![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Hello Ivanvector. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).
Sent via-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello Ivanvector. I have worked on this article after it was userfied upon your reco. Could you please have a look and comment? and please let me know what is the next step??? Please see the article here User:Educationtemple/Sunil Kumar Verma Educationtemple ( talk) 21:16, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I write to tell you I appreciate your response on the ANI. You made several good points that hadn't been discussed I wanted to briefly address.
I agree that I do tend to be more verbose than I should be in these discussions. I learned to write in the days before the 140 character limit, and the approach these days is very different. I'm getting there.
I also accept that I can be perceived as out to "right great wrongs." I think my writing tends to come-off a bit bombastic.
My only agenda... well, I have some areas of interest, and one over-arching concept. The areas of interest are abuse of the wiki for PR self-promotion; financial frauds, and frauds generally; and the abuse of statistics in the social sciences. The overarching concept is that I object to bullshit. I think I'm pretty good at detecting bullshit. (A decade and a half investigating frauds, interviewing criminals, and deposing law enforcement officers, combined with an innate mistrust of others, and you start to be able to smell a lie.) I think people in general, including the folks who edit and maintain the wiki, drastically underestimate their susceptibility to manipulation and deceit, as well as the risks posed. Everybody does, or fraudsters wouldn't be able to operate.
BBR23 brought up Joseph Borg. When I saw Joe Borg claiming to have shut-down Stratton-Oakmont, which I know isn't true because I was there, I went through his other claims. I found that, starting with his web page and personal promotional materials, he'd been taking credit, falsely, for faux roles in shutting down major frauds. In a typical example, after other lawyers for other places shut-down and seized a building that had been used to operate a fraud, Borg rode to the building, apparently from Alabama, in a military attack vehicle and upon arrival declared that he and others had taken the building. That made it onto Borg's materials as "Borg led the seizure of... using an all terrain military vehicle." The same language, with very minor variations, appeared in Borg's materials and his page here, with excerpts on the pages for the individual frauds. I look at that and see "You know, the only way this could have happened, is if a politician was trying to take credit for a lot of things he didn't do, and he or his staff went out to journalists (which they have, we've seen this) to push that story in interviews, and the only way the talking points would get on here verbatim is if he and his staff were putting them up themselves."
Maybe I'm over-sensitive; but I think I know a good fraud when I smell one. Djcheburashka ( talk) 09:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I really appreciate your taking the time. Yes, it all makes sense.
Regarding "following Roscelese" -- not exactly. When the "edit war" began, I wanted to see what the deal was, so I looked at her page. I found all these warnings for stuff that seemed really similar to what I was experiencing. I didn't know who she was or what the sides were on these issues. So I started to look through some of her edits and what gave rise to the warnings. In most cases, I thought her contributions made perfect sense, or were within how I understand the wiki is supposed to work. So, cool. I also, however, found several instances in which there's a pattern I find disturbing: One or two editors will "camp" on a page, and a series of editors will comment about POV issues. Each time, however, the "camping" editors will very quickly accuse the new editor of POV, and disruption, because they're violating "the consensus." Everyone new who tries to come to the page gets bullied off, so at any given moment it seems like there's a consensus, when really there isn't. This seemed to always be about what, for lack of a term less likely to get me accused of something, I'll call "women's rights issues 80% of the way to the end of a broad spectrum." What I did when I found those, was add my comment to the effect that I agreed with the outside editor -- the point being, that the next time an issue arose, it would be harder to claim "consensus." I understand that there's some controversy caused by "mens rights movement" people, and I understand why we would object to that and find it disruptive. But that doesn't have anything to do with me, and I don't think showing POV by vandals demonstrates that the article is NPOV or unbiased to begin with.
Regarding Joe Borg, do all such issues have to go to the WP:RSN noticeboard? Can't I use the article talk pages, as I did in this case?
Also -- how do I prove a negative? Someone puts up a claim, citing a profile-piece on Borg from, say, 2012, which is about something that occurred in 1996. The record from 1996, though, doesn't refer to Borg. As you say If there is notable controversy about Borg's involvement in the Stratton Oakmont case, then reliable sources will have written about it. But there is no notable controversy. The claim appeared in the "Alabama Business Journal" profile piece, and nearly verbatim on, I think five, wiki pages. That's it.
The cites to the Wall St. Journal and Forbes did not support the claim on the wiki article. There's a big gap between "Joe Borg was part of a task force of state attorneys' generals that sued Stratton Oakmont," which is surely true and what the Forbes and Wall St. J said; and "Joe Borg formed and led a task force of state attorneys whose investigation uncovered Stratton Oakmont's fraud and led to it and others prosecutions," which is what the wiki page said.
I think with Joe Borg, on the talk page I went through the record regarding the claims. The claim was, as I recall, that Borg had put together a task-force that led to the investigation and arrest of Belfort, because of complaints Borg received after taking office. The important part of the claim is causation, that a-led-to-be-led-to-c. I found WP:RS -- consisting of contemporaneous documents -- showing that (a) Belfort had been under investigation for 5 years prior to Borg having taken office; (b) Borg's task force was assembled at the conclusion of those other investigations, not before them; and (c) the event that led to Belfort's criminal arrest, was when the FBI (led by an AUSA who, contemporaneous sources said, had been investigating Belfort for five years) obtained the cooperation of a confidential informant. I also cited editorials in the NY Times and Wall St. J., and an interview on Bloomberg TV available on the web, by the lead AUSA who investigated and prosecuted Belfort, the SEC attorney who led their team regarding Belfort, and the FINRA receiver who took over Stratton Oakmont. None of them mention Borg's task force.
