User talk:OlYeller21/archives 5

March 2013

I looked over the linked page and I don't see any wording or sentences that are copied from it on the Taj Boston page. Certain facts are sourced from it, but that's the whole point of citing sources. I did not copy the text from that website, I was copying existing Wikipedia text from the "Ritz-Carlton Hotels" chain page, as it was about the history of the Boston hotel. Can you show me specific places that copy the wording of the Ritz Carlton page? If not, I think the information I added deserves to be restored. User:Jamesluckard (talk) 12 March 2013

I just checked with the duplicate detector and what I found that was copied in a Google search isn't showing up on the duplicate detector. Not sure why. Please check and make sure that the text found at the Ritz-Carlton Hotels wasn't taken from a copyrighted source. If it wasn't, you may use that text but it may not be appropriate to simply have text about the Ritz-Carlton Hotels in this article. Linking to that article would be more appropriate. Lastly, if the text is copyrighted, simply changing a few words or rewording each sentence isn't good enough and still constitutes a copyright violation.

Lastly, please remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes (~). Also, changing your talk page messages drastically is frowned upon. I'm not even sure if my response applies at this point because it looks like you almost completely changed your first message. OlYeller21^Talktome 19:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for any confusion. While I've been involved here at Wikipedia for a few years, I've never used the "Talk" function until yesterday, and am still getting the hang of it.

The "Ritz Carlton Hotels" page was clearly an amalgam of an old page solely on the Boston property, along with other additions on the chain itself. I migrated all the info on the Boston property to the page for that hotel, today known as the Taj Boston, and then revised the remaining page for the chain as a whole. I'll look over everything to try and be sure there is no plagiarism.

I'm not sure I follow the part about signing with four tildes, where should I do that? (talk) 12 March 2013

COI template

I have initiated a discussion at Village Pump Proposals regarding applying Template:COI editnotice more broadly, in order to provide advice from WP:COI directly onto the article Talk page. Your comment, support or opposition is invited. Cheers. CorporateM (Talk) 21:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey OlYeller21; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:23, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Gardner-White Furniture

Gardner-White is a highly notable company in Detroit, it is super ridiculous the way that all of these mods are working on here, if they care so much to try to discredit, they should do research and they would find the high amount of notability.S.clouthier (talk) 19:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello! First off, I'd like to let you know that I understand that you might feel attacked at this point. I'd like to help you, if I can, and show you that the people involved are just doing what they feel is best for the encyclopedia.

The big question here is about "notability". Here at Wikipedia, there's a guideline called WP:NOTABILITY that outlines what will be included in the encyclopedia. This exists because the resources (time, people, effort, etc.) that keep up Wikipedia would be spread too thing of WP included any subject. This is the reason that people are doing the things they're doing and why they expect you to produce proof of notability instead of taking the time to establish notability for the large number of new articles they assess every day. Inclusion guidelines are also common to many other popular encyclopedias. WP:NOTABILITY is is very large but to save you the time of heaving to read the whole thing, the sections WP:GNG and WP:ORG are the areas that this organization would most likely satisfy that would warrant inclusion on WP.

I can help you with proving notability but please, understand that these other editors aren't mods, they're just other people wish to do what's best for Wikipedia. That's not always easy to see when you're new but assuming good faith is a big part of what we do here and I believe that they have all acted in good faith and according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

To start off with establishing notability, do you have a list of news articles that have been written about the company? It will help if they're not local news sources like a small town or neighborhood newspaper. OlYeller21^Talktome 19:38, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/18447762/fox-2-and-gardner-white-present-trbute-to-our-troops-2011?clienttype=printable http://www.freep.com/article/20120510/BUSINESS06/205100494 http://www.furnituretoday.com/article/556127-Gardner_White_Furniture_opens_its_largest_store.php http://www.furnituretoday.com/article/553709-Gardner_White_Furniture_to_open_test_stores_in_Best_Buy.php http://www.furnituretoday.com/article/550770-Gardner_White_celebrates_100_years_partly_with_new_DC_store.php http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/26/idUS29735+26-Mar-2011+PRN20110326 http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/83849857/gardner-white-drives-growth http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gardner-white-furniture-prevents-lions-tv-blackout-104581764.html http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gardner-white-furniture-to-host-a-job-fair-on-monday-august-13-165742186.html http://macomb.patch.com/listings/gardner-white-furniture-warehouse http://business-news.thestreet.com/voice-news/story/michigan-based-gardner-white-expands-wake-centennial-0/1

I hope some of these are further usefulS.clouthier (talk) 20:01, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey. I responded over on the talk page of the article. Is this all making sense so far? I know it can be a lot to take in at first. OlYeller21^Talktome 20:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Gardner-White Furniture

Hello. You recently tagged this for notability, and the creator has responded at the above link and removed the tag. If you still feel it's non-notable, you may want to consider AfD. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I placed the tag, he got into a bit of an edit war over the tag, I helped him prove that the subject is notable by getting him to supply sources, and I removed the tag based on our discussion on the talk page. OlYeller21^Talktome 15:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, OlYeller21. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shanghai Metals Market.
Message added 03:30, 2 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:30, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyvio

I have completely rewritten Oredog to avoid the copyright problem you have tagged. Please review, and if you feel that the rewrite is still too close a paraphrase, re-tag for deletion or let me know. I have no particular fondness for the article -- I feel it is scratching the edge of notability, but if it is to be kept, it should be clean. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Great work! OlYeller21^Talktome 23:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

San Francisco Soccer Football League

Read the article before you place an auto delete on it. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/San_Francisco_Soccer_Football_League

Read it. It's original. http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/San_Francisco_Soccer_Football_League — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxschweitzer (talk • contribs) 03:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I did. The leauge may not be notable per WP's standards (see here). Besides that, it's a copyright violation making the question of notability, moot. OlYeller21^Talktome 03:16, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

1. A soccer league operating from 1902, before you were born is notable.
2. There is no copyright violation.
3. Are you serious or a fake editor looking for kicks by harassing people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxschweitzer (talk • contribs) 03:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Look, I understand that you're upset but what you consider notable may not line up with what thousands of Wikipedia editors consider notable. Their opinion is represented by the inclusion guideline called WP:NOTABILITY. Most importantly, there's nothing in that guideline that says that anything that has existed for X number of year, is notable.

There is a copyright violation and I'm not going to discuss that with you because this duplicate detecting tool shows that full portions of text were taken directly from the subejct's official website. I'm losing my patients when you claim that there's no copyright violation because it's completely obvious that you took the text from a copyrighted source. "Are you serious or a fake editor looking for kicks by harassing people?".... I am serious and not a fake editor.

I would have been happy to help you by lending you my experience but this really wasn't the best way for you to go about getting my help.

