User talk:Theroadislong/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

speedy deletion CONTEST

Hi dear i want contest your Speedy Deletetion, because i want know why you put my Profile Page in this section

Waiting one reply

Best Regards

The notice explains why..."a userpage being used only for promotion or publicity, with a username that promotes or implies affiliation with the entity being promoted. The use of one's userpage for advertising or publicity is considered spam and is not a legitimate use of one's userspace. Furthermore, promotional usernames are forbidden by the username policy and are blocked as spam." Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 12:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh dear

I really can't understand what is wrong with the St Andrews reference. I've reworded it in case it helps. There are so many confusing instructions that I'm sometimes really at sea. I appreciate your frustration Balquhidder2013 (talk) 12:54, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I have once again reformatted the reference to show you what the references should look like, can you see how it differs from the ones you have done? Have you read WP:REFB ? Theroadislong (talk) 12:58, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Misery

Many thanks.Yes, I have read the guidelines over and over. But I still don't see what I'm doing wrong. You have entered ''.

I had cited the url. (https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/music/perform/instrumental/chamberorchestra/). The rest I simply can't follow. Sorry.Balquhidder2013 (talk) 13:28, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

OK not to worry, a more pressing concern is to really establish his notability by finding sources that report on him in depth rather than just mention him. Theroadislong (talk) 13:38, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks

Many thanks. I'm sure I'll encounter other similar problems. There are now a number of in-depth reviews included. As a well-known freelance musician in big demand and performing solo and otherwise in numerous concerts in one capacity or another throughout the year reviews are not always forthcoming and often not on line. Many less knows musicians are on Wikipedia with no citations whatsoever! Others have simply a few notices for concerts.

I am still working on it.

Thanks again Balquhidder2013 (talk) 15:12, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks again.

Balquhidder2013 (talk) 15:14, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Levan Songulashvili‎

Since you've been editing Levan Songulashvili‎ you may want to participate in the deletion discussion about the article: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Levan Songulashvili‎.--Jahaza (talk) 20:20, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

citations

I hope to return to the citations in the coming days. I'm in trepidation over these. Take the Auriga Strings one for example. Is this below correct?

And if so, when I correct them do I remove the rest of the coding? I've never worked with symbols or codes and they baffle me.

Thank you for your patience. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

link

I see my link didn't come through in my message. I'll alter it in the text. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 20:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Am I dumb?

I'm sorry to bother you. I simply can't get the references as you want them. I've entered them as I was instructed to at the very beginning. I've experimented over and over with The Auriga Strings ref but no matter how I try to follow what you've put in for others it doesn't work.

I've been through all the links and have deleted those which do not name the subject. As for notability there are at least six long reviews included as well as a comprehensive overview of his work.

I realise I'm a burden to you. I am truly grateful though.You might like to pass me on to someone else.Balquhidder2013 (talk) 21:06, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Clearly you are not dumb, and not a burden either, I am just not very good at explaining! Theroadislong (talk) 22:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Ref 1

Yes, Hetherington is mentioned for Ref 1. on instrumental teaching staff list on that page under Strings (2nd name down)Balquhidder2013 (talk) 09:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Auriga Strings link

When I copy the link to violins it seems to now revert to main page. It is under 'players' and 'violins' which is listed below. It is http://www.theaurigastrings.co.uk/violins.html. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 10:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Referencing

I tried over and over to follow your instructions. I didn't know what was 'instruction' and what was code. I've spent hours on this. I eventually in the maze of instructions on wikipedia came across this which I am following and in the first 6 references appears to work:

'If the citation you are placing between the ref tags as your source is a link to an external website, place the website address (URL) within single square brackets along with some text, which the reader will see as a link. For example:

'

This is what I am attempting to do.

Thank you for your help. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

But you have only applied this to the references that I had already done correctly for you? Theroadislong (talk) 16:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Delighted to hear from you sir. But I want to introduce my institution information on Wikipedia so that people can get to know about me. As I said I have an institute which perform research based on Artificial Intelligence and Neural Networking. So , I want to introduce my website to Wikipedia, by creating a new page. So I just wanted to know whether Wiki will allow me to create a page of my institution here and let the World know about me. Regards.

Please read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not This is absolutely NOT the place to promote your institute. Theroadislong (talk) 17:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

References

Ongoing problem

When I thought I had cracked it I went to the beginning. I thought various symbols etc inserted by you were instructions and had to come out. I had completed a few when I saw your message. I do apologise but I had tried to ask if I was on the right track. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 09:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

No I didn't. I've only just now seen your messages and clicked 'thank'. I have not been back to the text except to correct spelling before seeing you note.Balquhidder2013 (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Your edit here [2] reverted all my edits. Theroadislong (talk) 19:55, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Bernard Lokai

Bernard Lokai is a Student from Gerhard Richter and a reliable source is for example his particpation in the serial of exhibitions under the title"Junge Figuratve" 2001 and 2002 in Museum Mönchehaus, Goslar. This Museumis famous in Grmany because of the Annual Award named Kaiserring. I will add asap some citations. Best regards Martin Frisch — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin Frisch (talk • contribs) 10:03, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

From my understanding A. Bierbrauer is an important artist regarding his hypnosis paintings fromthe 40's and early 50`s, which can be seen as one of the first conceptual art after marcel Duchamps. Bierbrauer trained as artist and doctor, he painted the "hypnosis paintings" from the description of images which appeared to his patients while they were in a trance-like condition. Afterwards he went into dialogue with his patients about his art work. Till today he is the first artist who integrated the recipient into his artwork and who takes the the thoughts of the recipient as part of an art work.