Is that not enough regarding the claim of causation? Is the issue that it should be taken to WP:RSN rather than the talk page?
This is coming up on a related page, Jordan Belfort. Belfort's memoir says that he went to work at L.F. Rothschild as a stockbroker trainee, then was laid-off following Black Monday, and then after that was taught about penny stocks, and after that founded Stratton Oakmont. This storyline is rather key to the portrayal of Belfort's character. It's so key that it became a memorable scene with Matthew Mcwhateverahey playing an L.F. Rothschild broker in the movie. The idea is that Belfort was a legitimate guy who went bad because of temptation and then got redeemed, and really wasn't different than other Wall St. people. The same FINRA document above shows, though, that Stratton Oakmont was founded six months before Black Monday. I think the FINRA document is WP:RS as to when Stratton Oakmont was founded.
Is that not enough to be able to say on the wiki article that the story of Rothschild-then-Black-Monday-then-penny-stocks-then-SO, as told in the memoir and repeated widely, is false?
The question of whether Belfort's memoir is true or another fraud is itself noteable. Its been the subject of numerous articles in the NY Times (including several editorials and at least one op-ed), the Wall St. J, slate.com, and is discussed at least briefly in many of the pieces covering Belfort or the movie.
Thank you again for your help and advice. Djcheburashka ( talk) 05:50, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Djcheburashka ( talk) 05:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Again, with Joe Borg, I don't agree. I see where you're going, and my analysis was possibly incorrect. Disputing the claim of causation is fine, but the problem is you are disputing it based on your own research. It's good research, but it's still your own, and not published in a reliable source. WP:V doesn't require everything to be included, but WP:NPOV does require all reliably published viewpoints to be considered, so no, you can't just remove reliably-sourced claims that you disagree with; that's cherrypicking. If a reliable source publishes the claim, and no reliable source disputes it, then it goes in. You could challenge the reliability of the source, which is where the RS noticeboard would be of use. You might find more editors there with a sense of detecting PR promo pieces than I do (I tend to give sources leniency in this area unless they are obvious press releases, but many others don't) and you might find more supportive voices. Or at least, more comprehensive advice than I'm able to give on the subject.
Your analysis of the international legal interpretations of slander is over my head, to be honest. I'm not sure about CDA 230 with Creative Commons licensing in effect here; it's my (not particularly informed) understanding that all submissions here are considered to be published by the Wikimedia Foundation, rather than by the user who clicked the "save page" button, and I think it would be a stretch to claim that Wikipedia is an internet service provider (though maybe that's not required, I'm not very familiar with CDA 230). At any rate, the biography of living persons policy follows from recommendations of the WMF's legal team (as I understand it) and that's good enough for me.
In terms of what's acceptable as general notability and neutrality go, something I found immensely helpful when starting out here was following and participating in articles for deletion discussions. It's a good way to see how more experienced users formulate articles based in Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and what general thresholds are considered for notability and verifiability. Just a thought. Ivanvector ( talk) 22:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
The comments of @Ivanvector from the week-end suggest that the last two sections of the History section at Ukraine are far too long. This seems an accurate summation and the shortened edit would reduce the size by half titled: Euromaidan, Crimea, and the Secession Crisis. The short version is on Talk:Ukraine. FelixRosch ( TALK) 19:08, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
I object to your refactoring and as per WP:REFACTOR, you should revert it. The hatting usage notes to follow WP:REFACTOR. I request that you revert it. Tutelary ( talk) 21:45, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Goes both ways. You reject refactoring so I won't redo it. ^^ Tutelary ( talk) 01:18, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Re your post on his talk page, as far as I'm aware he's not actually posted in regard to homeopathy - just other fringe 'alt med' stuff. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 18:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hotter than July (album). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 ( talk) 12:10, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!! |
Hello Ivanvector, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message. |
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Education noticeboard. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smooth Island (Ontario); someone's given the article a complete rewrite. Nyttend ( talk) 02:10, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Ivanvector,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
NorthAmerica
1000
10:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (confabulate) @ 09:55, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Orson Scott Card. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello and thank you for your comments at Redirects for Discussion on Autism Research Institute. As I mentioned there, I work for ARI and now that the DAN! page has been renamed to Autism Research Institute, I'm hoping that editors such as yourself will help add more material to explain what ARI is and does. The page now still really focuses on DAN! and only describes ARI as having created that initiative, whereas it is an organization that continues to be active following the end of DAN! Knowing that it is not best for me to make any edits myself, I've provided a few pieces of information at Talk:Autism Research Institute about ARI that could be added, along with links to third-party references for them. Would you mind taking a look? Thank you, Difulton ( talk) 19:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
HALLO IVAN, Me as a Iranian-German is really sad someone make Samira SAMII wikipedi page with lots of wrong information. SAMII´s are a famous family in iran... why I can not edit anything in her page. why the article of Mahdavikia are in her page.. why they edit worng resident in her page... what is a picture??? Please answer me as an export user — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 19:02, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