If you continue to remove the deletion template or create articles with copyrighted material, you may be blocked or banned from editing Wikipedia. Unless you have some constructive to say here, please don't comment on my talk page again. OlYeller21^Talktome 03:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

1. Mission Statement was copied. You can copy a mission statement. 2. Secret harassment by a secret racist is totally out of line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxschweitzer (talk • contribs) 03:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I deleted the Mission Statement. I still believe you're secretly racist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxschweitzer (talk • contribs) 03:47, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

• 1. No you can't. See WP:COPYVIO.
• 2. Ya, that would be terrible. Glad I'm none of those things.

That's nice. OlYeller21^Talktome 03:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Now what? Maxschweitzer (talk) 03:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't really care to talk to you anymore. You'll have to deal with WP's policies and guidelines like everyone else. OlYeller21^Talktome 03:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Since you're so in the dark here's some new research results:

90% of men are gay 100% of women are gay Rape and incest is an epidemic All races, cultures, nationalities, groups, and religions are secretly racist Most women are secretly sexist Drug and alcohol abuse is abundant Dyslexia affects 90% of the population and is commonly undiagnosed and treatable Mental illness is commonly undiagnosed and incurable Sociopaths need to be separated from normal society

Humans have evolved from primates. There are the alpha males, the regular males and the females. Gay males have female minds. At one point in human embryonic development all people were once female. That is why males have nipples. Females have the ability to achieve a muscular orgasm just like a male, however most women do not know how.

Women can have a muscular orgasm if they repeatedly squeeze the vaginal muscle used to urinate.

Secret racism and secret sexism can be avoided by simply vocalizing the secret. Maxschweitzer (talk) 04:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

" to be honest, I don't care about you at all." Typical words of a bigot. I'm sure if my name was Cherokee you wouldn't treat me the way you have. Maxschweitzer (talk) 15:42, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I moved this comment here so that I could keep these responses together for later use. OlYeller21^Talktome 15:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Starting a list here, for safe keeping: [1][2] OlYeller21^Talktome 16:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

An article about a subject that's over 100 years old shouldn't include a section current teams. I'll leave this here until after the AfD.

List of USASA affiliated leagues Cosmopolitan Soccer League San Diego County Soccer League Monterey Peninsula Soccer League Men's Island Soccer Organization North Coast Soccer League North Texas Premier Soccer Association National Star Soccer League Vermont Amateur Soccer League Maxschweitzer (talk) 19:07, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm ignoring any message you leave for me until you apologize for the conduct that resulted in you being blocked. OlYeller21^Talktome 19:08, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

That's not constructive. Toddst1 (talk) 22:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

It may not be but I don't really see that it's unconstructive, either. As for his question, WP:OTHERSTUFF. OlYeller21^Talktome 00:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Please undelete RecycleBot

OlYeller21 -- I got the message that my article RecycleBot was speedy deleted and it is no longer there. I don't understand why it was deleted. On the G11 front - the recyclebot was not advertising as an open source project there is no "product" and although I believe there are some companies planning commercial versions there is nothing for sale now to the best of my knowlege. I tried to cut out all the non-wikipedia sounding information from the sources - On the G12 front all the text I lifted was from either the appropedia page on the topic which is cc-by-sa or the reprapwiki which is all gnufdl 1.2 - both of which I thought was consistent with wikipedia. Please reinstate - I think it is a great idea which has a ton of promise - and the initial list of media sources I used from appropedia make it clear it is noteworthy. (I also paired down that list of the references as a lot were repeats). Please let me know what else needs to be done to fix the article to reinstate it. --Recyclebotboy (talk) 23:52, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Agreed. I was just got Td-off because my new work was annihilated while I stepped away from my computer bu then got no response from anyone in what seemed like hours. Sorry I changed the text on your talk page -- I just cut out the stuff before that was no longer relevant. On to the current copyvio - I believe I fixed the main sentence in question and removed the tag. Thanks --Batboys (talk) 05:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

That's totally understandable. My first article and contribution was speedily deleted because the subject wasn't notable and I was pretty ticked off. I'll go check out the article do whatever is left (if there's anything left) that needs to be done and remove the {{copyvio}} template. OlYeller21^Talktome 15:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

tgvt

Well the page just looked like a small pile of horse manure to me. Before I had time to re-tag it {{db|g1}} maybe, or g3, user:Boing! said Zebedee deleted it a7. Who's wasting whose time? John of Cromer in Philippines (talk) mytime= Tue 08:43, wikitime= 00:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

You're wasting other people's time. I thought we already covered this. OlYeller21^Talktome 01:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, you're the time-waster. You could have deleted it in the first place, recognizing it as ordure regardless of classification, like Boing! said Zebedee did, rather than go round in loops, and make me go round in pointless loops too. John of Cromer in Philippines (talk) mytime= Tue 11:31, wikitime= 03:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

You made a mistake and I corrected it by placing the A7 tag which was the justification used for deleting the article. I left the message so that you would hopefully not make the same mistake in the future. I think maybe you missed the part where I marked it for A7 because it was deleted before you could see the page's history. Maybe that will help clear things up for you. OlYeller21^Talktome 03:40, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

We the ghost

Ok, I made a couple of minor grammar fixes too Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC) Thanks! Not sure that it's notable but I'd like to take a crack at it. OlYeller21^Talktome 16:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Christian Filostrat

Hello OlYeller 21, Your comments re Christian Filostrat are appropriate and thoughtful. Filostrat's bringing to the academic community that particular issue of L’Etudiant Noir is deserving of a place here. He's perhaps one of the last links to the Negritude founders. I will do all to comply with your suggestions to improve the article. Best, Passy975 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Passy975 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy to help however I can. I'll be watching the page and I'll try to assist however I can. OlYeller21^Talktome 17:47, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Norma Ackison.JPG missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:Norma Ackison.JPG

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 22:40, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Relisted AFD

Looks like it was in the log, but commented out. Your addition also didn't transclude properly. Cheers. RadioKAOS  – Talk to me, Billy 19:08, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not particularly family with how AfD logs are handled but I think what happened is that it was relisted for debate which lead to it being commented out so that it would only appear as active on one day's log. I don't think it was actually added to another log which is where the first issue started. After that, I tried to show the hidden AfD and accidentally added a parenthesis in which screwed up the transclusion.

