User talk:Beakerboy

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Bozo The Clown Pez

Sure enough, that's Bozo on a dispenser; good catch. I do stand corrected. Though I have to say that one is one scary Pez! And for $150 - yikes! That one won't be joining my collection any time soon... :)

Wwagner 19:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Information about the Blue Moon beer copyvio

Hi Kevin,

I wanted to follow up with information you asked about regarding the copyright violation notice I listed on the Blue Moon beer article. I've put up exact info on the plagiarizations there on its talk page. I would recommend someone from the beer project deletes most of the article and re-write it from a clean slate, because it probably can be done.

Regards, Guroadrunner 04:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YOGURT FLAVORED PEZ

I'm almost certain that i saw it on a reputible site. i don't have it handy, but i'll see if i can't find it soon and i'll give you the link. §Dr. Benjamin

Hmmm. It looks like you're right. I have a yogurt PEZ pack listed on PezBase Beakerboy 19:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for fixin my page and telling me how to keep my text on the page =) EditingFrenzy 00:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beer

Hi. Please don't let User:Mikebe's incivility and edit warring prevent you from contributing to the beer articles. — goethean ॐ 19:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beer project stuff

Hi,

I for one value your contributions to the beer project, so I hope you will decide to continue with it, despite the frustrations of this sort of conflict. I understand your position and I happen to agree with the broad gist of what should find its way into a beer article. While the debate does seemed to have reached an impasse (well, several), I think it should be possible to resolve, and I hope you'll stick around either to help resolve it or once an acceptable direction has been arrived at. I've added a few more related thoughts on the beer project talk page -- let me know if there's any service that would be useful in helping to resolve this. --Daniel11 09:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I first wanted to tell you that I am very happy with your recent edits and that we seem to be quite close in seeing how the beer articles should be written. Perhaps when you have the time, you might start translating the Beer Style article into English (I would do it myself, but I am not so familiar with beer styles). I find it sad that it is now written only for brewers and that regular users of Wikipedia cannot use it.

Now, I hope you won't be too upset, but I am going to change some of your changes in the Tripel article. It is not true that some of the Trappist breweries have recently started brewing beers stronger than tripels -- Westvleteren introduced their "12" shortly before World War II and Rochefort introduced theirs in 1950. Although the trappist breweries communicate and cooperate with each other, they do not all make the same beers. This is another reason why tripel is not a style, but a naming convention.

I hope that we will continue to work toward the same goal here. Mikebe 15:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, please accept my apology. You are correct that I should have clarified rather than removed. Is that you who added the taste description? I find it quite strange. Mikebe 20:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is my edit. I forgot to log in. That's quote from the head brewer at Duvel. I've noticed the same thing...not the stomach ache, but that Belgian tripels are dryer and have less body than the bad American tripels. Good American tripels are on par, but not the smaller breweries.Beakerboy 20:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well I found it strange because I would not call Belgian (trappist) tripels very dry. The Westmalle is, but most of the others are not. I've never had an American one, so I can't compare them. But, I also find the comment strange "if too many are consumed to quickly". If it is 9.5 percent, who will be drinking many of them quickly? And I also don't understand the comment that Belgian tripels "are very easy to drink." Does he mean you can just keep drinking one after another? Considering that trappist tripels are probably the most complex beers in the world, the comment "easy to drink" does not seem to apply. I hope that these points show that the note isn't really helpful. Mikebe 20:43, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get rid of that comment then. I just thought it was funny and worth noting the comment of a professional Belgian brewer on his impression of Belgian tripels vs. the American interpretation. Apparently the guy at Duvel drinks a lot. I'll put the exact quote word-for-word in the Tripel talk page tomorrow.

