![]() | 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. |
Can you expand on why you reverted the expansion of The Head and the Heart? You mention copyvios, but Googling sentences from the added text is not returning anything. I'm working with browneheather on IRC, and we're a bit confused. Thank you! – GorillaWarfare talk • contribs 19:48, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller 21, I took that picture at a house show they did for me. I also penned all of that content myself last night. It is all original, none of it is copyrighted elsewhere. Please let me know your specific concerns and I will answer each. Thanks. This is my first wiki page and I worked really hard on getting it right and making it exhaustive. Browneheather ( talk) 19:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand what criteria were used to delete so many alumni from the list, in particular the Pulitzer Prize winners. Why were some left and others deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 12:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Frankly, that's why I was confused. The one that jumped out at me, and the reason I left a comment here, is "Nick Anderson (cartoonist)". He was listed under the Pulitzer Prize winners, and he has a wikipedia article which describes his Pulitzer and other awards - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Anderson_(cartoonist) I didn't look at any of the other deletions besides that one, but I knew that it didn't meet the criteria you described. Before I undid that particular edit, I wanted to make sure I understood your reason for the change. Thanks for your work on wikipedia and for taking the time to reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 15:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC) '
My mistake. I just saw "Cartoonist" and thought it was like some of the other entries like "Engineer". Obviously, this one should be put back on the list. Do you want to put it back or would you like me to? OlYeller Talktome 16:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
If you don't mind putting it back, that would be great. The last thing I wanted to do was start an editing war. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 16:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
None that I know of. Thanks for doing that. I hope you feel better soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 19:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out that series of edits. There's nothing worse than having to clean up after a vandal who has made a long series of bad yet minor fact changes. In this case, I was able to spot check a few of the edits, and they do seem to line up exactly with the new 2010 census data. The census site was apparently designed by analysts who hate people, so jumping through the hoops to get to the right query is a bit of an adventure. You can start at census.gov and click through the most probable trail; if you hit a roadblock I can do the query again and give you a ste-by-step if you're interested. I cannot provide a direct link to results, however. :( Kuru (talk) 14:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi I updated some central ohio population numbers directly from the US census 2010 numbers. If you would like I can give you links to the us goverments census website or there are many newspaper publications that also provide this information. All my information has been accurate but I can stop updating if that is what you would like me to do.Just trying to help keep things current! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.165.76.233 ( talk) 06:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Do you think the May 20 article should include anything about the Draw Muhammad event? Voice your opinion here please, so we can reach consensus. Pass a Method talk 06:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Pretty strong talk! And I call what you are involved in "cronyism," and publically call you out on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agoodbadhabit ( talk • contribs) 04:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Seider's Springs, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: original author claims to be the author of the source. Please use Wikipedia:Copyright problems instead. Thank you. So Why 20:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for all the confusion with the contributions I that have made. I am the author of the source content with which there are alleged copyright violations. I am working to make my Wikipedia entries fully compliant. Many thanks for your time and helpful advice. Brykerwoods ( talk) 14:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Please do not delete the entries under the politics discussion of RPGnet. You deleted one entry saying "this is not a forum" but let all the others (which were basically similar kinds of statements), remain. The topic of RPG.nets political leanings is a source of heated debate on gaming boards, and at least worthy of inclusion on the discussion page. If I added objectionable material to the actual article, I could understand. But this is a debate on whether to include details on the RPG.net tangency-mods controversies and I was just adding my opinion on it. 107.3.67.184 ( talk) 13:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Nope, my comment was supporting including material on bias in the article. I wasn't just commenting to say I think its liberal. I was commenting to show the previous statements about including this detail had merit. What is your problem? 107.3.67.184 ( talk) 12:00, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Yeller, that is the discussion page, not the article itself. There is an ongoing debate over whether the article should contain references to politics. That post is simply part of that discussion. If someone changes the article without a source, you can change it. But you can't alter the discussion page. If you change that once more, I am reporting you for vandalism.The person's post is no different than the seven or so that procede it. Why are you interfering with a discussion page in this way? 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 15:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I think you are misapplying the policy. And if you continue to remove things like this from the talk page I will report it as vandalism. FOX News is known for being a conservative news station, and there is nothing wrong with including an objective description of this widely held belief on the FOX news wikipedia entry. In the same way, RPG.net is deemed by many, many gamers to have a strong left-wing bias. Including an objecting description of this widely held belief would certainly belong in the article if reliable sources can be cited to show the belief exists. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 18:51, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
You are misapplying the policy because that is meant from eliminating opinions from articles. I am not advocating the article describe rpg.net as liberal (that would be an opinion), I am advocating that the article include a description of the controversy itself (some gamers think rpg.net is liberal or politically biased). That is different from using the article as a platform to express the opinion that it is biased. But on the discussion page, people are simply voicing their belief that it is liberal to demonstrate the belief is out there.
So long as you don't delete a legitimate debate on the on this topic from the discussion page I won't pass judgement. But bear in mind, what people are really trying to say here, and what I am suggesting, is we simply include something like "some readers have accused rpg.net of having a liberal bias". There are plenty of sources out there making that accusation (the rpg pundit for one) and those rise to the same level of most of the sources on the article. I agree, the article shouldn't come down on either side of this debate. But it should at least acknowledge the debate exists. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 19:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I presented the first sourse that comes up on a google search on the issue. It is an online essay by rpgpundit. If you think that isn't a valid source, then fine, but keep in mind most of the sources on the actual article are of that nature as well (so those will need to be removed). Also the rest of the article is unsourced and appears to be a product of individual research, so the entire article probably needs to be hacked down to a much smaller entry if we are going to go on a wikipedia policy enforcement tagent here.