At any rate, it's listed on the AfD log for the 20th so hopefully it will get the attention it needs and will be closed soon. OlYeller21^Talktome 19:22, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello OlYeller21. Us at TPMS actually make edits on our school's page for fun. Please answer on my talk page. Tytty947 19:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

More personal attacks

Why are you following me? It has been 1 month now. It appears to be stalking. Maxschweitzer (talk) 20:00, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

You should prepare for a discrimination and stalking lawsuit. There are higher authorities than Wikipedia. Rules that tolarate such behavior will never stand. Your complicity is noted and will be held accountable. 20:18, 9 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CourtofLaw (talk • contribs)

I would cite WP:NLT regarding your legal threat but you've been indefinitely blocked - again. If it makes you feel better to waste your time threatening me with lawsuits that will never happen, feel free. OlYeller21^Talktome 21:17, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyvio at Angelo Vermeulen

Thank you for your helpful advice. This is all new to me and sometimes a bit confusing but I want to learn more about it. But still, could you please regard this copyright warnings. I've checked the so called copied texts and removed everything what could be interpreted as being copied or changed it so much that it doesn't look like the original text anymore. I'm still learning, this is my first article. If there are still be copyright violations after regarding the article, then please concretize a bit more on which sentences it goes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteVanBuylaere (talk • contribs) 18:04, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused because I think you may have left some words out of your message. I'm not sure what you mean by "regard this copyright warnings." Also, I'm guessing when you say "concretize", you mean "substantiate". I don't need to substantiate my copyvio claim because the tags I've placed on the article specifically show what text you obviously copied.

In regards to what you call, "co called" copyvio from other sources, this doesn't make me very excited to work with you when you yourself admitted to copying the text. I'm not going to give my time for this if you start going back on the fact that you've copied this text. At any rate, changing words in the text is still plagiarism which you can learn more about at WP:COPYVIO.

You would need to rewrite the article in your own words, from scratch, or get the owner of those sources to give Wikipedia permission to use that text. You can learn more about that process at WP:DCM but unless you're the owner, I wouldn't suggest wasting your time trying to get permission.

Before I move forward, I'd like you to answer one question. Do you have a close connection to the subject of the article? I'm not suggesting that you do, exactly, but before I put hours into helping you, I'd like to know if you have a connection to Angelo Vermeulen. OlYeller21^Talktome 18:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

To answer your question; I don't have any connection to the subject. I couldn't find information on 're-write the text from scratch'; how do I need to do this? Do I have to make an new page with the same title? Could you explain me more about this? User:CharlotteVanBuylaere I Talktome 21:56, 13 May 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteVanBuylaere (talk • contribs)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence

Hi OIYeller21, I just wanted to say thanks for the adjustments you just made to my article, which I really appreciate. I'm learning more all the time about how best to edit on Wiki and spent many hours trying to get the new version perfect, and you just made some small but welcome improvements that are beyond me at this stage. So, thanks! All the best :-) TheQuintessentialGambini (talk) 21:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

David Schaal

Hi OIYeller21 I don’t really understand your objections to my edits, be happy to hear them. I linked the author/director David Schaal to actor David Schaal as it is the same person! I did note this on the talk page, thought it might be useful to know that this is the same person rather than have two different entries that are unlinked? And added the other other cast members for info - if you are looking into plays’ performances, and authors this is useful info, cheers Lord el puss (talk) 07:16, 16 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord el puss (talk • contribs) 22:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

user page The Moons

Hello Yeller, I have made the changes to the user page that you set up for me. Is it ok to put this on actual page now? Please have a look and let me know. Thanks again for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrrooftop (talk • contribs) 13:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey. I only took a quick look because I'm about to pass out but I can already see a few issues. For instance, the mention about a specific celebrity being a fan seems trivial and advertorial. It's also unsourced. Several other changes, such as the current member list, also have no sources. A few other changes that are sourced use sources that I wouldn't call reliable per WP:RS (e.g. a blogspot blog). I'll go into more detail later when I'm not quite so tired (probably this weekend). It's a good first crack but we need to make some changes before we change the mainspace article. Sound good? OlYeller21^Talktome 03:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok this is a great start then. Thank you --Mrrooftop (talk) 10:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. If you get a min please can you help me get The Moons page finished. Thank you --Mrrooftop (talk) 11:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I'll give you a full report tonight or tomorrow. OlYeller21^Talktome 22:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I noticed the photo may have dissapered for some reason so I will have to upload it again. I have all weekend until monday evening and then im away for a week. --Mrrooftop (talk) 19:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, OlYeller21. You have new messages at Talk:Charles G. Smith.
Message added 20:10, 26 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cheers! Unforgettableid (talk) 20:10, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Adding peer reviewed research as a self-citation COI

Hi Olyeller. I was wondering if you could provide a second opinion here if you have a minute and any thoughts on how I should handle peer-reviewed research that is a self-citation COI on behalf of RTI International. They have a lot of research on a myriad of topics I think could be valuable to Wikipedia, but I'd like to get some input on anything I should look out for COI-wise and what my overall process/approach should be. CorporateM (Talk) 22:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll give it a good look tomorrow. Sounds like it could be a sticky situation but beneficial if handled well. OlYeller21^Talktome 01:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Yup, a little different (more mild) than the COI I usually work with. CorporateM (Talk) 05:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to take a look. Just as an FYI, I've posted another one here, but I was a little confused about some of the information in the source material like the methodology and have asked RTI if they can clarify a few things. CorporateM (Talk) 19:58, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

No problem.

It looks fine to me. The very last claim that it was considered the right approach is a tiny leap. The study doesn't specifically state that is was the right approach but shows that the people being treated responded very well and that dental health is seen large improvements. I don't think it's an illogical jump to make but someone could have an argument against it. I think it's splitting hairs, though. It looks good. OlYeller21^Talktome 20:30, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I had put that as a placeholder, because the sources were talking about the cultural fit, but without explaining what they meant exactly and I was hoping they might have some clarification, but I think I'll just take it out. Anyways, thanks for chiming in. It's not unusual for me to wait months for COI-related feedback, so you are providing an exceptional level of "customer service" ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 02:44, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Considering Name Change ...

OlYeller21,

Thank you for your suggestion, and I'm probably going to take your advice. I tend to be persnickety about accuracy, so ... But of course I might enjoy a more interesting name as well ...

Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advocateoftruth (talk • contribs) 13:34, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Geekologie concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Geekologie, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 03:24, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Ha, wow. That's old and was already made into an article long ago. Thanks, robot friend. OlYeller21^Talktome 03:26, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

SPI report

Just a note to say that per your suggestion on the COIN report I filed at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Milo_Yiannopoulos, a SPI has been filed and completed. Cheers. WilliamH (talk) 10:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I should have looked to see how long ago the editors involved had edited. Even so, I guess it's good that there's now a list of all the associated accounts at SPI.