Cheers

Beakerboy 20:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! I'll look forward to reading it. And, BTW, Duvel is one of my favourite beers -- I guess the brewer's too! Mikebe 21:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Witbier revert

Hello, Beakerboy;

I notice that you reverted the addition of a beer style infobox on the Witbier article with the edit summary "Removed wikibox per prior discussion". Sorry for being a bit dense here, but I've searched through your contribution history, the WikiProject Beer pages, and the talk page of the article, and the closest thing I can locate was a comment you posted on April 27 to the article talk page that you felt that the content was unnecessary and unreliable. I'm not sure that was what you were referring to, since it wasn't really a discussion if nobody responded to it, and don't want to get into a long-winded post to you if it just re-hashes old arguments from an old discussion that took place elsewhere. So before I address the specific points you've raised and address why I feel that your reversion was inappropriate, I wanted to inquire whether there was a discussion elsewhere that I've missed? A link would be helpful.

Looking forward to hearing from you, -- Neil916 (Talk) 06:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the fact that nobody commented on it for 3 months indicates to me at least that nobody feels strongly enough to keep it. There has also been a bit of discussion on the topic in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Beer. The consensus is that the BJCP is an American organization and therefor really is only an authority on american beer. The Belgians don't typically think of beer in a style context and thus things there are more difficult to put a box around. For example, the info you put in the wikibox had an OG of 1.044-1.052. What if I make a wort with an OG of 1.053? would it nonger be a Witbeer...No It could still be even though it falls outside the numbers you state. The suggestion I made in the discussion is that instead of placing questionable numbers in the wikibox, create a new section that discusses in detail the brewing process for this particular beer style. Also you need to add proper sources for information. Like stated above, the BJCP is an American Homebrewing guideline and many times does not reflect reality. Instead of using it, try to find a regional source of the same info, or extrapolate it from commercial examples from the country of origin. For example, you can measure the FG of a few commercial Begian examples and enter it, and then use the ABV to calculate what the OG was. I've been a homebrewer for many years by the way, and I'll probably be getting my BJCP certicication this year, but I know the system isn't perfect. This seems to be a good balance between us and the international visitors to the english wikipedia.Beakerboy 11:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quadrupel

Hi,

I don't know if you've been following the discussion on the Quadrupel talk page, but it has become quite clear to me that even in the US it is no longer considered a beer style. The BJCP has apparently dropped it and the people who do the Great American Beer Festival also do not list it. Only Beeradvocate seems to clearly think it is a style, however, some BA members don't agree: http://beeradvocate.com/forum/read/1054087

Anyhow, I am going to nominate the article for deletion since no organisation even in the US (other than BA) calls it a style. Is this something you would agree with or do you have other information that I should know about? If you agree, would you be kind enough to join in the delete vote when the time comes? I hope so.

BTW, I noticed from a conversation on this page that you had some involvement with the article about Blue Moon. I had a chance to taste it a few years ago, so I was very surprised to see the article say: "Blue Moon is a somewhat typical example of a Belgian white ale." Has it really improved so much in the last few years? The sample I tasted several years ago was actually quite awful.

Now, I've got one complaint: you said that you were going going to post the interview with the brewer from Duvel (is that really Ommegang?) on the Tripel talk page, but I can't find it. I was really looking forward to reading it after some of the things you quoted from him. Well, if you have a chance (and still have access to it), I'd really appreciate if you'd post it.

Again, thanks. Mikebe 15:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I won't cry if it's deleted, but I'd vote keep because I have two concerns about removing it. First, the article WILL be made again. There is so much (mis)information out there that someone will say..."Why isn't there a Quadrupel article? I'll start one." And you'll have to keep deleting the article and having to explain your point of view. Also, If the article remains, then people will learn something about the debate and be able to speak about the beer they enjoy in a more informed and intellegent manner.

An alternative which may not have been discussed, would be to merge this article in with De Koningshoeven Brewery and redirect Quadrupel to De Koningshoeven Brewery. I definately think the content of the Quad article should remain somewhere, and being that it is only a few sentences, it wouldn't add any extra bulk to De Koningshoeven Brewery but would add insight.

