This page 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.

I know, you wasted time investigating this while I was working on it too:-) Can't tell you how many times I've worked up some elaborate answer at various forums only to edit conflict with three other people.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 17:05, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Not a problem, it took me only a few minutes to figure out that you already took care of it. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 17:16, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Conflict of interest account repeatedly inserting promotional material. Thank you.

The above notification for information only. There is no suggestion of malfeasance on your part. DieSwartzPunkt ( talk) 16:23, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea what this was about, can't see anything in the archives of that page by that thread name. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 17:17, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Can you please help me with this Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 January 4, I've never had to do one of these before, and I can't seem to figure out what in the hell I am doing wrong.-- Yankees10 03:20, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, I see what I did.-- Yankees10 03:38, 4 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 (shout) @ 20:34, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe User:Hum1969 has many socks and who was banned from the CPTDB boards. See here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Ban_proposal_for_User:Hum1969 135.23.145.164 ( talk) 16:36, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I was looking at your comment on the above mentioned AFD. Looking at the article you nominated to merge this one into, doesn't look to meet WP:GNG or WP:NALBUMS either. Before I nominated another article I thought I would get your opinion.- McMatter ^{( talk)}/_{( contrib)} 02:39, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I didn't look closely at the Big Sounds of the Drags article before I left that comment. That article is completely unsourced, although with some of its songs included in notable video games and a Rovi review on Allmusic (I can't find much else), I'd say the notability is there, but borderline. I won't object if you nominate it for AFD, although I think the article could be a keeper if someone added citations. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 04:00, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the creator of the page Irish Car Rentals which was recently nominated for afd. After the discussion the result was keep which was performed by you. But the page is still not showing among the pages created by me. Can you please tell me why? Mr RD 15:51, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) Hello @ Mr RD:, if you look at the history of the article it was created by User:Martynjpipe, this is why it would not show up.- McMatter ^{( talk)}/_{( contrib)} 15:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

But the article was speedy nominated and was actually blank (mostly). I made the page on my user draft and then moved it to the main space. Does this overlap my contributions? Mr RD 15:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@ Mr RD: If you examine the deletion log of the page, you will see that you are one of its creators. It was created multiple times. When it was last restored, it was restored with all the contribution history intact, including contributions from 2007 that pre-dated yours. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 18:11, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok. Now I get it. Thank you for the information. Mr RD 18:29, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey, you and User:Scalhotrod have been in a bit of a disagreement over what should be included. I tried to rewrite the "2012" section, cleaning up the English and maintaining verifiability, while minding the talk page recommendations and mediation. This includes the BLP idea that Satnam's significance ends when he leaves Amma's life. I ended up effectively writing what User:Abhayakara came up with. I'm inviting you to have a look at it in my sandbox. -- Anon423 ( talk) 00:41, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

@ Anon423: It isn't really a disagreement. I agree that what Scalhotrod is restoring should be said in the article, the problem is that Scalhotrod is restoring a copyright violation, and that isn't acceptable on Wikipedia.

What you wrote in your sandbox looks OK, except that both sources you cite are all about the attacker's death. It seems odd that your proposed revision wouldn't mention it. As such, it sort of misrepresents the sources by omitting their main purpose. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 01:02, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

My apologies, I had no idea it was copy vio. There's so little there, it's hard to believe that it wasn't paraphrased. I've just been responding to Special:PendingChanges list reviews. As for the sources, that happens often. -- Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 07:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm, you're right. I was simply using the sources already in the article, while trying to remake the section following WP guidelines. I suppose then the question becomes one of why those sources were chosen - which would be to explicitly include mention of his death. Maybe we should find alternative references that, like our biographical policies, focus on Amritanandamayi. -- Anon423 ( talk) 14:30, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

High-frequency_trading

Spent a lot of time on it and it really needed a good clean up !!!

cheers !!!