I think at this point we just need to check the article for issues and watch for new activity. OlYeller21^Talktome 17:31, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

OK then. WilliamH (talk) 09:18, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Government of Serbia

Hi OIYeller21, just letting you know that all the edits I proposed on the various Serbia articles have been agreed with the exception of the Government of Serbia. If you could have a quick look at that one (here) and let me know your feedback at some point that would be great. Many thanks. Vivj2012 (talk) 12:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey, sorry I didn't get to those sooner. It's been a busy week. Do you need anything else done or are you good to go? OlYeller21^Talktome 14:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, no worries – they've all been looked at and agreed apart from the Government of Serbia. The situation with the cabinet has changed since my initial suggestion, however, as Lazar Krstic has recently been appointed Finance Minister – I've suggested a couple of sentences to reflect this on the talk page. See what you think – I've included full Harvard citation in the HTML so it would just be a case of cutting and pasting. Thanks. Vivj2012 (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Geekologie

Hello OlYeller21. It has now been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Geekologie.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Geekologie}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 02:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

This was something like four or more years ago. This is one of the first things I ever did. How do I make sure that I don't get these messages anymore? OlYeller21^Talktome 03:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Evan Strong

Hello OlYeller I am writing to request your assistance with the wiki article Evan Strong. There are two alerts at the top of the page that I am requesting your help with. First, I have removed all sources that could be considered "self published" and would like your review to see if the alert can be removed. Second, I understand the conflict of interest policy, but have attempted to be as objective as possible in editing the article on Evan Strong. What can we do here regarding the alert about this issue? Can we invite other wiki editors to review the article for accuracy? Is that something you can help with to be able to be able to release the alert? Thanks, rogerestrong Rogerestrong (talk) 01:48, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Roger. Sorry for the delayed response. I've been very busy lately.

I'll take a look right now. OlYeller21^Talktome 19:13, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on this question I've posed? I could really use your thoughts on the matter. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Preditas Inc. should stay on Wikipedia

This article should stay on Wikipedia because... (I have already provide Reliable sources to confirm the importance of the wiki page on Preditas Inc. on Wikipedia.It should be there on wikipedia. The following links confirm it http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-12-06/news/44864237_1_iits-startups-placement-season
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/emerging-businesses/startups/startups-offer-top-salaries-at-iits/articleshow/26923577.cms?intenttarget=no
http://content.timesjobs.com/new-startups-storm-iits-with-better-pay-package/?fromsite=toi ) --Nehapant19 (talk) 04:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Question for you

RE: User talk:IZAK#Speedy deletion nomination of True Torah Jews nomination of True Torah Jews, I am not how or why this tag was placed on my talk page [3]. In 2006 I voted to Delete this, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/True Torah Jews. Can you explain please, thanks. IZAK (talk) 06:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Bugas fix

Ok I've rewritten John Bugas. I used the referenced information only, and have completely written everything in my own words. There may be words that are the same as, for instance, the NYT used, of course, but this is my language using publicly available information--that I am arbitrarily using certain cites to reference. I hope you now agree that this is ok. Thank you--Automotony (talk) 02:58, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

WheelTug

You reverted the Wheeltug article, reintroducing clear and blatant errors.

1. There is no such thing in the literature or professional references/press as a "Wheel Tug". (I recently removed the gap in the name, and you undid this.)
2. There is no recent reference to "delivery in 2013" as all references are for introduction in 2015 in all recent aerospace journalism and other public sources.

Furthermore,

1. The reference to the WheelTug Twist is both valid and significant, and was presented and discussed before the Royal Aeronautical Society of Toulouse France. You removed this in your reversion.
2. The "Operational Impact" section that you removed was improper as it true for a all E-taxi systems including EGTS (by Safran/Honeywell), GreenTaxi by L-3/Crane, and DLR (German Aerospace Center) system which was using fuel cells instead of the APU.
3. What was the copywrite violation? Where was it from? I'm happy to make changes to keep copywrite protected material out, but the article needed the improvements I made.

Since coming back to look at WheelTug, I've also been considering making a EGTS (Electric Green Taxiing System) page for the Safran/Honeywell system that would be modeled on the WheelTug page. I'm not sure I want to do the work on an E-taxi page, but I've had someone ask me about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chovesh (talk • contribs) 18:41, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

WheelTug II

Looking into the notability guidelines "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." I find that WheelTug has been covered (and interviewed) by CNBC, won the 2013 "Eco-Technology of the Year" award from ATW (Air Transport World), has been written about by Cargo Network Services, AirInsight.com, FlightGlobal.com, aviationpros.com, Business Travel News (www.BTNew.co.uk) and several others. Aircraft Technology Engineering & Maintenance (http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?eid=0d0dbe8d-9d8c-4d59-834b-19a199c5e513&skip=true)

However I don't think putting in all these articles are necessary, or are they?

But most importantly, this article on WheelTug is NOT ABOUT the company (WheelTug plc.), it is about the "Technology" and its impact since it is an E-Taxi system (one of several proposed) and there is no entry yet on E-Taxi systems or their impact or how they will change airport operations.

Other issues.

1. Chorus Motors: Since Chorus Motors licensed the technology to WheelTug, and since WheelTug is a subsidiary to Chorus Motors plc (and Chorus Motors is a subsidiary to Borealis Exploration), then since WheelTug is relying upon patented Chorus Motor technology (a high phase order motor, one that has more than 3 phases), wouldn't it be relevant that the heart of the technology be mentioned more and that there be a link to it?
2. WheelTug is an E-taxi (electric taxi) system, and while E-taxi systems do not have their own web page, they all have some things in common (which I had included under "Operational Impact" which explains the significant and NOTEWORTHY aspects.

The Operational Impact of an E-taxi system is important for anyone looking into "ANY" of the E-taxi systems out there that are under development. I would be willing to create a separate E-taxi page, and even one for EGTS (by Safran/Honeywell), but my experience has been that editors take a quick look, don't understand either what they are reading (as they've not done the source research) and simply gut much of the information that makes the topic relevant.

Will you, as an editor, guide me so that I can make a relevant and 'useful' article? E-taxi is looking at making savings of anywhere from $200k/year per plane (EGTS), to up to $3.5 Million/year per plane (WheelTug using the WheelTug Twist to shave 17 minutes off of turnarounds).

BTW, I didn't have any issue with the deletion of the information on the clutch as that is probably outdated by recent developments. It is the 'Operational Impact' of WheelTug (and other E-taxi systems) which is particularly notable.

Chovesh (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Keith Moss

Dear OIYeller21,

I'm writing in response to the message you left earlier in which you said "You're going to need to explain why you just blanked 12k bytes of mostly referenced content."

Firstly, I've no idea what that means. I'm not the most 'net-savvy person in the World so please excuse my ignorance if that's what the problem is. Stranger still, when I clicked on the link (to see the revision you made to my edit) I was amazed to see the page that I had spent so long working on several months ago, but that I then deleted much of in response to your strong criticism of it and threat to whatever...Is this the thing you think I "blanked"? If so, it wasn't intentional.