For this reason it is senseful to integrate Bierbrauer into the List of contemporary artists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin Frisch (talk • contribs) 10:12, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

You will need to discuss this on the article talk page not here. Theroadislong (talk) 10:58, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Parelli

Saw the question in your edit summary. "Horsenality" is a term Pat Parelli or more likely, his wife Linda, came up with to describe a horse's personality. 😕 As far as I know from years of riding and a lifetime within the vicinity of horses, they and their students are the only ones to use it. (They may have it copyrighted, for all I know... I just know most other trainers DO NOT use the term.) Anyway, we use it in the article because it's the major facet of the program and it's hard to explain their method/theory/ideas without it. It is not backed up by science though (horses do have individual personalities, they just don't have them in four specific types based off either right brain or left brain thinking). White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 00:32, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Indeed. It's part of the Parelli marketing program and though other people are starting to pick up on the idea, it's not at all backed by any sort of study. I don't know if any studies exist on animal personality at all, but this is certainly just a marketing ploy. Linda Parelli knows advertising psychology, but I doubt it's much beyond that. Montanabw^(talk) 02:36, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Creationism

Just to clarify some facts:

No, I don't, but my opinion is not relevant. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

No, I don't. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I referred to his first statement but I most certainly did NOT remove them. Check the History page

An apology would be nice.... Silver Shiney (talk) 16:21, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

My apologies my edit summary was incorrect your edit here [3] added back content that the user had removed, it's considered impolite to refactor another users comments. Theroadislong (talk) 16

42, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Land art

I assume you are Jacek. The opening paragraph is a direct quote from your pedia text; As it is used it is a definition of terms, a material and method description of the field. Following the 'Wikipedia manual of style' the lead section, should be "a summary of its most important contents."

This piece is a detailed overview of the field, it is easy to read. I would argue that the introduction needs to describe the significant literature, reference a few of the key transitions (Grace Glueck is good but without reference; did you consider R.Krauss?) I would think the intro should describe some of the contemporary institutions, university programs and foundations that still support the work. Recent exhibitions of note include a project in Mongolia... Without a basic overview of the significant (and new) literature (with links for further reading) I am not sure how you can introduce a topic like this properly.

Talk to me or tell me to stop you like it as you wrote it. (Which seems to miss the point of all of this.)TIMC&GStudio (talk) 14:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

No I am not Jacek? Feel free to integrate your content into the body of the article, I just don't think it belongs in the lead section...certainly not before a description of what land art actually is.Theroadislong (talk) 15:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Hetherington Draft

Thank you for your comments. I'm still working on this and trying to find verification for a number of entries. Please don't delete - it is very much a work in progress. I have quite a few newspaper cuttings but with no date so have a lot of work to do. I'm hoping to get hold of some better material but it will take time.

Thank you for your time. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 21:22, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

It would stand a much better chance of being accepted if you hacked it back by at least 50% just to the notable reliably sourced parts. Theroadislong (talk) 21:27, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Wrong User Accused

Have you made this warning to Viriditas, the person who vandalized my page or just me? --Potguru (talk) 23:12, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Viriditas's edit was NOT vandalism, and if you keep blanking content you will be blocked. Theroadislong (talk) 23:23, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Deleting

Thanks for your comment. Please advise on this point. Should I delete names of teachers etc considering that, in the world of Classical Music, where you studied and who you studied with are all important. The Cleveland Institute of Music is one of the leading violin institutions in the worldBalquhidder2013 (talk) 10:55, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

All of this is currently unsourced so unless you can find references it needs to go. The article is bloated and over long, two well sourced paragraphs would be enough to get the article accepted if he is indeed notable. Theroadislong (talk) 11:05, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Forever More

Hello, I have read your revisions in which I have found several anomalies. I would be grateful for a reply to the following questions relating to those revisions.

1. Why has all information and associated links to Miles Copeland - a former manager of Forever More - been removed? 2. Why information and associated links to Mafalda Hall - also a former manager of Forever More - have been shortened? 3. Why all mention of Andy Johns (and associated links) who was the sound engineer on Forever more's second LP, was removed, whereas the details for the sound engineer on the first LP were retained? 4. Why the section relating to Forever More's session playing in the 1960s/70s (and associated recording details) was deleted? 5. Why have the life trajectories relating to recording and writing music of two former members of Forever More (Alan Gorrie and Onnie McIntyre, aka Onnie Mair) been retained but not those of the other two members, Mick Strode and Stuart Francis?

The information I provided was based on both primary and secondary source evidence. I have first hand knowledge of Forever More's performances and recordings, I was there at the time! Secondly, I have accessed the published work cited at the end of the article. The article is, therefore, a factually accurate, objective, and verifiable account of Forever More's history, and did not contain 'irrelevant puffery and name-dropping'!

As a researcher, with a highly reputable academic background, I find the above omissions puzzling to say the least. I ask you to reconsider your revisions, please.