looks amazing now

Brad Katsuyama is a financial services executive, working as the president, CEO and co-founder of the IEX, the Investors Exchange. Katsuyama is also the focus of Flash Boys, a non-fiction book by Michael Lewis about high frequency trading (HFT) in financial markets. Brad Katsuyama led a team that implemented THOR, a securities order-management system that splits large orders into many different sub-orders that arrive at the same time to all the exchanges through the use of intentional delays. Starting at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the largest future exchange in the world is the location where Spread Networks started a 827 mile long fiber optic line all the way to the Bats Exchange, Inc in Northern New Jersey.

ending idea

Starting at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange ^[1] Spread Networks spent $300,000,000 million to shave off two miliseconds connecting the largest future exchange in the world is the location where started a 827 mile long fiber optic line all the way to the Bats Exchange, Inc in Northern New Jersey. David Adam Kess^{\  talk /} 19th of January 2015 (UTC)

Hi! Way back in 2010, you put [[octopus]] on indefinite semi-protection for persistent vandalism. Since then, the page has received many edit requests and a recent complaint about semi-protection from a very active and helpful IP. Given all this in conjunction with the fact that the protection is 4.5 years old, I humbly request that you unprotect the page. If you do, I promise to keep a close eye on it and revert any vandalism. If persistent vandalism returns to the point where it is a problem, I'll let you know. A2soup ( talk) 09:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@ A2soup: The edit requests, particularly the fact that most of them have been declined, suggest that the protection is doing its job — especially with respect to preventing the disruption about plural forms and whatnot which resulted in the prior protections. I'll unprotect it for now and see what happens, but some biology articles are just magnets for disruption, probably due to being favored subjects in elementary schools (with Lemming and Yeti being other examples). ~ Amatulić ( talk) 20:35, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I understand your concerns and will do my best keep everything in order. Let me know if you are considering protecting it again. A2soup ( talk) 23:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Can you reply please at the Muhammad talk page? Cheers homeboy. I'm feeling slightly mellow ( talk) 00:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

You blocked this guy for a year starting in January, so you might be interested to see the new case page at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Kenny Loggins vandal. Materialscientist also blocked an IP related to this case. The vandal showed up again yesterday and I don't think we've seen the last of him now that he's using public IPs. Binksternet ( talk) 07:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

I've range-blocked 108.178.159.0/24 (255 addresses, very small range) for 6 months based on the similarity of IP addresses reported on that page. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 15:30, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Just wondering if you could perhaps take a look at, and even weigh in with your opinion of my proposal at Mohammedan. I wasn't sure if it was on your watchlist. Thanks! Quinto Simmaco ( talk) 09:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm curious if you've revisited the User:Wifione incident now that he's been banned. During an initial SPI in 2009 you said that an investigation was "premature after only two edits to the article". Having just seen this comment, I'm curious how you came to that conclusion. There were several red flags: 1) the user made their way to the Indian Institute of Planning and Management article on their 17th edit. Don't you find it the least bit strange that a new user would find their way to sockpuppet central on their 17th edit? I think most people would wonder about this. 2) you said "I am not seeing the same editing patterns", yet you characterize the pattern as simple reverting when the original poster made it clear that the pattern was not reverting, but "trying to whitewash the page and remove all uncomplimentary information." And, in fact, that is exactly what Wifione was doing. [1] So, it took an additional six years for the user to be banned when the evidence was clear back in 2009. As a scientist who is willing to revisit their theories, do you still think it was premature for an investigation of Wifione based on the initial SPI evidence? [2] Viriditas ( talk) 05:47, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Interesting, I didn't know he was banned.

I brought up evidence of Wifione's conflict of interest at his RFA. And earlier I participated in a WP:COIN investigation on Wifione.

You can find all that information yourself if you're interested. I have no idea what purpose you have in selectively revisiting old history pm this talk page. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 19:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

My purpose is to let you know he was banned and to learn as much as I can about why this happened and how to prevent another incident like it. I would very much like to review his RFA and the COIN investigation, so thanks for pointing me in that direction. I'm sure I can find the RFA comments, but am I correct to assume that the COIN discussion is located in the appropriate noticeboard archive? Btw, you may be interested in reading this article about the incident. Viriditas ( talk) 20:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.