As far as the Tripel comment goes...I used to have it written down somewhere but can't find it, and it was the head brewer from Duvel. I do have an audio interview with author Stan Hieronymus talking about the comments secondhand though.[[1]] I don't remember how far into the show it is, but if you listen to it maybe we can talk about it off wikipedia sometime. I'm sure there will be something you don't agree with.

Take Care Beakerboy 18:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how about a shock: I agree with your idea. I like the idea of redirecting to La Trappe. I'm not sure how much information and which information should be added though. As I said, neither the BJCP or GABF people recognise quadrupel as a style, so it is not really a controversy anymore. The only point I would add is that Quadrupel is a beer and not a style.

OK, I'll listen to the recording. I have to tell you though, I don't know who this Stan Hieronymous is, but he strikes me a complete idiot! A friend of mine was recently given a bunch of American beer magazines by a visiting American and my friend loaned some to me. Anyhow there was an article by Hieronymous saying that American homebrewers or microbrewers are what are keeping the beer world alive and moving forward. He gave the impression that if it wasn't for these home/micro-brewers we'd all be drinking gruyt or wine. However, it did give my some insight into what I saw as the strange behaviour by some of the homebrewers here.

I'll try to listen to it tomorrow and leave a note for you here when I've finished.

Cheers Mikebe 19:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As promised, I listened to the show today. There was a short bit where Stan talked about the Belgian brewers and what they said, but basically, as I recall, he said that some of the Americans weren't too happy with what they said -- he mentioned that one of the Belgians said that the American versions of Belgian beers are too sweet. The rest of the show was too technical for me (I am not a homebrewer), so I didn't pay much attention to it. If you are interested, here is a speech by Peter Bouckaert (New Belgium Brewery)[[2]] where he talks about styles. I suppose for American homebrewers it is quite normal, however, when European beer people see the BJCP style guide, for example, it is quite shocking! If you would like to talk more about this, it's fine with me. Cheers. Mikebe 16:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you are not a home brewer you can probably appreciate what he was saying about the simplicity of the recipes that the abbeys use. I'm just a big nerd when it come to anything I put in my mouth. I like to bake bread from scratch, I love to cook, and make beer. Some day I'd like to try my hand at honey and cheese.

You are quite right - I did listen to most of it, understand most of it and appreciate it. However, my "nerdishness" is limited to computers. I don't cook or make beer.

I've listened to the Peter Bouckaert one too and I really liked what he had to say. I can see and appreciate both sides of the "style" debate. "Artists" are just trying to create art, while the art critics and art historians then attempt to categorize it in order to make comparisons and discuss the influence and history of an individual in the grand scheme of "Art". This is the way I think about beer style and brewing in Belgium. German beer doesn't seem to suffer from too much beer art. The Germans seem to like to engineer their beer to specific guidelines, as in the Reinheitsgebot. America fascination with style is probably largely influenced by the fact that our industrial brewing history began with the German immigrants. Style is also a way of explaining to people what to expect in their beer. Most beer consumers don't pick apart the sensory experience they are having. They just think "I like this". If the "this" is called a porter, then they will want to find something else called a porter to try. If it's a Rochefort 6 that they like, they're not going to be happy of they try a Baltica 6 which is a porter. If however they have the concept of "Strong Belgian Dark Beer" Not as a style per se, but as a description of the beer, then they can find and compare and contract their drinking experience to other strong, dark, belgian beer. That's where I think the strength of styles comes in.Beakerboy 17:47, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may be going a little too far with the idea of "artist." Most brewers (I know a few, not very many and not from big breweries) in Belgium and the Netherlands don't see themselves as artists, but as craftsmen. They also see themselves as members of the same family, or colleagues. When Pierre Celis had a fire in his brewery in the 1980s, for example, quite a few other brewers came to him and offered whatever help he needed.