Basically, back in the Summer I spent a number of days editing painstakingly and providing as much relevant info as I could, which I made sure to back-up with the required inline citations and online references etc. and I also set up a separate page for the album and went through the convoluted (but I thought, ultimately helpful and informative) process of uploading artwork and tracklists, durations, themes, etc. However, I was surprised and saddened to find my work criticized and opposed to such a degree that I either removed the information or in the case of the album page it wasn't deemed a noteworthy subject to be allowed to become a page on Wikipedia because I hadn't sold eight million albums or something...and as for the artwork on the album page, it was deleted by Wikipedia because I was unable to prove that I had gained "permission from the copyright holder" of the artwork - even though I emailed the appropriate Wikipedia moderator to confirm that I, as the sole creator of the photograph and the artwork, was in fact the sole copyright holder! Basically, because I couldn't prove that I had given myself permission to use a photo I took on an album cover I designed, it was blocked, which is ridiculous. Another example of what I feel is the unnecessarily-paranoid and excessive monitoring of this site by it's moderators, who I try to understand are just doing their job etc, but it seems like even the most minor addition of info (that IS backed-up by the requested independent online sources etc) is subjected to censure and criticism.

And so, to the latest alleged infringement...I had avoided adding any new information to the page for the past several months, in the expectation that doing so would bring about the by-now customary rebuke from you and the usual dismal dismissal of whatever I added, no matter how many references I took care to back it up with. All I did this morning (when I made my first edit in several months) was to add a line about the new single - merely reporting its existence - which I made sure to have verified by the trusted music info resource site Musicbrainz beforehand, a website which I should add is policed in a far less hostile, high-handed and accusatory fashion than your very own Wikipedia. And I added one other line (a press quote, again which I backed-up with the appropriate reference). I expected trouble for having fulfilled this simplest of tasks, and duly found it forthcoming in your latest perplexing accusation. I did not do anything to revert the page to the way it was that caused you to have such a go at me the last time - I know you watch my page like a hawk and I wouldn't want to go through the hassle of another rebuke.

All I'm trying to do with this page is to provide some simple, basic facts (the version of the page with all the added info - the history etc - I had deleted previously, I have no idea how it came back, whether you believe me or not, I know I'm telling the truth). If I don't provide this information, you are certainly not going to. and if I leave it to my record label they will surely have the text riddled with the errors and spelling mistakes that are a feature of their own page. If it's your aim to dissuade genuine people from enhancing your service by providing legitimate information, then you are succeeding.

Yours sincerely, The Quintessential Gambini — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheQuintessentialGambini (talk • contribs) 00:42, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey. I'm pretty busy dealing with holiday related... stuff... right now so I'm not going to be able to read and respond to this whole message. The edit I was referring to was this one where you blanked a whole lot of content that was referenced. It may seem odd that I'm protecting content that you created from being deleted but it seemed good to me.

I skipped to the last paragraph. Please don't ever again assume that it's my "aim to dissuade genuine people from enhancing your service by providing legitimate information". First, it's not "my" service - I don't own or work for Wikipedia. I'm a volunteer. Secondly, I've donated an incredible amount time and effort to Wikipedia helping new editors get acquainted with Wikipedia, on top of all the other work I do here. I won't sit here and be accused of bad faith when all I asked was for an explanation as to why you made one single edit that blanked a great deal of content, without an edit summary. I didn't warn you for blanking content or criticize you in the slightest. I simply asked for some sort of comment which, by the way, would be best left on the article's talk page and not here.

I'll come back and read the rest of this 730 message later but I can tell you this. As of right now, I think you're here to complete a single goal and that's to add information about a single subject to Wikipedia. I assume that because that's all you've done here so far. That, as this case has shown, tends to lead new editors to do things without learning more about the hundreds of Wikipedia policies and guidelines that govern Wikipedia and furthermore, when they run afoul of those policies and guidelines, they lash out because there goal has become hindered. You're falling into that pattern right now.

If you're here to help this project (Wikipedia), I'd be more than happy to donate my time to helping you as I've helped probably over 100 other users. If you're here to promote Keith, I really have no desire to help you get better acquainted with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and I'll keep enforcing them them as best I can. If you're here to promote Keith Moss, you're forcing a square peg into a round hole.

I urge you to take some time to think about this before responding. I'm not trying to attack you but if you currently have a goal above helping Wikipedia, no amount of discussion here is going improve this situation. OlYeller21^Talktome 02:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Michael Lawson

WP:CSD#G4 does not apply to Michael Lawson because the prior AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Lawson) was for an article about a different person with the same name. The article may still merit deletion on other grounds but not G4. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:47, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Gotcha. I wish there was a way to see if something qualifies for G4 without being able to see the deleted article instead of having to just nominate it to see if it sticks. OlYeller21^Talktome 15:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Foxit

Yes, my revert to a pre-2011 version there was probably a mistake - I looked at the old history, missed your recent clean-up edits, for which thank you. Your revert seems good. The copyvio is however not all removed in my opinion; I'll post on the talkpage there. Best, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

CK Morgan

Hi There olyeller21 I seriousley think CK Morgan the page shouldnt be deleted yes i am his puplicist Barbara Johnson , he only signed a deal with atlantic and another label like a month ago , the young guy is working towards his debut Album which is not even out yet , because of deal finalisement his name is not on the router yet because the exact date for him to be in a router we still got 4weeks to go , so as for an upcoming artist like CK Morgan its good to keep the page so that when people are searching for him they can rather read his wikipedia then reading any other story you mgiht find online , ok i know maybe i shouldnt have created mutilple pages but first what i was trying to do because he is also born in germany i wanted to create one in german and the i wanted to create one CK Morgan Rnb Singer so they know exactly who the person is since the images i upload for him keeps getting deleted thats why i didnt want to create so many pages , CK Morgan had his wikipedia since August 2013 i think and so far no problem why now please im bleading on my behalf not to delete this page if theres anything i should change please let me know so i can change it into realiable story thank you Your Sincerely Barbara Johnson

Also press has been talking about him to not only one press but other too its hard to find on google because theres another company calling them self CK Morgan so its hard to see the most of the stuff which is kinda bit stupid we even wanted to change his name from CK Morgan to Ceekay Morgan but the management said no we should leave it when his first single comes out and it starts blowing it will become more search on google so please im pleading with you to close this discussion and not to delete this article cause this been for so long — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbarajohnson1 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

First off, please stop begging. I don't mean to sound crass but I'm not the gatekeeper, so to speak. The discussion at AfD is a discussion on whether or not the subject of the article satisfies any part of WP:N. WP:N is what we call our "inclusion guideline" because it lays out rules that we use to determine what subjects can be included on Wikipedia. No amount of pleading will change that guideline and I'm not willing to ignore our guidelines for this case.