IVAN, thanks for your Massage... can you please change the SMAIRA SAMII resident... she is living in Monte Carlo SAMIRA SAMII is also doesn't like to talk about Mahdavikia- She said in all her interviews this is her privacy... tats why it would be great if you delete FOCUS.DE article. SAMIRA SAMII is coming from well-known family. (Noble Family of Persia) She is permian-german not Iranian-German. She is famous i soccer Business and she has her own home-Page with many articles which you can find as a administrator.... Please remove all article about Mahdavikia because this is shame for us as person people to our SAMIRA SAMII - Person which we proud of her in IRAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 20:51, 12 January 2015 (UTC) Why anyone can help me???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 10:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ivan, I can not understand your comment in SamiraSamii deletion... see this link: http://www.samirasamii.com/en/ It snot nice to used the publicity PUBLIC FIGURS or famous people like Samira SAMII to use for Wikipedia in wrong from.... Anyway she warns everyone and her fans... Delete all Mahdavikia´s Article and picture with Fadi Merze and correct the Residence... I really wanna speedy deletion of her page... Its unfair what the user do it..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 12:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
HI IVAN, thanks for your massage... but you have to delete the wrong articles... For example her residence... She is a public Figure which she doesn't like to speak about her private life. But I know, that she never lives in AUGSBURG and she doesn't live in Germany... You don't have any sources, that make u sure about it. Also you dont have any sources that Mahdavikia´s History is correct. in Iranian NEWS-PAPERS all the apologized from SAMII Family... How you can add these things... WIKIPEDIA is the site for know the person and know about update and correct information but nor false.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC) According to this article she is living in Monte Carlo- The name of Newspaper is ABEND ZEITUNG NÜRNBERG http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.samirasamii.com/14/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/20080902_-B-_-Samiee-fcn-marketing_0647.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.samirasamii.com/az-3/&h=2283&w=1465&tbnid=fp4SqX3qJcA1HM:&zoom=1&tbnh=90&tbnw=58&usg=__Hp5VIxTNLK1BF087h1gGovDzZDY=&docid=8_j7Nn_FDw95BM&sa=X&ei=wq22VISSD8n3UqragZAN&ved=0CCMQ9QEwAA&dur=581 So you have a source which your residence info is wrong.... !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 18:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC) http://www.nordbayern.de/nuernberger-nachrichten/nuernberg/exotin-in-der-mannerwelt-1.895329 regarding this page you information is wrong... She is living in Monaco.... I can not understand which play you are playing.... Why you don't search exactly what you editing.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 18:18, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear IVAN, http://rund-magazin.de/uploads/images/am_ball/abcdefgh/samirapoldi.jpg Please upload this picture. Which is free of Charge and free of right and fits much better to the WIKIPEDIA PAGE. Under the Photo it is written: SPORT MANAGER- SPORT COLUMNIST I CAN UNDERSTAND GERMAN. If u have any question don't hesitate to contact me... THANKS!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
|
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Prostitution in Canada. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
I've closed the longstanding RFD for Lightning in a tropical cyclone as no consensus with an unusually detailed rationale. Basically, nobody wanted to keep it, but there wasn't consensus on what to do, so I've taken a bold step of un-redirecting it and immediately sending it to AFD to get input from people who don't often show up at RFD. I'd really appreciate your input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lightning in a tropical cyclone, where I've given a strong suggestion that people pick between the RFD-favored steps of deletion or retargeting to lightning. I'm attempting to notify everyone who participated in the RFD (that's BDD, Ivanvector, Inks.LWC, Guy1890, Steel1943, and Thryduulf), but if I missed someone, please do the notification for me. Nyttend ( talk) 18:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey Ivanvector,
Just wanted to give you a heads-up that I tagged
User:IvanVector for
speedy deletion criterion U2. If you want to make sure that "IvanVector" is always associated with you in regards to its spelling, there's a couple of options that I know that you can do:
Hope this helps! Steel1943 ( talk) 20:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Ivanvector, from the outset I thought the action 'ill-advised', but well intended. For that reason (on my part), no rant is required. Pincrete ( talk) 16:58, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gun show loophole. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert. Yes, I thought somebody had typed in the lines and misspelled "visitor", but then I went to The Raven and saw the spelling there, tracked it back to the cited source, and found what you already knew... and then spread the word about the word, so to speak. -- Thnidu ( talk) 01:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, i just explicitly requested to you, within the ongoing RFD about wp:KAFFEEKLATSCH redirects, that you remove the tag(s) you added to the wp:kaffeeklatsch redirect. It's bringing the RFD off-topic, if it has to be discussed more, so I'll try here. Seriously, i do appreciate your adding the soft redirect to the top of the RFD, and your trying to help. But, it is undermining the usefulness of the soft redirect example, if it is tagged. It makes it look bad and does not show what users would see if the soft redirect is kept. It is actually interfering with the RFD, imo, though I assume you do not intend that. I'll watch here, hope to keep this side discussion out of the RFD itself as much as possible. I hope you could just remove the tag and briefly indicate you've done so at the RFD, in response to my request. sincerely -- do ncr am 04:25, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Also, that redirect is incorrectly placed in a hidden category that refers to project pages. Nothing about Lightbreather's subpage nor that redirect to it has anything to do with a project. Please correct your mistakes. EChastain ( talk) 15:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
{{
R to user namespace}}
template has nothing to do with project pages. It only indicates that the redirect goes to a page in user space from a redirect that is not in user space (i.e. categorizing cross-namespace redirects).
Ivanvector (
talk)
16:26, 14 February 2015 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
See WP:Talk_page guidelines#Editing comments. In fact, I think it would be good if you read the whole WP:Talk page guidelines. What you just did is very forbidden. EChastain ( talk) 18:01, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:World marriage-equality laws.svg. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
NeilN talk to me 15:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
How did you correct the day in the substituted template without having to do a separate edit to change the day to a day other than the present day, as you did in this
? I'm just wondering; I'm assuming that there may be a parameter such as day=
that can be used for that template to refer the nomination to a day in the past, but since the
documentation page fails to mention this parameter, and since I cannot translate
Lua, I have no idea how you did it. (I may look through the template's history to find out, but I figure that you would know, given that aforementioned edit.)