Regards, Amber EliasAmber Elias (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Forever More

Hello, I have read your revisions in which I have found several anomalies. I would be grateful for a reply to the following questions relating to those revisions.

1. Why has all information and associated links to Miles Copeland - a former manager of Forever More - been removed? 2. Why information and associated links to Mafalda Hall - also a former manager of Forever More - have been shortened? 3. Why all mention of Andy Johns (and associated links) who was the sound engineer on Forever more's second LP, was removed, whereas the details for the sound engineer on the first LP were retained? 4. Why the section relating to Forever More's session playing in the 1960s/70s (and associated recording details) was deleted? 5. Why have the life trajectories relating to recording and writing music of two former members of Forever More (Alan Gorrie and Onnie McIntyre, aka Onnie Mair) been retained but not those of the other two members, Mick Strode and Stuart Francis?

The information I provided was based on both primary and secondary source evidence. I have first hand knowledge of Forever More's performances and recordings, I was there at the time! Secondly, I have accessed the published work cited at the end of the article. The article is, therefore, a factually accurate, objective, and verifiable account of Forever More's history, and did not contain 'irrelevant puffery and name-dropping'!

As a researcher, with a highly reputable academic background, I find the above omissions puzzling to say the least. I ask you to reconsider your revisions, please.

Regards, Amber EliasAmber Elias (talk) 17:04, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

The entire article is unreferenced, Wikipedia requires every claim and statement to be referenced, any content not referenced can be removed. The fact that you were there is irrelevant and of no use to us, in fact it means you probably have a conflict of interest Please provide reliable secondary sources for all the content. Theroadislong (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

You dope!

	You dope, I sent a POTSTICKER!
	Thank you for contributing to a meaningful conversation in an effort to make the article about (what I call) marijuana dispensaries a better article. Potguru (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello good patron. Right after I sent this my page was (for perhaps the fifth time) completely (I must say vandalized) by a user who has attempted for five days to change the name of the article to his preferred term "cannabis dispensary". Would you consider removing his (undoing his) most recent edits which only exist to attempt to sway the audience to his viewpoint? I am doing my best to remain neutral and he is doing his best to make it impossible for me to discuss (in an open honest and adult fasion) this important topic.

I beg your help. His edits have caused great pain to the community (and me) and he is being completely dishonest in his lack of presentation of factual material.

I believe his aggressive edits designed to hide my text are edit warring.

my two cents. --Potguru (talk) 18:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

His edits are certainly not vandalism, you appeared to be trying to move the goalposts after the match had already got started! I really don't wish to get that involved, I suggest you talk to User:Anna Frodesiak I'm out wassailing tonight. Theroadislong (talk) 18:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I am commenting to Anna now. Don't know what wassailing is but I hope you enjoy it. --Potguru (talk) 18:14, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello

Hi there, I don't know how to provide a citation so if you want I can paste the link to the source down below

http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-08_Flight_Directors.htm

Thank you for spotting I hadn't cited/referenced it.

Your content "Famous flight directors include Gene Kranz, who gave the famous "Failure is not an option" speech while on console during Apollo 13. Flight Directors have their own specific name for their teams when on duty." is not however supported by the reference? Theroadislong (talk) 08:53, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

I have just got your note about the proposed speedy deletion of the page I am working on. I strongly object to the proposal. The page is about a significant individual and his work and is in no way, shape or form a vehicle for publicity or promotion. The page is under construction - slowly, due to the health problems of the subject- and has not yet been submitted for review. If there is anything in particular that you consider to be in contravention of the rules of Wikipedia please inform me first and I will discuss them with you and if necessary change them.

Thank you and kind regards,

Stuart

(Stuartlindsaymorle (talk) 23:34, 26 January 2016 (UTC))

The page I tagged for deletion is your user page which is being used to promote you and your business against Wikipedia guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 23:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

COI Tag

Hello, I noticed that you tagged the Heritage Christian Academy page with a COI tag. Is there something I could edit to make the page more objective? I was trying to restore the content that was on the page prior to some vandalism, which resulted in several areas being blanked. (Sorry if this is not the correct place to ask this question.) Thanks. Hcacommunication (talk) 00:48, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Due to Yamaha PSR-E323

Good evening, Mr. Theroadislong, I wanted to ask. Advise, how do I improve this article? I do not know what to add! Can you reduce a gallery? Already very high!

See a, it took pictures at all angles, maybe a bit unsightly and out, but still better than no picture. Bye!--Lukaslt13 --Talk 17:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

To be honest it would be improved by removing the gallery! Galleries are not encouraged. Theroadislong (talk) 18:04, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Translation of Genesis (Jewish Version)

Translation of Genesis (Jewish Version) Hi Theroadislong the page you said already exists is not a translation of Genesis it only tells about Genesis. I don't think the page should be deleted.

Awesomedjh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomedjh (talk • contribs) 04:46, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Proton decay and cosmological

A good faith edit would have been to insert a better reference... in lieu of that I propose to cite [4] and [6] from the article on Proton Decay. Also the page on the Electron reference [7].

