coogan's actual birth name. Pinkadelica 01:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Restoring copyright problems[edit]

Hi. I'm at a bit of a loss at your action here which seems to suggest that you did not understand the purpose of the removal of content in this edit, which is tagged "Remove copyright infringement of".

Looking at some of the content you restored, I see the following:

In 1942 she joined the ATS and was posted to Halifax, Yorkshire. For most of the war she remained in the training branch of the Service, but early in 1945 she went to OCTU. She was commissioned later that year and after the war decided to remain in the Army.

The source says:

In 1942 she joined the ATS and was posted to Halifax, Yorkshire.... For most of the war Eileen Nolan remained in the training branch of the Service, but early in 1945 she went to OCTU. She was commissioned later that year and after the war decided to remain in the Army.

Although some content was omitted, what was used was copied verbatim from that source.

This content, too, which you restored was copied verbatim from that source:

Eileen Nolan retired as director in 1977 and was appointed CB. She went to live at Crowthorne, Berkshire, and took on the task of deputy controller commandant of the WRAC for the next seven years.

I thought you were aware at this point that, aside from brief, clearly marked quotations, you cannot copy content from previously published sources unless you can verify that these are public domain or compatibly licensed with Wikipedia. Please do not restore copied content. You have the option to rewrite removed content from scratch, but, please, do not restore content that violates our copyright policies to articles. If you do not understand the reason for removal, please seek feedback. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Updated article. Response at Moonriddengirl's talkpage. (talk) 15:56, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it. In terms of the CCI, sometimes people may remove more than you believe is strictly necessary (sometimes they may obviously remove more than necessary), but the removal is not "absurd" even if mistaken when they have reason to believe infringement. In this case, content was removed in two waves. With the bulk of his first removal problems are clear. In the second, here, he notes close paraphrasing rather than direct infringement. While you've transformed the content into a chonological list of jobs held, you have retained some of the language verbatim from your source ("responsible for moving freight to and from the Middle East"); it's possible that he saw that small run of unmarked copying and presumptively removed the rest. CCIs were engineered to avoid the presumptive removal of all major contributions by contributors by giving an avenue where diffs can be systematically analyzed, but sometimes more content than is necessary may be removed when a problem is identified. I have myself on verifying copying from one source rolled back articles in CCIs without checking for others; that's why the template at the talk page includes the language, "Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement." It recognizes that although some content may be problematic, some contributions may have been original.
I think the best thing you can do if you believe cleaning is overzealous is to seek feedback. Copyright cleanup is subjective; some cases will be smack-you-in-the-face obvious and some will not. Sometimes conversation is necessary to make sure that everybody involved in the work is on the same page as regards to what is acceptably rewritten and what isn't. Those conversations are best conducted calmly and without loaded terms, so long as everybody seems to be working to improve the project. :) Even when removal is "absurd" (and I have had to deal at WP:CP with reverse infringement where the source even had a label on it acknowledging that they copied Wikipedia), it's probably better to educate those who are doing cleanup in the hopes that they'll continue trying to improve the project, just a bit more competently. I know that it is an uncomfortable position when the person whose work is being scrutinized is you, but if there are mistakes made we'll get the record clear. (The AfD, of course, is a whole separate thing, wherever he may have come upon the article.) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Klaus Maria Brandauer[edit]

My underlying concern is that none of the sources (,,, and looks exactly like the gold standard of reliable sources. I know that IMDB suffers from user-supplied information, while is produced by a company that apparently specializes in websites developed by a combination of scraping and user contributions. The Austrian site appears (based on this page) to be a lot more solid than these, so the fact that it agrees with filmreference and IMDB on the maiden names of his mother and wife gives me some confidence. Meanwhile, I haven't gotten very far into answering the question of who stands behind the reliability of --Orlady (talk) 01:17, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for List of people who adopted matronymic surnames[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 10:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Helen of Troy had a face that launched 1,000 ships, but you started a list-article that got 13,500 page views at DYK. Huzzah! --Orlady (talk) 03:34, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Basil Artishenko[edit]

The main article I used to obtain information on Artishenko's denaturalization was an article published in the Philadelphia Daily News on March 5, 1985, which is one of the search results in Google News Archive if you search for his name. However, the link I copied apparently contained a vertical bar, which broke the table. I suggest that you try searching through Google News Archive to retrieve the aforementioned article and see if you can incorporate it properly. (talk) 02:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, you can search his name in Google Books/Google Scholar. (talk) 02:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

ć in Serbo-Croatian[edit]

For proof of Gostic's name written with a ć in Serbian/Serbo-Croatian, try searching for his name in Google and restricting the search to Serbian-language pages.