Bottom line, you appear to be using wikipolicy to stifle a legitimate debate on the discussion page. People aren't just simply using the dicsussion page as a forum, they are trying to make the case that a lot of people perceive a liberal bias at rpgnet, and this probbaly should be mentioned in the article. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 19:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I amn not suggesting we do original research. There are plenty of online secondary sources (though you may object to them) that describe this ongoing controversy. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 19:34, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
After you noted that several of the references aren't reliable, I checked out the rest. I don't believe that article satisfies WP:GNG or any part of WP:N and should not be included in the project. I have nominated the article for deletion. OlYeller Talktome 19:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Bullyediting_by_Olyeller 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 23:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry if you believed that I was attacking you in my answer on the project page. I did go on a bit too long in my response. I apologize. Student7 ( talk) 19:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
My apologies for this. I shouldn't have removed your comment, but you might do well remembering WP:BITE - the primary content of your warning wasn't particularly applicable, as the category was both appropriate for the articles in question, and supported by verifiable content. That's certainly one way to confuse a newbie. Mato ( talk) 18:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
I understand your point, but then we should just remove the whole "Open M2M initiatives" section, I guess... There is IMO no reason to have a link towards an old initiative (see BiTXml, for example), and none for a new open source (again) initative ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kartben ( talk • contribs) 11:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
On Kenya institute of media and technology. -- Greenmaven ( talk) 19:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller21. I recently deleted Saimir Pirgu, a page you tagged for speedy deletion under G12 with the edit summary "Nominating for G12. To patrolling admin, please check carefully. The Duplication Detector report is thrown off a bit but the similarities are very clear." A user has contested that deletion on my talk page. Your input would be appreciated. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 09:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Does this article warrant deletion on grounds of lack of independent verification? -- Greenmaven ( talk) 13:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I was curious why a fan site dedicated to TOMS with thousands of visitors and hundreds of fans would not be a relevant link to include on this page. Also, is there any reason why the last external link on this page would meet your editorial approval? http://www.fashioncatalog.co.uk/shoes/toms-classic-slip-shoes-for-summer/
To me this site is much less relevant to the editorial integrity of Wikipedia, but yet it is not removed. Just trying to understand the logic of what would be considered a credible link to add. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.27.121.252 ( talk) 16:46, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I also just noticed that you flagged this addition as vandalism. How in the world would this be considered vandalism? I think that is a bit extreme don't you thing? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.27.121.252 (
talk)
16:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
Hereby, I award You the Barnstar of Good Humor for Your recent contributions to Wikipedia talk:Notability. Hans Dunkelberg ( talk) 15:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC) |
I see you've started tagging, but I'm not seeing notices on the first editors talk page. I'll delete them, and take the heat, but I rarely delete without seeing a notice on the talk page.-- SPhilbrick T 20:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)-- SPhilbrick T 20:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
What is your relationship with Tom's Shoes? You seem to be engaged in PR/damage control with them and I honestly doubt your good faith on this subject. Perhaps you could find another contributor who is more neutral to make changes on this subject you feel is needed or at least restrict you outright deletions/reversions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Litch ( talk • contribs) 04:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Litch ( talk) 17:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
..."that one takes full responsibility for any action performed using Twinkle. One must understand Wikipedia policies and use this tool within these policies or risk having one's access to use Twinkle revoked or one's account being blocked. Anti-vandalism tools, such as Twinkle, Huggle, and rollback should not be used to undo good-faith changes in content disputes unless an appropriate edit summary is used."
You can't call "Vandalism! Vandalism" just because you don't like the edit! :)
[Or perhaps you can, if you want to show wiki supporters/subscribers that wiki lets just anyone moderate, regardless of personal agenda...] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agoodbadhabit ( talk • contribs) 05:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller21, You may remember me from our conversation on here on the WP:COIN talk page. I have completed a draft of the article about Bloomberg L.P. head of communications, Kevin Sheekey, and would appreciate it if you could take a look at it and see if you think it's ready to replace the current article. I'm still working on drafting the Daniel Doctoroff article to address the copyright violations, but I thought I'd start with Sheekey since the changes are more minor. Ordwayen ( talk) 19:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
For the "heads up" as they say. I don't have that page on my watchlist any more.-- andreasegde ( talk) 16:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Re. Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Swarcliffe,
Please see my addition, [1]. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts; I don't know how to proceed; I hate this stuff.
Related, explanation-why-I-am-here, disclaimer: I've been trying to help the editor, and been trying to calm his antagonistic attitude to prevent a block - see [2] [3].
Cheers, Chzz ► 20:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Is there any particular reason for making your date and time stand out in bold (and, I think, large font)? It's a bit distracting when reading talk pages or WP:COIN - seems to suggest some significance that probably isn't intended. PamD ( talk) 13:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
[[User:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Ol<font style="color:#FBB117;">Yeller</font></font>]]'''<sup>[[User_talk:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Talktome</font>]]</sup> OlYeller Talktome 14:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I recently noticed that the page on GameSoundCon was deleted, based in part on your analysis of the content. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/GameSoundCon)
I would like to respectfully ask you to reconsider, based on a couple of points
I would ask you to please reconsider the use of "MIX Magazine" (online or off) to be a dubious reference. MIX has been one of music industry's leading trade magazines for at least 30 years. Although they were owned for a time by Penton Media, the magazine was separate from the PR organization. Recording schools often make sure to note if one of their grads or faculty makes it into MIX; they consider it a "big deal." For example ( http://www.audiorecordingschoolblog.com/2011/07/13/grads-featured-in-mix-magazine/ or http://www.audiorecordingschoolblog.com/category/game-audio/), http://www.berklee.edu/bt/193/alumnotes.html, http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/CAM/faculty/meis/jermance/Pages/index.aspx. The "TEC" award, founded by MIX, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEC_Awards) is also very highly regarded in the industry.