Wifione has his RFA linked on his user page.

If you search the WP:COIN archives for "wifione" you will find the discussion. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 23:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

ABC-CLIO is a major publisher of academic books. I use them all the time and now they have e-books that are very useful references.

you put it on the blacklist

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&oldid=614260203

because one person "spammed" it ...he appeared for one day & is now gone for over a year /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/94.7.175.163 (he made a legit edit--it was not spamming)

can you please remove it? I got stopped short when I linked to them

see /info/en/?search=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#ABC-CLIO_Reference_books

Thanks RJensen

I agree with this request to take ABC-CLIO off the blacklist, where it should not have been placed. Binksternet ( talk) 04:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I have commented at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#ebooks.abc-clio.com. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 18:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Golden rule. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Golden rule redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Be..anyone ( talk) 13:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

You may recall your last contact with the above-noted user was to remind him not to engage in any editing until he had secured a mentor to advise him on matters of copyright infringement. Well, today Shashi Sumeet Productions popped up on my watchlist; it seems Noormohammed just recreated this deleted article with text copied verbatim or closely paraphrased from Realbollywood News and the Times of India. I'm not sure if he got the material directly from these external sites, or if he just blindly copied plot summaries from our own infringing articles. (Even if the latter, it's still problematic—we have rules about copying within Wikipedia which must be followed to ensure our contributors' own CC-BY-SA text is legally credited, and to help trace the source of infringing material which gets shuffled between pages, as may have happened here.) I did a quick check of his recent contributions and don't see any attempts by him to locate a mentor. His last word on the matter is an unsigned reply to you on his user talk page on 30 November 2014.

As you'd been handling the situation before, could you please revisit it? This user was a major time sink over at WP:CP and WP:CCI so I'm sure nobody there relishes the prospect of having to laboriously check over and clean up all his edits again. It's important that he immediately stop the problematic copying, and at this point I'm not particularly bothered whether that's through mentorship or the reinstatement of his indefinite block. — Psychonaut ( talk) 08:29, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Not interested? Should I refer this to someone else? — Psychonaut ( talk) 10:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry... lately my Wikipedia activities have been limited to things that can be done quickly without too much thought. As I recall, he was having trouble finding a mentor, suggested that I do it (which I can't), and then apparently he gave up and went off flying solo.

I'm not ignoring your notice, I'm just trying to find a good time where I have 20-30 minutes or so of uninterrupted time to study the evidence and take appropriate action -- which at this point looks like it might mean re-blocking. If you want to involve any of the other admins who previously declined unblock requests on his talk page, you're welcome to do so. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:15, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I certainly don't mind waiting, and think it's probably best if you're the one who responds so as to ensure some sort of continuity. In the meantime I'll try to keep an occasional eye out for further copyvios. — Psychonaut ( talk) 06:05, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any problems happening with Reddit. I am requesting it to be unprotected for this reason. Thanks, Anarchyte ( talk) 09:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@ Anarchyte: Er... there aren't any problems happening because the article is semi-protected. That means the protection is working as it should. You might want to see the RFPP request that led to this protection. Continuous disruptive activity from anonymous IP addresses and unconfirmed accounts, resulting in numerous (too many) entries in the protection log culminated in semi-protecting it indefinitely. You can certainly request removing the protection, but I suspect the article won't remain unprotected for long, given its history. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:31, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I've copy edited the Embedded_hypervisor page to try address some of the issues you flagged, would you care to review and add more comments to that talk page for specific areas requiring update. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.211.228.227 ( talk) 13:45, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi: Ali Astani plays for Iran national under-17 football team & Perspolis F.C. in the Persian Gulf Pro League IranLeague, PersianLeague and Article in Persian Wiki. PLZ Remove protection.- Samək ^Talk 23:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

What protection? Which article? I see no article on Ali Astani. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 23:33, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I want to ‍creat Ali Astani, But Protected. Samək ^Talk 23:40, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

You've removed in 3 September 2014.- Samək ^Talk 23:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I did not protect that page. HJ Mitchell protected it. Also, I will not unprotect it because you haven't offered any new information beyond what was already written in the deleted article. If you tried to re-create it, it would be quickly deleted again for that reason.