Steel1943 (
talk)
19:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
{{
rfd}}
.
Ivanvector (
talk)
19:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
112.79.38.146 ( talk) 10:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)welcome you i am aman paul
Thanks for starting the RFC at WP:VPP. I am pleasantly surprised the template is headed towards a strong keep despite it being considered possibly technically redundant. -- NeilN talk to me 18:52, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab). Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Did you get any further with it? I can take it if you want. You seem to be rather busy at the mo. I have time on my hands. Si Trew ( talk) 14:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
I have replied to your comments at Talk:Socialist state. 2.27.78.13 ( talk) 13:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
ping}}
to send a notification. I don't have time to reply at the moment but I will take a look later on.
Ivanvector (
talk)
17:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
ping}}
template.
2.27.78.13 (
talk)
17:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Cast your eyes over Gustav Wikkenhauser if you get a chance, I drafted it and put it in main. While I fiddle with the Spanish chap, do a bit of copy edit on that one will you?
I kinda like it when Rs become articles but nobody will appreciate your hard work for doing so.
I appreciate it, I appreciate your knowledge and considered decisions. Si Trew ( talk) 04:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Nicely done, that made me laugh. Si Trew ( talk) 07:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Ivanvector, I just wanted to say I appreciate your thoughts and perspective, and wanted to thank you for the time you are putting into the debate. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 17:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC) ps and I wouldn't be caught dead currently creating a garbage article such as that one.
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Child sexual abuse. Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Reagrding your comment at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Close? Not close? I looked at the discussion to see if it was ready to close. I've formed an opinion, but I wonder about 'the result looks fairly clear to me.' There were two different proposals for the revised text in the GA guideline. Do you believe that one of the two has consensus, or neither? It appears that people are ready for a change, but which change they want is not so clear. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 17:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ivanvector,
"April 2015.. Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject... This probably unnecessarily harsh warning left by Twinkle" and so on.
You are right, and I was wrong. Please don't give this a second thought. It was probably conduct unbecoming of an admin, and I'll "cop it sweet" if anything further happens.
Your friendly neighborhood
admin gone rogue aka --
Shirt58 (
talk)
11:56, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fremantle Prison. Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
This is a notification to let you know that there is a requested move discussion ongoing at Talk:Hillary_Rodham_Clinton/April_2015_move_request#Requested_move. You are receiving this notification because you have previously participated in some capacity in naming discussions related to the article in question.
Thanks. And have a nice day. NickCT ( talk) 18:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't want this to seem like WP:CANVASS, which it won't because of the timestamp, but just wanted to say thank you for putting in a good word for me at ANI. You and I often disagree at WP:RFD but we just disagree and that is how we get WP:CONSENSUS isn't it? I haven't been keeping tabs but I imagine you "win" about 90% if the time and I about 10% of the time, sometimes User:Lenticel plays a blinder at the last minute. I thought that was all part of the process. Si Trew ( talk) 15:28, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'm really pleased that no regard is shown for editors who have experienced bad faith from others bad attitude. (I'm employing sarcasm). — Calvin999 18:12, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Nicely done old bean. Wish I'd thought of it. Si Trew ( talk) 22:21, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I have probably said this before but I shall say it again. Thank you for all your hard work, your intelligence, and good nature, over at WP:RFD. I for one very much appreciate it. It shines out of you. I shall not always agree with you, that is why we have discussions, but you are always in good nature, and take my sarcasm well (but it is just that, sarcasm, and not meant badly). Together I think we make the encylopaedia a little bit better, day by day. Si Trew ( talk) 04:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:A Letter Concerning Toleration. Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aboriginal communities in Western Australia. Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kargil War. Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Poland. Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Well done, you made me laugh. I don't know how to string it farther, I think it should lay as as it stands, with maybe you closing it.
( edit conflict) Nah, not controversial, until some deadhead doesn't realise it. My refs are all actually correct and RS. I didn't bother to check the New International Version cos it is a piece of shit, King James is poetry. I'll probably NAC it, but all the points actually are valid (and my refs): That's the talent. I had to get special permission from the Bishop of Bedford to marry my wife-to-be in Cambridgeshire, cos it is kinda just across the border, bur more cos she is Hungarian and so "not C of E". But fortunately the church and pub were only two hundred yards apart, and our house was about a hundred from each. Best day of my life. My wife was taken to church in a 1949 Riley my friend had restored, all the one hundred yards. She and I, married, were escorted two hundred yards back to the pub overlooking the River Great Ouse. (Which I fell in once and had to be dragged out of it. That was fun.) Si Trew ( talk) 22:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello Due to the fact that the two users that are verified wiki users would not cooperate with us, i am writing to you. Dean is a Active Singer in USA however, due to the fact that the verified user changed his title to Dean (South Korean singer), many people believe that he's just another k-pop star or having misconception that he's a k pop star. We want to make it clear that Dean is an AMERICAN singer. No matter where and what race he might have been born, Once an American, ALWAYS an American. If possible, could you change his title to Dean (R&B singer) instead of having south korean singer. Thank you. Josephyangjoombas ( talk) 22:42, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ivanvector,
I would like to discuss Ian Troop's Wikipedia page with you.
I believe that all edits made two days ago were fair and impartial.
All content added was clearly cited from respected publications and prominent sources.
The edits made were merely done to add detail and update the page.
Please let me know what your thoughts are on this matter.
Best,
D.James252002
- The ChampionMan 1234 23:39, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies. Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Hello Ivanvector. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).