Will that suffice? GESICC (talk) 23:13, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Daddy's Girl (2001 film)

Hi, No offence intended. This is the first time I have done this so please put down any mistakes to ignorance. Apologies. Please reinsert reference. Thanks (Ignorance extended to the fact that I did not use Revision History page till now....) Sinkmac (talk) 12:18, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

No worries we all made mistakes when we started out...it's a VERY steep learning curve. Theroadislong (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your edits on Jerome Coopersmith. Much appreciated :)

gggoodgggirlGggoodgggirl (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Just a little note of thanks for your patience and balance in dealing with a new editor on Feargus Hetherington.

Gronk Oz (talk) 13:56, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Gronk Oz has embarrassed me thoroughly by thanking you on my behalf. Belatedly - thank you! Balquhidder2013 (talk) 10:42, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Dysna village

"What you are doing in the earth?". As I will now ask. ;). This may need to be written to the native homestead survived, but remained rebuilt else? And it is in the village was born and lived, not lived, but lived. Thanks :).--Lukaslt13 --Talk 16:42, 4 February 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

I have copyedited the article for you, but "native homestead survived, but remained rebuilt else?" still makes no sense, I have no idea what you are trying to say. Theroadislong (talk) 17:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Homestead, where he was born, to the Dysna river, but they for some reason (historical, political) disappeared. And the homestead where the picture, and there they reconstructed, as I understand it, as rural libraries presenter said that they reconstructed. But really the picture of Augustinas Voldemaras house.--Lukaslt13 --Talk 18:10, 5 February 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

I'm sorry but I still can't understand what you are trying to tell me. Theroadislong (talk) 19:25, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

That Augustinas Voldemaras homested, where he born, destroyed 1 world war. And they're rebuilding own house, but not near river, but where uploaded from my photo. Do you understand now?--Lukaslt13 --Talk 10:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

Sorry, you hear me?--Wikipedia great! - Lukaslt13 My talk - Yes? - Yes 09:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

You will need a reliable reference before adding anything. Theroadislong (talk) 09:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

But if there is no! If written sources unless it is the old books, but not the Internet. This could then best to leave that version, what you have changed.--Wikipedia great! - Lukaslt13 My talk - Yes? - Yes 09:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

Sources do not have to be on the internet, books are suitable. Theroadislong (talk) 09:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

We left the village temporarily resulted had no part of the text, and in the summer I can get a library book which, whether verbal source.--Wikipedia great! - Lukaslt13 My talk - Yes? - Yes 10:10, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13

Template:Koimoi

Hello, I noticed you that you added G2 (test page) notice on my created template Template:Koimoi. It wasn't a test page. The template was like Template:Indiatimes, Template:IMDb are. Why did you added that notice? ЖunalForYou ^☎️📝 04:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

My mistake I couldn't imagine why we would need such a template? Theroadislong (talk) 09:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Why are you removing Template:Koimoi. I've made the template to work now. But you are saying that the template is spam. I've also replied in my previous reply that this template is similar to Template:Indiatimes. Why are you removing it? ЖunalForYou (☎️|✍) 17:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

It's a barely notable website, why do we need to link to at all, let alone have a template for it? Theroadislong (talk) 17:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Good morning Theroadislong - I am working on the article AEDP: accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy. You alerted me to the fact that wiki picked up a copyright violation. Most of my article was then deleted. You let me know it is still available in my article history. When I clicked on undo (out of curiosity to see if my article would appear) - it appeared divided up into blue boxes. I have some questions:

1. are the blue boxes where a copy right violation was detected? I noticed in the bold print that noted the key words that matched the article I copy/pasted from - was "%4state3statetransformation That is a title of a diagram and also terminology specific to AEDP. There are many such items in the text.

2. Do I need to put quotation marks around these AEDP terms? Is it adequate enough add the reference? But I don't need to add the reference everytime, right?

3. After I copy/pasted the first sentence from the article I was using as a reference (which was picked up as a copyright violation), I revised the sentence, even changing the point of the sentence: i.e., the point was to say that aedp improves upon some other models, I revised to make the point of one aspect of what it simply does, without comparison. I saved that. It was after my revision was saved that the wikipedia deleted for copyright violation - citing the original sentence (that bold print with the%).

So can you advise me as to how to protect my draft-in-progress from being tagged? It says that repeated violators will be blocked from writing on wikipedia. Should i use the sandbox instead?

Thank you for your time in answering my questions. I am learning as I am going...Carrieruggieri (talk) 12:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

copyright issues while writing draft

Good morning Theroadislong - I am working on the article AEDP: accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy. You alerted me to the fact that wiki picked up a copyright violation. Most of my article was then deleted. You let me know it is still available in my article history. When I clicked on undo (out of curiosity to see if my article would appear) - it appeared divided up into blue boxes. I have some questions:

1. are the blue boxes where a copy right violation was detected? I noticed in the bold print that noted the key words that matched the article I copy/pasted from - was "%4state3statetransformation That is a title of a diagram and also terminology specific to AEDP. There are many such items in the text.

2. Do I need to put quotation marks around these AEDP terms? Is it adequate enough add the reference? But I don't need to add the reference everytime, right?

3. After I copy/pasted the first sentence from the article I was using as a reference (which was picked up as a copyright violation), I revised the sentence, even changing the point of the sentence: i.e., the point was to say that aedp improves upon some other models, I revised to make the point of one aspect of what it simply does, without comparison. I saved that. It was after my revision was saved that the wikipedia deleted for copyright violation - citing the original sentence (that bold print with the%).

