User talk:The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous

Wynton Marsalis

Saw you previously doing some work on the criticisms section trying to clean it up some. I put a POV tag on it and think it needs some more work, my thoughts are on the talk page. Wanted to get some input before having at it. --WGFinley (talk) 13:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, but couldn't agree more, and I noticed that I removed your POV tag. That was a mistake. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Media Matters tax-exempt controversy

Hey there. I have no problem with moving this to the "controversy" section. As I said, depending on the outcome of this petition it may eventually belong in the lead. However, if you look at the http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/08/05/what-irs-will-rely-on-in-dealing-with-media-matters/ site sourced you will see a photocopy of the actual petition filed by the law firm Boyden Grey and Associates with the IRS. This is a "reliable source" for making it a "formal petition", which is also exactly what the cited source calls it, so I've made that change. I've also removed the "shortly after 30 segments" comment at the beginning for being NPOV, unless it is balanced with the number of articles MMfA filed attacking FOXNews and NewsCorp during that timeframe to balance things out. Thanks! SeanNovack (talk) 03:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

citations

Hi, may I gently nudge you to fill in citations rather than using bare URLs? As the template atop Media Matters for America says, such citations' verifiability is threatened by link rot, plus they're plain ugly and uninformative. Thanks, Rostz (talk) 23:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You've misunderstood - the templates don't prevent links from going dead (impractical), they help editors subsequently find replacements for them if they do go dead. Rostz (talk) 12:56, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Signature link

It looks like your new signature does not link back to your userpage (see WP:SIGLINK). This makes things just a bit more inconvenient for the rest of us. If you put the text [[User talk:The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous|TheArtistAKA]] in the signature box in your preferences, it should fix the matter with only minor changes to the display. Thanks, - 2/0 (cont.) 00:27, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 01:05, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section

Please comment at Talk:Andrew_Breitbart#Controversies?. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I mention you in passing here, do please come along and have a say. Penyulap_talk 09:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Occupy Wall Street

An article that you have been involved in editing, Occupy Wall Street , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Amadscientist (talk) 03:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your message

(Received from you on my talk page) Welcome to OWS

Please join our talk on the response section and other issues in talk. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 05:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which discussion are you referring to? Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I found it. I've added a proposal titled "Proposal summary for the "Reactions to Occupy Wall Street" section" Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All im trying to do is to let people know that there are alternatives to aa which is my right. if this web site wants to block me fine.... I dont really care that much but you are clearly a man who has his mind made up and thats the kind of narrow minded thinking that needs to change in this country. Don't both responding. I've recovered from my addiction inspite of aa and i have a life to live. this was fun for a day I'm just not that interested in making it my life, and aa becomes your whole if you believe in there system. so i wont be checking my comments or even using WP i just thought id try to get through to some one and if even one person saw what i wrote its worth it. thank you for your time and good luck with YOUR life long recovery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmohr123 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. When you recently edited Rush Limbaugh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal: Request for participation

Dear The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous: Hello. This is just to let you know that you've been mentioned in the following request at the Mediation Cabal, which is a Wikipedia dispute resolution initiative that resolves disputes by informal mediation.

The request can be found at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/16 March 2012/Occupy Wall Street.

Just so you know, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate. If you wish to do so, and we'll see what we can do about getting this sorted out. At MedCab we aim to help all involved parties reach a solution and hope you will join in this effort.

If you have any questions relating to this or any other issue needing mediation, you can ask on the case talk page, the MedCab talk page, or you can ask the mediator, Whenaxis, at their talk page. MedcabBot (talk) 01:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please defend the horrendous judgment call we both just witnessed

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Occupy_Wall_Street#The_chart.27s_sources_have_nothing_to_do_with_their_slogan.2C_nor_does_the_cbo_report--why_restore_the_mess.3F

I started the talk page discussion here, but I have to be gone today & half of tomorrow. Please don't let the article fall into crap. People who check the page history and think "oh crap, a part of the article I liked has been deleted" then use the "revert button" like it's a [+1] thumbs-up button on youtube (who just want to click a couple buttons to make them like the article better) are the people who don't care what happens to the overall article. They see "keeping the things they like" as their duty for the betterment of the article. 완젬스 (talk) 22:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stay at 'em. If you allow the discourse to be told by BeCritical, he will explain the argument from his vantage point, which will result in the inclusion of unencyclopedic substance into the article. I look forward to working with you. 완젬스 (talk) 23:02, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