Here, I don't know why, people don't talk about styles -- ever. If someone asks me about a beer, for example, I don't have to say that it is a Strong Belgian Dark (which is a meaningless name, btw), I can say that it is like a mixture of beer A and beer B or that it is like beer A but a little sweeter or lighter. I'm sure you get the idea. Also, Belgium has many different kinds of beer and, perhaps because there are no styles, people feel free to try any crazy idea they come up with! Quite a few years ago, someone came up with the idea of tobacco beer, for example.

BTW, have you ever been in Belgium? If so, where have you been? If not, why not? ;-)

The Germans are a tricky bunch. Until rather recently the Reinheitsgebot was only in Bavaria and the rest of Germany made some wonderful strange beers. It was only last year, for example, that I had my first Gose -- I loved it. Also last year, I had Zoigelbier for the first time, also wonderful! Also, I quite like Alt and Kölsch, which are not typical German pilsners. There is one of the best beer festivals in the world (!) in Berlin in about one week (http://www.bierfestival-berlin.de/). They get beer from all over Germany, plus many Czech beers and Baltic beers. It will really give you a different view of German beers. Of course, I don't expect that you can just fly over in a week, but they hold the festival every year, so you can plan now for next year.

Do you want to continue this by email? If you like, I can turn on the email in my user page and we can then continue. Cheers. Mikebe 18:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My email is activated, so feel free to write me a short message and I'll email you back.Beakerboy 19:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I sent you a mail yesterday evening (my time). Did you receive it? I would like to get your input on something and would rather do it off-line. If you need me to resend, I will. Cheers. Mikebe 06:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fake PEZ Space Gun

In reply to your question -- The information should be verifiable against published sources. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No_original_research. Has this been published somewhere publicly? In PCN perhaps? A message board or mailing list post from David would be better than nothing. - PxT 20:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beer category decision

A discussion has been opened on changes that have been made to the existing Beer category system. The changes reverse the decision made by the Project in April 2006. The changes were based on agreement by only two people, and by a discussion that took place outside the Beer Project. There may be some merit in the changes, and to prevent future conflict it is important that there is some discussion of the matter. If you're interested, please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beer#Brewery_cats. SilkTork *^YES! 14:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Millstatt coat of arms

You seem interested in PEZ. Are you a collector? Thank you for reverting my edit to the PEZ article. As soon as I saw the coat of arms, I was immediately struck with the idea "those are just like PEZ dispensers!" The fact that PEZ was invented in Austria makes it even funnier. JIP | Talk 20:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Responded Here:

Yes I reverted the edit. It was clearly either an act of vandalism or "Original research" at best. An administrator like yourself should know better than to make either type of edit. My first thought upon seeing the coat of arms was "That looks like animal heads on a Doric column, not PEZ dispensers." When I saw that you are and admin, I thought you just knew more than I did because and admin would NEVER intentionally add false information to Wikipedia. I spent a little time researching it and found no corroborating evidence for your claim...so I reverted it. Your edit greatly disapoints me and has diminished my faith in the system by which this community operates.

Beakerboy (talk) 12:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello again!

It's nice to see you contributing again on the beer articles. Unfortunately, there are not many regular contributors left and some that are insist on putting in false information from home-brewing guides and such. It is still a struggle to try to keep the European beer acticles accurate! BTW, there's a discussion on the beer-style talk page you might take part in (sort of a poll on sources).

I don't know if you saw it, but I responded to a comment you made (I think on the barley-wine article) about how many examples is enough. Basically, I have concluded that the examples are more trouble than they are worth -- people are constantly adding their local brewery or their own brewery and at the same time, the example beers are mostly only available locally (with some exceptions, of course).

I hope all is going well with you otherwise and look forward to seeing you around on the beer articles again! Mikebe (talk) 14:56, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the BJCP inaccurate? Its not meant to be the end all authority on beer, just an extra link that people can access if they choose to. Patsperro (talk) 17:36, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh???