Please start a new article in your sandbox or in draft space, and when you are satisfied that it is ready for publication in main space, ask me or another administrator to review it and move it over the protected title. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 22:09, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was a copyvio site — thought it was licensed. Good catch. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 16:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Not a problem... every so often I go to Special:LinkSearch and look for new *.guru sites that have popped up, and remove them from main article space. With very few exceptions, .guru sites are generally not appropriate for linking on Wikipedia, because most of them are self-published or non-authoritative, and in some cases they are copyvio. The additions aren't frequent enough to warrant a blacklist of the .guru TLD, but it might be worth putting it into XLinkBot for reversion the first time a link is added, similar to the way XLinkBot already auto-reverts the first time someone adds a blogspot link. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 19:22, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

The 
Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Intelligent design". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. 
Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the 
request page, the 
formal mediation policy, and the 
guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 8 July 2015.

User:Amatulic, Hi. As you can see by this French Wikipedia page on Intelligent design (French: Dessein intelligent), they give both sides of the argument, presenting the subject in a more neutral tone. They write (translated from the French): "Intelligent design is presented as a scientific theory by its promoters, but in the scientific world it is considered as a pseudoscience, for reasons that both the internal facts of biology and also epistemological criteria cannot be rectified (the proponents of intelligent design appearing to biologists as having ignored numerous arguments, the more notable of which being the falsifiability criterion of Karl Popper)..." I am, therefore, quick to admit that the WP article on Intelligent design should at least attempt to show that ID is viewed differently by different folks, and that even if it were not a scientific theory, per se, it is still a philosophical question suggestive of something else beyond what is seen by our naked eye, and that some biochemists (i.e. Michael Behe) and physicists (i.e. Albert Einstein) have entertained that notion as a real possibility, given all their scientific experience. Do you think that it would be possible for us to incorporate something along the lines of the French article into our own English article, and to admit that there is a philosophical question that has been the subject of debate (or of mere musings) by some respected people of the scientific community? Davidbena ( talk) 22:22, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Each Wikipedia has different rules. The French Wikipedia (if not now then at least in the past), has no problem with companies using the platform to promote themselves, something that isn't allowed on the English Wikipedia. Similarly, their policies and guidelines regarding neutrality and undue weight are not the same.

That said, I do like the objectivity in the phrase "in the scientific world it is considered pseudoscience..." but the French version is wishy-washy about the leading description "presented as a scientific theory". Our lead is better in that regard, using a direct quotation from the Discovery Institute to describe exactly how proponents describe it.

As I have stated before, my only objection to the lead is the usage of the adjective "pseudoscientific", because it comes across as dictating an opinion in Wikipedia's voice, rather than simply stating that ID is considered as pseudoscience (a noun) which is more objective. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 08:23, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

The 
request for formal mediation concerning Intelligent design, to which you were listed as a party, has been 
declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the 
mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the 
Chairman of the Committee, or to the 
mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see 
Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Software developer may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Use dmy dates|date=July 2015}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:05, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Project Shrine Maiden (deleted by Xezbeth in 2012/2013), Sonic CD: The Movie (deleted in August 2011), Japanese Ritual Day (deleted by Fram in 2014), and Cheerleaders (the one Black Kite deleted in 2014, when it got moved to her userspace). Thanks. Now I've gotta play them all. ( talk) 21:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Just so you know Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:05, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

See also User talk:Whyedithere Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:10, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