Sent via-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello Ivanvector. I have worked on this article after it was userfied upon your reco. Could you please have a look and comment? and please let me know what is the next step??? Please see the article here User:Educationtemple/Sunil Kumar Verma Educationtemple ( talk) 21:16, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I write to tell you I appreciate your response on the ANI. You made several good points that hadn't been discussed I wanted to briefly address.
I agree that I do tend to be more verbose than I should be in these discussions. I learned to write in the days before the 140 character limit, and the approach these days is very different. I'm getting there.
I also accept that I can be perceived as out to "right great wrongs." I think my writing tends to come-off a bit bombastic.
My only agenda... well, I have some areas of interest, and one over-arching concept. The areas of interest are abuse of the wiki for PR self-promotion; financial frauds, and frauds generally; and the abuse of statistics in the social sciences. The overarching concept is that I object to bullshit. I think I'm pretty good at detecting bullshit. (A decade and a half investigating frauds, interviewing criminals, and deposing law enforcement officers, combined with an innate mistrust of others, and you start to be able to smell a lie.) I think people in general, including the folks who edit and maintain the wiki, drastically underestimate their susceptibility to manipulation and deceit, as well as the risks posed. Everybody does, or fraudsters wouldn't be able to operate.
BBR23 brought up Joseph Borg. When I saw Joe Borg claiming to have shut-down Stratton-Oakmont, which I know isn't true because I was there, I went through his other claims. I found that, starting with his web page and personal promotional materials, he'd been taking credit, falsely, for faux roles in shutting down major frauds. In a typical example, after other lawyers for other places shut-down and seized a building that had been used to operate a fraud, Borg rode to the building, apparently from Alabama, in a military attack vehicle and upon arrival declared that he and others had taken the building. That made it onto Borg's materials as "Borg led the seizure of... using an all terrain military vehicle." The same language, with very minor variations, appeared in Borg's materials and his page here, with excerpts on the pages for the individual frauds. I look at that and see "You know, the only way this could have happened, is if a politician was trying to take credit for a lot of things he didn't do, and he or his staff went out to journalists (which they have, we've seen this) to push that story in interviews, and the only way the talking points would get on here verbatim is if he and his staff were putting them up themselves."
Maybe I'm over-sensitive; but I think I know a good fraud when I smell one. Djcheburashka ( talk) 09:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I really appreciate your taking the time. Yes, it all makes sense.
Regarding "following Roscelese" -- not exactly. When the "edit war" began, I wanted to see what the deal was, so I looked at her page. I found all these warnings for stuff that seemed really similar to what I was experiencing. I didn't know who she was or what the sides were on these issues. So I started to look through some of her edits and what gave rise to the warnings. In most cases, I thought her contributions made perfect sense, or were within how I understand the wiki is supposed to work. So, cool. I also, however, found several instances in which there's a pattern I find disturbing: One or two editors will "camp" on a page, and a series of editors will comment about POV issues. Each time, however, the "camping" editors will very quickly accuse the new editor of POV, and disruption, because they're violating "the consensus." Everyone new who tries to come to the page gets bullied off, so at any given moment it seems like there's a consensus, when really there isn't. This seemed to always be about what, for lack of a term less likely to get me accused of something, I'll call "women's rights issues 80% of the way to the end of a broad spectrum." What I did when I found those, was add my comment to the effect that I agreed with the outside editor -- the point being, that the next time an issue arose, it would be harder to claim "consensus." I understand that there's some controversy caused by "mens rights movement" people, and I understand why we would object to that and find it disruptive. But that doesn't have anything to do with me, and I don't think showing POV by vandals demonstrates that the article is NPOV or unbiased to begin with.
Regarding Joe Borg, do all such issues have to go to the WP:RSN noticeboard? Can't I use the article talk pages, as I did in this case?
Also -- how do I prove a negative? Someone puts up a claim, citing a profile-piece on Borg from, say, 2012, which is about something that occurred in 1996. The record from 1996, though, doesn't refer to Borg. As you say If there is notable controversy about Borg's involvement in the Stratton Oakmont case, then reliable sources will have written about it. But there is no notable controversy. The claim appeared in the "Alabama Business Journal" profile piece, and nearly verbatim on, I think five, wiki pages. That's it.
The cites to the Wall St. Journal and Forbes did not support the claim on the wiki article. There's a big gap between "Joe Borg was part of a task force of state attorneys' generals that sued Stratton Oakmont," which is surely true and what the Forbes and Wall St. J said; and "Joe Borg formed and led a task force of state attorneys whose investigation uncovered Stratton Oakmont's fraud and led to it and others prosecutions," which is what the wiki page said.
I think with Joe Borg, on the talk page I went through the record regarding the claims. The claim was, as I recall, that Borg had put together a task-force that led to the investigation and arrest of Belfort, because of complaints Borg received after taking office. The important part of the claim is causation, that a-led-to-be-led-to-c. I found WP:RS -- consisting of contemporaneous documents -- showing that (a) Belfort had been under investigation for 5 years prior to Borg having taken office; (b) Borg's task force was assembled at the conclusion of those other investigations, not before them; and (c) the event that led to Belfort's criminal arrest, was when the FBI (led by an AUSA who, contemporaneous sources said, had been investigating Belfort for five years) obtained the cooperation of a confidential informant. I also cited editorials in the NY Times and Wall St. J., and an interview on Bloomberg TV available on the web, by the lead AUSA who investigated and prosecuted Belfort, the SEC attorney who led their team regarding Belfort, and the FINRA receiver who took over Stratton Oakmont. None of them mention Borg's task force.
Is that not enough regarding the claim of causation? Is the issue that it should be taken to WP:RSN rather than the talk page?