Secondly, the claim that he signed with Atlantic - why isn't he listed as a signed artist on their website? Do you have any proof that he signed with Atlantic. Surely, as his publicist, you have proof for that claim.

Next, if press organizations have been publishing articles about him, where are they? I know that CK Morgan International is a company but that doesn't make it difficult to find sources about CK Morgan the artist. A publicist is typically aware of everything that's published about their clients. If you know where articles are being published, I'd be more and happy to help find copies of those articles. I live less than 10 miles from one of the largest libraries on Earth. Between that and the internet, I'm sure we can find a copy of any article. Just give me some clues.

Everything else you've mentioned is rather unimportant to this discussion and the AfD. I assume you're new to Wikipedia and having created several articles here and at the German Wikipedia has no bearing on this discussion. Being new, it's completely understandable that you wouldn't know all of the hundreds of policies and guidelines that govern Wikipedia so your previous actions aren't being held against you and more importantly, they have no bearing at all on whether or not the article will be included on Wikipedia. The problem at this point is that you seem to be ignoring policies and guidelines, changing the article in the same way multiple times, and leaving comments in the AfD that aren't helpful to the discussion. This is part of the reason that the article was protected from edits from non-confirmed users.

If you want to help keep this article on Wikipedia, help me find news articles that specifically cover CK Morgan. If those articles exist, I'll have no problem keeping the article on Wikipedia. If they don't, then there's not much I can do to help you. It's that simple. OlYeller21^Talktome 17:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Mark B. Cohen

So, do we just archive COI discussions without any conclusion? A reporter seems to believe Zulitz is Cohen or a member of the family, and his response was a non-response to the accusations of COI editing.--ColonelHenry (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

More needs to be done. It can be hard to get people to work on articles that large but we need to do it. It's on my list of things to do but that list is pretty large these days. I'll get to it as soon as I can. OlYeller21^Talktome 00:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

CK Morgan News Articles

Hi there his not listed at the atlantic records yet because this deal was only signed like a month ago and the date that his suppose to be on the artist router is on the 23rd of february here are the articles 1.http://www.ghanamusic.com/news/from-the-diaspora/ck-morgons-qim-nearly-thereq-album-release-projected-to-move-100000-copies-in-1st-week/index.html

2.http://www.modernghana.com/music/24274/3/ck-morgan-releases-trick-me-ft-miss-flavia.html

3.http://www.modernghana.com/music/24525/3/mzbel-shakes-it-down-with-ck-morgan.html

4.http://www.ghanamusic.com/news/from-the-diaspora/ck-morgan-teams-up-with-akwaboah/index.html

5.http://archive.is/MWK7s

6.http://thinkghmusic.com/2013/07/06/ck-morgan-collaborates-with-mzbel-on-shake-it-down/

7.http://www.ghanalatest.com/ck-morgan-talks-about-facebook-love-on-new-single-by-jessica-wilson/

8.http://ghanagist.com/ck-morgan-working-on-his-maiden-album-am-nearly-there/

9.http://exposeghana.com/2013/12/ck-morgan-drops-trick-ft-miss-flavia/

10.http://www.xfmnewscenter.com/news/news.php?cat=Entertainment&id=41490&title=Line+Up+For+CK+Morgan's+World+Tour.

11.http://www.ghanamusic.com/news/from-the-diaspora/ck-morgan-collaborates-with-mzbel-on-qshake-it-downq/index.html

12.http://www.blayleak.com/ck-morgan-releases-cover-art-for-debut-album/

13.http://www.twimovies.com/latest-additions/20440-ck-morgan-collaborates-with-mzbel-on-his-latest-track-titled-shake-it-down-video.html

14.http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=297650

15.http://vibeghana.com/2014/01/13/mzbel-shakes-it-down-with-ck-morgan/

16.http://www.news1ghana.com/?p=30105

new press just like an hour ago the news1ghana — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.223.91.102 (talk) 15:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

--Barbarajohnson1 (talk) 09:11, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbarajohnson1 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC) 

like i said theres more as ck is releasing his first single thursday they will be more press

--Barbarajohnson1 (talk) 19:50, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

theres a lot more the reason why you dont see it in google so much cause when you have other people calling them self ck morgan or whatever its kinda a bad habbit and am not begging here are the news articles . like i said he is about to blow his only an upcoming artist who just signed a deal a month ago its actually two companys but the other i cant talk about because of law rights that deal should be announced ending of this month and i didnt ignore your messeage i just didnt see it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbarajohnson1 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Even if the article is deleted, it can easily be brought back. If he "about to blow", then when he does, we'll already have an article to start with. All we have to do is a little work to get it un-deleted.

I'll check out the articles to see if they can be used but they'll need to be "significant coverage from independent and reliable secondary sources." I'll respond here soon. OlYeller21^Talktome 00:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey i wanted to know how long til this discussion is closed ,and i wanted to ask how do i send you a picture was gonna send you a pic where ck was in a newspaper one newsone daily guide Gh ,wednesday --Barbarajohnson1 (talk) 15:10, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:People from Chugiak, Alaska

Category:People from Chugiak, Alaska, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 04:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 8 February

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

• On the Trey Parker page, your edit caused a wikilink error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Copywright

You're talking to the wrong person! I didn't write that I took it from the redirect Winter Dew Tour article. Find the person who wrote the article leave me alone.Cosprings (talk) 15:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

I really don't care. You're responsible for the text that you move. If it's "copyrighted", you're responsible for that violation. OlYeller21^Talktome 16:07, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Clifton: A Community Arts School

Hello - OlYeller21

I am new to Wikipedia. I realized that Clifton: A Community Arts School hasn't got a Wiki Page. So I created one with the requirement for the school. Just recently I added the Clifton's History including external links for more information. And you took it off. I would like to add the Clifton's History, so if you can help me and tell me how I organize/structure and add text for the history it will be grateful.

Thanks,

Joe Parkinson (talk)

Hey! Welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for taking the time to come and contribute to Wikipedia.

The issue with the text that you added was that it was copyrighted by the school. It's also not written in an "encyclopedic" way. Some parts were in first person while others were simply not neutral in tone. Even if we did get permission to use the copyrighted text, it would violation WP:NPOV and would still need to be removed.

Fortunately, the solution is a simple one. You'll just need to write the text in your own words while using references to support the information you're adding to the article. Typically, Wikipedia would prefer the use of secondary sources that are independent of the subject itself. In other words, content in your own words that's based off of references written by independent and reliable sources.

The big thing will just be to remember that this is an encyclopedia and not a social network. The kind of description you'd find on Facebook isn't suitable for Wikipedia.