GameSoundCon was the very first public showing of the previously private tools used to develop content for the video game, Rock Band (published by MTV/Viacom). This became part of the launch of "The Rock Band Network" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Band_Network) and a highly notable event. This is covered in a "gamasutra" article here: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/25015/GameSoundCon_Adds_Rock_Band_Network_Classes.php Gamasutra is the leading online resource for the entire game development community.
Your largest concern seemed (justifiably) to be about the "GamesOpt.com" reference. That was poor judgement to use a non-vetted source (especially one obviously trying to capitalize on users who make a typo when trying to find GameSpot.com). Since I knew the information to be accurate, I didn't vet rest of the site properly. There were many sites which had referenced Marty O'Donnell (Halo Composer) keynoting the kickoff conference -- I picked a bad one (at one point, Marty had it listed on his own page).
I hope you will take the above into consideration and reconsider the deletion of the page; I will update the references to include the Gamasutra article as well as a non-dubious reference on O'Donnell's keynote.
Thank you for your time Bschmidt1962 ( talk) 18:11, 11 August 2011 (UTC) bschmidt1962
The Children's Museum Backstage Pass! - You are invited! | |
---|---|
![]() |
The Children's Museum of Indianapolis is hosting its second Backstage Pass and its first Edit-a-Thon on Saturday, August 20. The museum is opening its doors to Wikipedians interested in learning about the museum's collection, taking them on a tour of the vast collection before spending the afternoon working with curators to improve articles relating to the Caplan Collection of folk toys and Creative Playthings objects. Please sign up on the event page if you can attend, and if you'd like to participate virtually you can sign up on the Edit-a-Thon page. --- LoriLee ( talk) 15:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC) |
That sounds awesome. I haven't been there for quite a while. Also, it's a great idea for getting experience Wikipedians to help you out. I love the idea but live to far to take make the trip. I'll check out the virtual edit-a-thon at some point. OlYeller Talktome 16:37, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Hey there,
I recently wrote an article on an algorithm i invented to the sorting problem, the algorithm i described works better then all comparison algorithms exists on the market. i dont see why would it be non important. if you still do think so you may as well delete it, but others who would love to use it or just love to see a brand new exit on this particular computer science issue, are the ones to suffer.
i am asking you to reconsider,as i would love let others use my contribution.
Thank you for your time OfekRon —Preceding undated comment added 18:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC).
Hey again, well i'm a senior year student of Ort Braude college of Israel, im just an annonymous private who would want to share his creation with the world, i got my Proffesor to agree with me that that is definitely the best comparison algorithm there is on the market, but other then that, a little man like me cant do. I got a C code with the algorithm implementation that works and aprove its efficiency, but other than that i got nothing but what I and my proffesor knows. if you guys, or other members or users can approve the aritcle, they are more then welcome to use and test it. would it be helpfull if i added a specific implementation of the program in C code? I thought thats a little unapropriate and that is why i didnt do so in the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OfekRon ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
There is a serious problem on the Swarcliffe page, as some editors are ignoring advice about the edits they are making. I have made a list of mistakes on the talk page, to which one editor replied, "I have no intention of going through the list of "errors" ". Help is very definitely needed here.-- andreasegde ( talk) 13:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anne Lorraine Gales, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The awards and medals won indicate notability sufficient for A7. Take to AfD if required, but will add BLPPROD notice now. Thank you. Ged UK 07:10, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
I apologise for my "move on" comment at User talk:Graeme Bartlett. I felt that GB had taken enough over one decision; it was not my intent to characterise you as a problematic editor (I don't actually know you at all as an editor, so should have been more careful in my response). Sorry.
Regards, 88.104.46.22 ( talk) 18:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
I realize he had removed the AFd tag, but did you really mean to characterize all sixteen of the previous edits as vandalism? [4] I can't say I can tell what he thought a lot of them were accomplishing, and he has proven to be very difficult to communicate with, but I don't think those edits were done with he specific intent to harm Wikipedia. Beeblebrox ( talk) 22:05, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I did not understand the reason why you deleted my posting. I didn't feel that I had done wrong. PKdundee ( talk) 21:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I was correcting a report at SPI when I noticed that your signature does not accurately say who you are. You are not User:OlYeller, but User:OlYeller21. Would you consider changing your signature by adding the '21' part, so that there is no confusion in the future? Phearson ( talk) 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Do we have to take this to the talk page? This was your original accusation of User:Bluestarblackcar. The user only made three, inconsequential edits. What proof do you have against User:EdGl other than a similarity to the subject's name? Look at the edit history of the user you're accusing and you'll see that the user was a general editor. Are you suggesting that Bluestarblackcar was a SockPuppet of EdGl? Please clarify your position. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 14:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi there OIYeller21. The images that were in question on the wikipedia site for Selena Cuffe have since been removed. So everything on there now has been submitted by other users. So I'd love for you to review and see what can be done to remove the COI, which no longer applies. Thanks in advance - I really appreciate it ( Selenacuffe ( talk) 15:05, 7 September 2011 (UTC)).
So grateful and thankful! Thank you! ( 75.186.1.187 ( talk) 02:03, 10 September 2011 (UTC)).
This is a response to your comment on my article about Jon Hinck. I put the response on my talk page, but it is not clear that you ever saw it, so I'm copying it here.