So can you advise me as to how to protect my draft-in-progress from being tagged? It says that repeated violators will be blocked from writing on wikipedia. Should i use the sandbox instead?

Thank you for your time in answering my questions. I am learning as I am going...Carrieruggieri (talk) 12:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC) Carrieruggieri (talk) 13:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

"Wiki" didn't pick up a copyright violation? I did. You cannot protect your draft, Wikipedia is editable by anyone. You shouldn't be copying and pasting ANYTHING at all into your draft or sandbox. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, everything needs to be written in your own words using the sources to verify each sentence or claim. Theroadislong (talk) 13:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

how to withdraw an draft submitted for review

Hi theroadislong, It's carrieruggieri once again. I would like to withdraw article AEDP... from the editors for review. I did not realize review automatically leads to publication. I only wanted to see how I was doing before continuing on with a long article. I would like to complete the article before I submit my draft for review. BTW, are you a reviewer? Was my article up for review and that is why it got tagged? I very much appreciate you patience. Carrieruggieri (talk) 13:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not a reviewer, but any editor can see what everyone else is editing, there are no secrets I'm afraid ! I'm not aware that your draft was up for review, but you did ask for others to look at it at The Teahouse. Theroadislong (talk) 13:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your willingness to wade into the "unpleasant nest of vipers." Your comments and edits are neutral and appropriate. I explained (several times) to the other editor why the "first of its kind" claim is clearly nonsense and puffery; the magazine probably just mostly pulled it from a press release, the press will do that from time to time...  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 21:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong,

I finished my Wiki-Excercise yesterday where I should write about something that I like and explain why I do so. So I wrote about Minions, what they are, where they appear and why I like them so much. Today my page was talk page was deleted, because the article type was not accepted. I am really devastaded, because firstly my post was not copletely in blog style and secondly - how am I suppose to write a post about what I like without it being in blog style? As this is a class exercise from my university this is really important for me to be online before 12 o'clock. But I am afraid to upload everything again and in the end be banned from Wikipedia. How should I proceed?

Thank you for any help you can offer. Kind regards, Christina.

My talk page was deleated!

Hi Theroadislong,

I finished my Wiki-Excercise yesterday where I should write about something that I like and explain why I do so. So I wrote about Minions, what they are, where they appear and why I like them so much. Today my page was talk page was deleted, because the article type was not accepted. I am really devastaded, because firstly my post was not copletely in blog style and secondly - how am I suppose to write a post about what I like without it being in blog style? As this is a class exercise from my university this is really important for me to be online before 12 o'clock. But I am afraid to upload everything again and in the end be banned from Wikipedia. How should I proceed?

Thank you for any help you can offer. Kind regards, SchrumpflinH (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid that you are misunderstanding what Wikipedia is, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia it is not the place for writing about something you like. There are blogs and forums for that sort of thing, but here we are building an encyclopedia. SeeWikipedia:What Wikipedia is not Theroadislong (talk) 10:45, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Bishop Challoner Catholic Federation of Schools

Dear theroadislong

Many thanks for advice and tips which I think come from you? Wikipedia entries not something I've done before so am not clear if I have done it correctly. I have attempted to maintain the neurtrality and avoid conflicts of interest or bias and have tried to cite as much as I can.

There is a problematic name with this entry in that Bishop Challoner Catholic Collegiate School has changed its name to Bishop Challoner Catholic Federation of Schools. I have tried to make clear this disambiguiation.

I have also added facts and data about headteachers of the past and information about the architectural setting.

I hope this has been appropriate as I have tried to make it plain and ecyclopedic in content and made any changes cited and verifiable.

I am the current Executive Principal so very much not wanting to have conflict of interest but am wanting accuracy.

Nick

BishopChallonerSoar (talk) 17:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)BishopChallonerSoar

I suggest you make suggestions on the article talk page rather than edit the article yourself and please do NOT upload any more copyrighted photographs Wikipedia takes copyright infringement very seriously. Theroadislong (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Bishop Challoner page edits

Dear Theroadislong

Really realy helpful - thank you. Understood regarding your changes and your guidance here very much welcome.

My I ask about your removal of the photographs? We own the copyright to these so therefore no infringements, no? I did try to indicate this when the uploader asked me? They are our photos?

Understood regarding feeling that this was beginning to become prospetus-lit. Didnt intend so thanks for this. Hence not using an anonymous account but wanting to be above board and clear. Accept and understood regarding "puffery" - though I dont really get that the standards and results section was puffery - I intended it to be entirely factual and a recitation of Ofsted / Dfe data. I will find valid and reliable soure and add if you think this apt.

The main reason I went onto the page was to change the name as the "collegiate" term is out of date and was only in existence for a few years. I would welcome any advice on whether I did the correct thing re-directing federation searches to the "collegiate" page itself or whether I should tried to begin a new page?