This is to dispute the deletion of Galaxy Fräulein Yuna. The contents of the original article was from the original Galaxy Fraulein Yuna, which was deleted also for a different reason (redirection to a deleted page). The source you have mentioned was actually the one which copied the article from Wikipedia, instead of the other way around. Kindly check and verify. Thank you. THE IMPERIOUS DORK ( talk) 05:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@ THE IMPERIOUS DORK: Yes, you're correct. I was about to restore it but noticed there's a mess that needs fixing: The histories of both articles need to be merged. I'll fix it up. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 17:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

All done. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 17:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Nice. Many thanks! THE IMPERIOUS DORK ( talk) 12:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Can you have a look at Talk:Robert_Eringer#Advert_tag I've got a administrative editor who thinks it cool to trash other works when you contest his AfD nomination. I'm the paid editor you helped with Robert Eringer, I don't believe I can remove even an unwarranted Advert tag from the article space. Cheers -- 009o9 ( talk) 01:16, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Looks like someone else took care of it. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 17:24, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

(moved to User talk:Joeysevenforever)

Hi, I happened to find that Nick Catchdubs has been deleted three times and the page is created from creation. It looks like significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page. Below are the sources which prove the subject passes WP:GNG and WP:BAND criterion #1.

• "Nick Catchdubs / Fordinho / Teddy Celebration - Hi-Fi Club, Calgary AB June 7". Exclaim!. June 22, 2008.
• "Download Jackie Chain After Hours Mixtape". Stereogum. February 8, 2012.
• "Mixtape Of The Week: Jackie Chain & Nick Catchdubs After Hours". Stereogum. February 15, 2012.
• "Nick Catchdubs – "Bizness" (Feat. Iamsu! & Jay Ant)". Stereogum. July 23, 2013.
• "V-EDM Playlist: Nick Catchdubs x tyDi x Rudimental x Jody Wisternoff & James Grant". Vibe. July 23, 2013.
• "Nick Catchdubs Offers a Peek Behind Fool's Gold Records". OC Weekly. November 8, 2013.
• "Nick Catchdubs ft. B.I.C. - "Wuts That"". Complex. September 11, 2014.
• "Nick Catchdubs remixed Red Baraat, who are touring (listen)". BrooklynVegan. February 9, 2015.
• "Fool's Gold's Nick Catchdubs Announces Debut LP Smoke Machine, Shares "Full House" Ft. Heems and Troy Ave". Pitchfork Media. February 26, 2015.
• "Nick Catchdubs – "Full House" (Feat. Troy Ave & Heems)". Stereogum. February 26, 2015.
• "Nick Catchdubs – Smoke Machine". Consequence of Sound. May 1, 2015.
• "Stream Nick Catchdubs' 'Smoke Machine' Album". Complex. May 2, 2015.
• "Kehlani and Nick Catchdubs Release New Albums". The New York Times. May 22, 2015.

I suppose you are the administrator who salted the page. Can you please unsalt the page? 153.206.5.198 ( talk) 21:24, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

OK, let's look at those:

• "Nick Catchdubs / Fordinho / Teddy Celebration - Hi-Fi Club, Calgary AB June 7". Exclaim!. June 22, 2008. -- brief coverage of a party, not the person
• "Download Jackie Chain After Hours Mixtape". Stereogum. February 8, 2012. -- trivial mention
• "Mixtape Of The Week: Jackie Chain & Nick Catchdubs After Hours". Stereogum. February 15, 2012. -- brief piece with only tangential coverage of the person
• "Nick Catchdubs – "Bizness" (Feat. Iamsu! & Jay Ant)". Stereogum. July 23, 2013. -- brief coverage of a music single, not the person
• "V-EDM Playlist: Nick Catchdubs x tyDi x Rudimental x Jody Wisternoff & James Grant". Vibe. July 23, 2013. -- trivial mention
• "Nick Catchdubs Offers a Peek Behind Fool's Gold Records". OC Weekly. November 8, 2013. -- blog sites are generally not acceptable sources
• "Nick Catchdubs ft. B.I.C. - "Wuts That"". Complex. September 11, 2014. -- brief review of a single, not the person, not significant coverage
• "Nick Catchdubs remixed Red Baraat, who are touring (listen)". BrooklynVegan. February 9, 2015. -- trivial mention, local-interest coverage
• "Fool's Gold's Nick Catchdubs Announces Debut LP Smoke Machine, Shares "Full House" Ft. Heems and Troy Ave". Pitchfork Media. February 26, 2015. -- brief coverage of an album, although with the bulk of the coverage being a quotation from Catchdub, it's essentially self-published, not a viable source
• "Nick Catchdubs – "Full House" (Feat. Troy Ave & Heems)". Stereogum. February 26, 2015. -- marginally decent coverage here
• "Nick Catchdubs – Smoke Machine". Consequence of Sound. May 1, 2015. -- coverage of an album, not the person
• "Stream Nick Catchdubs' 'Smoke Machine' Album". Complex. May 2, 2015. -- trivial coverage of an album, even less for the person
• "Kehlani and Nick Catchdubs Release New Albums". The New York Times. May 22, 2015. -- brief coverage of an album