This is coming up on a related page, Jordan Belfort. Belfort's memoir says that he went to work at L.F. Rothschild as a stockbroker trainee, then was laid-off following Black Monday, and then after that was taught about penny stocks, and after that founded Stratton Oakmont. This storyline is rather key to the portrayal of Belfort's character. It's so key that it became a memorable scene with Matthew Mcwhateverahey playing an L.F. Rothschild broker in the movie. The idea is that Belfort was a legitimate guy who went bad because of temptation and then got redeemed, and really wasn't different than other Wall St. people. The same FINRA document above shows, though, that Stratton Oakmont was founded six months before Black Monday. I think the FINRA document is WP:RS as to when Stratton Oakmont was founded.
Is that not enough to be able to say on the wiki article that the story of Rothschild-then-Black-Monday-then-penny-stocks-then-SO, as told in the memoir and repeated widely, is false?
The question of whether Belfort's memoir is true or another fraud is itself noteable. Its been the subject of numerous articles in the NY Times (including several editorials and at least one op-ed), the Wall St. J, slate.com, and is discussed at least briefly in many of the pieces covering Belfort or the movie.
Thank you again for your help and advice. Djcheburashka ( talk) 05:50, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Djcheburashka ( talk) 05:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Again, with Joe Borg, I don't agree. I see where you're going, and my analysis was possibly incorrect. Disputing the claim of causation is fine, but the problem is you are disputing it based on your own research. It's good research, but it's still your own, and not published in a reliable source. WP:V doesn't require everything to be included, but WP:NPOV does require all reliably published viewpoints to be considered, so no, you can't just remove reliably-sourced claims that you disagree with; that's cherrypicking. If a reliable source publishes the claim, and no reliable source disputes it, then it goes in. You could challenge the reliability of the source, which is where the RS noticeboard would be of use. You might find more editors there with a sense of detecting PR promo pieces than I do (I tend to give sources leniency in this area unless they are obvious press releases, but many others don't) and you might find more supportive voices. Or at least, more comprehensive advice than I'm able to give on the subject.
Your analysis of the international legal interpretations of slander is over my head, to be honest. I'm not sure about CDA 230 with Creative Commons licensing in effect here; it's my (not particularly informed) understanding that all submissions here are considered to be published by the Wikimedia Foundation, rather than by the user who clicked the "save page" button, and I think it would be a stretch to claim that Wikipedia is an internet service provider (though maybe that's not required, I'm not very familiar with CDA 230). At any rate, the biography of living persons policy follows from recommendations of the WMF's legal team (as I understand it) and that's good enough for me.
In terms of what's acceptable as general notability and neutrality go, something I found immensely helpful when starting out here was following and participating in articles for deletion discussions. It's a good way to see how more experienced users formulate articles based in Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and what general thresholds are considered for notability and verifiability. Just a thought. Ivanvector ( talk) 22:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
The comments of @Ivanvector from the week-end suggest that the last two sections of the History section at Ukraine are far too long. This seems an accurate summation and the shortened edit would reduce the size by half titled: Euromaidan, Crimea, and the Secession Crisis. The short version is on Talk:Ukraine. FelixRosch ( TALK) 19:08, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
I object to your refactoring and as per WP:REFACTOR, you should revert it. The hatting usage notes to follow WP:REFACTOR. I request that you revert it. Tutelary ( talk) 21:45, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Goes both ways. You reject refactoring so I won't redo it. ^^ Tutelary ( talk) 01:18, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Re your post on his talk page, as far as I'm aware he's not actually posted in regard to homeopathy - just other fringe 'alt med' stuff. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 18:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hotter than July (album). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 ( talk) 12:10, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!! |
Hello Ivanvector, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message. |
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Education noticeboard. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smooth Island (Ontario); someone's given the article a complete rewrite. Nyttend ( talk) 02:10, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Ivanvector,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
NorthAmerica
1000
10:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (confabulate) @ 09:55, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Orson Scott Card. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello and thank you for your comments at Redirects for Discussion on Autism Research Institute. As I mentioned there, I work for ARI and now that the DAN! page has been renamed to Autism Research Institute, I'm hoping that editors such as yourself will help add more material to explain what ARI is and does. The page now still really focuses on DAN! and only describes ARI as having created that initiative, whereas it is an organization that continues to be active following the end of DAN! Knowing that it is not best for me to make any edits myself, I've provided a few pieces of information at Talk:Autism Research Institute about ARI that could be added, along with links to third-party references for them. Would you mind taking a look? Thank you, Difulton ( talk) 19:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
HALLO IVAN, Me as a Iranian-German is really sad someone make Samira SAMII wikipedi page with lots of wrong information. SAMII´s are a famous family in iran... why I can not edit anything in her page. why the article of Mahdavikia are in her page.. why they edit worng resident in her page... what is a picture??? Please answer me as an export user — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 19:02, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