If you have a connection with Jon Hinck, please disclose your connection with him on your talk page. Also, please review our policy regarding editing with a conflict of interest. The page is being closely monitored and I assure you, if there is a connection, it will eventually be found. OlYeller Talktome 20:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Before addressing your suspicions, let me say that I did review carefully the page on Wiki's COI policy. The statement itself is rather porous. "Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest." I don't know or care much about Wikipedia per se. All of my outside interests are therefore more important to me than the aims of Wikipedia. I think it is convenient to have an information source like W, and I would like to contribute my expertise to anyone who might need it, but my outside interests are obviously more important in themselves (to me) than my inclination to share information about them.
What Wikipedia ought to be concerned about is not which interest is more important to the author, but whether the author has an interest that actually leads to the distortion or falsification of a story.
Having noted (to myself, in the first instance) that the Wiki definition of COI is defective, I noted also the temporizing effect of the subsequent paragraph ("Editors with COIs are strongly encouraged—but not actually required—to declare their interests..."). Before undertaking the Hinck article, I also reviewed all the other articles on Maine legislators. Quite a few are transparently written by the subjects themselves. For instance, Jeffery Gifford's stub notes that he coached Pop Warner football for twenty-five years. No documentation whatsoever on that. Where would the information have come from? Seth Berry's relatively extensive article has information about his hobbies, highlights of his career as a school teacher, and a lot of other information no disinterested Wiki writer would likely have. The two newspaper articles cited for that article have virtually no corroboratory function. I could go on, but you know what I'm talking about.
So please let's not pretend that Wiki authors have no interest other than serving the aims of Wikipedia.
As for my alleged COI in compiling the Hinck article, here is my response:
I was a colleague of the subject (Jon Hinck) when we both taught ESL for Iran America Society in Isfahan. That was in the spring of 1975. It happened that Jon was from a town a few minutes from my parents' place, and when I visited them in the late summer, I also stopped by to see the Hincks. After that I lost contact with him until around 2003, when I ran across a reference to his work, which I found pretty inspiring. I dug up his address, sent him some photos from Iran, and we had a brief snail-mail exchange. Later I set up a Google alert on Hinck, so that I could follow his career. Recently I opened a wiki account, intending to do some articles on Nepal, especially Rolwaling, on which I have some expertise. (See rolwaling.com/,, mountainlegacy.org, wanderingeducators.com). As I was organizing my material on Rolwaling, I noticed that Hinck was edging toward a run against Olympia Snowe, which I think would be extremely significant politically. I researched his career online to the extent I could, and emailed him for clarifications and documentation, which he was kind enough to assist with. One area where he was especially helpful was his role in Greenpeace USA. Although I gave money ($10-25/year) to Greenpeace back in the 90s, I was not directly involved in campaigns, and had no idea of Hinck's role.
Clearly, my article on Hinck is more extensive than the write-ups of other Maine legislators. (On the other hand, the article on John Eder, whom Hinck defeated, is of comparable length, but with negligible documentation; there is no indication how the author would have known anything about Eder's bumming around and living in a solar powered shack.) I think we would be better off if authoritative and reasonably comprehensive articles were available on all office-holders. Hinck is particularly deserving of attention because of his effective environmental activism. This is not a minor figure like some candidates for national office, whose accomplishments have been largely in the area of self-promotion. Hinck's work for Greenpeace USA, as well as his service for the emerging nation of Palau, are more than just "notable": they are remarkable.
All that being said, I understand that Wiki may feel that now is the time to burnish its credibility. Perhaps you are in the process of reviewing all articles on officeholders or environmental activists. Or whatever. I would be perfectly happy if someone else wanted to take over the Hinck article. I have no personal stake at all in it, other than my hope that he will run for the Senate sooner rather than later, simply because our country needs his service.
I am concerned that Wiki's COI policy may mean that you would also have issues with my working on Nepal articles, since I have a record of promoting backpacker tourism. I hasten to add that all my efforts in that respect have been non-lucrative. On the other hand, I don't want to waste my time or yours on more articles that are going to be problematic simply because I have a prior interest not just in the subject but also in its success. I assure you that I have no fear of being publicly shamed as having what Wiki deems a Conflict of Interest. Anybody whose main interest in life is Wikipedia -- and who is not making somehow making money from it -- probably needs to get a life, or at least some real-world interests.
I thank you for your time and guidance on this matter.
Sicroff ( talk) 21:06, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
not to get sucked in yourself! The case study needs someone who hasn't had their own tussles with her. (Thanks again BTW for all the hard work, even just this far.) JohnInDC ( talk) 01:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Just want to give you a heads up that the AfD you started in August is still open, and not listed at WP:AfD for some reason. Cheers Tooga - BØRK! 14:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
KuwarOnline Talk 09:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Recently you edited the article Robot economics using Twinkle. I'm a new user and have no much idea about the whole process. I have provided needed links to the article as it notified. Please contact me at resourcesecon@yahoo.com. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.23.184.14 ( talk) 13:37, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
This is for you contribution for checking copyvios for India Education Program.
Thanks a ton, keep the good work going! Cheers, Ram ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
Thanks, Ram! OlYeller Talktome 19:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm here to chime in with your comment from a year and a half ago. Please see the associated article and its recent history also. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 17:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
It's okay. Thanks for your input at the COI noticeboard. Keep up the good work, 99.168.81.210 ( talk) 00:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am a newbie, as you probably are aware. I have been trying to site information correctly about the artist Patricia Elliott Seitz. I am sorry for the unintentional deletion of your earlier warnings. Since you are well versed in the Wikipedia protocol, possibly you might help me, so that I might not receive any more deletion notices/warnings?