Also, as a general rule, all Serbo-Croatian surnames ending in -ic will have an accent mark over the c (for more information, you can read the article on Serbian name). (talk) 03:10, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Only surnames that end in -ic will definitely have the accent mark over the c. For surnames which end in another vowel followed by c, it varies: Dragan Tarlać contains an accented c, but Vlade Divac does not. (talk) 21:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

A great find[edit]

I just discovered a new resource that would help us in our efforts to continue building the List of denaturalized former US citizens page. Back in December 2006, the Justice Department produced a memo more than 600 pages long that detailed how the US government allowed ex-Nazis to settle in the US and its subsequent efforts (since the 1970s) to denaturalize/deport them. The report was hidden from the public until last November, when a full version was obtained by the New York Times. At the end of the report there is a list of 134 individuals the US government sought to denaturalize/deport and the results of those efforts (as of the time of the report's publication). The dates of birth/death of the individuals listed may not always be 100% accurate, but I will try to incorporate as much of that report's information onto the List of denaturalized former US citizens page as possible, and you can use that file to cross-check information on that page and add/improve citations. The full report can be found at [8]. The list of denaturalization/deportation suspects starts at page 569 (579). (talk) 03:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Jack Wishna[edit]

Thank you for your kind remarks. Cullen328 (talk) 14:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Victoria Kereszi[edit]

To be honest with you, instead of just refactoring the link descriptions to be more specific and understandable to a newcomer, I almost refactored it to say the following, but I stopped myself short as I did not want to overstep my bounds.

... I recommend reviewing the policies WP:Biographies of living persons and WP:Original Research, and also the guidelines WP:Notability, WP:FANSITE, and WP:Conflict of Interest.

Cheers! Face-smile.svgAjltalk 15:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Bath School disaster[edit]

Michael Boyle (the elder)[edit]

You made several edits to Michael Boyle (the elder). If you split paragraphs if there is a citation covering the whole paragraph, please make sure that it is appended to both of the new paragraphs. Most of the information came from the DNB but some of it was from the ONDB (and was not in the DNB article) hence the reason why both articles were cited. Also if there is a line like this


in the ==references== section, please do not remove it, or the lines following, as they have been placed there in compliance with the WP:PLAGIARISM guideline to protect Wikipedia (and the editors) from allegation of plagiarism. -- PBS (talk) 00:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

JP Licks[edit]

I've declined the G11 on this page, as it is not terribly blatant advertising. G11 is designed to deal with articles that say "YOU SHOULD BUY THIS PRODUCT 'CUZ IT'S AWESOME" and include no real facts, not articles about companies or products of questionable notability. I also declined to delete the redirect at J.P. Licks. I did delete your AfD nomination under G7, which you might want to recreate if you decide the article should be deleted. I will be happy to restore it for you, if you like, or you can just re-nominate (which might be faster). Cheers. lifebaka++ 14:56, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Rose Chibambo[edit]

I saw your edits to this BLP article - all good. It takes a fresh eye to see improvements like the ones you made. I just wish the underlying content was better. Her birth date is uncertain and there is a huge gap of almost 30 years while she was in exile. Also, even though there is a lovely photo here which I am sure the publishers would not mind our using, I can't find any that are free to use. A picture would add 100% or more. I suppose some sort of article is better than none, but still... She seems like a fascinating person and this thumbnail just does not do justice to the subject. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Eden Paul[edit]

Hi, thanks for adding categories and persondata info to this page. I wasn't sure why you moved it (he was generally known as Eden Paul), thought the reference & couple of details you removed were cruft (though that may be you disliking redlinks), or made the year of birth less specific. Best, Dsp13 (talk) 15:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)


Would you please note that academic titles (Dr, Professor etc) and degrees should not appear in the lead. Also postnominal letters should not be bolded. Thank you. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

So noted. Thanks, (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Alice Ward page[edit]

I disagree, as it seems do several others, she is a real life person that someone won an Academy Award for portraying, and although brief a article as it is (it may get longer as more people want to add, there IS more information out there, she deserves her own article on Wikipedia. (22:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC))

  • I'm totally with you. It seems pretty obvious to the experienced WP editor that this article does not belong. However, someone could come along and easily wind you up. I would suggest you calm down a few notches, delay each post you intend to make for two hours, and tone down your rhetoric when you do post. Chin up! --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:35, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Fred Magee[edit]

Please be aware that Canadian politicians are subcategorized by province, by political party and/or by the specific legislative body they sat in; they are never filed directly in Category:Canadian politicians. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 04:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Winrich Behr[edit]

Hi. On 5 May 2011 you marked [[9]] the article Winrich Behr as being of disputed neutrality - I would be grateful if you could give more detail as to which statements in the article you believe require attention so that we can get the article fixed-up. (Perhaps your concern was the previously-unsourced statement regarding his meeting with Hitler; if so, note that I have now added a reference for this story.) Thanks, Felix116 (talk) 15:50, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


Please do not reformat the Template parameters. The spacing and currently unused parameters are there to help in keeping these up to date. Flatterworld (talk) 17:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Your closure of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 May 15#Category:Novels by Andrew M. Greeley[edit]

2 notes about your closure of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 May 15#Category:Novels by Andrew M. Greeley:

  1. Except in MfD, the top template goes immediately after the discussion header (in MfD it goes immediately before).
  2. In each process, you use that process's top and bottom templates - so in CfD you use {{subst:cfd top}} and {{subst:cfd bottom}}, in TfD you use {{subst:tfd top}} and {{subst:tfd bottom}} etc.

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Hi there. is it possible you have not "ended" (I don't know the correct term) the formatting on your digital signature correctly? Because as of 10 am ET, the rest of the CfD page for this day after your signature appears to me to be in the same font as your username. thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
      • Please just take a look at the CfD page. It's not your name it's just the formatting after that seems strange to me. I have no concerns at all about your choice of name. thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)