IVAN, thanks for your Massage... can you please change the SMAIRA SAMII resident... she is living in Monte Carlo SAMIRA SAMII is also doesn't like to talk about Mahdavikia- She said in all her interviews this is her privacy... tats why it would be great if you delete FOCUS.DE article. SAMIRA SAMII is coming from well-known family. (Noble Family of Persia) She is permian-german not Iranian-German. She is famous i soccer Business and she has her own home-Page with many articles which you can find as a administrator.... Please remove all article about Mahdavikia because this is shame for us as person people to our SAMIRA SAMII - Person which we proud of her in IRAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 20:51, 12 January 2015 (UTC) Why anyone can help me???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 10:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ivan, I can not understand your comment in SamiraSamii deletion... see this link: http://www.samirasamii.com/en/ It snot nice to used the publicity PUBLIC FIGURS or famous people like Samira SAMII to use for Wikipedia in wrong from.... Anyway she warns everyone and her fans... Delete all Mahdavikia´s Article and picture with Fadi Merze and correct the Residence... I really wanna speedy deletion of her page... Its unfair what the user do it..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 12:04, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
HI IVAN, thanks for your massage... but you have to delete the wrong articles... For example her residence... She is a public Figure which she doesn't like to speak about her private life. But I know, that she never lives in AUGSBURG and she doesn't live in Germany... You don't have any sources, that make u sure about it. Also you dont have any sources that Mahdavikia´s History is correct. in Iranian NEWS-PAPERS all the apologized from SAMII Family... How you can add these things... WIKIPEDIA is the site for know the person and know about update and correct information but nor false.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxXXX-max ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC) According to this article she is living in Monte Carlo- The name of Newspaper is ABEND ZEITUNG NÜRNBERG http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.samirasamii.com/14/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/20080902_-B-_-Samiee-fcn-marketing_0647.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.samirasamii.com/az-3/&h=2283&w=1465&tbnid=fp4SqX3qJcA1HM:&zoom=1&tbnh=90&tbnw=58&usg=__Hp5VIxTNLK1BF087h1gGovDzZDY=&docid=8_j7Nn_FDw95BM&sa=X&ei=wq22VISSD8n3UqragZAN&ved=0CCMQ9QEwAA&dur=581 So you have a source which your residence info is wrong.... !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 18:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC) http://www.nordbayern.de/nuernberger-nachrichten/nuernberg/exotin-in-der-mannerwelt-1.895329 regarding this page you information is wrong... She is living in Monaco.... I can not understand which play you are playing.... Why you don't search exactly what you editing.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 18:18, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear IVAN, http://rund-magazin.de/uploads/images/am_ball/abcdefgh/samirapoldi.jpg Please upload this picture. Which is free of Charge and free of right and fits much better to the WIKIPEDIA PAGE. Under the Photo it is written: SPORT MANAGER- SPORT COLUMNIST I CAN UNDERSTAND GERMAN. If u have any question don't hesitate to contact me... THANKS!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
|
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Prostitution in Canada. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
I've closed the longstanding RFD for Lightning in a tropical cyclone as no consensus with an unusually detailed rationale. Basically, nobody wanted to keep it, but there wasn't consensus on what to do, so I've taken a bold step of un-redirecting it and immediately sending it to AFD to get input from people who don't often show up at RFD. I'd really appreciate your input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lightning in a tropical cyclone, where I've given a strong suggestion that people pick between the RFD-favored steps of deletion or retargeting to lightning. I'm attempting to notify everyone who participated in the RFD (that's BDD, Ivanvector, Inks.LWC, Guy1890, Steel1943, and Thryduulf), but if I missed someone, please do the notification for me. Nyttend ( talk) 18:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey Ivanvector,
Just wanted to give you a heads-up that I tagged
User:IvanVector for
speedy deletion criterion U2. If you want to make sure that "IvanVector" is always associated with you in regards to its spelling, there's a couple of options that I know that you can do:
Hope this helps! Steel1943 ( talk) 20:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Ivanvector, from the outset I thought the action 'ill-advised', but well intended. For that reason (on my part), no rant is required. Pincrete ( talk) 16:58, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gun show loophole. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert. Yes, I thought somebody had typed in the lines and misspelled "visitor", but then I went to The Raven and saw the spelling there, tracked it back to the cited source, and found what you already knew... and then spread the word about the word, so to speak. -- Thnidu ( talk) 01:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, i just explicitly requested to you, within the ongoing RFD about wp:KAFFEEKLATSCH redirects, that you remove the tag(s) you added to the wp:kaffeeklatsch redirect. It's bringing the RFD off-topic, if it has to be discussed more, so I'll try here. Seriously, i do appreciate your adding the soft redirect to the top of the RFD, and your trying to help. But, it is undermining the usefulness of the soft redirect example, if it is tagged. It makes it look bad and does not show what users would see if the soft redirect is kept. It is actually interfering with the RFD, imo, though I assume you do not intend that. I'll watch here, hope to keep this side discussion out of the RFD itself as much as possible. I hope you could just remove the tag and briefly indicate you've done so at the RFD, in response to my request. sincerely -- do ncr am 04:25, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Also, that redirect is incorrectly placed in a hidden category that refers to project pages. Nothing about Lightbreather's subpage nor that redirect to it has anything to do with a project. Please correct your mistakes. EChastain ( talk) 15:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
{{
R to user namespace}}
template has nothing to do with project pages. It only indicates that the redirect goes to a page in user space from a redirect that is not in user space (i.e. categorizing cross-namespace redirects).
Ivanvector (
talk)
16:26, 14 February 2015 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
See WP:Talk_page guidelines#Editing comments. In fact, I think it would be good if you read the whole WP:Talk page guidelines. What you just did is very forbidden. EChastain ( talk) 18:01, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:World marriage-equality laws.svg. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
NeilN talk to me 15:29, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
How did you correct the day in the substituted template without having to do a separate edit to change the day to a day other than the present day, as you did in this
? I'm just wondering; I'm assuming that there may be a parameter such as day=
that can be used for that template to refer the nomination to a day in the past, but since the
documentation page fails to mention this parameter, and since I cannot translate
Lua, I have no idea how you did it. (I may look through the template's history to find out, but I figure that you would know, given that aforementioned edit.)