BishopChallonerSoar (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2016 (UTC)BishopChallonerSoar

The links I included would seem to show that you do NOT own the copyright? Copyright belongs to the photographer not the owner of the photographs? Theroadislong (talk) 19:52, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Links to usefull sources

Dear LongRoad, I've added 2 very useful links that helped me understand the YEC's position and as this article is all about the YEC, often seen through different glasses, it is more than useful to help readers find these sources. As you have removed the links, what is the reason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeeliefhebber (talk • contribs) 15:50, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Yobo removed them the second time actually. The article is meant to explain YEC according to the reliable sources, it is not for you to promote the cause with spammy external links. Please discuss on the articles talk page. Theroadislong (talk) 15:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear friend, There are many sentences in this article explaining what others think of YEC, which is not encyclopedic at all. Henry Morris is mentioned in the opening part, as a key person, but the organisation he founded you label as spammy. I sense you strongly disagree with the YEC's position and therefor label these sites as spammy? But these sites are really very good in explaining about everything there is to say from the YEC's position. please reconsider, that is, do some fact checking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeeliefhebber (talk • contribs) 16:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Please present your case for inclusion on the article talk page not here. Theroadislong (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

From Darrylowens312

You've sent me two messages about editing the page of Beacon College. You've called the edits "soapboxing" and the like, which is the furthest from the truth as I intentionally exercised restraint in not using aggrandizing adjectives to describe the school. Rather I presented facts in a sober manner as cited in published news papers and trades. In fact, the style and structure and content mirrors other college and university pages which apparently made it through with flying colors. What the deal? ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darrylowens312 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

You clearly can't tell when you are being promotional, which is precisely why editors with a conflict of interest are strongly advised NOT to edit articles directly but make suggestions on the talk page. you added these two chunks of promotional puffery for a start "Every Beacon student leaves the college with stronger critical-thinking skills and — equipped by a four-year career development program — professional skills designed to help each student understand his or her specific skill set and goals. Career development courses, along with professional internships, help ensure each student embarks on the appropriate career path after leaving Beacon" and..."As Beacon College evolves to meet the needs of a growing student body, helping revive, restore and reinvigorate Leesburg has gone in lockstep" This kind of content has absolutely no place in an encyclopedia but is fine in your prospectus. Theroadislong (talk) 22:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Gareth Williams - composer

Thanks for looking at this. The content has long been in Wiki - I've simply tried to provide some links. I'll try to provide more verification when I have time Balquhidder2013 (talk) 11:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

East London Group

Thanks for your edit about external references. I've done as you suggested. Not sure how to get rid of the suggestion box at the top of the page.

Graean (talk) 12:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Good morning:

Thank you for including the quoted passages in your most recent response. That material was drawn from our website content and not drafted by me, and thus, not as closely vetted. I see your point about the material's marketing quality, even if I take exception with what reads like (at least digitally) a bristly bedside manner. However, here is the question: All that material and the new sections that I invested hours in creating (including new photos uploaded) seem to have disappeared into the ether. Must I now add all the "suggestions" to the talk page so that it will be considered for restoration? 8.26.113.34 (talk) 15:19, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry I have no idea what you are talking about...can you help me with an article name? Theroadislong (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Who are you

I've never edited Bernard Tomic's wikipedia page. I think you have me mistaken with someone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.143.86.21 (talk) 16:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Because you have no account you have a shared IP address so will get warning messages whenever vandalism occurs with that ip address. You can always create an account. 16:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Theroadislong (talk)

Warning?

No need to warn me because I have already been blocked from editing. SabbirHossen177 (talk) 17:15, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

You have NOT been blocked or you would not be able to edit here. Theroadislong (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I have been blocked. I can't edit anywhere. SabbirHossen177 (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Then you are misunderstanding the meaning of "blocked" if you were blocked you would not be able to edit anything except your own talk page. Your edits may have been reverted because you didn't supply reliable sources? Theroadislong (talk) 17:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

No. I can't edit in any page. Not even my own talk page. SabbirHossen177 (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Clearly that is NOT the case. Theroadislong (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Anyway, sorry for disturbing. SabbirHossen177 (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Premier Inn edit

Hello,

I have now added the appropriate citation for the edit I made. Please let me know if this still fails to meet the appropriate requirements. Best wishes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cityhotelexpert (talk • contribs) 12:52, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I can't see where the reference mentions "digital promotion'? The reference is also a primary source it would be much more useful if it were a secondary source. Theroadislong (talk) 12:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

editing Redeemer Presbyterian Church

Hi thanks for the reminder. I was aware of this protocol. The edit I made was removing a person's name because it was randomly inserted at the end of a paragraph. It kind of looked like someone did it as a joke. I searched the article being referenced and her name does not appear in it. RedComm2000 (talk) 18:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Because you thanked me

Theroadislong, you thanked me for one of my recent edits, so here is a heart-felt...  YOU'RE WELCOME! It's a pleasure, and I hope you have a lot of fun while you edit this inspiring encyclopedia phenomenon! Marianna251TALK

19:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC) Marianna251TALK 19:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk page on Feargus Hethherington article

I see that you have re-instated the 'talk' from 'Talk' on draft pages. I did not intend to be rude when I removed it but understood that this was in order. Where you have placed this 'talk' places it in the public domain. I would be very grateful if you would remove it. Thank you. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 11:25, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk pages can be archived, but you cannot delete other peoples comments unless it is on your own talk page. Theroadislong (talk) 11:44, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I would be grateful if you would archive them. There was no warning that either an editor's comments or a user's comments would be placed in the public domain. If this is the norm (which it clearly isn't) there should be a warning to that effect. These reflect badly on my incompetence and inexperience and have nothing to do with the subject. I don't mind them remaining on my user page but I do not wish any of this dialogue to be on the Feargus Hetherington page. Thank you. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 14:48, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