Except for one marginally decent source listed above, I'm not seeing coverage of Catchdubs. Plenty of sources seem to provide brief coverage of his works, and there are plenty of trivial mentions, but no significant coverage that has any depth. Sorry, I am not seeing a compelling case for notability here. You are welcome to create a new article in draft space and submit it for review., but I must decline to de-salt the article on the basis of those sources. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 00:44, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Nur Ali Elahi#Requested move 15 October 2015. You were involved in a previous discussion about moving this page (ca. Nov. 2007). Thanks. Gyrofrog (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Amatulic, the iBooks Author page is locked which explains why the information on the page is very old. If you'll unlock the page, I'll add information on version 2.3 and 2.4 and the just-completed iBooks Author Conference. Right now, the page's condition is so poor it might as well be deleted - the information is extremely out of date. Thanks - Metrock — Preceding unsigned comment added by BMetrock ( talk • contribs) 02:41, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

@ BMetrock: It isn't locked, it's semi protected to prevent drive-by spamming and other COI edits. Any confirmed user account may edit it. It looks like in 2 days you will automatically gain that status (you need 4 days and 10 edits). ~ Amatulić ( talk) 20:11, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I just saw your comments to me on Scrapironiv's page. (I can't reply to you there, however.) If you look at my edits, most of them are copyediting and cleanup. There may be a couple of items I could add a source for, but I was just aligning them with their source pages. (To be honest, I think we have way too many US Navy articles, and keeping all their info current and matching is a pain in the butt). Anyway... I didn't want to make any further edits today for fear of violating 3RR myself. But tomorrow, I will certainly get back at it. As for Scrapironiv, he did violate 3RR, right after I warned him. He has 2 recent blocks for this and knows better. Also, the reverts were not justified. If you look at my edits, many of them were perfectly ok and the wholesale undoing of all of them was just silly. (As were the multiple templates he stuck on my page. - That was baiting.) The insulting use of my username and the heavy-handed "you wanna go outside?" was also out of line. He was basically looking for more, but I disengaged. With the totality of all this, along with the 3RR, I feel a sanction is warranted. That is why I brought it to ANI. As for me, I already acknowledged I could have handled it better, but his actions and attitude were quite antagonistic and frustrating. There is certainly a disparity between out behavior and actions here, but I'll leave it up to you an accept any decisions you make. You've been fair with me before. Cheers. - ^theWOLFchild 19:14, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

@ Thewolfchild: I suggest you make your minor changes one section at a time, not a wholesale large edit. Then it would be more clear what, exactly, the dispute is about. The other editor may not object to the minor updates. But he has a good point in that sources should be cited, particularly for substantive changes.