Steel1943 (
talk)
19:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
{{
rfd}}
.
Ivanvector (
talk)
19:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
112.79.38.146 ( talk) 10:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)welcome you i am aman paul
Thanks for starting the RFC at WP:VPP. I am pleasantly surprised the template is headed towards a strong keep despite it being considered possibly technically redundant. -- NeilN talk to me 18:52, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab). Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Did you get any further with it? I can take it if you want. You seem to be rather busy at the mo. I have time on my hands. Si Trew ( talk) 14:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
I have replied to your comments at Talk:Socialist state. 2.27.78.13 ( talk) 13:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
ping}}
to send a notification. I don't have time to reply at the moment but I will take a look later on.
Ivanvector (
talk)
17:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
{{
ping}}
template.
2.27.78.13 (
talk)
17:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Cast your eyes over Gustav Wikkenhauser if you get a chance, I drafted it and put it in main. While I fiddle with the Spanish chap, do a bit of copy edit on that one will you?
I kinda like it when Rs become articles but nobody will appreciate your hard work for doing so.
I appreciate it, I appreciate your knowledge and considered decisions. Si Trew ( talk) 04:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Nicely done, that made me laugh. Si Trew ( talk) 07:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Ivanvector, I just wanted to say I appreciate your thoughts and perspective, and wanted to thank you for the time you are putting into the debate. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 17:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC) ps and I wouldn't be caught dead currently creating a garbage article such as that one.
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Child sexual abuse. Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Reagrding your comment at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Close? Not close? I looked at the discussion to see if it was ready to close. I've formed an opinion, but I wonder about 'the result looks fairly clear to me.' There were two different proposals for the revised text in the GA guideline. Do you believe that one of the two has consensus, or neither? It appears that people are ready for a change, but which change they want is not so clear. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 17:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ivanvector,
"April 2015.. Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject... This probably unnecessarily harsh warning left by Twinkle" and so on.
You are right, and I was wrong. Please don't give this a second thought. It was probably conduct unbecoming of an admin, and I'll "cop it sweet" if anything further happens.
Your friendly neighborhood
admin gone rogue aka --
Shirt58 (
talk)
11:56, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fremantle Prison. Legobot ( talk) 00:05, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot ( talk) 00:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
This is a notification to let you know that there is a requested move discussion ongoing at Talk:Hillary_Rodham_Clinton/April_2015_move_request#Requested_move. You are receiving this notification because you have previously participated in some capacity in naming discussions related to the article in question.
Thanks. And have a nice day. NickCT ( talk) 18:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't want this to seem like WP:CANVASS, which it won't because of the timestamp, but just wanted to say thank you for putting in a good word for me at ANI. You and I often disagree at WP:RFD but we just disagree and that is how we get WP:CONSENSUS isn't it? I haven't been keeping tabs but I imagine you "win" about 90% if the time and I about 10% of the time, sometimes User:Lenticel plays a blinder at the last minute. I thought that was all part of the process. Si Trew ( talk) 15:28, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'm really pleased that no regard is shown for editors who have experienced bad faith from others bad attitude. (I'm employing sarcasm). — Calvin999 18:12, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Nicely done old bean. Wish I'd thought of it. Si Trew ( talk) 22:21, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I have probably said this before but I shall say it again. Thank you for all your hard work, your intelligence, and good nature, over at WP:RFD. I for one very much appreciate it. It shines out of you. I shall not always agree with you, that is why we have discussions, but you are always in good nature, and take my sarcasm well (but it is just that, sarcasm, and not meant badly). Together I think we make the encylopaedia a little bit better, day by day. Si Trew ( talk) 04:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:A Letter Concerning Toleration. Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aboriginal communities in Western Australia. Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kargil War. Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Poland. Legobot ( talk) 00:03, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Well done, you made me laugh. I don't know how to string it farther, I think it should lay as as it stands, with maybe you closing it.
( edit conflict) Nah, not controversial, until some deadhead doesn't realise it. My refs are all actually correct and RS. I didn't bother to check the New International Version cos it is a piece of shit, King James is poetry. I'll probably NAC it, but all the points actually are valid (and my refs): That's the talent. I had to get special permission from the Bishop of Bedford to marry my wife-to-be in Cambridgeshire, cos it is kinda just across the border, bur more cos she is Hungarian and so "not C of E". But fortunately the church and pub were only two hundred yards apart, and our house was about a hundred from each. Best day of my life. My wife was taken to church in a 1949 Riley my friend had restored, all the one hundred yards. She and I, married, were escorted two hundred yards back to the pub overlooking the River Great Ouse. (Which I fell in once and had to be dragged out of it. That was fun.) Si Trew ( talk) 22:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello Due to the fact that the two users that are verified wiki users would not cooperate with us, i am writing to you. Dean is a Active Singer in USA however, due to the fact that the verified user changed his title to Dean (South Korean singer), many people believe that he's just another k-pop star or having misconception that he's a k pop star. We want to make it clear that Dean is an AMERICAN singer. No matter where and what race he might have been born, Once an American, ALWAYS an American. If possible, could you change his title to Dean (R&B singer) instead of having south korean singer. Thank you. Josephyangjoombas ( talk) 22:42, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Ivanvector,
I would like to discuss Ian Troop's Wikipedia page with you.
I believe that all edits made two days ago were fair and impartial.
All content added was clearly cited from respected publications and prominent sources.
The edits made were merely done to add detail and update the page.
Please let me know what your thoughts are on this matter.
Best,
D.James252002
- The ChampionMan 1234 23:39, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies. Legobot ( talk) 00:06, 27 July 2015 (UTC)