ALL content is visible to everyone on Wikipedia, the talk page will be archived when necessary but will still be visible to all. You have absolutely nothing to be concerned. Theroadislong (talk) 15:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I would be grateful if you would remove it from the Feargus Hetherington page. Thank you. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 15:26, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I can't do that, you will have to discuss it with an admin. Theroadislong (talk) 15:31, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I will do so. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Theroadislong. I have done as you suggested and only landed myself in more trouble. I have read all pages on 'Talk' and new contributors etc and feel entitled to ask you once more to delete the Talk from the page in question. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

You clearly have not read enough then, I CANNOT delete the talk page I would be vandalizing if I did that. It simply isn't allowed unless the content was malicious or attacking in nature in which case an admin could redact it. Theroadislong (talk) 20:16, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I mean archive it. Leave it where it had been. Thank you. Balquhidder2013 (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

My recent edit on God

Sorry about the wordings' lack of sense. I have known about that myself.Gonzales John (talk) 11:13, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Newport International University, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages West Hills and NIU. 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) 15:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for the welcome to Wikipedia.

Ethanlu121 (talk) 19:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi

So you may have a point that I have been edited this page to much. Yes I have, but should a page have mistakes or should people like me fix the problem?

"Hariton Pushwagner is not a big pop art artist. He is big only in Norway. He should not be on this Page. Yes this disturbing that you or the person behind this page not have any control. I was only edited this page from that, but you or the person behind this page put it back. Can you please answer why this artist should be on this page?" ISueco (talk) 13:55, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Designmagnani

Hi! I declined your speedy on User:Designmagnani – it's true that "Passionate interior designer." is a bit promotional, but I think we can allow a new user who's signed up for Wikipedia:Meetup/Scranton/ArtAndFeminism 2016/University of Scranton a little slack: at least they're going to receive some appropriate training. I hope you don't disagree with this too vehemently :) Best wishes,  —SMALLJIM  17:36, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Bfield26

I have declined this speedy, because since it was placed the user has contributed to the mainspace, and it is clear she is not here for U5-style Facebookery. I have given her some advice about the use of user pages. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:59, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

This is Barbara Field (Bfield26). I am a new user who trained yesterday with Feminism+Art at MOMA. About 3 or 4 volunteers, one of whom is a Wikipedia expert, worked with me. I'm a journalist also. We double checked things together and I was very cautious. I made sure that the two entries I did--one for an artist and one for an author---were fine. I checked with them. I don't understand and am asking one of them whose email I have for help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:E08E:B200:6CBD:D30:69A5:7E1C (talk) 18:10, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

The content on her user page is entirely inappropriate though? Theroadislong (talk) 18:28, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Not entirely - it's over the top, and I have advised her to tone it down. (Marketing people have terrible difficulty in not writing marketing-speak). The main point though, is that she is here to contribute to the encyclopedia, and contributors are allowed some latitude for what they put on their user pages; if there is a problem, it's best to explain it first rather than speedy (see WP:UP#Handling inappropriate content. WP:CSD#U5 is designed for the many newbies who think this is a social-networking site and only want to write about themselves. This was posted as a first edit, and at that point when you tagged it was U5-eligible, though it might be better to wait an hour or two to see what a new user does next, so as not to be WP:BITEy.

I see that both this newbie and the one above were on editathons. If I can find who organised them, I might suggest that they brief their new contributors that user pages (a) should not be promotional and (b) should up-front say something about the user's editing intentions, e.g. that they were taking part in the editathon, or planned to edit a particular type of article, to make it clear that they were not here just for Facebookery. JohnCD (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for your recent edit. You are requested to verify the citations you have deleted manually and restore those citations because those all are third party citations in support of the articles. These all sources can be verified manually on line.Prinshukr (talk) 13:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

They are not citations they are mentions of the books, books don't require citations the ISBn numbers verify that they exist you need to find some in depth coverage of the books rather than commercial links to purchase them. Theroadislong (talk) 14:03, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

thanks. i do understand your points and would revise those citations and remove commercial links. Prinshukr (talk) 14:14, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Bishopsgate Institute

Hi Theroadislong

You seem to have stripped the Bishopsgate Institute of most of the activity that goes on within this 120 year old charity in your last edit. We are not a commercial organisation but were set up in 1894/5 to provide learning and support to those living in the East End of London . This has been part of our charitable objects for over hundred years. Our courses are for the most part paid for by those enrolling but are often just covering costs. Any profit is reinvested into the charity to provide more courses and talks. The other charity work supporting pensioners and other members of the community has also continued for over a hundred years.

I imagine wikipedia entries for charities are permitted to contain information about the work that they do. I can see how it would become problematic if they went on to claim that this work was important or worthwhile or making a difference to the world.

The edit on the section that describes the how the various cultural events/debates/talks arrive at their subject matter seems to be removing descriptive/explanatory text not promotional content. They're not described as 'great' or 'inspirational'. No one is urged to attend. It just explains the potential origins of content.

My next edit was to be an updated image of the front of the building as the existing images is now at least seven years out of date. At risk of sounding flippant, would this be best taken by somebody at a further distance from the building?