Thank you kindly, — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatriciaSeitz ( talk • contribs) 11:57, 7 October 2011 (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. |
Can you expand on why you reverted the expansion of The Head and the Heart? You mention copyvios, but Googling sentences from the added text is not returning anything. I'm working with browneheather on IRC, and we're a bit confused. Thank you! – GorillaWarfare talk • contribs 19:48, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller 21, I took that picture at a house show they did for me. I also penned all of that content myself last night. It is all original, none of it is copyrighted elsewhere. Please let me know your specific concerns and I will answer each. Thanks. This is my first wiki page and I worked really hard on getting it right and making it exhaustive. Browneheather ( talk) 19:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand what criteria were used to delete so many alumni from the list, in particular the Pulitzer Prize winners. Why were some left and others deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 12:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Frankly, that's why I was confused. The one that jumped out at me, and the reason I left a comment here, is "Nick Anderson (cartoonist)". He was listed under the Pulitzer Prize winners, and he has a wikipedia article which describes his Pulitzer and other awards - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Anderson_(cartoonist) I didn't look at any of the other deletions besides that one, but I knew that it didn't meet the criteria you described. Before I undid that particular edit, I wanted to make sure I understood your reason for the change. Thanks for your work on wikipedia and for taking the time to reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 15:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC) '
My mistake. I just saw "Cartoonist" and thought it was like some of the other entries like "Engineer". Obviously, this one should be put back on the list. Do you want to put it back or would you like me to? OlYeller Talktome 16:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
If you don't mind putting it back, that would be great. The last thing I wanted to do was start an editing war. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 16:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
None that I know of. Thanks for doing that. I hope you feel better soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohioreader ( talk • contribs) 19:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out that series of edits. There's nothing worse than having to clean up after a vandal who has made a long series of bad yet minor fact changes. In this case, I was able to spot check a few of the edits, and they do seem to line up exactly with the new 2010 census data. The census site was apparently designed by analysts who hate people, so jumping through the hoops to get to the right query is a bit of an adventure. You can start at census.gov and click through the most probable trail; if you hit a roadblock I can do the query again and give you a ste-by-step if you're interested. I cannot provide a direct link to results, however. :( Kuru (talk) 14:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi I updated some central ohio population numbers directly from the US census 2010 numbers. If you would like I can give you links to the us goverments census website or there are many newspaper publications that also provide this information. All my information has been accurate but I can stop updating if that is what you would like me to do.Just trying to help keep things current! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.165.76.233 ( talk) 06:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Do you think the May 20 article should include anything about the Draw Muhammad event? Voice your opinion here please, so we can reach consensus. Pass a Method talk 06:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Pretty strong talk! And I call what you are involved in "cronyism," and publically call you out on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agoodbadhabit ( talk • contribs) 04:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Seider's Springs, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: original author claims to be the author of the source. Please use Wikipedia:Copyright problems instead. Thank you. So Why 20:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for all the confusion with the contributions I that have made. I am the author of the source content with which there are alleged copyright violations. I am working to make my Wikipedia entries fully compliant. Many thanks for your time and helpful advice. Brykerwoods ( talk) 14:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Please do not delete the entries under the politics discussion of RPGnet. You deleted one entry saying "this is not a forum" but let all the others (which were basically similar kinds of statements), remain. The topic of RPG.nets political leanings is a source of heated debate on gaming boards, and at least worthy of inclusion on the discussion page. If I added objectionable material to the actual article, I could understand. But this is a debate on whether to include details on the RPG.net tangency-mods controversies and I was just adding my opinion on it. 107.3.67.184 ( talk) 13:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Nope, my comment was supporting including material on bias in the article. I wasn't just commenting to say I think its liberal. I was commenting to show the previous statements about including this detail had merit. What is your problem? 107.3.67.184 ( talk) 12:00, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Yeller, that is the discussion page, not the article itself. There is an ongoing debate over whether the article should contain references to politics. That post is simply part of that discussion. If someone changes the article without a source, you can change it. But you can't alter the discussion page. If you change that once more, I am reporting you for vandalism.The person's post is no different than the seven or so that procede it. Why are you interfering with a discussion page in this way? 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 15:49, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I think you are misapplying the policy. And if you continue to remove things like this from the talk page I will report it as vandalism. FOX News is known for being a conservative news station, and there is nothing wrong with including an objective description of this widely held belief on the FOX news wikipedia entry. In the same way, RPG.net is deemed by many, many gamers to have a strong left-wing bias. Including an objecting description of this widely held belief would certainly belong in the article if reliable sources can be cited to show the belief exists. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 18:51, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
You are misapplying the policy because that is meant from eliminating opinions from articles. I am not advocating the article describe rpg.net as liberal (that would be an opinion), I am advocating that the article include a description of the controversy itself (some gamers think rpg.net is liberal or politically biased). That is different from using the article as a platform to express the opinion that it is biased. But on the discussion page, people are simply voicing their belief that it is liberal to demonstrate the belief is out there.
So long as you don't delete a legitimate debate on the on this topic from the discussion page I won't pass judgement. But bear in mind, what people are really trying to say here, and what I am suggesting, is we simply include something like "some readers have accused rpg.net of having a liberal bias". There are plenty of sources out there making that accusation (the rpg pundit for one) and those rise to the same level of most of the sources on the article. I agree, the article shouldn't come down on either side of this debate. But it should at least acknowledge the debate exists. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 19:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I presented the first sourse that comes up on a google search on the issue. It is an online essay by rpgpundit. If you think that isn't a valid source, then fine, but keep in mind most of the sources on the actual article are of that nature as well (so those will need to be removed). Also the rest of the article is unsourced and appears to be a product of individual research, so the entire article probably needs to be hacked down to a much smaller entry if we are going to go on a wikipedia policy enforcement tagent here.