Does all that make sense? I'd be happy to discuss things with you further. OlYeller21^Talktome 16:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello - OlYeller21

OK - It makes sense to me. Can you help me then with the page. I am trying to add Clifton's History. So do i briefly/summarize Clifton's History and then add the external links or what ... Please Can You Help Me. Thanks in advance.

Thanks,

Joe Parkinson (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

It's pretty simple, really. You'd basically write a sentence (in your own words) and the sentence can have 1+ "claims" in it. Every claim in the article should have a reference with it in the form of an inline citation. The "reference" can be something like a URL to a website that backs up the "claim" or "claims" and it goes at the end of the sentence, after the punctuation. You put the URL inside of <ref></ref>. You can learn more about how to cite sources at WP:CITE.

So, for example, you would add something like this in the editor:

The Chair of Govenors at Clifton is Andrew Lee.<ref>http://cliftonschool.org/about-clifton/governors1.html</ref>

It's a factual statement. It's not an opinion such as, "Clifton is a great place to go to school." which obviously isn't neutral. Even if the school is rated highly, opinions like that are very difficult to justify in the article. The reference points back to Clifton's website which is OK to use but preferably, you'd use a secondary source like a newspaper article.

The reference will show up automatically in the "References" section.

So right now, I'd create a bit of an outline. If you want to create a "History" section, what subsections will that section have? You could talk about the founding of the school or major events such the school moving or closing for a significant period of time. Once you have that outline, it gets easier to target what you'd like to write about which makes it easier to find references to use to fill that subtopic.

Just make sure everything is in your own words. Also, you can sign your talk page messages by using four tildes (~~~~). OlYeller21^Talktome 16:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

DrChrissy's conflict of interest on Marian Dawkins

Hi, I added new evidence to the case, but the case was closed by an admin, I believe the decision is a mistake. What other channels are available? Thanks124.170.241.154 (talk) 07:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

• The IP has raised related issues in this AN section. I recommend changing the IP's heading above because seeing these unsubstantiated attacks on an editor is very tiresome. Johnuniq (talk) 09:27, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

IP (I don't know what else to call you). That block you received was a overdue. It's been made clear to you, several times and in various locations, that your accusations lack good faith. Personally, I think you violated WP:FORUMSHOPPING as well.

If you sincerely want my advice I'm more than willing to give it to you but frankly, it seems that you've ignored what people have told you thus far. Regardless, my advice is below. Before reading, try to reboot your state of mind. Ignore what you've felt so far and start fresh.

It seems clear that you feel that there are POV issues with the article. Assuming you're correct, here's some things to remember.

• You're collaborating on an article. Sometimes you'll be right and sometimes you'll be wrong. Recognizing that is important and staying civil is equally important.
• Wikipedia doesn't function like a democracy, exactly. Decisions are made by consensus which typically means that if you're in a dispute where you think you're right and the other person is wrong, trying to convince them should be your first step. There are many phrases used when it comes to convincing others but "you get more bees with honey" comes to mind. Be civil, don't accuse, assume good faith, etc.
• If that fails and you still feel that you're correct, seeking outside opinions would be the next step. One thing to remember is that you shouldn't be trying to find people that agree with you. You should be trying to get more eyes on the situation so that you can do what's best for Wikipedia. Another thing to remember here is that WP:FORUMSHOPPING is unhelpful and frowned upon. The best thing to do is to find related venues, particularly Wikiprojects, and make a post. You can often find related Wikiprojects on the talk page of an article. Furthermore, when seeking outside assistance, don't present your case at those venues. If your goal is to do what's best for Wikipedia, let others draw their own conclusions. Simply point them to the discussion you already started by saying something to the effect of, "I've run into what I feel is NPOV issues at <article name> and I would appreciate it any of you could take a few minutes to help out with the article." In my opinion, that's the best way to do what's best for Wikipedia.
• If that fails, WP:NPOVN would be a good next step. Again, Wikipedia is a collaboration. If you're seeking help, make it clear that you want what's best for Wikipedia and not that your top priority is to be recognized as correct. Remember to read all of the rules about posting at any noticeboard - they're there for a reason. Also, let the case speak for itself. If you're right, you won't have to do very much work outside of getting other people's attention. If that fails and you still think you're correct, well... I've never seen that happen before. You could try more Wikiprojects
• Lastly, while COI's are related to POV editing, POV editing isn't always relate to a COI. When you spot POV editing, do what I listed above. If it becomes clear that an editor has a conflict of interest and they're creative NPOV material, then you can report that to COIN but that shouldn't fall into the normal steps of dealing with a content dispute. Remember, you must have evidence of a close connection and not just evidence that suggests that someone has a COI. Strong POV editing could suggest that someone is a fan or advocate but that's different than a close connection that's required for someone to have a COI by Wikipedia's terms. The same goes for WP:AN and WP:ANI. Especially when you have no evidence, that's a good way to burn bridges and keep people away from helping with an article. We're all just volunteers here and very few people enjoy jumping into muddy disputes. It's just not enjoyable.

Does that all make sense? I'm sick and don't feel so hot and didn't proof read so there may be some mistakes. Feel free to ask questions if you need me to clarify something. OlYeller21^Talktome 18:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I had a quick look I think I understand you fine. You don't need to worry about proof reading. I am not that kind of superficial people who care a lot of 'formalities'. I have turn around much difficult cases in my professional/academic career. So this case is not a big deal for me. We just need more time. I am patient about it.

I am wondering to what extend Wikipedia allow people edit their own Wikipedia pages? Is there any general rules about this? Have a nice day!124.149.100.102 (talk) 12:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring isn't allowed at all. It's contrary to the collaborative nature of Wikipedia. As far as policies go, there's the WP:3RR (three revert rule) where one is automatically blocked for reverting an edit within 24 hours. That's just the backstop, though. You can be blocked for editing warring before that happens. OlYeller21^Talktome 15:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I just saw this.

• I think you misunderstood my question above. I was wondering, for example, to what extend Barack Obama himself can edit Barack Obama.
• I just noticed CYl7EPTEMA777 complained the desruptive editing of DrChrissy on talking birds. CYl7EPTEMA777's editing is sensible, I agree to his complain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.1.198 (talk) 01:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, just let you know two more editors had similar negative experiences with DrChrissy. PraetorianFury and timelezz. DrChrissy is accusing and threatening timelezz on the admin noticeboard. 124.170.199.49 (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Source checking

Please try actually looking for sources before proposing new articles for deletion on the basis of their notability, as you did at Yamboree. — Scott • talk 14:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

No. I spend my time elsewhere and will continue to because you've presented zero evidence that I should change my habits. Instead of establishing notability when others don't, I spend my time cleaning up Wikipedia in other ways that I consider more productive. As a sysop, I'm surprised that you're apparently not familiar with this concept. If you feel that I broke a policy or guideline, feel free to point that out and I'll admit my mistake. If you feel that WP:PROD's "before" section should be more like WP:AFD's WP:BEFORE, by all means, go fight that fight.