I can see how the Hall Hire activity (our most overtly commercial activity, used to provide funds which are invested into new courses) might not be appropriate - but the language used was fairly neutral and the information has stood unaltered for a while now, before my time at the Institute.

It's my first edit of any wikipedia page and one for which I finally felt qualified to be able to provide accurate and up-to-date information. I was careful to keep my language as neutral as possible and only swapped outdated content for current information (salsa out, tap dancing in) . The list of courses that had existed previously but I updated gave no value judgement on their worth or quality or reasons why anyone should enrol. Anyone seeking to check on the accuracy of the lists would have needed to consult the Institute and would probably have ended up speaking to me to verify information. I also made my association with the Institute as explicit as possible with my user name. I therefore don't understand why they should be contentious.

Your message prompted me to read through guidance on Conflict of Interest and Bias, but cannot see how any of the edits I made were biased or promoted the organisation other than by providing information that was accurate and current. I understand why the rules are there but don't really see how I broke them with my edits.

The demonstration video containing the encouragement to click the Edit button and become a wikipedian did not mention what would ensue when I did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielatBishopsgateInstitute (talk • contribs) 15:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia relies on what the reliable secondary sources say about the subject; we are not interested in what the institute has to say about itself. Theroadislong (talk) 15:51, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Theroadislong/Archive 18. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by -Liance^{talk/contribs} 17:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Wereld Dovenbond - World Federation of the Deaf - Fédération mondiale des sourds

Could you help me to translate an article in Dutch , please ? I need some help. This article is World Federation of the Deaf (Wereld Dovenbond). 90.60.250.222 (talk) 19:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

ik spreek geen Nederlands Theroadislong (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Ralfonso Gschwend

Good evening, I am a new member and yesterday I tried to upload 2 pictures from kinetic sculptor Ralfonso Gschwend. Later I received a notification about the deletion and I am totally confused. This is my first time using Wikipedia and I read the copyright information I received. Since I've got both pictures I published from the artist, I assumed I was allow to published. Please advice. i am new at this and I am just trying to create awareness about his art in this area. He created last year's International Kinetic Art Exhibit in our county and also is the co-founder of KAO. Please advice and thanks for your help.Floridana33 (talk) 00:18, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Owning the photographs doesn't give you the copyright? The copyright rests with the photographer who would need to release them himself. You need to prove that the copyright holder has released the image under an acceptable free license. Note that images that are licensed for use only on Wikipedia, or only for non-commercial or educational use, or under a license that doesn't allow for the creation of modified/derived works, are unsuitable. (example, see below for details) When in doubt, do not upload copyrighted images. Theroadislong (talk) 09:58, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Swansea Grand Theatre

Hi Theroadislong, all of the edits we have made to the 'Grand Theatre, Swansea' page have been historical facts not our opinions. The only reason we have been editing at all is so that we could get authorised and change the name to the correct name 'Swansea Grand Theatre'. We first requested this in the page's talk in 2014 but nothing ever happened. Are you able to change the page title for us please? Kind regards Swansea Grand TheatreSwansea Grand Theatre (talk) 15:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I've done that for you. Theroadislong (talk) 15:37, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Massive thanks

Hi Theroadislong, thanks so much that was awesome of you Swansea Grand Theatre (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

hi there

Hi there, thank you for flagging the guidelines for the wiki page for Harlyn Bay. I noticed that Polmark holiday properties has included a reference to their site, so thought it would only be fair if we added a link our our site which is the main site for the area harlynbay.com - we have lived here for over 100 years. This is a very small area in Cornwall and our site includes lots of useful information for visitors whether they want to stay at our self-catering accommodation or not. Is there a better way for me to include a link to this information on our site? Thanks in advance for your guidance, Daniel Green — Preceding unsigned comment added by HarlynBaycornwall (talk • contribs) 17:10, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I have removed the other link for you, neither has any place in an encyclopedia article. Theroadislong (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

COI - UKFast

Hi Theroadislong.

I'd like to know what, in the latest edit, required the COI tag? I'm eager to work with you on a page which complies completely, but it will be difficult to keep this page updated if a COI tag is to be added with every new addition?

--A.Hardaker (talk) 14:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

With your conflict of interest it would be advisable to make suggestions on the talk page rather than editing the article directly. Theroadislong (talk) 15:09, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

---What conflict would that be? --A.Hardaker (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @A.Hardaker, please be advised that WP:OUTING applies. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 15:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

---@Theroadislong  @Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi Handy. Given the removal of the table, why is there still a COI tag?

Hello I'm very new to wiki I was hoping to add a link to my publishers page Michael Aushenker since his page references me. Not sure how to get my info up without breaking the rules. I guess I just wait for someone to write it for me? Thank you for your time sorry for being confusing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus Collar (talk • contribs) 16:27, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

If you are notable someone else will write an article about you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Putting in Links

Hi Theroadislong, Many thanks for doing this for me. I am so grateful. I need to go through the page and make more links. Could you tell me how to do it please? I must say,it is driving me mad! Liubov HandsofGenius (talk) 12:56, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

You simply put two brackets like this [ at the beginning of the article name and two like this ] at the end? Theroadislong (talk) 12:59, 24 March 2016 (UTC)