I don't understand why you said I was making trouble in my complaint about Peterdjones. What trouble do you think I made? Mikebe (talk) 22:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Come on!!! When a person has a many disputes with other editors as you do..you have to step back and ask yourself if you're part of the problem. Do you honestly believe that everyone is misguided and your job is to set "the truth"? Peace Out.Beakerboy (talk) 11:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if I disagree with you, then I just prove your point, so I won't ;-) I don't think that there are so many other editors who I disagree with as there are a few who I disagree with often. Peter is a case in point. He clearly knows nothing about Belgian beer, yet he argues as if he does. He calls adding misinformation "informative." Take a look at the reply I wrote to him today on the Trappist beer talk page. It's got nothing to do with accuracy or facts, just a simple matter of understanding. A British friend of mine recently asked me for some help on an article (it was about German and Dutch beers) and the instructions from the (British) publisher included this: "Internet: Please only fact check using RELIABLE Internet sites, for example, Encyclopaedia Britannica. If you must use Wikipedia, please cross-reference with another source." So, I'm not the only one who questions the accuracy of the articles here. I don't edit or even discuss things I don't know - for example, home brewing, American beers, technical issues, etc. But, when people write inaccurately about the things I know, then I will discuss and, if necessary, argue for what I know is correct.

BTW, thanks for catching that error I made in changing the text about tripels. I'm not perfect and I will admit that. I appreciated that you fixed it. Oh, another BTW: what does "peace out" mean? Mikebe (talk) 14:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP Beer in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Beer for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 23:27, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No

No I do not know who that user is. I am a Dutchman and know of course much about European beers. In your message, you wrote "please keep an open mind on the internationalization of beer." What does that mean? I have not heard of this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.160.54.33 (talk) 13:05, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No again

Until you reply to this question that I have asked you three days ago, I will not respond to any more of your attacks on me.

I responded to your last message on my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.160.54.33 (talk) 13:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Phenethyl acetate article

Looks good! Just added the IUPAC names in case that's what people search for, and a cite to Sigma-Aldrich's page on it. Blythwood (talk) 20:55, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Blythwood: Wikipedia is all about many people adding to any article...No need to update me on changes you made. That's what the watchlist is for.Beakerboy (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Delta-Nonalactone

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Delta-Nonalactone requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ochib (talk) 17:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Beakerboy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of List of Pez Conventions

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on List of Pez Conventions requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Quasar G ^{t - c} 15:36, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Beakerboy. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brewery name convention

I'm contacting you as an active contributor on brewery articles and/or member of WikiProject Beer. There is some discussion going on as to how we should name our brewery articles. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beer#Change_brewery_titles? and Talk:Greene_King_Brewery#Requested_move_10_May_2018. If you are interested, please comment. SilkTork (talk)

Saccharomyces uvarum

Hello, I'm Smjg. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Saccharomyces uvarum. Please do not do this. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. As a rule, if you discover a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If a 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. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you wish to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Smjg (talk) 14:02, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Beakerboy. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Crypto GS

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Jtbobwaysf (talk) 12:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jtbobwaysf: Is this just a formal way of reminding me to be civil and unbiased? I think my 15 years here and large number of contributions has clearly demonstrated this.Beakerboy (talk) 13:01, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bitcoin Cash - Bitcoin SV splitting proposal

I have seen that you are an active contributor to the Bitcoin Cash article. I would like to inform you that there is currently a discussion on the Talk page about splitting Bitcoin SV out from the Bitcoin Cash article. It would be great to get your feedback on the split proposal. torusJKL (talk) 19:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Beakerboy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 155.190.20.6 and is used by my employer (a large respectable, international corporation). I am not editing anonymously but using an account that has good standing on the site. It shouldn't matter what my IP address is. Beakerboy (talk) 16:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Employers use proxies/VPNs as security measures. It generally is not permitted to use them to edit, as they are often used abusively. However, you may request an IP block exemption by following the instructions at WP:IPECPROXY to contact a Checkuser. 331dot (talk) 20:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.