I also don't appreciate your tone. "Please try actually looking"? Surely you don't think that's a good way to convince someone to do something.

I hope you're having a better day today. Please don't bother responding unless your response is going to include policies or guidelines and not just a condescending and baseless command. Or maybe an apology. OlYeller21^Talktome 16:01, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

"Evidence that you should change your habits" exists in the restored article. It took me all of five minutes to establish notability for it, and probably most of that was spent typing out the citation templates. You didn't break any rules; you just lazily tagged a valid article and moved on. The admin who deleted it on the basis of your tag was equally lazy for not checking either. If you're going to raise doubts about the notability of new articles, have the courtesy to their authors of doing your homework first. — Scott • talk 16:14, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

So the evidence that I should spend time establishing notability instead of doing other work is that the article currently exists? Like I said, your argument holds no water.

Also, calling me is clearly lazy is an assumption of bad faith. Please redact that assessment or discontinue trying to convince me of, well, anything. If you continue with the personal attacks, which calling me lazy clearly is, I'll readily take this to ANI. OlYeller21^Talktome 16:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what brought you here to try and change my habits based on no policies, guidelines, or even essays but the way you're going about trying to change something, clearly isn't working. Perhaps you can back up and try again in a different way? OlYeller21^Talktome 16:44, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

No, an assumption of bad faith would have been me theorizing that you tagged an article badly because you deliberately didn't want to put any effort into checking. I'm not. What I'm saying is that you should have spent some more time on due diligence before slapping on that PROD. Editors should try to establish notability when they create articles, but, conversely, subsequent editors should try to establish that there is a genuine lack of notability if they believe that to be an issue; the door swings both ways. It's especially important in the case of articles created by brand-new editors, who probably aren't conversant with our referencing standards. Labeling a new editor's first article with a scary sign that says "Not good enough! Gonna be deleted!" is a surefire way to scare them away.

Have a nice day. — Scott • talk 17:14, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

See, here's your assumption: "Not good enough! Gonna be deleted!" I never said that and you fundamentally can't make the assumption that I did without bias.

If you paid any attention to what I do on Wikipedia, you'd know that I spend an incredible amount of time trying to acclimate new editors who show in interest in learning and not just publishing information that's either advertorial, a copyright violation, or simply about a subject that isn't notable per WP:N (I focus on those areas and COIs).

I spend time with people who show that they may actually become a contributor to Wikipedia. I don't go around telling people that they need to do a thing, based on no policies or guidelines, other than "don't PROD before checking for sources because somehow that's biting newcomers". Its my choice to do so and it's perfectly within the current policies and guidelines to do so.

Using your own argument, don't you think that coming here and calling me lazy and talking to me in a condescending way may make me not want to edit? If you convince me not to edit for 2 weeks, I promise you that's way more work being done on this project than any new person that we didn't somehow bite by PRODing an article. I promise you.

You conveniently ignored the fact that you made a personal attack against me. If you want to play equal score cards here, you've obviously created a negative. All you would have had to do is come to my talk page and say, "Hey, will you please try and check for references before PRODing? It's not required but I would appreciate it." I would have changed a bit. Instead, you left the shit show of a response that you did.

How many people do you do this with? Have you ever considered that leaving messages for long-time editors may do far more damage than having one article deleted per PROD? OlYeller21^Talktome 17:36, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

That's what I thought.

I'm going to assume that you've realized that you both failed to assume good faith and made a personal attack. If that's incorrect and you'd like to take this further, we can take it to ANI to discuss as I won't stand by and continue to let you, as a sysop, violate two of the most important guidelines Wikipedia has.

In conclusion, I think you should consider your actions and try to improve for the good of this project. OlYeller21^Talktome 18:13, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Borealis Exploration vs Wheeltug

Looking at the Borealis Exploration page vs the Wheeltug page I see that Wheeltug has a larger entry in the Borealis page than its own, since you tagged Wheeltug thought you might be interested.109.67.39.225 (talk) 12:27, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Extant Organizations/Noticeboard

Someone suggested at the Village Pump that I boldly create Wikipedia:Extant Organizations/Noticeboard, a noticeboard to discuss articles about organizations that may be subject to non-neutral editing. Basically it's the corporate version of BLPN, where both adverts and attack pages can be brought to the community for broader scrutiny. Except this board does not currently relate to a specific policy like BLPN does, except NPOV, V, etc. (though it could refer to this essay I wrote or something). You participated in the prior village pump discussion that led to consensus for Template:COI editnotice, which is now widely used. Although this noticeboard is not COI-related, I thought you might have an interest in this as well, in whether the noticeboard should be kept and/or in participating in it generally. CorporateM (Talk) 18:36, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

COI related article nominated for deletion

Hi OY,

There is a new essay on the subject of COI that I recently nominated for deletion. There is a lot of back and forth going on as you might imagine, and I thought it might be helpful to ask some editors with a historical interest in the area to give their input.

Just to be clear, you are not being canvassed based on my perceptions of what your views are. I am asking for input from the top 10 contributors to the COI Noticeboard, expecting that some expertise and interest might be found here.

Thanks in advance for your input, if you feel able and willing to participate. Formerly 98 ^{talk|contribs|COI statement} 22:53, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bfk logo09.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bfk logo09.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:27, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Patxi's Chicago Pizza for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Patxi's Chicago Pizza is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patxi's Chicago Pizza (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 19:48, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers

Hi OlYeller21,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

List of YouTubers

There is another deletion discussion on List of YouTubers. If you would like to weigh in, you can do so by checking out the discussion here. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 05:25, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, OlYeller21. 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)

Saylor Academy

Greetings, OlYeller21! Many years ago (well, in Wikipedia time), you offered to assist an editor with a conflict of interest at Saylor Academy, a nonprofit offering free and open online courses. Is that offer still on the table? I have been working on Wikipedia to help update articles related to MicroStrategy and its founder, Michael J. Saylor. Per Wikipedia rules of engagement, I make suggestions on article discussion pages rather than directly edit articles where I have a conflict of interest. With that, I created a new draft of the article for Saylor Academy. You can see my request at Talk:Saylor_Academy#New_draft_available. I have sought out editors at WikiProject Open, WikiProject Education, WikiProject Organizations, WikiProject Technology, WikiProject Universities, and WikiProject Books, to no avail. Would you be so kind as to review this request? Thanks in advance for your help!

Regards,

Andrewggordon84 (talk) 19:35, 27 February 2019 (UTC)