Also, please stop posting on his talk page. You may use the {{ping|username}} tag (like I did for you) to notify someone that you are addressing them, on the article talk page. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 19:27, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Uh, yeah... I just saw your comment. WHY would you say that? I haven't posted there in hours. In my comment above I already stated I can't reply to you there. In the ANI I clearly explained why there is a reply from me, a few minutes after he asked me not to post there. That is NOT harassment and your comments, especially about my 'history' are completely unnecessary and unwarranted. Please remove them, they only serve to inflame the situation and create an imbalance. Like I said... I haven't posted there in hours, and certainly didn't post anything "harassing". (it's not as if I posted multiple bogus templates, or bastardized his username as an insult, or threatened to escalate the dispute...) WTH dude? - ^theWOLFchild 19:36, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I reverted myself. I saw multiple instances of him saying to stay off his talk page, and I wasn't paying close enough attention to the time stamps of the comments, noticing only that they all were dated today. If someone has to ask you more than once, it suggests harrassment, and I admit my response was hasty. I apologize. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 20:09, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

speaking of...

This editor "scrapironiv", have you had a look at his contribs? In the short time he has been here, he has amassed a large number of edits, almost exclusively by use of tools such as reviewer and rollbacker. Some of these are controversial. Other than the recent issue at USN ships, I suggest you look at the article Peter Lindbergh. He has just gutted that page. He removed a lot of hard work, some due to "sourcing", even though he has recently been advised that in many cases it is more appropriate to add a template requesting citations. A large amount of work was removed due to wp:notdir. This is an artist and he has removed the lists of all his works (something that is actually allowed).

Now as you've seen, this editor is capable of being extremely hostile and confrontational, (something I wish to avoid) and he is making many, many edits removing people's work and templating them when other less inflammatory options are available. That's why I'm bringing this to your attention. You have just investigated this editor for a complaint and interacted with him, so as an admin it's certainly within your purview to look further. I have seen good editors brought to ANI and sanctioned for less than what this person has done. But again, I will leave this to you. I've had enough of ANI and dealing with troublesome editors and biased admins found there. I wish to avoid it altogether. I really wish to avoid further problems than what I've seen from just looking at these two articles. - ^theWOLFchild 11:30, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Your recent edits to WP:UAA/BOT ( diff) appear to have copied in the content of an entire template, making the source of the article very difficult for others to read or manipulate. This is probably because you inadvertently used the "subst" qualifier to substitute in the text of the template, instead of simply using the template without substitution. Could you please not do that? Kind regards, -- The Anome ( talk) 01:41, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I understand that you have unblocked the subject user Noormohammed satya to give them a WP:FRESHSTART. But the problem with this user was excessive promotion of stuff related to Indian TV shows and such. Post unblocking, this hasn't changed and has resulted in creation of some templates now placed in Category:Gold Awards. Some of these templates were deleted before but are now recreated. Another problem with these templates is that they fail WP:V as there are no sources backing this up on the template or even the article Zee Gold Awards that relates to this. I wouldn't mind fixing the issue but the problem is that these so-called "awards" given by a TV production house Zee TV isn't much independent and more like their own very long advertisement that spreads on various levels. Putting efforts on such a advertorial isn't wise and hampers WP by falling into WP:NOT category. Can something be done?
Pinging others involved @ DangerousPanda, Brianhe, Psychonaut, SpacemanSpiff, and TheRedPenOfDoom: §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { Talk / Edits} 08:38, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Put Zee Gold Awards up for AfD in a bundle with the templates and I will support. — Brianhe ( talk) 11:53, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

		Happy Diwali!!!
		Sky full of fireworks, Mouth full of sweets, Home full of lamps, And festival full of sweet memories... Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { Talk / Edits} 04:39, 10 November 2015 (UTC) Send Diwali wishings by adding {{ subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

You deleted the page I was working and your reasons are so off the mark its astonishing. Firstly you accuse me of using Wiki as a hosting site, what on earth do you mean by this, it makes no sense to me. For your information I have my own hosting and have no need for the use of Wiki's.

I refer to my friend as a client as I am doing some working for him for FREE. Yes for FREE. He has never paid me a penny for any work I have done for him as he is a friend. However, if I choose to call him a client it is because I have a lot of respect for his work and the work he has done with other great artists, actors and more in the UK.