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

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

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 01:17, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Alan Greenspan. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Artoasis (talk) 08:23, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite a source for Greenspan's support of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. --Artoasis (talk) 09:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

Hi. When you recently edited Wurlitzer electric piano, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miss You (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DRN Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Occupy Wall Street". Thank you. --Amadscientist (talk) 06:39, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Occupy Wall Street". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 10 May 2012.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 01:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am a member of the Mediation Committee. I write to ask that you indicate your acceptance or rejection of entering the mediation process, in the page linked above. You are free to revert this; I just want you to write a specific reply on the case page. Thank you in advance and best regards, Lord Roem (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation accepted

The request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning Occupy Wall Street, in which you were listed as a party, has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. The case will be assigned to an active mediator within two weeks, and mediation proceedings should begin shortly thereafter. Proceedings will begin at the case information page, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Occupy Wall Street, so please add this to your watchlist. Formal mediation is governed by the Mediation Committee and its Policy. The Policy, and especially the first two sections of the "Mediation" section, should be read if you have never participated in formal mediation. For a short guide to accepted cases, see the "Accepted requests" section of the Guide to formal mediation. You may also want to familiarise yourself with the internal Procedures of the Committee.

As mediation proceedings begin, be aware that formal mediation can only be successful if every participant approaches discussion in a professional and civil way, and is completely prepared to compromise. Please contact the Committee if anything is unclear.

For the Mediation Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 13:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

(Ping) Requested email for mediation

Just a reminder/notification that mediation has requested a small statement of issues from each party[1] before we begin, no longer than 300 words, about the issues as you see them and what you would like to see to resolve them. Bullet points can be used to list your issues if needed and sent to User:Lord Roem.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:03, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have never used e-mail here before, it only identifies you through Wikipedia as your username and has no information about you. If you do not wish any information revealed, just do not reply directly from your own email to something sent to you by another editor. Only use the Wikipedia e-mail feature linked on the user page if you wish to remain anonymous-and no...the irony does not eacape me here. =D. If you don't have e-mail enabled for your account, that should just mean no one can contact you, but you should still be able to contact those who have enabled the feature. Let someone know if this is not the case.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:12, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My email: reubenlack1@gmail.com

Lord Roem (talk) 01:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NPA and BLP

My strong advice is for you to carefully read and abide by WP:BLP and WP:NPA - not to mention WP:CIV, comments like the ones you made have no place here and you almost earned yourself a long block. Dreadstar ☥ 21:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for violating the policy on biographical material. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. MastCell ^Talk 23:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your second block for serious BLP violations. If this problem doesn't improve when your current block expires or is lifted, then your editing privileges here are likely to be suspended indefinitely. MastCell ^Talk 23:39, 14 May 2012 (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).

The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

BLP has no relevance of what I wrote. I accurately portrayed her as driven by SEO. MastCell has made a very strong call with apparent no policy to justify it. The issue of Tone applies only to articles. So I have no idea of what aspect BLP I violated. Furthermore, I did remove what I imagined to be the language objected to. But no one can make the case that Jacobs is not beholden to SEO issues, so much, including her body of work and candid admissions show otherwise. This is valid in judging any source. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 00:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

BLP applies everywhere on Wikipedia ... articles, talkpages, user talkpages ... and as such, the block is valid. You have been blocked for BLP before, so you knew better - otherwise, your reversion of that material would have been viewed favourably. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:18, 15 May 2012 (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.

I've removed your latest unblock request and protected your talk page because you continued the attack you were originally blocked for; I've also extended your block to indefinite. Dreadstar ☥ 00:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- To email a block appeal, see here. Equazcion ^(talk) 08:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Frank Vandersloot concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Frank Vandersloot, 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. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. 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) 18:43, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission Frank Vandersloot

Hello The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Frank Vandersloot.

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 edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for 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/Frank Vandersloot}}, 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) 13:02, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]