Bottom line, you appear to be using wikipolicy to stifle a legitimate debate on the discussion page. People aren't just simply using the dicsussion page as a forum, they are trying to make the case that a lot of people perceive a liberal bias at rpgnet, and this probbaly should be mentioned in the article. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 19:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I amn not suggesting we do original research. There are plenty of online secondary sources (though you may object to them) that describe this ongoing controversy. 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 19:34, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
After you noted that several of the references aren't reliable, I checked out the rest. I don't believe that article satisfies WP:GNG or any part of WP:N and should not be included in the project. I have nominated the article for deletion. OlYeller Talktome 19:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Bullyediting_by_Olyeller 98.110.177.20 ( talk) 23:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry if you believed that I was attacking you in my answer on the project page. I did go on a bit too long in my response. I apologize. Student7 ( talk) 19:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
My apologies for this. I shouldn't have removed your comment, but you might do well remembering WP:BITE - the primary content of your warning wasn't particularly applicable, as the category was both appropriate for the articles in question, and supported by verifiable content. That's certainly one way to confuse a newbie. Mato ( talk) 18:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
I understand your point, but then we should just remove the whole "Open M2M initiatives" section, I guess... There is IMO no reason to have a link towards an old initiative (see BiTXml, for example), and none for a new open source (again) initative ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kartben ( talk • contribs) 11:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
On Kenya institute of media and technology. -- Greenmaven ( talk) 19:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller21. I recently deleted Saimir Pirgu, a page you tagged for speedy deletion under G12 with the edit summary "Nominating for G12. To patrolling admin, please check carefully. The Duplication Detector report is thrown off a bit but the similarities are very clear." A user has contested that deletion on my talk page. Your input would be appreciated. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 09:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Does this article warrant deletion on grounds of lack of independent verification? -- Greenmaven ( talk) 13:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I was curious why a fan site dedicated to TOMS with thousands of visitors and hundreds of fans would not be a relevant link to include on this page. Also, is there any reason why the last external link on this page would meet your editorial approval? http://www.fashioncatalog.co.uk/shoes/toms-classic-slip-shoes-for-summer/
To me this site is much less relevant to the editorial integrity of Wikipedia, but yet it is not removed. Just trying to understand the logic of what would be considered a credible link to add. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.27.121.252 ( talk) 16:46, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I also just noticed that you flagged this addition as vandalism. How in the world would this be considered vandalism? I think that is a bit extreme don't you thing? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.27.121.252 (
talk)
16:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
Hereby, I award You the Barnstar of Good Humor for Your recent contributions to Wikipedia talk:Notability. Hans Dunkelberg ( talk) 15:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC) |
I see you've started tagging, but I'm not seeing notices on the first editors talk page. I'll delete them, and take the heat, but I rarely delete without seeing a notice on the talk page.-- SPhilbrick T 20:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)-- SPhilbrick T 20:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
What is your relationship with Tom's Shoes? You seem to be engaged in PR/damage control with them and I honestly doubt your good faith on this subject. Perhaps you could find another contributor who is more neutral to make changes on this subject you feel is needed or at least restrict you outright deletions/reversions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Litch ( talk • contribs) 04:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Litch ( talk) 17:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
..."that one takes full responsibility for any action performed using Twinkle. One must understand Wikipedia policies and use this tool within these policies or risk having one's access to use Twinkle revoked or one's account being blocked. Anti-vandalism tools, such as Twinkle, Huggle, and rollback should not be used to undo good-faith changes in content disputes unless an appropriate edit summary is used."
You can't call "Vandalism! Vandalism" just because you don't like the edit! :)
[Or perhaps you can, if you want to show wiki supporters/subscribers that wiki lets just anyone moderate, regardless of personal agenda...] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agoodbadhabit ( talk • contribs) 05:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller21, You may remember me from our conversation on here on the WP:COIN talk page. I have completed a draft of the article about Bloomberg L.P. head of communications, Kevin Sheekey, and would appreciate it if you could take a look at it and see if you think it's ready to replace the current article. I'm still working on drafting the Daniel Doctoroff article to address the copyright violations, but I thought I'd start with Sheekey since the changes are more minor. Ordwayen ( talk) 19:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
For the "heads up" as they say. I don't have that page on my watchlist any more.-- andreasegde ( talk) 16:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Re. Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Swarcliffe,
Please see my addition, [1]. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts; I don't know how to proceed; I hate this stuff.
Related, explanation-why-I-am-here, disclaimer: I've been trying to help the editor, and been trying to calm his antagonistic attitude to prevent a block - see [2] [3].
Cheers, Chzz ► 20:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Is there any particular reason for making your date and time stand out in bold (and, I think, large font)? It's a bit distracting when reading talk pages or WP:COIN - seems to suggest some significance that probably isn't intended. PamD ( talk) 13:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
[[User:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Ol<font style="color:#FBB117;">Yeller</font></font>]]'''<sup>[[User_talk:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Talktome</font>]]</sup> OlYeller Talktome 14:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I recently noticed that the page on GameSoundCon was deleted, based in part on your analysis of the content. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/GameSoundCon)
I would like to respectfully ask you to reconsider, based on a couple of points
I would ask you to please reconsider the use of "MIX Magazine" (online or off) to be a dubious reference. MIX has been one of music industry's leading trade magazines for at least 30 years. Although they were owned for a time by Penton Media, the magazine was separate from the PR organization. Recording schools often make sure to note if one of their grads or faculty makes it into MIX; they consider it a "big deal." For example ( http://www.audiorecordingschoolblog.com/2011/07/13/grads-featured-in-mix-magazine/ or http://www.audiorecordingschoolblog.com/category/game-audio/), http://www.berklee.edu/bt/193/alumnotes.html, http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/CAM/faculty/meis/jermance/Pages/index.aspx. The "TEC" award, founded by MIX, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEC_Awards) is also very highly regarded in the industry.