He his held in very high regard in the industry as an artist, animator, film maker and animator.

He has worked with the greatest artists, musicians, songwriters, composers and actors of our generation.

You said I hadnt worked on his page for over a year, did you not see the added references and citations I added 4 weeks ago?!!!! I guess not. You have removed a tremendous amount of work and research that I fit in for Devlin my friend and client with absolutely no regard for the facts.

I am sure if I told Sir Peter Blake, Pete Townsend, Andy Serkis and many others he works with, what has been happening here they would not be happy.

You have insulted many people by your flippent inaccurate response to me and I insist that my draft be reinstated with immediate effect.

The British Film Institute acknowledges his work, IMDB, Art Galleries all over the world, Art Filmhouses all over and we found out his latest work is nominated for an award along with Sir Peter Blake in Chicago just a week ago.

This is the second time this site has removed the draft and if it wasnt that my friend wants his page on here I wouldnt bother again.

I would like a speedy response and the page reinstated as a matter of urgency as I do not have time to repeat work over and over because someone on wiki decides to delete it without any consideration for the user.

When I asked for help on many occasions to ensure the draft would be accepted, no-one got back to me. So I thank Wiki for their lack of support too.

If I sound annoyed and frustrated thats because I am, I am furious. I do not appreciate being told I am a liar and a chancer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devlin crow ( talk • contribs) 00:09, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

( talk page watcher)If you are not Devlin Crow, then you have chosen to masquerade as Devlin Crow. As far as we know, "Devlin Crow" has chosen to create an autobiography here and has ignored every bit of guidance offered along the way. Autobiographies are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia.

If you are not Devlin Crow, then why have you been impersonating them when uploading images?

Either way, Google searches don't give a single result that shows that Mr. Crow meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. Wikipedia is not a listing service or social media site. There are well-explained notability requirements for all article subjects here. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 03:43, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

@ Devlin crow: You don't appreciate being called a liar? Then stop lying. Your user page was an advertisement masquerading as an article, and your username is false as well. I'm willing to restore your draft in draft space, but frankly, you have NOT demonstrated any "matter of urgency" so far. Would you care to explain what you mean by that? We are all volunteers here, and we are not subject to any arbitrary schedule you may have. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 13:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Please note that I am not the filing party but rather a volunteer at the DRN. JQTriple7 ( talk) 05:49, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

Your response to my corrections to the English wine article is insulting and seems to me to be distinctly prejudiced. I am a professional viticulturist, vine historian, and researcher, and the amendments I made regarding Wrotham Pinot are both entirely factual and are based on intensive and careful research. Wikipedia carries a series of entries for Wrotham Pinot, all of which are no more than unmitigated propaganda and advertising; they are absolutely NOT factual, and are not supported by science or sound research, and my pointing out this not only does the wider viticultural community a service but also constitutes my sharing my valuable personal research with Wikipedia.

It appears I am wasting my time whenever I do this however.

May I ask precisley what you know about this topic --- Wrotham Pinot -- and how you therefore possibly make such an ignorant and presumptuous misjudgement about my very carefully and extensively researched amendments to the utterly tendentious propaganda you currently allow to stand as 'fact' regarding Wrotham Pinot? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.73.213.122 ( talk) 00:06, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Amatulic, I have left a note on this IPs talk page about our verifiability, original research, and civility policies. I will remain uninvolved in the content issue. HighInBC 00:11, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

@ HighInBC: Thanks.

@ 121.73.213.122: Unfortunately, your edits injected editorial opinion without referencing reliable sources, violating Wikipedia's WP:Neutral point of view and WP:Verifiability policies as well as the WP:Reliable sources guideline. While expertise is appreciated in crafting better content, unsourced opinions are not, unless you can point to reliable source citations. Yes, you are wasting your time every time you do this, because someone who does have expertise in Wikipedia policies and guidelines will usually come along and revert you. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 00:17, 18 December 2015 (UTC)