GameSoundCon was the very first public showing of the previously private tools used to develop content for the video game, Rock Band (published by MTV/Viacom). This became part of the launch of "The Rock Band Network" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Band_Network) and a highly notable event. This is covered in a "gamasutra" article here: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/25015/GameSoundCon_Adds_Rock_Band_Network_Classes.php Gamasutra is the leading online resource for the entire game development community.
Your largest concern seemed (justifiably) to be about the "GamesOpt.com" reference. That was poor judgement to use a non-vetted source (especially one obviously trying to capitalize on users who make a typo when trying to find GameSpot.com). Since I knew the information to be accurate, I didn't vet rest of the site properly. There were many sites which had referenced Marty O'Donnell (Halo Composer) keynoting the kickoff conference -- I picked a bad one (at one point, Marty had it listed on his own page).
I hope you will take the above into consideration and reconsider the deletion of the page; I will update the references to include the Gamasutra article as well as a non-dubious reference on O'Donnell's keynote.
Thank you for your time Bschmidt1962 ( talk) 18:11, 11 August 2011 (UTC) bschmidt1962
The Children's Museum Backstage Pass! - You are invited! | |
---|---|
![]() |
The Children's Museum of Indianapolis is hosting its second Backstage Pass and its first Edit-a-Thon on Saturday, August 20. The museum is opening its doors to Wikipedians interested in learning about the museum's collection, taking them on a tour of the vast collection before spending the afternoon working with curators to improve articles relating to the Caplan Collection of folk toys and Creative Playthings objects. Please sign up on the event page if you can attend, and if you'd like to participate virtually you can sign up on the Edit-a-Thon page. --- LoriLee ( talk) 15:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC) |
That sounds awesome. I haven't been there for quite a while. Also, it's a great idea for getting experience Wikipedians to help you out. I love the idea but live to far to take make the trip. I'll check out the virtual edit-a-thon at some point. OlYeller Talktome 16:37, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Hey there,
I recently wrote an article on an algorithm i invented to the sorting problem, the algorithm i described works better then all comparison algorithms exists on the market. i dont see why would it be non important. if you still do think so you may as well delete it, but others who would love to use it or just love to see a brand new exit on this particular computer science issue, are the ones to suffer.
i am asking you to reconsider,as i would love let others use my contribution.
Thank you for your time OfekRon —Preceding undated comment added 18:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC).
Hey again, well i'm a senior year student of Ort Braude college of Israel, im just an annonymous private who would want to share his creation with the world, i got my Proffesor to agree with me that that is definitely the best comparison algorithm there is on the market, but other then that, a little man like me cant do. I got a C code with the algorithm implementation that works and aprove its efficiency, but other than that i got nothing but what I and my proffesor knows. if you guys, or other members or users can approve the aritcle, they are more then welcome to use and test it. would it be helpfull if i added a specific implementation of the program in C code? I thought thats a little unapropriate and that is why i didnt do so in the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OfekRon ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
There is a serious problem on the Swarcliffe page, as some editors are ignoring advice about the edits they are making. I have made a list of mistakes on the talk page, to which one editor replied, "I have no intention of going through the list of "errors" ". Help is very definitely needed here.-- andreasegde ( talk) 13:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anne Lorraine Gales, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The awards and medals won indicate notability sufficient for A7. Take to AfD if required, but will add BLPPROD notice now. Thank you. Ged UK 07:10, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
I apologise for my "move on" comment at User talk:Graeme Bartlett. I felt that GB had taken enough over one decision; it was not my intent to characterise you as a problematic editor (I don't actually know you at all as an editor, so should have been more careful in my response). Sorry.
Regards, 88.104.46.22 ( talk) 18:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
I realize he had removed the AFd tag, but did you really mean to characterize all sixteen of the previous edits as vandalism? [4] I can't say I can tell what he thought a lot of them were accomplishing, and he has proven to be very difficult to communicate with, but I don't think those edits were done with he specific intent to harm Wikipedia. Beeblebrox ( talk) 22:05, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
I did not understand the reason why you deleted my posting. I didn't feel that I had done wrong. PKdundee ( talk) 21:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I was correcting a report at SPI when I noticed that your signature does not accurately say who you are. You are not User:OlYeller, but User:OlYeller21. Would you consider changing your signature by adding the '21' part, so that there is no confusion in the future? Phearson ( talk) 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Do we have to take this to the talk page? This was your original accusation of User:Bluestarblackcar. The user only made three, inconsequential edits. What proof do you have against User:EdGl other than a similarity to the subject's name? Look at the edit history of the user you're accusing and you'll see that the user was a general editor. Are you suggesting that Bluestarblackcar was a SockPuppet of EdGl? Please clarify your position. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 14:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi there OIYeller21. The images that were in question on the wikipedia site for Selena Cuffe have since been removed. So everything on there now has been submitted by other users. So I'd love for you to review and see what can be done to remove the COI, which no longer applies. Thanks in advance - I really appreciate it ( Selenacuffe ( talk) 15:05, 7 September 2011 (UTC)).
So grateful and thankful! Thank you! ( 75.186.1.187 ( talk) 02:03, 10 September 2011 (UTC)).
This is a response to your comment on my article about Jon Hinck. I put the response on my talk page, but it is not clear that you ever saw it, so I'm copying it here.
If you have a connection with Jon Hinck, please disclose your connection with him on your talk page. Also, please review our policy regarding editing with a conflict of interest. The page is being closely monitored and I assure you, if there is a connection, it will eventually be found. OlYeller Talktome 20:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Before addressing your suspicions, let me say that I did review carefully the page on Wiki's COI policy. The statement itself is rather porous. "Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest." I don't know or care much about Wikipedia per se. All of my outside interests are therefore more important to me than the aims of Wikipedia. I think it is convenient to have an information source like W, and I would like to contribute my expertise to anyone who might need it, but my outside interests are obviously more important in themselves (to me) than my inclination to share information about them.
What Wikipedia ought to be concerned about is not which interest is more important to the author, but whether the author has an interest that actually leads to the distortion or falsification of a story.
Having noted (to myself, in the first instance) that the Wiki definition of COI is defective, I noted also the temporizing effect of the subsequent paragraph ("Editors with COIs are strongly encouraged—but not actually required—to declare their interests..."). Before undertaking the Hinck article, I also reviewed all the other articles on Maine legislators. Quite a few are transparently written by the subjects themselves. For instance, Jeffery Gifford's stub notes that he coached Pop Warner football for twenty-five years. No documentation whatsoever on that. Where would the information have come from? Seth Berry's relatively extensive article has information about his hobbies, highlights of his career as a school teacher, and a lot of other information no disinterested Wiki writer would likely have. The two newspaper articles cited for that article have virtually no corroboratory function. I could go on, but you know what I'm talking about.
So please let's not pretend that Wiki authors have no interest other than serving the aims of Wikipedia.
As for my alleged COI in compiling the Hinck article, here is my response:
I was a colleague of the subject (Jon Hinck) when we both taught ESL for Iran America Society in Isfahan. That was in the spring of 1975. It happened that Jon was from a town a few minutes from my parents' place, and when I visited them in the late summer, I also stopped by to see the Hincks. After that I lost contact with him until around 2003, when I ran across a reference to his work, which I found pretty inspiring. I dug up his address, sent him some photos from Iran, and we had a brief snail-mail exchange. Later I set up a Google alert on Hinck, so that I could follow his career. Recently I opened a wiki account, intending to do some articles on Nepal, especially Rolwaling, on which I have some expertise. (See rolwaling.com/,, mountainlegacy.org, wanderingeducators.com). As I was organizing my material on Rolwaling, I noticed that Hinck was edging toward a run against Olympia Snowe, which I think would be extremely significant politically. I researched his career online to the extent I could, and emailed him for clarifications and documentation, which he was kind enough to assist with. One area where he was especially helpful was his role in Greenpeace USA. Although I gave money ($10-25/year) to Greenpeace back in the 90s, I was not directly involved in campaigns, and had no idea of Hinck's role.
Clearly, my article on Hinck is more extensive than the write-ups of other Maine legislators. (On the other hand, the article on John Eder, whom Hinck defeated, is of comparable length, but with negligible documentation; there is no indication how the author would have known anything about Eder's bumming around and living in a solar powered shack.) I think we would be better off if authoritative and reasonably comprehensive articles were available on all office-holders. Hinck is particularly deserving of attention because of his effective environmental activism. This is not a minor figure like some candidates for national office, whose accomplishments have been largely in the area of self-promotion. Hinck's work for Greenpeace USA, as well as his service for the emerging nation of Palau, are more than just "notable": they are remarkable.
All that being said, I understand that Wiki may feel that now is the time to burnish its credibility. Perhaps you are in the process of reviewing all articles on officeholders or environmental activists. Or whatever. I would be perfectly happy if someone else wanted to take over the Hinck article. I have no personal stake at all in it, other than my hope that he will run for the Senate sooner rather than later, simply because our country needs his service.
I am concerned that Wiki's COI policy may mean that you would also have issues with my working on Nepal articles, since I have a record of promoting backpacker tourism. I hasten to add that all my efforts in that respect have been non-lucrative. On the other hand, I don't want to waste my time or yours on more articles that are going to be problematic simply because I have a prior interest not just in the subject but also in its success. I assure you that I have no fear of being publicly shamed as having what Wiki deems a Conflict of Interest. Anybody whose main interest in life is Wikipedia -- and who is not making somehow making money from it -- probably needs to get a life, or at least some real-world interests.
I thank you for your time and guidance on this matter.
Sicroff ( talk) 21:06, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
not to get sucked in yourself! The case study needs someone who hasn't had their own tussles with her. (Thanks again BTW for all the hard work, even just this far.) JohnInDC ( talk) 01:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Just want to give you a heads up that the AfD you started in August is still open, and not listed at WP:AfD for some reason. Cheers Tooga - BØRK! 14:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
KuwarOnline Talk 09:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Recently you edited the article Robot economics using Twinkle. I'm a new user and have no much idea about the whole process. I have provided needed links to the article as it notified. Please contact me at resourcesecon@yahoo.com. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.23.184.14 ( talk) 13:37, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
This is for you contribution for checking copyvios for India Education Program.
Thanks a ton, keep the good work going! Cheers, Ram ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC) |
Thanks, Ram! OlYeller Talktome 19:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm here to chime in with your comment from a year and a half ago. Please see the associated article and its recent history also. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 17:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
It's okay. Thanks for your input at the COI noticeboard. Keep up the good work, 99.168.81.210 ( talk) 00:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am a newbie, as you probably are aware. I have been trying to site information correctly about the artist Patricia Elliott Seitz. I am sorry for the unintentional deletion of your earlier warnings. Since you are well versed in the Wikipedia protocol, possibly you might help me, so that I might not receive any more deletion notices/warnings?
Thank you kindly, — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatriciaSeitz ( talk • contribs) 11:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC)