![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
InSegment ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello-
I am looking to enlist the help of a knowledgeable editor that can help me out with a Wiki article I have recently created.
The article I created was first marked for speedy deletion; I delayed the request using the "hang on" function. After leaving comments on the article's talk page, it came back that the neutrality of the article was being challenged, and it may need to be cleaned-up.
I am not sure what the next step is. At this point, will the article be "cleaned up" by an editor? Or, am I responsible for cleaning up the article before it gets deleted?
I created this article with Wiki policy/guidelines in mind, and I tried to create the article to read as neutral as possible. I am open to changes that make the article more in accordance with Wiki guidelines and would love help from others, but I am not sure who is responsible for making these changes. It would be great if I could receive some feedback from a more experienced Wikipedian!
Please let me know what I need to do to ensure that the article gets cleaned-up rather than deleted entirely.
Thanks!
-Jordan
Jordan.Gilbert ( talk) 20:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am not good at computers, and I am having difficulty formatting the article that I have created. Please assist. the name of the article is: Matt Urmy. thank you,
BK Monroe The Red Light Library — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRedLightLibrary ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
The link to the Steven Lloyd on the Congregation Beth Shalom Rodfe Zedek page is the wrong Stephen Lloyd. The correct Stephen Lloyd is an architect practicing in Brattleboro, VT and Chester, CT. He presently does not have a website so the link should be removed. Thank you. Signed, Stephen Lloyd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.92.121 ( talk) 20:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I've never posted here before so this might not be the right place to do this, but I seem to be having trouble formatting references in Mechanics' Union of Trade Associations. I formatted the first two references correctly, but when I tried to use the second reference twice (by using <ref name=Mechanics' Union: A history></ref> the second time) it didn't work and gave me some red error. I checked the Help page it directed me too, but I still couldn't figure it out even after trying to correct it numerous times. If anyone could take a look at the page and see what the problem is, that would be greatly appreciated. -- Ashershow1 talk• contribs 20:26, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I mostly edit MMA related articles as a part of WP:MMA and we are having a problem with an editor that makes multiple disruptive edits. S/he has never posted an edit summary or anything on a talk page and I'm wondering what the proper course of action (and timeline) would be at this point. I've looked through WP:dispute resolution but most of the solutions require some kind of dialog. Thanks! ZephyrFox ( talk) 03:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The links to ALL arcades on this page are "dead" EXCEPT for the link for "Video Paradise" in the 1983 list of arcades. You might want to delete the dead links. Again, the link for "Video Paradise" is valid and goes to a web site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.7.135 ( talk • contribs) 01:43, March 8, 2011
Hi. It appears that I am getting banned from contributing to admin areas, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic bans for Porchcrop. See my recent talk page discussions and they say that I lack in understanding the policies and guidelines. I need help in knowing what I need to improve. Is any of you willing to help me? Thank you so much for your help. - Porchcrop ( talk| contributions) 07:17, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I have just had to put our snuff company back on the list of UK snuff companies under the heading 'snuff' someone keeps deleting Toque snuff from the list. Is there anything we can do to stop this malicious act?
Hasn't Toque snuff the same right to be listed as all the other UK snuff companies?
Regards
Roderick Lawrie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toquesnuff ( talk • contribs) 17:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
The user User:Markpb91 is adding content to the Android article that is npov, while removing any positive references in the sections he edits. I accidentally pressed 'Save Page' instead of 'Show Preview' and cleared out the section, and got a warning about an edit war, so I'm not going to edit the page until I'm sure I won't get blocked, but when he adds negative statements and I revert them, he immediately adds them back, and I'm unable to get any response from the talk page. He adds (and re-adds when I remove them to create a npov section) words to avoid such as 'unfortunately' and 'called the fragment of all things' etc., and the entirety of the Usage Share section (which he renamed Fragmentation without reason) is nothing but pro-Apple and anti-Android quotes, while he removed a quote from a developer saying that the fragmentation problem wasn't as big of a problem. From his edits of the Mac OS X article, it's clear (in my opinion) that he has a pro-Apple and anti-Android slant, and it's being reflected in his edits. My attempts to achieve a npov are being reverted by him and now I'm unable to edit the page for fear of being blocked, and I'm unsure of what to do. Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thank you. - SudoGhost ( talk) 05:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Spy Game ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
An editor added the following paragraph to the lead of this article:
Spy Game is a true to life composite of many real intelligence operations. Spy Game is more real than fiction and is based on the life of intelligence operative Tom Golden, the son of an Arkansas dirt farmer. Golden was an army intelligence officer assigned to the Central Intelligence Agency Phoenix Program during the Vietnam War. Nathan Muir was Golden’s CIA code name in Southeast Asia, and during his intelligence operations in Indochina. Golden served a distinguished career in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), The Pentagon, and the CIA. He served in Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, and Central and South America. Tony Scott does a great job of presenting the true to life dangers faced by Intelligence Agents in the field and the bureaucratic decisions sometimes made in Washington that are driven by politics.
These are the two citations that follow the material: "[Secret Warriors, Putnam Press 1988 by Steven Emerson]" and "[PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, 12/16/1990; KNIGHT RIDDER, 12/18/1990]". The film came out in 2001.
I reverted the editor. Another editor added it back in. I reverted the second editor twice more. After my third reversion, yet another editor (this time an IP) reverted me. On my third reversion, I posted information about all this on the article's Talk page. No one has responded, and the material remains.
The first editor has been registered since March 2010 but has made only a handful of edits, most of them to Spy Game. The second editor has been registered only since February 28, 2011, and has edited only this article. The IP made only the one edit, the reversion. I'm suspicious of the editors themselves, but, more important (to me) is the quality of the lead, which is still compromised.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am here to request some help with more experienced editors who could help me here. I'm currently expanding the article Systematic Chaos, a studio album from Dream Theater, and relative articles. The problem, it's one of the songs, which is Constant Motion, but this is a redirect to the precedent album, and there is an article which is Constant Motion (song), which really doesn't need a disambiguation. I'm just trying to keep the article but with the title without disambiguation.
Thanks for your time. -- Sirius 128 ( talk) 00:49, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Vinnie Vincent ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I noticed that the section "The Vinnie Vincent Model Guitar" had some bad grammar, words in all-caps, etc, so I cleaned it up. In the process, I noticed that the entire section was unsourced and unverifiable. I removed most of it but left a few sentences. The page's original author, DAworDisDAword101 is apparently watching the page and continuously reverts the changes. I tried to be polite in encouraging him to discuss the reverts on the article's talk page, but he doesn't participate in the discussion. I added the "article ownership" warning to his talk page and tried to be polite there, as well. I've re-done the edit to the article a second time, but won't do it again, because I have no interest in an edit war. In any case, the majority of the entire article (not just the section I edited) appears to be original research. LesPaul75 talk 18:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The article G.j. Alexandrie is in several languages (not english) but isn't relevant or accurate at all. Can someone check it out and maybe delete it? Thank you -- 83.226.108.74 ( talk) 17:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
The current wikipedia entry on gang stalking has been illegitimised and locked so as to prevent redaction.
Harassment of this nature has been verified in recent court cases including that of James Walbert, who was recently recognised by u.s. courts as having five subcutaneous implants above the neck. Within the last week, a presidential bio-ethics committee was appointed to issue a report to President Obama on gang stalking by the end of this year. These facts are verifiable (see below).
The current "article" on gang stalking illegitimises it by using quotes around the term, and by using vague and insinuating language relegating reports as "examples of belief systems" instead of anything pertinent to objective reality.
The article I proposed for gang stalking uses neutral language that does not intend to assert or deny the authenticity of these reports, unlike the preexistent content which intends for the term to be pertinent to imagined phenomenon only.
This is my submitted article. More information follows below.
I am contacting you in hopes that you can further explain and advise on a recently deleted page that I posted, titled "Myles L. Berman" on 3/6/11 by RHaworth.
In creating the article, I tried to avoid solicitation designed to promote Mr. Berman or his law firm. Rather, I attempted to demonstrate the notability and achievements in his expertise through biographical information and works of accomplishments. Utilizing the model article of a fellow attorney (which can currently be viewed on Wikipedia), I devised the content with reliable sources of information provided for verification.
It appears that as a new page, the patrol division deleted it due to "unambiguous advertising or promotion." Can you please offer any guidance on this reasoning and the following questions? 1. How come some articles on an individual or company are considered "masquerading articles" and deleted, while others are not and left posted? 2. What constitutes notability and the legitimacy of an individual or commercial entity? 3. Is there any way to recreate a page for either Mr. Berman or his firm without it being considered advertising or promotion?
I am passionately working on social media for our company and was suggested at a recent conference to take part in Wikipedia, as it is such a large media reference globally. If there is any information or advice you could offer in regards to posting a successful, acceptable article, I would greatly appreciate it.
Myleslberman ( talk) 22:23, 9 March 2011 (UTC)Evelyn Hirshberg, Office Manager, Law Offices of Myles L. Berman
Shmuley Boteach repeated vandalism through the years - its been approved as is by multiple users and I'd like to request a block/lock and dont know how to do so. Please advise and assist ? Jonathangluck ( talk) 23:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I revised the page on Richard Poirier that contained an inaccurate statement that Richard Poirier..."he was Marius Bewley". However, on 7 March 2011, a Mr. Charles Matthews "Moorlock" revised my change to reflect his previous script as of 21 Feb 2011. That version is not accurate. How do we resolve this issue. I want to correct this factual error and also post a new accurate bio on Marius Eugene Bewley that will provide a more comprehensive, accurate description of him and his achievements. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely, Bruce Johnson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.246.159.201 ( talk) 00:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
On second read at the disputed article, I think I've come to the following conclusions:
I am curious as to whether the Nestle Chunky Candy Bars come in minatures? Who could I contact to request this? Nestle.com doesn't really comment on Chunky Bars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.248.176.241 ( talk) 03:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Christianity and homosexuality ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is a question of neutrality in the Christianity and homosexuality article. I feel there may be a conflict of interest on the part editors involved in the article. This being such a contentious issue I feel it begs the assistance of a neutral third party to both resolve the neutrality dispute and if the consensus is that this article lacks a NPOV perhaps a neutral third party to help guide this article to Wikipedia standards. Thank You. Serialjoepsycho ( talk) 07:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
It is no doubt that people can have vested interest in a subject and edit an article on it but people can also be to passionate about an issue which in an article like this can lead them to neglect a part of an article that does not correlate to their passion. When your vested interest in an article causes you to neglect policies like wp:npov there is an obvious issue of wp:coi. The argument on the talk page by Carey for neutrality is based on bias towards particular individuals critical to homosexuality and original research that has lead him to conclusions that particular individuals views are not worthy of inclusion in the article. The suggestion above by Roscelese that I have brought this issue to this page due to Carey's sexuality leads me to question their ability to neutrally edit that article as Roscelese is also an editor of that article. I have said nothing negative of homosexuality here or in my 2 comments on the discussion of the talk page so any discussion of bigotry on my part seems highly questionable since it implies bad faith on my part with no inherent basis behind that bad faith. This issue does not differ from any other article about 2 or more prominent conflicting views as it pertains to Wikipedia. This article as with any other article requires neutrality. In an attempt to not join in the unbalanced and highly biased debate that is playing out on that page and an attempt to not start or be a part of an edit war I have brought this issue here. I have brought it here in hopes that a neutral body more acquainted with this religion might address the question of neutrality. Serialjoepsycho ( talk) 15:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
I never said,"the page isn't biased enough against homosexuality! there must be a conflict of interest involved!" I have tried to impress the point that there has been failure on the part of editors particularly Carey to address the issue of neutrality. The conflict of interest on his part is his inability to septate his religious and academic beliefs from his job as an editor. The views of Christians critical of homosexually many may call biased but that's a topic for a forum. The conversation at hand is about neutrality and the particular favorability of the views of Christians favorable to homosexuality. I am not nor do I feel that the IP was suggesting that anyone make the page more biased to homosexuality. I and I feel the IP was suggesting that editors of the article should equal validity to both sides represented in the article. Though initially the IP was suggesting that the side critical of homosexuality be given more prominent and deserved more weight that the favorable side. Making this an issue of bigotry seems more like a straw man tactic to me than anything else. I would gladly edit it but as highlighted in the "Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ" Deleting information isn't the best way to edit when there's a reasonable chance of becoming neutral eventually. Serialjoepsycho ( talk) 19:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Jean-François Berdah ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello,
A comment has been added to the page I createdlast year that says : "This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful". I haven't been able first to answer it due to a major research project, but secondly to understand properly what it's all about and how to "get rid" of the banner. There is no "contentious material" nor "libelous or harmful" content, but perhaps yes not enough sourced references. Since the page has been included in WikiProject Biography and WikiProject France I suppose that its interest is not unrelevant and maybe interesting. I would be very thankful to receive the advice of a good specialist of living biographies and academic profiles, someone who could help me to improve it and adapt more closely to Wiki standards. Many thanks in advance. Vanechka79 ( talk) 21:21, 10 March 2011 (UTC) 10th March, 2011, 22:20 (CET)
User:Fleetham has been around for a while, but I only encountered him when he started work on articles relating to the Chinese auto industry in 2010. I have been spending about a third of my time since, trying to repair his often disruptive and confusing edits. I have engaged in countless talkpage conversations on his, mine, and article talkpages, but absolutely nothing has any impact. The problematic articles are manifold, but the biggest dispute is at Share taxi. I expanded lengthily on my problems below, but a visit to Share taxi and some digging around should make the problems fairly obvious. WP:OWN, over-referencing, chopping articles into countless subsections, and a refusal to engage in any useful conversation with other editors are the main problems I've encountered. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 21:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
(I typed the long below harangue before realizing that this should be kept short - I figured I'll leave it in but don't read it if you don't feel like it)
The problems are manifold, but since Fleetham's targeted articles are rarely of interest to very many people his oft disruptive edits are rarely noted. Here is an example of one of his versions of a sentence:
In Turkey[15] and Turkish controlled, Northern Cyprus[16] dolmuş (pronounced "dolmush"[17]) are share taxis that run on set routes within[17][18] and between cities.[17]
Over referencing, many times quoting one source several times in a single sentence for entirely innocuous statements. He also treats the articles as his own personal sandbox, while reverting any edits done by any other user. Other bizarre edits such as this one abound. Here's another favorite - the result reads "Incorporated in September[5] 1953[5][6]". When asked why there are so many references he answered:
"Okay, I will reduce the number of refs as a "final step" once I finish my major editing. Some of the refs are really low quality, such as blogs or just totally random travel sites like "Moscow.info". So I do want to add many refs, and then later I will remove the lesser-quality ones." - clear ownership issues. His references almost always consist of nothing more than a URL between ref brackets, and when asked to provide proper referencing he says it would be "inconvenient".
Another method of his is chopping articles into hundreds of subsection, many often containing a single sentence. Check out Skyworth for an example of his style.
Not all of his edits are useless, but he often edits without thinking. As an example, a few days ago he began deleting pictures with CC-SA 2.0 licenses across dozens of articles. I brought this up with him and asked him to replace the pictures, but he refused and kept arguing that the license was no good. See my my talk page for an ongoing and very frustrating effort to change things (it continues into the next section). He still hasn't replaced a single photo, although he has stopped reversing my replacing them. As a further example, I like the following quote by the user himself: "I can understand why people didn't want to read a page of superscripts but all these facts need citations because I tend to add stuff that isn't true. Each fact carries a burden of truth and if that must be a superscript than so be it." (superscript mine)
Lately I have been getting tired of these fruitless discussions with Fleetham and have attempted to turn "his" articles into readable prose once again. His result has been to revert everything and now considers me a "hostile bother". Another editor supported my suggestions but has been brushed off entirely.
I hope someone could look into this, as the situation is becoming very frustrating and an enormous timesuck. Most of these articles aren't even of any real interest to me, but it is upsetting to see perfectly acceptable articles become chopped into pieces. The sad thing is that he finds a great amount of often useful sources for articles, but then refuses to adapt any of the style parameters and will not listen to any suggestions that he change. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 21:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi All,
I have hesitated regarding participation for years because I become lost and don't know to begin.
My passions are Jazz Improvisation, Afro-Cuban Jazz and Jazz Bass Guitar. I would like to help in one of these areas.
Is there a way I can help??? Where do I begin???
Enjoy The Journey, Tom Williams AKA mystic1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystic1 ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
I have had it ,,,i am sick to be left out .My name is Michael Clayton Kelly ,,,I am the youngest seal ..I knew Scott ...Run the math ..And check the military records before you come to a false answer .I signed up when i was 16,,,i had no a school ...i was in class 106 ..when i reported onboard at udt/21 i was still 17 ...this is simple ...did Scott report before he was 18 ? /// [Redacted some material not necessary to resolution of issue]
I was billed in 2009 for $688.00 now I have a court date for Mar. 25 I'm being sued for $5,000.00 or less bills were sent to my old address for the past two years(I think that this is very unethical) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.10.152.19 ( talk) 18:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Chanel No. 5 ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello, I just completed the re-editing, actually a complete re-write and re-formating for the "Chanel No. 5" page. There was (and still is) a box posted at the top of the page, indicating that the entry needed to be re-written. How do I delete this now that it has been re-written? I'm fairly new to Wiki so I need assistance with this process/policy. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Betempte ( talk) 22:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Voltaire ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I saw a (citation needed) in the article on Voltaire that I've been trying to provide, but could not find the means to do it.
It's under the heading "Legacy", toward the end, in a discussion of the often cited phrase "If God didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him". A citation is requested to prove that this was part of a retort to d'Holbach and the atheists.
Peter Gay gives this explanation in "Voltaire's Politics: The Poet as Realist", Yale University, 1988, p. 265, and provides the original line in full: "If the heavens, despoiled of his august stamp could ever cease to manifest him, if God didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him. Let the wise proclaim him, and kings fear him."
Hope that helps, and that you'll be able to provide/correct the entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.200.61.7 ( talk) 00:22, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Comogreg/W. Ferrell Shuck, Publisher
I want to cite these two references in the W. Ferrell Shuck, Publisher article: http://www.mopress.com/hall_of_fame.php and the Lee's Summit Journal, July 1, 1981, page 3A How? Thanks. Comogreg ( talk) 14:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello -
I need some advice and assistance. The page Parents Via Egg Donation was created back in 2009 with the help of one of your Wiki editors Toons. We received some sound advice from him and appreciated. In the meantime I edited my own page which I didn't realize at the time was against the rules. I was banned. Thankfully Wiki worked with me and I learned the rules and was unbanned. We moved on and with Toons advice went on to gather more credible information about the organization. It's now 2011 and our page was tagged orphaned and thankfully I was able to find a writer who was familiar with our organization and has edited as a user on Wiki before and she added to our page. Shortly after, it was marked for speedy deletion. We followed the rules and used the ((hang on)) command to explain our position and it was deleted.
So, I am back now at square one, frustrated and not sure what to do next. Our organization is a service organization, at non-profit that helps thousands of patients yearly with infertility issues, focusing on egg donation. We are not self serving, and we are not promoting a single individual, we are attempting to become part of an encylopedia as we are an educational and support organzation.
If you can help, I would be in your debt. Thanks.
MDG 00:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marnad1963 ( talk • contribs)
Howdy, I noticed Category:Israeli settlers has been created recently. I don't know the rules regarding cats but it seems to be this cat gives undue weight to an assumed political view of the person by dint of association. Thoughts? Joe407 ( talk) 04:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't see any POV issues with the cat, it seems to be created for Israeli settlers, Israeli settlements are called Israeli settlements by the international community. -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 15:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I was looking at the US Senate Committee pages, and noticed that the Energy and Natural Resources subcommittees are incorrectly named "United States Senate Energy Subcommittee ..." rather than "United States Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee ..." Upon further looking I noticed that there is a similar situation with regards to the subcommittees for the "Commerce, Science and Transportation", with them being shortened "United States Senate Commerce Subcommittee on ..." Contrastly, for some of the "Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs" Subcommittee pages, they are named "United States Senate Homeland Security Ad Hoc Subcommittee on ..." whereas others use the above system of shortening them.
So my questions are 1) Should there be some consistancy here? 2) Which method should be used? Using Ad Hoc, not, or using the full title? 3)If it should be changed, I can do it myself, but am unsure how to (if I can) change the title of the pages, so how would I do that?
Although this may be more fitting for a discussion page, it involves multiple pages and may involve changing the name of a page which I'm unsure how to do, or if I even can.
Sincerely, Ezuvian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezuvian ( talk • contribs) 13:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
At this thread this self-styled "newbie" keeps asking me for my philosophy and my reading list to challenge my explanations on the WP:OR of his proposing to reorganize the article according to criteria he has yet to prove are backed by WP:RS (and probably are not). I just can't figure out what the best page to refer him to to explain "editor responsibilities" (or whatever you might call it). I.e., that would explain that unless one is using/proposing new references, editors don't have to do this and it is WP:Soapbox or tendentious editing or whatever for him to keep asking me. Thanks! CarolMooreDC ( talk) 14:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
This is the first time I am trying to edit a page and I am totally confused. I am trying to add important biographical info to the above article to include criminal activity of which he has been found guilty. My reference source is the mainstream press,i.e. The Hartford (CT) Courant, March 9, 2011. I thought I had edited it properly but apparently the style of the reference note is not correct.
Help! Davidmb48 ( talk) 15:12, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Frances O'Roark Dowell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Last fall I posted a brief article about my publishing history, unaware that this isn't how Wikipedia works. I just wanted something to link back to the UMass MFA program page, so anyone I'd gone to grad school with could see what I was up to. Obviously, I should have done a bit more research about Wikipedia before posting. In any event, I would like the article deleted, mostly out of personal embarrassment--not at the content, which is factual--but just because it looks like I'm self-promoting. Is there anyway to take this article down?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_O'roark-D Francesdowell ( talk) 00:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)owell
Thanks for your help!
Best, Frances O'Roark Dowell
Thanks for your prompt reply. Well, I'm glad it doesn't seem self-promotional, but it's still a bit embarrassing to have all the notations above it about it being suspicious because I wrote it. I suppose that's what I get for not investigating the rules more closely (or, to be honest, at all) and for wanting to make sure the people I went to grad school know I'd amounted to something! Again, thanks for the fast feedback; I appreciate your help.
Best, Frances Dowell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francesdowell ( talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Peak phosphorus ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) editor chhe has twice removed my additions to the Peak Phosphorus page. Chhe first claimed it was plagerism thenthat it contained copywrite material. In both cases this is incorrect and I have re-instated my contribution. I suspect it will again be removed and I would like a third (neutral) oppinion. I am new to Wikipedia, so please excuse me if I am misunderstanding the proceedure. Feedingtheworld ( talk) 13:10, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I've added a table with images to a section of Maidenform ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). The table and images move down to the external links catagory.
Bfoster333 ( talk) 16:42, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Dear editor,
My changes to errors in the Wiki on Spanish flu have been undone. I pointed out that the "theory" of the second wave is unsupported, and referred to those who identified the virus (Mohrens and Tauberger, in the New England Journal of Medicine). 1- The reference to later 'partial immunity" by sufferers from that flu is from a newspaper article - how on earth would you be able to identify systematically that partial immunity many decades later, other than through anecdote? You can check this statement is only supported by hearsay. Epidemiologists attribute that partial immunity to the large pandemics in 1896-1900: these saved the elderly. Now you assume that the imaginary "first wave" did not touch the younger??? 2- It was this theory of the second wave that created a health scare from a mild virus. It is an observable fact that this health scare generated billions for the vaccine and antiviral industry. This creates powerful interests.
I am not ready to learn the ropes of wikipedia. Besides, I can not compete with interest groups with multi billion interests. I would like you to remove this part of the "second wave" of the wiki. If you don't believe me, you may read the paper in the New England, the most prestigious medical journal. You can check my name in the Pubmed to observe that I am a regular scientist. You may check for yourself that the history of acquired immunity is tenuous indeed (if not impossible).
Yours truly,
Luc Bonneux details removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.87.139.149 ( talk) 17:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
John M. Florescu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello,
My name is Dana Gliga. I am contacting you reffering John Florescu's wikipedia profile. I know I have been receiving a message from Wikipedia's assistance about the fact that if I don't provide references, more exactly, links about the pege yped on wikipedia website, it would be deleted. I begun to post the text about John Florescu on 4th of March and the term (regarding the possibility to be deleted) was mentioned to be about 10 days.
Please do not delete the page created, because I will send you references about John Florescu in short time. He is a worldwide very good known producer, one of the best cable television professionists. You'll see upon the links that I will send you.
I will forward you tomorrow other sources from other websites as you suggested in your inquiry. Thank you for your understanding.
Best regards, Dana Gliga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I accidently deleted the references from a page when I tried to add my own (alkaline diet) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.116.163.176 ( talk) 03:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I am writing again with the request to add some websites about John Florescu's activity as an executive producer and as an cable television expert. I will forward you a selection of some articles written by or about John M. Florescu. They are in NYT, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, Boston Globe, San Francisco Chronicle. I will send you also some refernces written by important personalities from the political life reffering John Florescu as a nominee for the post of Ambassador of Romania. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 10:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
32nd Cavalry Regiment (United States) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I can no longer edit a redirect page I was trying to create because I screwed up trying to follow the directions (I've never done this before.) Now I'm blocked from further work on the page because it suspects I'm vandalizing for some reason.
I'm trying to add a redirect from: 32nd Cavalry Regiment (United States) to: 32nd Armored Regiment (United States)
The first one ( the redirect attempt) is the one that's blocked.
Thanks for any help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wheels0132 ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Well the problem seems to be that your target is actually called 32nd Armor Regiment (United States). Should that be moved to 32nd Armored Regiment (United States)? Jezhotwells ( talk) 16:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Can you please tell us how something important may be added to a locked page? We refer specifically to the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
We would like to post a reference but cannot. We have a major reference book about the Nazi party that Wikipedia viewers should know about. How can we get the title, author, etc., posted on the page?
Thank you.
208.105.17.242 ( talk) 16:33, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Enigma Books editors
My mom is an AKC Judge and has content on her site www.Bi-Mar.com that we thouhgt would be benenifical for article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_(dog) but we have noticed that that Miyagawa removed every edit we do. I hoping this is just because we didn't create the link correctly or something. I'm wondering if we add to the article if this might be a better way of sharing information instead of just putting an external link.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prosenba ( talk • contribs) 19:13, 15 March 2011
Salsa (dance) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can anyone help me fix this please? Cold Salsero ( talk) 02:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Is there a policy about redirects in user space? I found a user with a borderline offensive username whose only edits are from 2008 when he redirected both his user and user_talk pages to the mainspace article to which his username alludes. 99.164.121.246 ( talk) 11:02, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Help! I obviously don't know what I'm doing so I need someone to fix my errors. I was trying to edit "Janet Fielding" and was correcting her date of birth and age to 1957 and 53, resepectively. All edits performed on 3/20/11 were mine. Thank you.
Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Fielding —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.30.185 ( talk) 20:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Over on Talk:Spark_(fire), there have been five failed attempts to get a consensus to rename the page, within four months. Every time an attempt fails, yet another attempt starts. All but one of these have been started by the same editor. The sixth attempt has just started. This all seems a bit silly. Can it be curtailed somehow? Ernestfax Talk 19:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Silverpoint ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article seems to have been hijacked by two [editors] <attempted outing redacted> who have each entered quite a bit of self-promotional information and personal links into the page. I am not comfortable with the editing rules, and there seems to be a bit of rivalry on the discussion page. It is quite different than the articles on watercolor, or oil painting for example. 128.190.125.2 ( talk) 19:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)amy
I invented a new word and I can't provide Citations other than from my own published works. brending — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdzarlino ( talk • contribs) 04:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Camp Moshava, Wild Rose, WI ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) The article Camp Moshava, Wild Rose, WI is an article about a summer camp. It seems notable and is sourcing everything but somehow has become a WP:ADVERT and WP:NOTWEBHOST. The main editor states on his talk page that is a past employee. Any help in assessing how to proceed would be appreciated. If you look at it and it seems fine, I'd be appreciative to know. Thanks, Joe407 ( talk) 21:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I helped to create both the Nefsis and Loring Ward pages. Sticking to Wikipedia guidelines, each page has/had a significant amount of reliable sources.
In the Loring Ward case, a Wiki admin deleted the page altogether without putting up a flag for speedy deletion or a flag for proposed deletion.
In the Nefsis case, this article has been nominated for deletion on the Nefsis articles for deletion page
The editor who flagged the Nefsis page and tore down the Loring Ward page citing Churnalism for both artilces – yet each page has/had references from reliable sources.
Wondering if I could get help/guidance on how to deal with this Wiki admin and if there is a possibility to get the Loring Ward page back up since the editor did not put up a flag, as common practice. Karebear 1022 ( talk) 23:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I have been engaged in a disput for the past 2 days now with user KWW and now user Edjohnston whom I asked for help first. KWW has needlessly deleted numerous very notable events of this artist -- ALL WHICH ARE/WERE SOURCED!
I'm asking that the edits of KWW 03:34, 15 March 2011 are reverted. This is a copy of the conversation for edjohnston talk page:
Hi, I noticed you placed a protection on the Marc Mysterio page in 2009. It came to my attention that a user with the handle KWW is, and has been for over 2 years, needlessly butchering this article of sourced info.
I have now reverted his edits on a few occasions and added sources but this fellow is intent on killing this article, and this is a very known musician on major labels and major press.
Can you please place the article under a loock status to prevent this KWW from further vandalizing and revert the edits he may make in the interim between now and the time you get this.
He is even deleting sourced notices of the artist collab on a Grammy winner new album (Roger Sanchez) and other chartings.
This is one of the better sourced articles on this web site to it seems this KWW may have some personal issue or obession with the artist.
marc mysterio page is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Mysterio —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.159.213 ( talk) 02:29, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Ed, can you please revert the edits of KWW as they are valdalism and were done prior to your protection and is the exact cause of the valdalism which requested the edit. @kww, I am not Marc Mysterio. Why would you think he is the one making these edits? You sound to have a personal gripe with the artist? Information that was removed, was all sourced and I even spent 20 minutes sourcing it myself. It appears info was even edited out that was previously talked about on discussion page. Sourced collaborations with Grammy Winners, MTV Awards, etc. I suggest a revert of the last edits of KWW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.159.213 ( talk) 07:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I'm relatively new to wikipedia, and have run across an article with apparently an abusive old timer. I'm pretty sure they can't get away with what they are doing, but since I am learning the ropes, I'm not sure what to do.
The article is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew,_Mark,_Luke_and_John
The problem is the user editor claims that it is widely called the Black Patornoster in the opening, but won't cite it. Looking online, very few if any people call it this.
A cite on origins further down provides the only citation for a Black Patonoster, but it was only for a book citing a reference to a similar (not the same) poem made by an alleged witch - "Satan's invisible world". I looked at the source the editor provided. Originally, the name of the author of the book wasn't correct either. The quote alleged from Ady in the book isn't there either. I've repeatadly tried to correct this, but the editor just keeps putting it back - while keeping the correction to the author's actual name, and is accusing me of vandalism..
Now, actually, I've never removed his material, although I feel it is pretty bad research, I just kept after correcting the quote that wasn't correct and the author's name which wasn't correct.
However, the section I put it which has sources for a possible catholic origin of this rhyme keeps getting removed. I believe that is vandalism according to wikipedia. I think it's pretty darn poor scholarship to keep information when it is shown to be wrong, and to delete information about a possible origin of a ryme when it is part of the printed literature.
Can anyone help?
Hi, On Category:Open proxies blocked on Wikipedia contains 27,054 Open Proxies that are blocked on Wikipedia. Those 27k separated into 199 pages. I want to take them into a single page like we do on history pages. Please help. Thank you -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie | tool box 17:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not have a article on Open-Source HTML5 Advertising.
Wikipedia uses donations for Ad-free content in 2011, Wikipedia only accepts Ogg-Theora multimedia content.
Use of Open-Source video formats as Elements in HTML5 Advertising, is an important situation which can be a article on Wikipedia.
The article can mention the various types of Open-Source HTML5 video Ads.
HTML5 video Banners HTML5 Video Overlay Ads HTML5 Pre-Roll Commercials HTML5 Multi-Element HTML5 Ads
The article can mention Flash, Canvas, and other Web Advertising methods.
The article can mention both Ogg-Theora and Google's WebM video formats as video elements in HTML5 Advertising.
(Types of Ad formats Wikipedia would have displayed, if it had Advertising to supplement operating costs in 2011).
The article can mention browser share supporting Open-Source HTML5 Advertising.
The article can mention possible Open-Source Advertising on Wikipedia, (as an example for general reference).
The article can mention Open-Source mobile HTML5 Advertising on phones and tablets.
The article can have a link to the examples.
Open-Source HTML5 Advertising, is a important article to add to Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.61.253.148 ( talk) 17:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I placed a request on the Requested Articles page for Businesses and organizations a few months ago for inVNT, but haven't seen any movement or received any feedback from the editorial community. Admittedly, I took the wrong route in trying to post this article myself, as I'm a contractor for the company, and it was deleted under the conflict of interest rules. So instead, I posted the request here. My question is, what else can I do to get an editor to consider writing an article about the company? I already have a few notable pieces of media coverage listed here (and I can list more), which seems to be more than what a lot of people are doing on the Requested Articles page. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Andrew rodger ( talk) 18:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I am finding bit difficult to put the picture of Mr. Ramjee Kunwar to its page . If its possible to help and also sort out the format
thank you
Prashant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashantk23 ( talk • contribs) 20:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Martin Hirsch ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
In the course of the unreferenced BLP, I took a lot of French persons articles in my watchlist. I spotted a problem wht I beleive is a problem with neutrality on this article, and I'm now accused of "exporting a wp:fr edit war". -- Anneyh ( talk) 09:51, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the material keeps coming back in. No one wants to contribute to the discussion on the Talk page (except one mindless comment). The material is incoherent and still a possible copyright violation. I've posted a message regarding the copyright vio on WP:MCQ here, but no one has responded and it was the wrong place for me to post it. I should have posted it at WP:CP, but I'm embarrassed to say I didn't know that. I'll try to fix that, but in the meantime, I'm running out of reverts.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Gang stalking, group stalking, community stalking, cause stalking or gaslighting refers to alleged coordinated harassment often involving electronic and psychological methods such as HSS speakers and classical conditioning. [1] These activities are difficult to trace or verify, leaving few precedents for public credibility outside of cases such as the electronic harassment of James Walbert. [2]
Anecdotal accounts generally depict gang stalking as a widespread, often international conspiracy of unclear intent, associated with counterintelligence programs such as MKULTRA and CoIntelPro.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nowpublic.com/world/who-getting-thousands-gang-stalking-reports-month|title=WHO IS GETTING THOUSANDS OF GANG STALKING REPORTS A MONTH?|date=August 17, 2009|publisher=nowpublic.com|accessdate=2011-03-03}}</ref>Critics propose that reports of gang stalking are rooted in psychological issues catalyzed by the exchange of information on the internet. [3] [4]
As you can see, this proposed entry is significantly less biased towards the assertation that reports of gang stalking can only be attributed to mental illness and is overwhelmingly more sympathetic to victims of a crime that is being reported with increasing frequency and verifiability.
The case of James Walbert is documented in many places online, despite a lack of media acknowledgement. A cursory examination of the issue will reveal that the matter is certainly not trivial and that public awareness of these pernicious crimes would prevent such occasions from transpiring so easily.
Video from the recent bio-ethics committee hearings - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0yKaE6Jy1o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjcLRIFVRO0
The personal doubts of the wikipedia editors in these matters must be put aside, and a more neutral stance must be taken in this entry when the increasing amount of evidence indicates that these events are actually taking place. There are thousands of reports of gang stalking online, not hundreds, and the truth of the matter is not to be decided by click-happy wikipedia editors.
My proposed article is wholly unbiased towards why these events are taking place and whether they are authentic or imagined, outside of the case of Mr. Walbert, which is verifiable as far as the u.s. legal system is concerned. The denigration heaped on the subject in the current article can be offensive to people who may have had to endure these transgressions.
At any rate, the concept of gang stalking is so widespread in this culture that it does not need to be illegitimised as language. We do not honour the word "small" and refute the word "little" because they both mean the same thing. It is time for the cultural redaction being enacted in the maintenance of this article to cease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xoxos ( talk • contribs) — Xoxos ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Thank you for the well wishes, I will certainly need them :) I am not sure that a consensus is possible. eg.
Phil Bridger (remove delusional conspiracy theory yet again) Phil Bridger (Once again, please take this to the talk page - previous consensus has been against including these delusions Phil Bridger (revert addition of loopy conspiracy theory "cause stalking" content -
I do not have Phil Bridger's experience with editing wikipedia and expect that I will be outmanoeuvred at every turn. Moreover, though I am not able to prove it, I would not be surprised in the slightest to find that this topic is watched by special interest groups who already have a large body of active editors to ensure that this topic does not express views they find unfavourable, which is why I am appealing to whatever authority on wikipedia there is to help to approach objectivity in this matter instead of wasting my time struggling with these offensive censors in their territory.
If no one is able to interject on the grounds I have already presented, I will pursue the protocol for request for comment as recommended.
I agree re: ambiguity. We have two sides to this argument: either these reports are in part factual, as verified by Mr. Walbert's case, or they are delusional, as suggested by an article in the New York Times. Perhaps the u.s. courts are not equal to the opinions of the New York Times journalists on the matter of reality? Especially since both have vested interests, I will once again request that an entry that is not biased against the claims of gang stalking be adopted, thank you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xoxos ( talk • contribs) 19:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi there, My post in whistleblowing was removed as it was considered 'promotional'
I work for a registered charity that gives free legal advice to anyone in the UK who wants to blow the whistle on something at work, but who is unsure about how to go about this
The awareness of our free help is low and this seems a simple way to help
There is no commercial gain from quoting our existence and phone number, its is a straightforward user benefit, and I would like to request that the post is reinstated
Gary Brown Public Concern at Work <phone number redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garybrown23 ( talk • contribs) 17:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Traditional Chinese medicine ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am still relatively new to WP, but I am frustrated and curious to get a second opinion. I created a wiki profile in 2008 in order to contribute to the TCM page. I have been attempting to do so this last week, but there is an editor who seems to be on WP 24/7 lawyering all suggestions and acting as a consensus. There are other very knowledgable editors working to improve this article as well, but none can keep up with the editors (PPdd) constant changes. He has changed my entries and claimed he mistakenly erased them thinking it was his addition, but never reverted the entry when I pointed out that it was my addition. He makes accusations of POV due to the subject matter and ignores the consensus on the definition of what constitutes Traditional Chinese Medicine. I find it impossible to reach any consensus with other editors since by the time we discuss it on the talk page, PPdd has changed the whole thing many times over. I just wish he could be given a time out from the page in order to allow some time for those editors with a great deal of schooling (including masters of science and doctorates) on this matter a chance to work out inaccuracies without them being changed 30 seconds later, with 10 other inaccuracies being introduced at the same time. I'll admit that most editors trying to improve this page are fairly new to WP, and that has lead to a great deal of wikilawyering and citing of rules without true care for accurate entries. Calus ( talk) 01:23, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Gavin Menzies (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)
Hi, recently I've been trying to make some improvements to this biography of a living person, which I think is biased. I tried to do this a year ago when I was new at wikipedia, and now I'm trying again. This article has been very controversial for over two years. For me the problem, now as well as last year, is that everybody usually disagrees with me. So I'm hoping to get some neutral feedback: Are my suggestions reasonable? Am I presenting them in a manner that is clear and civil? I entered the discussion on the talk page
here, and everything below this section on the talk page has been discussion of my recent suggestions.
Thanks!
--
Other Choices (
talk)
02:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Masanobu Fukuoka ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am having great difficulty dealing with User:Macropneuma working on the article Masanobu Fukuoka. I had originally gotten involved through an RFC to help improve a previously woeful version of the page [10] but have struggled to understand Macropneuma's objections through incredibly long talk page comments with unconventional grammar and littered with accusations of POV, personal attacks and a plethora of other wikilinks (eg. [11] [12] [13]). He had also tried to revert the entire page back to his last version [14] with an unintelligible edit summary.
Since then he has engaged in sarcastic (eg. [15]) or outright incivil edit summaries (eg. [16]), has been hostile in his comments on the talk page. When asked to comment on the reasoning behind his changes or to help seek consensus, he seems to refuse to detail his concerns in any clear or concise manner and instructs to 'read the talk page', which is now over 160K in size. The explanations he does give don't make much sense to me and he doesn't seem interested in answering what I consider to be fair, simple questions to try to deduce his meaning.
I believe I've made genuine effort to try to work with this editor. I have become increasingly frustrated and less able to assume good faith on his part, and I admit that I have been drawn into a few edit wars (including us both crossing the 3RR line) with him born from that frustration. Obviously I'm not happy about that, and I've made clear that if any reports were to happen I'd be reporting myself as well. I've had to warn him no less than five times to stop making unfounded accusations about me (he seems to believe anything I say contrary to his opinion is a personal attack or POV), including his comment that he has 'better editors' to deal with. I believe there is still a case of WP:OWN going on, but since the article has very few interested editors, for the most part it's just the two of us and I'm really struggling to find a way to productively work together with him.
I could really use some advice here on how best to proceed. TechnoSymbiosis ( talk) 05:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, can someone please evaluate consensus and close the discussion in Talk:Pat Tillman#Hew to the source?
It is a quite simple discussion about "Should we use THIS quote or THAT quote".
It had generated a lot of discussion since 8 December 2010, and so - on 9 march - I created a new heading, "Clarifying for consensus", to try and sort things out.
Without wishing to be at all biased...I think consensus is clear. But as I've actually commented in the discussion, I'd like someone else to close it off.
Many thanks, Chzz ► 07:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Heat map ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article above contains an external link to something called iMapBuilder which is off topic and seems to be only for the purpose of advertising a commercial product. The user's only edits are postings of this link to this and other articles, although this is the only article it remains on. Attempts to remove the link by previous editors and myself have been reverted by the original editor. I also posted on the user's talk page to indicate the reasons, although it is an IP user (203.198.150.93) so I'm not sure if that is significant. To continue trying to remove the link would just be to engage in an edit war. So, I'm not sure what the proper process is from here. Any guidance would be appreciated. Polydeuces ( talk) 14:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
User Platinumshore [17] has been asked several times to provide RS sources for material they have written at Peak oil. In response, they have removed CN tags, repeatedly replaced uncited and poorly cited material (ie using wikis, commercial websites, and discussion threads), called other edits "sabatoge", and ignored discussion on their talk page and the article talk page. Please help. 206.188.51.1 ( talk) 23:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Rabbi Pinto page assistance please ? A major investigative feature was written and need eyes ? http://forward.com/articles/136250/ - Feature story is here can editors assist ? Thanks much Babasalichai ( talk) 11:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The article on acupuncture is written from a critical, evidence based medicine perspective. And so is grossly non-neutral. Also contains some factual inacuracies. I tried to make some small amendments, I did not remove any of the critical comments, but these were reverted within 24 hours to a previous version (warts and all). I recognize that there may have been some deficiencies in my contribution in terms of sources which presumably could have been noted. I am new to Wikipedia, but I do not have unlimited time to enter into a war of editing. And I do not want to adopt an antagonistic approach. Such an instant dismissal of my work cannot be good in itself in terms of Wikepedia aims and policies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acupuncture
Examples of factual inacuracies in the first section! The comment on 'causes' of disease is not accurate. Chinese medicine includes a concept of causes of disease that would include emotional, environmental and physical factors. And so the contrast with modern medicine is less clear cut. What this article is describing is the mechanims not the causes. Possibly to acentuate the critical viewpoint. The comment on the origin of 12 channels in 12 rivers of China may or may not be factually accurate (there were 11 meridians in early text so it may not be). But this is only an historical note, and presumably intended to portray acupuncture as fixed in archaic ideas, and not real world observation. For example, the Greeks coined the term 'atom' it would make no sense for me to point this out in front and centre, in an article on modern physics (silly modern physics still believing in ancient Greek ideas) except in an historical context. Describing Qi as metaphysical is not accurate. It is not verified by modern science. But in contradistinction to metaphysics. It is intended to be a model of the physical world in physical laws. It may be disputed, but modern science, but so is 'string' theory, and that would not be described as metaphysical - simply an unproven theory.
Andy Prescott Aaprescott ( talk) 14:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
There is a slow motion edit war occurring on these articles. From my perspective, it appears as though there is a version of the first article with WP:PEACOCK and WP:POV problems. There is a group of SPAs fighting to preserve this version and refusing to engage in any discussion:
I have tried various approaches, including copy editing, removing bad sources, and tagging the article for the problems I mentioned above. I also tried getting some input from the WP:INDIA talk pages, but have received no feedback from there. I'd like to get more opinions on whether the article needs changes. The second article is having similar problems, but I haven't participated in it as much. — Torchiest talk edits 21:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
There has been a prolonged disagreement of editors on the Talk page Talk:Israel and the apartheid analogy ( | [[Talk:Talk:Israel and the apartheid analogy|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), "Section 1 New version of proposed contribution," subsection "1.1 Version 2: First Paragraph" (see the most recent postings in this subsection), regarding proposed sources and text to add to the article itself under its Section 10.2: "Criticism of the Apartheid Analogy:Differences in Motivations." In the case here on which I am asking for an independent assessment, I have proposed adding to the article some description of a book, written by a British analytical philosopher, devoted to the subject of the logic and assumptions in left liberal anti-Israel circles that readily push the apartheid analogy. That the book is notable and that there must be some reference to it in the article has been granted by other editors, but the one chiefly in debate with me about it wants to reduce the reference to a brief phrasing that removes as irrelevant the book's reference to and focus on left liberal ideologists as such, and therefore also the author's "deconstruction" of what lies behind their critical view of Israel including their claim of "apartheid." This however is the whole point of the book, as I have shown in the Talk page debate, and the author discusses this explicitly in the section of his book dealing with the "apartheid" accusations as elsewhere throughout his book. Moreover, it is essential to understanding the relevance of the book to a discussion of "motivations" behind proponents of the Israel apartheid analogy. I argue that the focus on left liberal ideology must be included in the article description, and the argument of the book concerning the cultural significance of this ideology also included as being relevant to "Differences in motivations." Tempered ( talk) 22:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
This may be the wrong place, but two days ago I asked a couple of Admins on their talk pages and they never responded. We have a pair of AfDs which have been running for far too long, and we need an Admin to come in and close them. The original issue was CoI, but I think that has been solved, and now it comes down to notability. One is about an academic society, the other is about a publication of said society. One solution which has been proposed would be to merge them under the society. That would be acceptable to me as the original author of both articles. I think that between the two we have enough sources to justify notability for at least one article, but not everyone agrees. One problem is that we have a person present (actually an admin, but he appears to be contributing just under his "user" hat) who is arguing for deletion on a very personal basis and raising the aggro level. We just need the thing finished one way or the other. Here are the links:
Would be good if someone in authority can take control of this. Thanks. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 23:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I created Floating wave power plant page Page still have "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's .." sign Please help me to fix it or advise how I can fix it myself
Ivec01 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivec01 ( talk • contribs) 23:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
James O'Keefe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have tried several times to improve the page "James O'Keefe". The edits are dismissed and removed almost in real time and whle I'm on the page continuing to edit.
This last time I included several citations from the Wasington Post as well as politico and media matters. Respected sources, all. They were removed in buk and cited as poor sourcing
I also removed a superfluous statement that has been without citation since oct 2010. I also added a reference from the Congressional record.
There were many more.
I took pains this time to carefully cite all my edits.
Someone is carefully watching the page and keeping it slanted in favor of mr o'keefe a controversial figure.
The gist of many of my edits was to change the page so that it doesn't refer to mr okeefes deceptively edited videos at great length before briefly mentioning at the end that the videos have been investigated and discredited
To be blunt, the right wing is watching this page and they're persistently removing any attempts to make the page more objective, even-handed and fair.
Any idea about what to do here? I don't think just undoing their revision is the right thing.
Also, I'm new to the wikipedia thing. I'm stmbling through what to do. I surfed into te page and I was irritated at how uneven it was. Gcherrits ( talk) 03:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Glenn
I notice that a horrible pencil edit thingy has today appeared on every page adjacent to the section heading. Doubtless there is a page where people are complaining about it, but I can't seem to find it. Can anyone point me in its direction as I'd like to add my dissenting voice (although it's rather late in the day), or is there a way of switching it off? Thanks, Ericoides ( talk) 10:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
List of power stations in England ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User:Stor-Börge ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I have made some contributions to an alternative to the article List of power stations in England on Thryduulf's user page and think it is mature to replace the original article as a better and more encompassing format and content. Could a more experienced user please facilitate this?
Stor-Börge ( talk) 18:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
There has recently been an edit war on the article on Magnetic reconnection, of which I was one participant. A section was added a week ago by another user entitled, "Criticism of the reconnection concept." I am a researcher in this field and have investigated magnetic reconnection in space, laboratory, and astrophysical plasmas for seven years. I can attest that the views presented in this section are held by an extremely small number of plasma physicists and astronomers, and have been discredited over the last few decades. I attempted to remove this section, but it was put back up several times. The person who posted this also had very long arguments on the talk page about this with others. It is my interpretation of events that this section was posted to put forth the author's unconventional views presented here. The tone of the author on the talk page is also a cause for concern, and suggests that compromise is unlikely. Any advice or assistance? - Spacehippy ( talk) 02:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
RE: New Category -Ecological_art
please advice how to revert to today's published article since we are working with several art historians and curators of ecological art to develop the category accordingly. Curator emeritus John K. Grande has been involved in this process and we are in the process of editing references, etc...Thanks for your immediate attention to this issue. Nohra Corredor/ECOARTNET PUBLISHER
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests&action=edit§ion=new# — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ecoartnet (
talk •
contribs)
18:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to start editing, translating and making pages especially about actors and singers, or artists in general. I would like to work mainly with those two languages: italian and english, and translate pages from one page to another.
Is it possible, I mean, can I already start working on this?
Thanks — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Portanza (
talk •
contribs)
22:11, 19 March 2011 (UTC) #
Zambia Adventist University ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
i have edited this article (above named) but there is no change that is taking place. but i redirected an article "runsangu unversity" to the same page and it displays my changes why doesn't the original article display the changes?
luwii 00:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
I was searching Gemma Atkinson's wiki-page and noticed there was no link to the movie she starred in '13Hrs'. It won BEST BRITISH FILM and BEST PRODUCTION at GRIMM Up North Film Festival and peaked at number 7 on the DVD new release chart and I thought, due to that, you'd have some more information on it as I really enjoyed the movie and the actors in it. It also stars Tom Felton (who plays Draco Malfoy in the HP series) and have noticed that there is nothing about 13Hrs on his page. I've heard they may be a sequel and would like to see if there's more info on that. I also am intruiged to find out more on Antony De Liseo (who plays Luke in 13Hrs) as he has a real talent and I have noticed him on TV a few times. There is a bit of info on him on his IMDB page but thought you may have some more. Also intruiged in the Actor Joshua Bowman who stars in 13hrs (alongside Atkinson and De Liseo) as Ive seen some coverage lately on him dating Miley Cyrus. Thanks for your help Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoganRMF ( talk • contribs) 07:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Peggy Ann Adler ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Since I am the source of my own bio, how can I have copied it from someone else? The bio I submitted was written by me and is entirely info from my life and resume. Please explain. Regards, Peggy Ann Adler — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bxzooo ( talk • contribs) 09:23, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Religious toleration ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please compare the above article with Toleration. The latter is largely restricted to religious examples, and I have started to insert material at the former (to be expanded) which deals with toleration of gays, ethnic groups, political groups, etc. Both articles are now templated to indicate a merger proposal. I am aware of the merger proposal noticeboard, but it seems to be very sleepy. Eventually, I know that if no-one objects, I can boldly accomplish this myself by turning "Religious toleration" into a redirect, while pasting its content to "Toleration" (which is where I personally believe the surviving article should be). Is this acceptable, or is it better practice here to involve an admin, do a formal page move, etc? Thanks, Jonathanwallace ( talk) 14:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
I am assisting my colleague with posting his own images, he is the creator of those images, under dental articles. But, as soon as we added the images, those were nominated for deletion. So, we sent permissions to OTRS a few days ago, but it seems like no one has responded yet.
I am wondering if there is any other things I can do, or we should just wait for a few more days.
Thank you,
Jacob-- Jacobleigh ( talk) 15:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Gijsbertus Jacobus Sas ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Good Morning,
I'm not sure how to go about this but I happened to come accrtoss an article about my grandfather - Gijsbertus Jacobus Sas. Toward the end of the article it list his rank at the time of pension as Lt. Colonel. The article correctly states that he died in a plane crash in Scotland but the article implies that he was retired (pension). At the time he was on active duty and was serving as the Dutch military attache in Washington DC. His rank was Major General (Generaal Majoor) at the time of his death. His also had one son, Gijsbertus Jacobus Sas, born 29 July 1918 died 15 November 1982.
One thing the article doesn't reference is that his efforts made it possible for Queen Wilhelmina to escape to England after Germany invaded the Netherlands on 10 May 1940. The article doesn't state that Sas' credibility was seriously in question because Hitler had cancelled the invasion 22 times prior to 10 May 1940. Even after Sas was re-united with Reijnders, the General Staff and Queen Wilhelmina in London in June-July of 1940, there was great emnity between Reijnders and Sas and the General Staff. After that Sas traveled to Canada to train Dutch forces and was promnoted and assigned to Washington DC as the military attache as a reward for his sevice during the war.
I will gladly provide citations as requested. My email address is --redacted--
Thanks, Guy Sas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.252.129.98 ( talk) 15:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Maybe it's the style, or the added external link, but I'm not comfortable with these recent additions to Azithromycin. As a layman I'm reluctant to revert edits that are not obvious spam from medical articles, so I'd like some advice on this and similar edits. Thanks, CliffC ( talk) 17:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
On the Time_Matters topic, another editor keeps reverting the deletion of his addition of irrelevant links. The External Link and Reference are to a competing product and violate NPOV.
I posted the following on his Talk page: Please post a rationale for including HoudiniEsq as an External Link and Reference on the Time_Matters page. You should provide an Edit Summary explaining the reason for reverting the deletion. When I deleted your links, I noted in the Edit Summary that the links were removed because of Neutral Point of View. To elaborate on that, one would need to include links to all competing products to be consistent with including the link to HoudiniEsq. In other articles, links to all competing products are not found.
The other editor has not posted anything in Edit Summary to explain the basis for his edits. What should I say to this editor? At what point should I go further in the Dispute Resolution process? Thank you. Wells50 ( talk) 17:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)Wells50
I Have created a new page with reference to the above, i would like to know how i post it to the Encyclopedia, does it have to be passed before it is seen ???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yaino_TV/A_State_of_Being
YA I NO TV — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yaino TV ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Super (2010 film) was renamed Super (2011 film) by Bencey ( talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), without any discussion. He then proceeded to make many changes to other pages to reflect this change. However, as the article itself says, the film was released in 2010. I have requested a move to change the name back, as it seems I can't just revert it, but wonder if an admin can bulk revert all this at once. I'd rather not chase him around and undo every edit by hand, quite likely starting an edit war in the process. Barsoomian ( talk) 03:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
OK, so 2011 it is. Would have been nice if the editor had bothered to mention this on the Discussion page. Barsoomian ( talk) 05:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.148.215.156 ( talk) 11:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,far from being an expert I have jusst read with much interest your 4 definitions quoted above and i would like you to explain what you gain or lose,when enterind a type of market or/and leaving another, what are the risks associated, etc. Of course you can also give the links i can follow to access such answers. Thanks and regards.
<<email redacted>> (Paulette Emmanuelle Essame) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.148.198.156 ( talk) 12:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
See Article on Serena Harragin...
This biography was written by Serena Harragin and it is completely false.
I tried to put a disclaimer on the article, but it was "almost instantly rejected."
Either a disclaimer is needed, or the false article needs to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acctatwiki ( talk • contribs) 15:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Serena Harragin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The biography of Serena Harragin was written by her to get herself a job.
Most of it is false.
Please either put a disclaimer on it or remove it.
Acctatwiki (
talk)
15:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello -
The page for 'Coffee Party Progressives' has been a target of a speedy delete:
10:08, 23 March 2011 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted "Coffee Party Progressives" (Multiple reasons: Speedy deletion criteria G11, A7)
I don't believe that these codes are appropriate to this article. Additionally the editor did not give time for improvement of the article.
This organization, Coffee Party Progressives, does in fact exist, being a smaller informational/activist group similar to "Move On" but formed in reaction to the "Tea Party" in the U.S. I have been a member for many months now, and heard about this deletion this morning.
It is disturbing that the editor used the "speedy delete" option without appearing to do doing any specific research. Does this person only value what he has personally heard of, or perhaps what he politically agrees with? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.152.148 ( talk) 12:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
The editor removing the page seems to be active on the "Coffee Party USA" page, which has had a bit of "bad blood" with Coffee Party Progressives. The speedy deletion and assertions of lack of notability are thus questionable.
If the article needs to be rewritten, that should be the comment. --the original poster — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.152.148 ( talk • contribs)
We have a series of article such as List of war films based on books (1927–1945). At first glance, I'd think the films were released 1927–1945, or maybe the books they were based on were published then. Turns out the wars took place 1927–1945. That is completely opaque. Any ideas on where to move these? "List of book-based films on wars 1927–1945", maybe. Still not very good, though. — kwami ( talk) 23:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Feminist movement ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The user, Aronoel, has mistakenly interpreted the UN HDR 2004 report, see page 233, to mean that women in selected developing countries work 20% more than men. In the same data Aronoel has interpreted the data to mean that women work 5% more than men in OECD countries. The actual numbers should be 9%, and 2.42%, according to basic calculations of percentage. Please see the WikiProject_Feminism talk page to see my attempt to explain this to Aronoel, despite them changing it back to incorrect percentages. The way that they have presented the data is false and does not reflect the data. It inflates the amount of work that women do more than men, from 9 to 20%, and from 2.42 to 5%, respectively. 175.100.127.94 ( talk) 00:08, 25 March 2011 (UTC) talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Request_to_remove_unverified_statistic—Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.100.127.94 ( talk) 00:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I have created an article with the heading "User:Hamptonhouse/First women to run around australia"
How do i change the heading to First women to run around australia
thanks for your assistance Hamptonhouse ( talk) 02:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
The article on Krishna opens with the following statement: This article is about the Hindu deity.
The term Hindu is nowhere to be found in the Vedic literatures of India. A more appropriate term would be Vaishnava Deity. The term Hindu derives from the name of the River Sindhu, and was invented by Islamic invaders to refer to the people east of the Sindhu River.
Since Wikipedia is an open source encyclopedia dedicated to presenting the truth, I implore your editors to illumine all your uses of the term Hindu with reference to more appropriate terminology and in general to inform the reading public that this term Hindu is both offensive and inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rozenthalm ( talk • contribs) 02:53, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello, I seem to have some issues with tables again. In the article List of colleges affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, which I am expanding completely, the table goes out of the normal page width. I've experimented by removing some sections, but it still doesn't seem right. Would be grateful for any help. Regards, Yes Michael? • Talk 15:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
{ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Aleksandar_Obradovic]
Dear colleagues, a few weeks ago I wrote an article about a writer and painter Aleksandar Obradovic and put it on your portal to be reviewed from one of the administrators. Cause I didn't knew the conditions necessary for publication of articles, I repeatedly changed the article, but after the precise instructions that I received from the administrator named Chzz, I have attempted to set and credible source of information or a link after each data. So, after the date of birth, I put a link to the municipality in which the author was born and where you can check the information, after the information about his studies - the link to faculty where he studied, after the data about his first employment - link to the company Radio Television Sarajevo and after citing the published book - ISBN numbers and a link to the National Library of Serbia, where it is possible to check the information etc. You must bear in mind that all these sources are not on the technological level as in America, so if you want to prove some of information, it is necessary to contact the institution by phone or by mail. In the countries of former Yugoslavia is not possible to establish another form of data verification, because the computer system is still based on undeveloped technology. Newspaper articles from the past can not be obtained through web pages or internet. Few days ago I spoke with Aleksandar Obradovic and I wrote the information about his activities in Sarajevo, Frankfurt and Munich. If I, for example, cite the fact that the author worked as a cook in Frankfurt and at the same time as a source of reference I list an address and telephone number of the restaurant "Schwarzwald Cafe, " that means that the restaurant doesn't have its own web page and that the only way to verify information is via phone call. At the end of this letter I want to say that for such an article don't exist another credible sources of information and if you want to have as a collaborator somebody who has over twenty years of journalistic experience, you should give a little more detailed look at the mentioned article and accept my arguments about data sources. Yours sincerely Nobelovac ( talk) 09:47, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I have attempted several times to include Victor "Transport" Maghakian on the list of Historically Notable Marines. However, it is being removed without clear or neutral explanation as to why. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historically_notable_United_States_Marines Victor Maghakian (aka Ear Banger Maghakian) is the first Marine ever in history to have his blood shed by a Japanese sword in China long before the commencement of WWII. He is also one of the most decorated Marines in WWII history and one of the first of the Carlson Raiders. The United States even made a movie about him called Gung-Ho! Tashjian, James H. The Armenian American in World War II. Boston: Harenik Association, 1952, p. 34-43. Apparently, the Marine Corps wants to exclude him on the list because of these historical factors to include his last name. This cannot be tolerated as it violates the neutrality requirements of Wikipedia. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 21:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
You state see below, however, you have deleted the inquiry. Why have you done that? Is it because his name ends in IAN? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I have attempted several times to include Harry "K-Barr" Kizirian on the list of Historically Notable Marines. However, it is being removed without clear or neutral explanation as to why. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historically_notable_United_States_Marines Harry is the first Marine ever in history to have the Marine Corps bayonet named after him the "K-Barr." He is also one of the most decorated Marines in WWII history and one of the first Marines ever to be awarded the Rhode Island Cross for valor. Tashjian, James H. The Armenian American in World War II. Boston: Harenik Association, 1952, p. 108-113. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 22:50, 27 March 2011 (UTC) Apparently, the Marine Corps wants to exclude him on the list because of these historical factors and because of his last name. This cannot be tolerated as it violates the neutrality requirements of Wikipedia. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 22:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
So, as I understand it, you have not included these Marines because they don't have their own articles. That is extremely disturbing as an American. Why hasn't the Marine Corps done articles for these individuals as they did for some other Marines like Chesty? Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC) Since you are a volunteer, why haven't you done an article on these extremely notable Marines? What is the problem? Based on these, why shouldn't sharpen my K-Barr? Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't think I used the word conspiracy. I rather use names and facts. Particularly, that cursed name Macbeth. If the facts lead you to treachery, then don't be surprised if Macbeth sticks Harry's K-BARR (affectionately named after him as the Angel of Death) into you. If you ever see the Marine Corps silent drill team, and Harry's K-Barr slices an ear off, then you will know who is cursed. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 17:03, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
If you are interested in prime numbers and solving mathematical problems, then you should have figured out by now in your theorem that I am a 1.5 er. Semper Fi Mac....beth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 18:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I think we're done here. I'm sure we all hope our advice will assist you now and in the future. Rehevkor ✉ 18:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Frot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm writing about a series of wide raging disputes that I have had with Flyer22 on the Frot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article. Basically, we disagree on where to place and what to call what is currently called the Comparisons to Anal Sex section of the article. This has all been documented at length on the article's talk page starting here; however, the dispute essentially centers around whether men's motivations and feelings about practicing frot should be considered factual content or perceptions and opinions and listed and labeled accordingly. Flyer22 supports the former, while I support the latter. My primary concern is that the main sources cited at length in the Debates subsection see the act of frot as a way of negotiation gay masculinity and therefore situate it in a network of perceptions about anal sex and its relation to masculinity, effeminacy, monogamy, promiscuity, and AIDS that are beyond the scope of the article.
My secondary concern is that, given my edit history, Flyer22 interprets the bulk of my edits to be supporting an "agenda" and continually claims that I am "hindering the article" or "tampering with the article". While little can be done to actualy alter Flyer22's opinion of my edits, I feel the repeated claims constitute a personal attack as they attack the contribution through the contributor and not the contribution alone. Mijopaalmc ( talk) 07:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Genital ulcer diseases include genital herpes, syphilis, and chancroid. These diseases are transmitted primarily through “skin-to-skin” contact from sores/ulcers or infected skin that looks normal. HPV infections are transmitted through contact with infected genital skin or mucosal surfaces/secretions. Genital ulcer diseases and HPV infection can occur in male or female genital areas that are covered (protected by the condom) as well as those areas that are not. [18]
The placement and content of the Debates subsection of the Comparison to anal sex section of the Frot article has been discussed at great length on the Frot talk page. While the current placement of the subsection is a compromise, I still question that general relevance of the subsection to the article. For instance, the general notability of the movements that provide the bulk of the source material for the Debates section has been questioned by the editor who maintains that the Debates section relevant to the article, when it was proposed that the Debates section be split off into separate articles, so I question the notability of the opinions themselves. Moreover, an editor on the Anal sex article has mentioned that the "frot vs anal sex" dichotomy gives undue weight to frot in the Anal sex article, which consequently lead to the rewording of the paragraph containing the information on frot in both the Anal sex article and the Frot article, so I question why the elaboration of opinions of questionable notability in the Debates subsection does not also give undue weight to those very opinions.
My edits and comments expressing concern about the general tenor of the Debates subsection and its appropriateness to the article have been met with suspicion and hostility on the part of the regular editors of the article, so I wondering if I could get several fresh pair of eyes to look at the article. Mijopaalmc ( talk) 20:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Without responding to Mijopaalmc's most recent comments, I'd like to hear from other editors about the article overall. Obviously, if the Debates section - or at least most of the content of the Debates section - shouldn't be in the article in the first place, that would moot at least some of Mijopaalmc's concerns.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 19:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Why don't you two come and discuss the article on the talk page? Mijopaalmc ( talk) 01:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
September 11 attacks ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User:Pedant ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Another editor has called me a "known POV pusher" , "who has been banned before" (I have not been banned, nor am I a POV pusher, known or otherwise) I have attempted to discusss the article's content rationally but this editor (after I have requested 3 years ago that the editor refrain from attacking me on my talk page) The issue is over an unsourced assertion of fact, which the editor in question refuses to acknowledge, dismissing the request as if it were frivolity to request a cite for the assertion as fact.
I have at all times been unable to get a rational response from this editor, and since this has recurred 3 years after it first happened, this has ceased to be a case wherein it is possible to assume good faith. I consider this behavior to be chronic, rather than anomalous. Editor in question maintains a single-purpose account for the purpose of owning a single article. User:Pedant ( talk) 09:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I suspect this is beyond the scope of this board.. I'd try suggestions at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution or WP:ANI. Rehevkor ✉ 01:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
In the future it would be nice to notify me when I am being talked about. Otherwise it's all taking place behind my back. -- Tarage ( talk) 20:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Good morning,
My name is Arnaud Masson deputy project scientist of the Cluster mission at the European Space Agency. There are two articles on wikipedia in English related to the European Space Agency/NASA Cluster mission.
One is "Cluster mission", the other one is "Cluster (spacecraft)". However, the Cluster mission article redirects to Cluster (spacecraft) one.
This does not make sense, I strongly suggest to do it the other way round. Namely that the "Cluster (spacecraft)" being redirected to the "Cluster mission" article.
I tried to do that but didn't do it the right way and don't know how to do it.
Thanks to help me out.
Dr. Arnaud Masson Deputy project scientist of the Cluster mission European Space Agency details removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masson75 ( talk • contribs) 10:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Banana Equivalent Dose ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Would love to have some savvy help with dispute resolution at Banana Equivalent Dose. There is some disagreement among editors as to the content of the article and placement of some of that content within the article. This is being worked out in the Discussion section, but I believe we may also be having some trouble with Disruptive Editing and/or a Sockpuppet which is making resolution needlessly difficult. Being a fairly new editor who is still learning the ropes, I'm having trouble finding and applying appropriate Wikipedia policies that can be applied to this situation. Thanks in advance. Belchfire ( talk) 17:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Dear Sir,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubli
I am trying to edit the page of Hubli(Industrial & Business development paragraph). We need to add our companies name (It is established in 1978 and which is India's no. 1 company www.basantbetons.com) 'Basant Floorings Pvt Ltd' in your listings and 'high quality concrete products mainly for landscaped areas'. I am able to edit but it disappears after some time.
Paragraph after editing will read as below:
Hubli is a developing industrial hub in Karnataka after Bangalore, with more than 1000 allied small and medium industries already established basically located in Gokul Road[4] & Tarihal[5] regions of Hubli. There are machine tools industries, electrical, steel furnitures, food products, rubber,leather industries,tanning industries and high quality concrete products mainly for landscaped areas. With the establishment of K.E.C, Bhoruka textile Mill, Universal Group of Industries, Microfinish Group, Apace Life Sciences, N.G.E.F, K.M.F, BDK Group of Industries[6],Murudeshwar Ceramics[7][8],Basant Floorings Pvt ltd. It has gathered momentum in industrial development. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.115.243 ( talk) 12:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Please see this edit.
An SPA is reverting the article back to "his" version and remaining silent to requests for discussion both on the article talk page and on the user talk page. I'm tried requesting that this user be blocked until some discussion can be had as to the nature of the edits and concerns I raised on the talk page (POV, ADVERT, WEBHOST, OWN). For some reason my request was dropped from the RPP page so I may have posted in the wrong place. Perhaps someone can help me out with proceeding. For the moment I have not reverted his edit again so as to avoid warring. Thank you.
Joe407 (
talk)
14:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Ref The article English Defence League ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). The article described the EDL as 'Far right' and in several places as 'Hooligans'. Since both of these descriptions are entirely subjective, I edited them out of the article. Almost immediately, user 128.40.128.87 undid my edits. Pete ( talk) 14:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Led Zeppelin ( | article | history | links | watch | logs) User talk:Revan ltrl ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
I was recently blocked for 24 h because of my posting on another user's (LedRush) talk page without his consent; furthermore, I was recommended to act "as if he didn't exist" in the future (this recommendation by the administrator who blocked me, the whole thing punitive rather than preventive). We were in dispute on the Led Zeppelin talk page, and now, after my block has expired, and after I wanted to contribute to the same discussion, he keeps bringing up the dead issues we had, in a condescending discourse, reminding me of my block, both on the article's and my own talk page. He has done the following: he thinks I should stay away from the entire Led Zeppelin article because he thinks that it is synonymous with staying away from him; he makes up theories about why I post, believing I have a hidden agenda; he deletes posts I make on the talk page; he repeatedly posts on my talk page, both before and now after my initial block, imploring me to stay civil and stop attacks I haven't made. I have repeatedly told him to stay away from my talk page because I don't want anything to do with him. I have also reminded him several times that he keeps bringing up a dead issue. I feel that I have been mistreated and that he grants himself too much freedom with what he can accuse me of because of his better orientation with WP policy and regulation. Revan ( talk) 15:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
It's curious how new sections keep getting added and dealt with while mine remains uncommented on. Revan ( talk) 22:38, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I sent you a while ago a message regarding to add some links to complete the page for John M. Florescu - executive producer. If I send you the links to the materials- articles are you willing to add them as references ?
Thank you, Wait for an answer from you, Dana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 15:59, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
Regarding the previous message that I have send it to you - for example if I send you links, as this one, for example :
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/boston/access/40103250.html?FMT=ABS&date=Mar 29, 1999
are you willing to make the connection to the link, please, for the readers ?
Thank you, Wish you a beautiful day, Wait for your answer, Dana Gliga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 16:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Rabbi Pinto ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A major feature story ran on Rabbi Pinto, the largest story ever written about him and the few editors who control the board didnt allow neutral entrees to be placed. Need assistance from curious non interested parties.
The article was syndicated and picked up by Globes a major Israeli paper, The Real Deal a major NYC real estate publication and Vos Iz Neas Religious news service but entire chunks of article werent included. Can we have new eyes please ?
Would suggest adding: "Considerable questions have risen regarding Pinto’s organizations finances. A report by a leading New York Jewish newspaper has revealed a “contrast between the rabbi’s lifestyle and his reputation for modest living, and questions about the rabbi’s image as a business guru when his own not-for-profit faces financial problems.” The Forward stated: “The business troubles at Mosdot Shuva Israel could be seen as ironic, given Rabbi Pinto’s reputation as an adviser to businessmen, and particularly to real estate brokers.” 65.112.21.194 ( talk) 13:24, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Is is possible that one of you hear can confirm my name so that I can upload images to Wikipedia? If so that would be very helpful Michael Power 2011Michael Power 2011 22:52, 26 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaela Power 2011 ( talk • contribs)
I want the full details and pictures of RAF Dhubalia during Second World War. Please send this to my email --redacted-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aritrac4 ( talk • contribs) 20:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Someone should fix the message it gives you when you register. Sindragosa ( talk) 16:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
You should not have quotes in the Word of the Day on Wiktionary. Saw the Homer quote. No. That's the last thing anyone needs is a confusing messeage. NO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selena George ( talk • contribs) 04:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I've felt for awhile that it would be useful to create a page listing the times that the term "spring" is used in a political context to referred to a period of political liberalization, ie, Prague Spring, Beijing Spring etc. I added these events onto the Spring (disambiguation) page but another user removed it saying, quite rightly, that no one searching for just the word "spring" would be interested in all of this. I just created a new article, Spring (political liberalization) which at this moment is merely the same listing of events I had put on the disamg page.
However, I am not quite sure if the article as it currently exist meets Wikipedia standards. I've just been upgraded to a Wikipedia:Autopatrolled status and do not want to jeopardize it by adding a non-encyclopedic article. Where should I put this listing? Combine into another article? Create a "spring" category? Open to suggestions.-- Dudeman5685 ( talk) 16:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I developed a new concept concerning authors. Can I submit an article describing what it is and who practices it? I am the originator of the concept, so there are no other references available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharoncjenkins ( talk • contribs) 01:25, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Wine ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have several times attempted to resolve or discuss the issue of the origins of wine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine The page states that it originated in modern day Georgia without stating that the territory was previously ancient Armenia. Moreover, there is a lot of confusion and contradictions as to the origins of wine. I have attempted to remove the wild speculationsItalic text of Georgian paid scholars. Speculations should have no place in Wikpedia once the archeological evidence contradicts them. Yet, the editor insists on maintaining those speculations. The Georgian language is neither Indo-European nor Semetic therefore their language was not used to pass on the technology to other neighboring tribes. The editors are misleading readers to believe that some how this technology was passed on to other tribes by the Georgian language. I have several times attempted to include the latest archeological discovery in Armenia of a wine making operation dating back 6,100 years ago as the first origin which contradicts the speculative Georgian origins. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12158341 However, it continues to be deleted because the editor believes that the "BBC" news report was "shady." Moreover, the editor continues to delete the Indo-European Armenian word for wine "Gini" (pronounced Keenee) without explanation. This conduct cannot be tolerated as it violates the neutrality requirements of Wikpedia. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 22:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I think you need to apologize to me for stating that I went over the top when I said "Stalin is the Devil himself." You need to do a lot of research on Stalin and Georgia before you ask me to give you apologies. Don't you ever say that I went over the top regarding the Devil himself and Goergia's Stalin. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 18:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
You may also wish to consider reposting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wine. The WP:WINE is an extremely active project run by knowledgeable wine historians and professionals, and you can be sure that they will look into it. -- Kudpung ( talk) 00:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Please in the future, do not delete my comments about the Devil himself Joseph Stalin and his beloved Georgia. I find that kind of conduct deceptive and to be extremely insensitive and disingenuous. Be very careful with regards to glorifying Stalin's Georgia or Adolf Hitler's Germany. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Please stop making personal attacks. That no place in this forum. You either haven't followed the preceding comments, or , you have purposefully mischaracterized them. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 04:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Please stop making unfounded accusations. Moreover, I am not done yet with attempting to resolve this matter through discussion. Therefore, don't close the thread just yet. I will have to weigh all of your so-called suggestions with other neutral bodies to determine whether indeed it has been neutral. These discussions will have be considered on either arbitration or mediation to be determined relatively soon. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 04:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
There is no citation for it anywhere yet. I am uncertain how to proceed, as I feel this term is a genuine contribution to the ongloing endeavors here. New things require indentifying terms; as I have searched extensively for any referent term for the subject matter it is intended to describe, and found nothing, it is my hope this new term can be accepted without a citation available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CinDan ( talk • contribs) 06:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I have attempted several times to include Arman T. Manookian on the list of historical Marines. Inexplicably, the discussion and his name are being removed from the list without response. Just recently as I asked again regarding the discrepancy, it was moved all the way on the bottom of the list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_historically_notable_United_States_Marines. Please see page 9, first center incomplete paragraph of this article. http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf The editors of the Historical Marines page continue to violate the neutrality requirements of Wikpedia. Arman does indeed have his own Wikpedia page and no valid grounds for exclusion. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 19:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
First of all, no one is shouting and no body at this point is alleging a conspiracy. That was an unreasonable and unprofessional characterization on your part perhaps to instigate a belligerent response. Secondly, your statements made no sense. Note that Arman is listed, as cited above, a Historically Notable Marine by the father of the Marine Corps History himself, Maj. Edwin N. McClellan. Please respond appropriately and succinctly to the questions posed and don't skirt the issue. If you try to skirt the issue, then it leads people to believe that indeed you are part of that so-called conspiracy as you stated. Semper Fi Mac..beth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 23:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
As I read the article cited above, and I quote from it: "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf [p.9, first incomplete paragraph, Maj. Edwin N. Mclellan]. Are we reading the same articles? How do you justify this glaring inconsistency with your statements? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 00:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I also want to note something that has become glaringly obvious. It seems to me that these so-called volunteers have a particular bias for Marines who volunteer for suicide missions or ended their lives in suicide and having their last names ending in IAN. Do you see the same pattern? I consider myself an expert at recognizing trends and patterns. Do you agree with my observations? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 00:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Well, then in the context of the first Marine Corps Artist in Marine Corps History, what does this quote mean? "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf [p.9, first incomplete paragraph, Maj. Edwin N. Mclellan]. Are we reading the same articles? How do you justify this glaring inconsistency with your statements? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 00:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Are you people English speaking Americans? Your bias is really inappropriate. As I read the article, The Genesis of The Marine Corps History was with Mclellan. Those weren't just merely nice words about Arman T. Manookian. Please read the article again. Moreover, please indicate your level of education with regards to English so I can determine your level of expertise on the subject of English, Art and History. Do you really think people will not read the article cited at page 9? I quote from it: "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 02:24, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Englishmen, with regards to Marine Corps History, are truly inappropriate experts. Moreover, it is common practice in our Anglo American scheme of fairness to test the credentials of so-called experts opining on these pages. I am sorry you feel that somehow you have been offended. But, in America, we always ask for credentials and don't believe in biased opinions. In the future, please provide your credentials. I can tell you this, I majored in English as an English speaking American. So, is there an American Marine, with an English, Art and History out there who can tell me what this quote means? '"As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian
Let me make a suggestion for you. Why don't you apply a little common sense and realize that your statements are totally out of line. If you don't have proper knowledge regarding Marine Corps History, you then should follow your own advice and stop giving baseless opinions as to what the speaker had in mind when he made the comment. So, my question remains the same. Namely, is there some one out there, applying the plain meaning of English, who can tell me what this quote means? '"As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian —Preceding undated comment added 04:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC).
Well then, in the context of Arman being the first Official Marine Corps artist/illustrator for the Marine Corps Historical Department, what does this quote mean? "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth Monte Melkonian ( talk) 05:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Moreover, there is no requirement of inside information as alluded to in your comment. The entire article that I keep citing to on Mclellan and Manookian speak for itself if one simply reads it carefully. The frustration is instigated when one does not read it carefully. Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 05:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Moved from top to follow convention Why do you have this discussion alleged to have been Answered when there is a pending question? Monte Melkonian ( talk) 04:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Please stop making unfounded accusations about tone. You are starting to look defensive and silly. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 21:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Please answer the question posed above. Namely, in the context of Arman Manookian being the first Marine Corps artist/illustrator to ever do Marine Corps illustrations for Marine Corps History, please explain what the following quote means?: "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it." http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 21:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
The article I have been working on is: Almine De Villiers, The Countess of Shannon (Almine Barton) I have been editing for almost two days to clean up my article reference links and citations. There had been someone editing whom never cited that they were editing in the user talk discussion so I was unaware that there was a editing dispute going on. On top of that, this user started jumping to conclusions and gave me a warning to be blocked if I didn't stop editing my own article...I was only trying to fix the issues stated in the tag of the article. Now I am getting threats of being blocked when there was no notice before I was editing the article. It took me this long to get all the links changed. Also the editor is taking out verifiable sections of the article and changing the name of the person in the article which totally changes the validity of the section in question which is articles about Almine Barton, not articles about De Villers. Please can someone mediate this. This person seems to be on a mission and I don't understand why they are working so hard to change my article when I have not been given a chance to fix the issues on top of the fact that this person is doing this edits without telling me. Then out of the blue, I get a warning! Please someone help! I have worked so hard on this article. I have spent hours upon hours researching and redoing the reference links to the article. Thank you. user:theonelife Theonelife ( talk) 20:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
We have a problem with these two pages. Dr Martin Cawley (Neautone), an American citizen, has recently purchased what he believes to be the "manor" of Newton-in-Bowland, Lancashire from a company called Manorial Auctioneers. Unfortunately, for Dr Cawley, the "manor" does not exist. All manorial rights relating to Newton-in-Bowland were subsumed into the Manor & Liberty of Slaidburn, West Bradford and Grindleton after 1399. The Manor of Slaidburn was bought by the Assheton family out of the Second Schedule of the 1885 Towneley Estates Act in 1950. The current Lord of the Manor and Liberty of Slaidburn, West Bradford and Grindleton is Thomas Assheton, nephew of the second Baron Clitheroe. Mr Assheton owns the manorial rights relating to Newton-in-Bowland.
This can be proved by reference to HM Land Registry documents from 1950, 1977, 2003 - copies of which are held by Ingham & Yorke, land agents to the Clitheroes. The claim made by statutory declaration upon the "manor" of Newton by Lord O'Hagan and his agent Manorial Auctioneers is a false one and the sale to Dr Cawley was invalid. Dr Cawley is a victim here but unfortunately, refuses to accept the facts. He will not look at the evidence or engage with the experts in the area.
Dr Cawley is repeatedly amending the Newton-in-Bowland and Slaidburn pages to demonstrate that he is "Lord of Newton". This is a misrepresentation and cannot be allowed to stand.
For the record, I have no relationship with the Assheton family. I am an academic and a historian of Bowland based at the University of Cambridge. I co-authored the definitive history of manorial Bowland with local historian CJ Spencer in 2010.
I need help to protect the integrity of the pages for Newton-in-Bowland and Slaidburn.
Manorial ( talk) 13:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Mudflap ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm fairly new to Wiki (and I apologize in advance for posting from an IP), but I somehow ended up on Seaphoto's user talk page and then wandered over to the Mudflap article and tried to help it, but the user Avgjoejohn316 is having some problems with COI and self-promotion issues and keeps putting what I would say is irrelevant and frankly false information in the article. Seaphoto got on this first and has posted on User_talk:Avgjoejohn316 as have I (along with the article's talk page and Seahoto's talk page), in an effort to resolve the problem, but seemingly to little effect. We've tried to explain the issues and I've tried to post evidence to refute Avgjoejohn's claims, but he just keeps on going. :)
I don't really know what to do at this point, and don't want to get into further reverts, so I thought I'd look for some advice. Could you look at the article and talk postings and see what you think? Thanks. 96.238.148.17 ( talk) 20:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC) Just removing misposted text from below request... 96.238.148.17 ( talk) 22:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, my name is Hannah. I play the double bass (upright bass, contrabass, ect.) in my high school orchestra as well as in the school jazz band. I've been looking into getting a new bow, of a better quality than the student one I'm currently using. Thus I have looked into the materials and craftsmanship that go into making a decent bow. So I looked up the original bow(music) page, the pernambuco wood page, and finally the ebony page. I noticed that on the bow page stated that, "For the frog, which holds and adjusts the near end of the horsehair, ebony is most often used". However, on the ebony page, though there is an extensive list of musical instruments, not only was the double bass not listed, neither was the bow! Well, seeing as how ebony frogs are used on violin, viola, and cello bows as well as bass ones, I wanted to rectify this oversight. So I signed up for an account, and didn't really read through the guidelines. I learn quickest by doing, you see. Well, after some rookie mistakes, (for instance, I had a link on "frog" that led to the page on amphibians, not the bow, and I now know to test such things in the sandbox first) I finally had a working edition that added the information missing from the article. And then it was deleted. I'm not entirely sure why, perhaps I missed some essential protocol or something. But if I can't add this information to the article, can someone else? It bothers me that the page on musical bows doesn't match the page on ebony. 123Hannah65 ( talk) 03:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)123Hannah65 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123Hannah65 ( talk • contribs) 03:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. The edit is up- turns out that only the early edits with really blatant mistakes were removed. It was still kind of funny to see my work branded "vandalism", though. :P 123Hannah65 ( talk) 17:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
InSegment ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello-
I am looking to enlist the help of a knowledgeable editor that can help me out with a Wiki article I have recently created.
The article I created was first marked for speedy deletion; I delayed the request using the "hang on" function. After leaving comments on the article's talk page, it came back that the neutrality of the article was being challenged, and it may need to be cleaned-up.
I am not sure what the next step is. At this point, will the article be "cleaned up" by an editor? Or, am I responsible for cleaning up the article before it gets deleted?
I created this article with Wiki policy/guidelines in mind, and I tried to create the article to read as neutral as possible. I am open to changes that make the article more in accordance with Wiki guidelines and would love help from others, but I am not sure who is responsible for making these changes. It would be great if I could receive some feedback from a more experienced Wikipedian!
Please let me know what I need to do to ensure that the article gets cleaned-up rather than deleted entirely.
Thanks!
-Jordan
Jordan.Gilbert ( talk) 20:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am not good at computers, and I am having difficulty formatting the article that I have created. Please assist. the name of the article is: Matt Urmy. thank you,
BK Monroe The Red Light Library — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRedLightLibrary ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
The link to the Steven Lloyd on the Congregation Beth Shalom Rodfe Zedek page is the wrong Stephen Lloyd. The correct Stephen Lloyd is an architect practicing in Brattleboro, VT and Chester, CT. He presently does not have a website so the link should be removed. Thank you. Signed, Stephen Lloyd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.92.121 ( talk) 20:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I've never posted here before so this might not be the right place to do this, but I seem to be having trouble formatting references in Mechanics' Union of Trade Associations. I formatted the first two references correctly, but when I tried to use the second reference twice (by using <ref name=Mechanics' Union: A history></ref> the second time) it didn't work and gave me some red error. I checked the Help page it directed me too, but I still couldn't figure it out even after trying to correct it numerous times. If anyone could take a look at the page and see what the problem is, that would be greatly appreciated. -- Ashershow1 talk• contribs 20:26, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I mostly edit MMA related articles as a part of WP:MMA and we are having a problem with an editor that makes multiple disruptive edits. S/he has never posted an edit summary or anything on a talk page and I'm wondering what the proper course of action (and timeline) would be at this point. I've looked through WP:dispute resolution but most of the solutions require some kind of dialog. Thanks! ZephyrFox ( talk) 03:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The links to ALL arcades on this page are "dead" EXCEPT for the link for "Video Paradise" in the 1983 list of arcades. You might want to delete the dead links. Again, the link for "Video Paradise" is valid and goes to a web site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.7.135 ( talk • contribs) 01:43, March 8, 2011
Hi. It appears that I am getting banned from contributing to admin areas, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic bans for Porchcrop. See my recent talk page discussions and they say that I lack in understanding the policies and guidelines. I need help in knowing what I need to improve. Is any of you willing to help me? Thank you so much for your help. - Porchcrop ( talk| contributions) 07:17, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I have just had to put our snuff company back on the list of UK snuff companies under the heading 'snuff' someone keeps deleting Toque snuff from the list. Is there anything we can do to stop this malicious act?
Hasn't Toque snuff the same right to be listed as all the other UK snuff companies?
Regards
Roderick Lawrie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toquesnuff ( talk • contribs) 17:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
The user User:Markpb91 is adding content to the Android article that is npov, while removing any positive references in the sections he edits. I accidentally pressed 'Save Page' instead of 'Show Preview' and cleared out the section, and got a warning about an edit war, so I'm not going to edit the page until I'm sure I won't get blocked, but when he adds negative statements and I revert them, he immediately adds them back, and I'm unable to get any response from the talk page. He adds (and re-adds when I remove them to create a npov section) words to avoid such as 'unfortunately' and 'called the fragment of all things' etc., and the entirety of the Usage Share section (which he renamed Fragmentation without reason) is nothing but pro-Apple and anti-Android quotes, while he removed a quote from a developer saying that the fragmentation problem wasn't as big of a problem. From his edits of the Mac OS X article, it's clear (in my opinion) that he has a pro-Apple and anti-Android slant, and it's being reflected in his edits. My attempts to achieve a npov are being reverted by him and now I'm unable to edit the page for fear of being blocked, and I'm unsure of what to do. Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thank you. - SudoGhost ( talk) 05:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Spy Game ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
An editor added the following paragraph to the lead of this article:
Spy Game is a true to life composite of many real intelligence operations. Spy Game is more real than fiction and is based on the life of intelligence operative Tom Golden, the son of an Arkansas dirt farmer. Golden was an army intelligence officer assigned to the Central Intelligence Agency Phoenix Program during the Vietnam War. Nathan Muir was Golden’s CIA code name in Southeast Asia, and during his intelligence operations in Indochina. Golden served a distinguished career in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), The Pentagon, and the CIA. He served in Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, and Central and South America. Tony Scott does a great job of presenting the true to life dangers faced by Intelligence Agents in the field and the bureaucratic decisions sometimes made in Washington that are driven by politics.
These are the two citations that follow the material: "[Secret Warriors, Putnam Press 1988 by Steven Emerson]" and "[PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, 12/16/1990; KNIGHT RIDDER, 12/18/1990]". The film came out in 2001.
I reverted the editor. Another editor added it back in. I reverted the second editor twice more. After my third reversion, yet another editor (this time an IP) reverted me. On my third reversion, I posted information about all this on the article's Talk page. No one has responded, and the material remains.
The first editor has been registered since March 2010 but has made only a handful of edits, most of them to Spy Game. The second editor has been registered only since February 28, 2011, and has edited only this article. The IP made only the one edit, the reversion. I'm suspicious of the editors themselves, but, more important (to me) is the quality of the lead, which is still compromised.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am here to request some help with more experienced editors who could help me here. I'm currently expanding the article Systematic Chaos, a studio album from Dream Theater, and relative articles. The problem, it's one of the songs, which is Constant Motion, but this is a redirect to the precedent album, and there is an article which is Constant Motion (song), which really doesn't need a disambiguation. I'm just trying to keep the article but with the title without disambiguation.
Thanks for your time. -- Sirius 128 ( talk) 00:49, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Vinnie Vincent ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I noticed that the section "The Vinnie Vincent Model Guitar" had some bad grammar, words in all-caps, etc, so I cleaned it up. In the process, I noticed that the entire section was unsourced and unverifiable. I removed most of it but left a few sentences. The page's original author, DAworDisDAword101 is apparently watching the page and continuously reverts the changes. I tried to be polite in encouraging him to discuss the reverts on the article's talk page, but he doesn't participate in the discussion. I added the "article ownership" warning to his talk page and tried to be polite there, as well. I've re-done the edit to the article a second time, but won't do it again, because I have no interest in an edit war. In any case, the majority of the entire article (not just the section I edited) appears to be original research. LesPaul75 talk 18:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The article G.j. Alexandrie is in several languages (not english) but isn't relevant or accurate at all. Can someone check it out and maybe delete it? Thank you -- 83.226.108.74 ( talk) 17:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
The current wikipedia entry on gang stalking has been illegitimised and locked so as to prevent redaction.
Harassment of this nature has been verified in recent court cases including that of James Walbert, who was recently recognised by u.s. courts as having five subcutaneous implants above the neck. Within the last week, a presidential bio-ethics committee was appointed to issue a report to President Obama on gang stalking by the end of this year. These facts are verifiable (see below).
The current "article" on gang stalking illegitimises it by using quotes around the term, and by using vague and insinuating language relegating reports as "examples of belief systems" instead of anything pertinent to objective reality.
The article I proposed for gang stalking uses neutral language that does not intend to assert or deny the authenticity of these reports, unlike the preexistent content which intends for the term to be pertinent to imagined phenomenon only.
This is my submitted article. More information follows below.
I am contacting you in hopes that you can further explain and advise on a recently deleted page that I posted, titled "Myles L. Berman" on 3/6/11 by RHaworth.
In creating the article, I tried to avoid solicitation designed to promote Mr. Berman or his law firm. Rather, I attempted to demonstrate the notability and achievements in his expertise through biographical information and works of accomplishments. Utilizing the model article of a fellow attorney (which can currently be viewed on Wikipedia), I devised the content with reliable sources of information provided for verification.
It appears that as a new page, the patrol division deleted it due to "unambiguous advertising or promotion." Can you please offer any guidance on this reasoning and the following questions? 1. How come some articles on an individual or company are considered "masquerading articles" and deleted, while others are not and left posted? 2. What constitutes notability and the legitimacy of an individual or commercial entity? 3. Is there any way to recreate a page for either Mr. Berman or his firm without it being considered advertising or promotion?
I am passionately working on social media for our company and was suggested at a recent conference to take part in Wikipedia, as it is such a large media reference globally. If there is any information or advice you could offer in regards to posting a successful, acceptable article, I would greatly appreciate it.
Myleslberman ( talk) 22:23, 9 March 2011 (UTC)Evelyn Hirshberg, Office Manager, Law Offices of Myles L. Berman
Shmuley Boteach repeated vandalism through the years - its been approved as is by multiple users and I'd like to request a block/lock and dont know how to do so. Please advise and assist ? Jonathangluck ( talk) 23:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I revised the page on Richard Poirier that contained an inaccurate statement that Richard Poirier..."he was Marius Bewley". However, on 7 March 2011, a Mr. Charles Matthews "Moorlock" revised my change to reflect his previous script as of 21 Feb 2011. That version is not accurate. How do we resolve this issue. I want to correct this factual error and also post a new accurate bio on Marius Eugene Bewley that will provide a more comprehensive, accurate description of him and his achievements. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely, Bruce Johnson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.246.159.201 ( talk) 00:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
On second read at the disputed article, I think I've come to the following conclusions:
I am curious as to whether the Nestle Chunky Candy Bars come in minatures? Who could I contact to request this? Nestle.com doesn't really comment on Chunky Bars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.248.176.241 ( talk) 03:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Christianity and homosexuality ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is a question of neutrality in the Christianity and homosexuality article. I feel there may be a conflict of interest on the part editors involved in the article. This being such a contentious issue I feel it begs the assistance of a neutral third party to both resolve the neutrality dispute and if the consensus is that this article lacks a NPOV perhaps a neutral third party to help guide this article to Wikipedia standards. Thank You. Serialjoepsycho ( talk) 07:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
It is no doubt that people can have vested interest in a subject and edit an article on it but people can also be to passionate about an issue which in an article like this can lead them to neglect a part of an article that does not correlate to their passion. When your vested interest in an article causes you to neglect policies like wp:npov there is an obvious issue of wp:coi. The argument on the talk page by Carey for neutrality is based on bias towards particular individuals critical to homosexuality and original research that has lead him to conclusions that particular individuals views are not worthy of inclusion in the article. The suggestion above by Roscelese that I have brought this issue to this page due to Carey's sexuality leads me to question their ability to neutrally edit that article as Roscelese is also an editor of that article. I have said nothing negative of homosexuality here or in my 2 comments on the discussion of the talk page so any discussion of bigotry on my part seems highly questionable since it implies bad faith on my part with no inherent basis behind that bad faith. This issue does not differ from any other article about 2 or more prominent conflicting views as it pertains to Wikipedia. This article as with any other article requires neutrality. In an attempt to not join in the unbalanced and highly biased debate that is playing out on that page and an attempt to not start or be a part of an edit war I have brought this issue here. I have brought it here in hopes that a neutral body more acquainted with this religion might address the question of neutrality. Serialjoepsycho ( talk) 15:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
I never said,"the page isn't biased enough against homosexuality! there must be a conflict of interest involved!" I have tried to impress the point that there has been failure on the part of editors particularly Carey to address the issue of neutrality. The conflict of interest on his part is his inability to septate his religious and academic beliefs from his job as an editor. The views of Christians critical of homosexually many may call biased but that's a topic for a forum. The conversation at hand is about neutrality and the particular favorability of the views of Christians favorable to homosexuality. I am not nor do I feel that the IP was suggesting that anyone make the page more biased to homosexuality. I and I feel the IP was suggesting that editors of the article should equal validity to both sides represented in the article. Though initially the IP was suggesting that the side critical of homosexuality be given more prominent and deserved more weight that the favorable side. Making this an issue of bigotry seems more like a straw man tactic to me than anything else. I would gladly edit it but as highlighted in the "Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ" Deleting information isn't the best way to edit when there's a reasonable chance of becoming neutral eventually. Serialjoepsycho ( talk) 19:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Jean-François Berdah ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello,
A comment has been added to the page I createdlast year that says : "This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful". I haven't been able first to answer it due to a major research project, but secondly to understand properly what it's all about and how to "get rid" of the banner. There is no "contentious material" nor "libelous or harmful" content, but perhaps yes not enough sourced references. Since the page has been included in WikiProject Biography and WikiProject France I suppose that its interest is not unrelevant and maybe interesting. I would be very thankful to receive the advice of a good specialist of living biographies and academic profiles, someone who could help me to improve it and adapt more closely to Wiki standards. Many thanks in advance. Vanechka79 ( talk) 21:21, 10 March 2011 (UTC) 10th March, 2011, 22:20 (CET)
User:Fleetham has been around for a while, but I only encountered him when he started work on articles relating to the Chinese auto industry in 2010. I have been spending about a third of my time since, trying to repair his often disruptive and confusing edits. I have engaged in countless talkpage conversations on his, mine, and article talkpages, but absolutely nothing has any impact. The problematic articles are manifold, but the biggest dispute is at Share taxi. I expanded lengthily on my problems below, but a visit to Share taxi and some digging around should make the problems fairly obvious. WP:OWN, over-referencing, chopping articles into countless subsections, and a refusal to engage in any useful conversation with other editors are the main problems I've encountered. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 21:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
(I typed the long below harangue before realizing that this should be kept short - I figured I'll leave it in but don't read it if you don't feel like it)
The problems are manifold, but since Fleetham's targeted articles are rarely of interest to very many people his oft disruptive edits are rarely noted. Here is an example of one of his versions of a sentence:
In Turkey[15] and Turkish controlled, Northern Cyprus[16] dolmuş (pronounced "dolmush"[17]) are share taxis that run on set routes within[17][18] and between cities.[17]
Over referencing, many times quoting one source several times in a single sentence for entirely innocuous statements. He also treats the articles as his own personal sandbox, while reverting any edits done by any other user. Other bizarre edits such as this one abound. Here's another favorite - the result reads "Incorporated in September[5] 1953[5][6]". When asked why there are so many references he answered:
"Okay, I will reduce the number of refs as a "final step" once I finish my major editing. Some of the refs are really low quality, such as blogs or just totally random travel sites like "Moscow.info". So I do want to add many refs, and then later I will remove the lesser-quality ones." - clear ownership issues. His references almost always consist of nothing more than a URL between ref brackets, and when asked to provide proper referencing he says it would be "inconvenient".
Another method of his is chopping articles into hundreds of subsection, many often containing a single sentence. Check out Skyworth for an example of his style.
Not all of his edits are useless, but he often edits without thinking. As an example, a few days ago he began deleting pictures with CC-SA 2.0 licenses across dozens of articles. I brought this up with him and asked him to replace the pictures, but he refused and kept arguing that the license was no good. See my my talk page for an ongoing and very frustrating effort to change things (it continues into the next section). He still hasn't replaced a single photo, although he has stopped reversing my replacing them. As a further example, I like the following quote by the user himself: "I can understand why people didn't want to read a page of superscripts but all these facts need citations because I tend to add stuff that isn't true. Each fact carries a burden of truth and if that must be a superscript than so be it." (superscript mine)
Lately I have been getting tired of these fruitless discussions with Fleetham and have attempted to turn "his" articles into readable prose once again. His result has been to revert everything and now considers me a "hostile bother". Another editor supported my suggestions but has been brushed off entirely.
I hope someone could look into this, as the situation is becoming very frustrating and an enormous timesuck. Most of these articles aren't even of any real interest to me, but it is upsetting to see perfectly acceptable articles become chopped into pieces. The sad thing is that he finds a great amount of often useful sources for articles, but then refuses to adapt any of the style parameters and will not listen to any suggestions that he change. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ ( talk) 21:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi All,
I have hesitated regarding participation for years because I become lost and don't know to begin.
My passions are Jazz Improvisation, Afro-Cuban Jazz and Jazz Bass Guitar. I would like to help in one of these areas.
Is there a way I can help??? Where do I begin???
Enjoy The Journey, Tom Williams AKA mystic1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystic1 ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
I have had it ,,,i am sick to be left out .My name is Michael Clayton Kelly ,,,I am the youngest seal ..I knew Scott ...Run the math ..And check the military records before you come to a false answer .I signed up when i was 16,,,i had no a school ...i was in class 106 ..when i reported onboard at udt/21 i was still 17 ...this is simple ...did Scott report before he was 18 ? /// [Redacted some material not necessary to resolution of issue]
I was billed in 2009 for $688.00 now I have a court date for Mar. 25 I'm being sued for $5,000.00 or less bills were sent to my old address for the past two years(I think that this is very unethical) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.10.152.19 ( talk) 18:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Chanel No. 5 ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello, I just completed the re-editing, actually a complete re-write and re-formating for the "Chanel No. 5" page. There was (and still is) a box posted at the top of the page, indicating that the entry needed to be re-written. How do I delete this now that it has been re-written? I'm fairly new to Wiki so I need assistance with this process/policy. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Betempte ( talk) 22:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Voltaire ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I saw a (citation needed) in the article on Voltaire that I've been trying to provide, but could not find the means to do it.
It's under the heading "Legacy", toward the end, in a discussion of the often cited phrase "If God didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him". A citation is requested to prove that this was part of a retort to d'Holbach and the atheists.
Peter Gay gives this explanation in "Voltaire's Politics: The Poet as Realist", Yale University, 1988, p. 265, and provides the original line in full: "If the heavens, despoiled of his august stamp could ever cease to manifest him, if God didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him. Let the wise proclaim him, and kings fear him."
Hope that helps, and that you'll be able to provide/correct the entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.200.61.7 ( talk) 00:22, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Comogreg/W. Ferrell Shuck, Publisher
I want to cite these two references in the W. Ferrell Shuck, Publisher article: http://www.mopress.com/hall_of_fame.php and the Lee's Summit Journal, July 1, 1981, page 3A How? Thanks. Comogreg ( talk) 14:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello -
I need some advice and assistance. The page Parents Via Egg Donation was created back in 2009 with the help of one of your Wiki editors Toons. We received some sound advice from him and appreciated. In the meantime I edited my own page which I didn't realize at the time was against the rules. I was banned. Thankfully Wiki worked with me and I learned the rules and was unbanned. We moved on and with Toons advice went on to gather more credible information about the organization. It's now 2011 and our page was tagged orphaned and thankfully I was able to find a writer who was familiar with our organization and has edited as a user on Wiki before and she added to our page. Shortly after, it was marked for speedy deletion. We followed the rules and used the ((hang on)) command to explain our position and it was deleted.
So, I am back now at square one, frustrated and not sure what to do next. Our organization is a service organization, at non-profit that helps thousands of patients yearly with infertility issues, focusing on egg donation. We are not self serving, and we are not promoting a single individual, we are attempting to become part of an encylopedia as we are an educational and support organzation.
If you can help, I would be in your debt. Thanks.
MDG 00:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marnad1963 ( talk • contribs)
Howdy, I noticed Category:Israeli settlers has been created recently. I don't know the rules regarding cats but it seems to be this cat gives undue weight to an assumed political view of the person by dint of association. Thoughts? Joe407 ( talk) 04:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't see any POV issues with the cat, it seems to be created for Israeli settlers, Israeli settlements are called Israeli settlements by the international community. -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 15:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I was looking at the US Senate Committee pages, and noticed that the Energy and Natural Resources subcommittees are incorrectly named "United States Senate Energy Subcommittee ..." rather than "United States Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee ..." Upon further looking I noticed that there is a similar situation with regards to the subcommittees for the "Commerce, Science and Transportation", with them being shortened "United States Senate Commerce Subcommittee on ..." Contrastly, for some of the "Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs" Subcommittee pages, they are named "United States Senate Homeland Security Ad Hoc Subcommittee on ..." whereas others use the above system of shortening them.
So my questions are 1) Should there be some consistancy here? 2) Which method should be used? Using Ad Hoc, not, or using the full title? 3)If it should be changed, I can do it myself, but am unsure how to (if I can) change the title of the pages, so how would I do that?
Although this may be more fitting for a discussion page, it involves multiple pages and may involve changing the name of a page which I'm unsure how to do, or if I even can.
Sincerely, Ezuvian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezuvian ( talk • contribs) 13:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
At this thread this self-styled "newbie" keeps asking me for my philosophy and my reading list to challenge my explanations on the WP:OR of his proposing to reorganize the article according to criteria he has yet to prove are backed by WP:RS (and probably are not). I just can't figure out what the best page to refer him to to explain "editor responsibilities" (or whatever you might call it). I.e., that would explain that unless one is using/proposing new references, editors don't have to do this and it is WP:Soapbox or tendentious editing or whatever for him to keep asking me. Thanks! CarolMooreDC ( talk) 14:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
This is the first time I am trying to edit a page and I am totally confused. I am trying to add important biographical info to the above article to include criminal activity of which he has been found guilty. My reference source is the mainstream press,i.e. The Hartford (CT) Courant, March 9, 2011. I thought I had edited it properly but apparently the style of the reference note is not correct.
Help! Davidmb48 ( talk) 15:12, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Frances O'Roark Dowell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Last fall I posted a brief article about my publishing history, unaware that this isn't how Wikipedia works. I just wanted something to link back to the UMass MFA program page, so anyone I'd gone to grad school with could see what I was up to. Obviously, I should have done a bit more research about Wikipedia before posting. In any event, I would like the article deleted, mostly out of personal embarrassment--not at the content, which is factual--but just because it looks like I'm self-promoting. Is there anyway to take this article down?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_O'roark-D Francesdowell ( talk) 00:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)owell
Thanks for your help!
Best, Frances O'Roark Dowell
Thanks for your prompt reply. Well, I'm glad it doesn't seem self-promotional, but it's still a bit embarrassing to have all the notations above it about it being suspicious because I wrote it. I suppose that's what I get for not investigating the rules more closely (or, to be honest, at all) and for wanting to make sure the people I went to grad school know I'd amounted to something! Again, thanks for the fast feedback; I appreciate your help.
Best, Frances Dowell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Francesdowell ( talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Peak phosphorus ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) editor chhe has twice removed my additions to the Peak Phosphorus page. Chhe first claimed it was plagerism thenthat it contained copywrite material. In both cases this is incorrect and I have re-instated my contribution. I suspect it will again be removed and I would like a third (neutral) oppinion. I am new to Wikipedia, so please excuse me if I am misunderstanding the proceedure. Feedingtheworld ( talk) 13:10, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I've added a table with images to a section of Maidenform ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). The table and images move down to the external links catagory.
Bfoster333 ( talk) 16:42, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Dear editor,
My changes to errors in the Wiki on Spanish flu have been undone. I pointed out that the "theory" of the second wave is unsupported, and referred to those who identified the virus (Mohrens and Tauberger, in the New England Journal of Medicine). 1- The reference to later 'partial immunity" by sufferers from that flu is from a newspaper article - how on earth would you be able to identify systematically that partial immunity many decades later, other than through anecdote? You can check this statement is only supported by hearsay. Epidemiologists attribute that partial immunity to the large pandemics in 1896-1900: these saved the elderly. Now you assume that the imaginary "first wave" did not touch the younger??? 2- It was this theory of the second wave that created a health scare from a mild virus. It is an observable fact that this health scare generated billions for the vaccine and antiviral industry. This creates powerful interests.
I am not ready to learn the ropes of wikipedia. Besides, I can not compete with interest groups with multi billion interests. I would like you to remove this part of the "second wave" of the wiki. If you don't believe me, you may read the paper in the New England, the most prestigious medical journal. You can check my name in the Pubmed to observe that I am a regular scientist. You may check for yourself that the history of acquired immunity is tenuous indeed (if not impossible).
Yours truly,
Luc Bonneux details removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.87.139.149 ( talk) 17:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
John M. Florescu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello,
My name is Dana Gliga. I am contacting you reffering John Florescu's wikipedia profile. I know I have been receiving a message from Wikipedia's assistance about the fact that if I don't provide references, more exactly, links about the pege yped on wikipedia website, it would be deleted. I begun to post the text about John Florescu on 4th of March and the term (regarding the possibility to be deleted) was mentioned to be about 10 days.
Please do not delete the page created, because I will send you references about John Florescu in short time. He is a worldwide very good known producer, one of the best cable television professionists. You'll see upon the links that I will send you.
I will forward you tomorrow other sources from other websites as you suggested in your inquiry. Thank you for your understanding.
Best regards, Dana Gliga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I accidently deleted the references from a page when I tried to add my own (alkaline diet) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.116.163.176 ( talk) 03:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I am writing again with the request to add some websites about John Florescu's activity as an executive producer and as an cable television expert. I will forward you a selection of some articles written by or about John M. Florescu. They are in NYT, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, Boston Globe, San Francisco Chronicle. I will send you also some refernces written by important personalities from the political life reffering John Florescu as a nominee for the post of Ambassador of Romania. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 10:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
32nd Cavalry Regiment (United States) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I can no longer edit a redirect page I was trying to create because I screwed up trying to follow the directions (I've never done this before.) Now I'm blocked from further work on the page because it suspects I'm vandalizing for some reason.
I'm trying to add a redirect from: 32nd Cavalry Regiment (United States) to: 32nd Armored Regiment (United States)
The first one ( the redirect attempt) is the one that's blocked.
Thanks for any help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wheels0132 ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Well the problem seems to be that your target is actually called 32nd Armor Regiment (United States). Should that be moved to 32nd Armored Regiment (United States)? Jezhotwells ( talk) 16:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Can you please tell us how something important may be added to a locked page? We refer specifically to the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
We would like to post a reference but cannot. We have a major reference book about the Nazi party that Wikipedia viewers should know about. How can we get the title, author, etc., posted on the page?
Thank you.
208.105.17.242 ( talk) 16:33, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Enigma Books editors
My mom is an AKC Judge and has content on her site www.Bi-Mar.com that we thouhgt would be benenifical for article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_(dog) but we have noticed that that Miyagawa removed every edit we do. I hoping this is just because we didn't create the link correctly or something. I'm wondering if we add to the article if this might be a better way of sharing information instead of just putting an external link.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prosenba ( talk • contribs) 19:13, 15 March 2011
Salsa (dance) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can anyone help me fix this please? Cold Salsero ( talk) 02:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Is there a policy about redirects in user space? I found a user with a borderline offensive username whose only edits are from 2008 when he redirected both his user and user_talk pages to the mainspace article to which his username alludes. 99.164.121.246 ( talk) 11:02, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Help! I obviously don't know what I'm doing so I need someone to fix my errors. I was trying to edit "Janet Fielding" and was correcting her date of birth and age to 1957 and 53, resepectively. All edits performed on 3/20/11 were mine. Thank you.
Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Fielding —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.30.185 ( talk) 20:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Over on Talk:Spark_(fire), there have been five failed attempts to get a consensus to rename the page, within four months. Every time an attempt fails, yet another attempt starts. All but one of these have been started by the same editor. The sixth attempt has just started. This all seems a bit silly. Can it be curtailed somehow? Ernestfax Talk 19:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Silverpoint ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article seems to have been hijacked by two [editors] <attempted outing redacted> who have each entered quite a bit of self-promotional information and personal links into the page. I am not comfortable with the editing rules, and there seems to be a bit of rivalry on the discussion page. It is quite different than the articles on watercolor, or oil painting for example. 128.190.125.2 ( talk) 19:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)amy
I invented a new word and I can't provide Citations other than from my own published works. brending — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdzarlino ( talk • contribs) 04:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Camp Moshava, Wild Rose, WI ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) The article Camp Moshava, Wild Rose, WI is an article about a summer camp. It seems notable and is sourcing everything but somehow has become a WP:ADVERT and WP:NOTWEBHOST. The main editor states on his talk page that is a past employee. Any help in assessing how to proceed would be appreciated. If you look at it and it seems fine, I'd be appreciative to know. Thanks, Joe407 ( talk) 21:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I helped to create both the Nefsis and Loring Ward pages. Sticking to Wikipedia guidelines, each page has/had a significant amount of reliable sources.
In the Loring Ward case, a Wiki admin deleted the page altogether without putting up a flag for speedy deletion or a flag for proposed deletion.
In the Nefsis case, this article has been nominated for deletion on the Nefsis articles for deletion page
The editor who flagged the Nefsis page and tore down the Loring Ward page citing Churnalism for both artilces – yet each page has/had references from reliable sources.
Wondering if I could get help/guidance on how to deal with this Wiki admin and if there is a possibility to get the Loring Ward page back up since the editor did not put up a flag, as common practice. Karebear 1022 ( talk) 23:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I have been engaged in a disput for the past 2 days now with user KWW and now user Edjohnston whom I asked for help first. KWW has needlessly deleted numerous very notable events of this artist -- ALL WHICH ARE/WERE SOURCED!
I'm asking that the edits of KWW 03:34, 15 March 2011 are reverted. This is a copy of the conversation for edjohnston talk page:
Hi, I noticed you placed a protection on the Marc Mysterio page in 2009. It came to my attention that a user with the handle KWW is, and has been for over 2 years, needlessly butchering this article of sourced info.
I have now reverted his edits on a few occasions and added sources but this fellow is intent on killing this article, and this is a very known musician on major labels and major press.
Can you please place the article under a loock status to prevent this KWW from further vandalizing and revert the edits he may make in the interim between now and the time you get this.
He is even deleting sourced notices of the artist collab on a Grammy winner new album (Roger Sanchez) and other chartings.
This is one of the better sourced articles on this web site to it seems this KWW may have some personal issue or obession with the artist.
marc mysterio page is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Mysterio —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.159.213 ( talk) 02:29, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Ed, can you please revert the edits of KWW as they are valdalism and were done prior to your protection and is the exact cause of the valdalism which requested the edit. @kww, I am not Marc Mysterio. Why would you think he is the one making these edits? You sound to have a personal gripe with the artist? Information that was removed, was all sourced and I even spent 20 minutes sourcing it myself. It appears info was even edited out that was previously talked about on discussion page. Sourced collaborations with Grammy Winners, MTV Awards, etc. I suggest a revert of the last edits of KWW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.159.213 ( talk) 07:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I'm relatively new to wikipedia, and have run across an article with apparently an abusive old timer. I'm pretty sure they can't get away with what they are doing, but since I am learning the ropes, I'm not sure what to do.
The article is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew,_Mark,_Luke_and_John
The problem is the user editor claims that it is widely called the Black Patornoster in the opening, but won't cite it. Looking online, very few if any people call it this.
A cite on origins further down provides the only citation for a Black Patonoster, but it was only for a book citing a reference to a similar (not the same) poem made by an alleged witch - "Satan's invisible world". I looked at the source the editor provided. Originally, the name of the author of the book wasn't correct either. The quote alleged from Ady in the book isn't there either. I've repeatadly tried to correct this, but the editor just keeps putting it back - while keeping the correction to the author's actual name, and is accusing me of vandalism..
Now, actually, I've never removed his material, although I feel it is pretty bad research, I just kept after correcting the quote that wasn't correct and the author's name which wasn't correct.
However, the section I put it which has sources for a possible catholic origin of this rhyme keeps getting removed. I believe that is vandalism according to wikipedia. I think it's pretty darn poor scholarship to keep information when it is shown to be wrong, and to delete information about a possible origin of a ryme when it is part of the printed literature.
Can anyone help?
Hi, On Category:Open proxies blocked on Wikipedia contains 27,054 Open Proxies that are blocked on Wikipedia. Those 27k separated into 199 pages. I want to take them into a single page like we do on history pages. Please help. Thank you -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie | tool box 17:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not have a article on Open-Source HTML5 Advertising.
Wikipedia uses donations for Ad-free content in 2011, Wikipedia only accepts Ogg-Theora multimedia content.
Use of Open-Source video formats as Elements in HTML5 Advertising, is an important situation which can be a article on Wikipedia.
The article can mention the various types of Open-Source HTML5 video Ads.
HTML5 video Banners HTML5 Video Overlay Ads HTML5 Pre-Roll Commercials HTML5 Multi-Element HTML5 Ads
The article can mention Flash, Canvas, and other Web Advertising methods.
The article can mention both Ogg-Theora and Google's WebM video formats as video elements in HTML5 Advertising.
(Types of Ad formats Wikipedia would have displayed, if it had Advertising to supplement operating costs in 2011).
The article can mention browser share supporting Open-Source HTML5 Advertising.
The article can mention possible Open-Source Advertising on Wikipedia, (as an example for general reference).
The article can mention Open-Source mobile HTML5 Advertising on phones and tablets.
The article can have a link to the examples.
Open-Source HTML5 Advertising, is a important article to add to Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.61.253.148 ( talk) 17:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I placed a request on the Requested Articles page for Businesses and organizations a few months ago for inVNT, but haven't seen any movement or received any feedback from the editorial community. Admittedly, I took the wrong route in trying to post this article myself, as I'm a contractor for the company, and it was deleted under the conflict of interest rules. So instead, I posted the request here. My question is, what else can I do to get an editor to consider writing an article about the company? I already have a few notable pieces of media coverage listed here (and I can list more), which seems to be more than what a lot of people are doing on the Requested Articles page. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Andrew rodger ( talk) 18:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I am finding bit difficult to put the picture of Mr. Ramjee Kunwar to its page . If its possible to help and also sort out the format
thank you
Prashant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashantk23 ( talk • contribs) 20:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Martin Hirsch ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
In the course of the unreferenced BLP, I took a lot of French persons articles in my watchlist. I spotted a problem wht I beleive is a problem with neutrality on this article, and I'm now accused of "exporting a wp:fr edit war". -- Anneyh ( talk) 09:51, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the material keeps coming back in. No one wants to contribute to the discussion on the Talk page (except one mindless comment). The material is incoherent and still a possible copyright violation. I've posted a message regarding the copyright vio on WP:MCQ here, but no one has responded and it was the wrong place for me to post it. I should have posted it at WP:CP, but I'm embarrassed to say I didn't know that. I'll try to fix that, but in the meantime, I'm running out of reverts.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Gang stalking, group stalking, community stalking, cause stalking or gaslighting refers to alleged coordinated harassment often involving electronic and psychological methods such as HSS speakers and classical conditioning. [1] These activities are difficult to trace or verify, leaving few precedents for public credibility outside of cases such as the electronic harassment of James Walbert. [2]
Anecdotal accounts generally depict gang stalking as a widespread, often international conspiracy of unclear intent, associated with counterintelligence programs such as MKULTRA and CoIntelPro.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nowpublic.com/world/who-getting-thousands-gang-stalking-reports-month|title=WHO IS GETTING THOUSANDS OF GANG STALKING REPORTS A MONTH?|date=August 17, 2009|publisher=nowpublic.com|accessdate=2011-03-03}}</ref>Critics propose that reports of gang stalking are rooted in psychological issues catalyzed by the exchange of information on the internet. [3] [4]
As you can see, this proposed entry is significantly less biased towards the assertation that reports of gang stalking can only be attributed to mental illness and is overwhelmingly more sympathetic to victims of a crime that is being reported with increasing frequency and verifiability.
The case of James Walbert is documented in many places online, despite a lack of media acknowledgement. A cursory examination of the issue will reveal that the matter is certainly not trivial and that public awareness of these pernicious crimes would prevent such occasions from transpiring so easily.
Video from the recent bio-ethics committee hearings - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0yKaE6Jy1o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjcLRIFVRO0
The personal doubts of the wikipedia editors in these matters must be put aside, and a more neutral stance must be taken in this entry when the increasing amount of evidence indicates that these events are actually taking place. There are thousands of reports of gang stalking online, not hundreds, and the truth of the matter is not to be decided by click-happy wikipedia editors.
My proposed article is wholly unbiased towards why these events are taking place and whether they are authentic or imagined, outside of the case of Mr. Walbert, which is verifiable as far as the u.s. legal system is concerned. The denigration heaped on the subject in the current article can be offensive to people who may have had to endure these transgressions.
At any rate, the concept of gang stalking is so widespread in this culture that it does not need to be illegitimised as language. We do not honour the word "small" and refute the word "little" because they both mean the same thing. It is time for the cultural redaction being enacted in the maintenance of this article to cease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xoxos ( talk • contribs) — Xoxos ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Thank you for the well wishes, I will certainly need them :) I am not sure that a consensus is possible. eg.
Phil Bridger (remove delusional conspiracy theory yet again) Phil Bridger (Once again, please take this to the talk page - previous consensus has been against including these delusions Phil Bridger (revert addition of loopy conspiracy theory "cause stalking" content -
I do not have Phil Bridger's experience with editing wikipedia and expect that I will be outmanoeuvred at every turn. Moreover, though I am not able to prove it, I would not be surprised in the slightest to find that this topic is watched by special interest groups who already have a large body of active editors to ensure that this topic does not express views they find unfavourable, which is why I am appealing to whatever authority on wikipedia there is to help to approach objectivity in this matter instead of wasting my time struggling with these offensive censors in their territory.
If no one is able to interject on the grounds I have already presented, I will pursue the protocol for request for comment as recommended.
I agree re: ambiguity. We have two sides to this argument: either these reports are in part factual, as verified by Mr. Walbert's case, or they are delusional, as suggested by an article in the New York Times. Perhaps the u.s. courts are not equal to the opinions of the New York Times journalists on the matter of reality? Especially since both have vested interests, I will once again request that an entry that is not biased against the claims of gang stalking be adopted, thank you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xoxos ( talk • contribs) 19:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi there, My post in whistleblowing was removed as it was considered 'promotional'
I work for a registered charity that gives free legal advice to anyone in the UK who wants to blow the whistle on something at work, but who is unsure about how to go about this
The awareness of our free help is low and this seems a simple way to help
There is no commercial gain from quoting our existence and phone number, its is a straightforward user benefit, and I would like to request that the post is reinstated
Gary Brown Public Concern at Work <phone number redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garybrown23 ( talk • contribs) 17:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Traditional Chinese medicine ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am still relatively new to WP, but I am frustrated and curious to get a second opinion. I created a wiki profile in 2008 in order to contribute to the TCM page. I have been attempting to do so this last week, but there is an editor who seems to be on WP 24/7 lawyering all suggestions and acting as a consensus. There are other very knowledgable editors working to improve this article as well, but none can keep up with the editors (PPdd) constant changes. He has changed my entries and claimed he mistakenly erased them thinking it was his addition, but never reverted the entry when I pointed out that it was my addition. He makes accusations of POV due to the subject matter and ignores the consensus on the definition of what constitutes Traditional Chinese Medicine. I find it impossible to reach any consensus with other editors since by the time we discuss it on the talk page, PPdd has changed the whole thing many times over. I just wish he could be given a time out from the page in order to allow some time for those editors with a great deal of schooling (including masters of science and doctorates) on this matter a chance to work out inaccuracies without them being changed 30 seconds later, with 10 other inaccuracies being introduced at the same time. I'll admit that most editors trying to improve this page are fairly new to WP, and that has lead to a great deal of wikilawyering and citing of rules without true care for accurate entries. Calus ( talk) 01:23, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Gavin Menzies (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)
Hi, recently I've been trying to make some improvements to this biography of a living person, which I think is biased. I tried to do this a year ago when I was new at wikipedia, and now I'm trying again. This article has been very controversial for over two years. For me the problem, now as well as last year, is that everybody usually disagrees with me. So I'm hoping to get some neutral feedback: Are my suggestions reasonable? Am I presenting them in a manner that is clear and civil? I entered the discussion on the talk page
here, and everything below this section on the talk page has been discussion of my recent suggestions.
Thanks!
--
Other Choices (
talk)
02:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Masanobu Fukuoka ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am having great difficulty dealing with User:Macropneuma working on the article Masanobu Fukuoka. I had originally gotten involved through an RFC to help improve a previously woeful version of the page [10] but have struggled to understand Macropneuma's objections through incredibly long talk page comments with unconventional grammar and littered with accusations of POV, personal attacks and a plethora of other wikilinks (eg. [11] [12] [13]). He had also tried to revert the entire page back to his last version [14] with an unintelligible edit summary.
Since then he has engaged in sarcastic (eg. [15]) or outright incivil edit summaries (eg. [16]), has been hostile in his comments on the talk page. When asked to comment on the reasoning behind his changes or to help seek consensus, he seems to refuse to detail his concerns in any clear or concise manner and instructs to 'read the talk page', which is now over 160K in size. The explanations he does give don't make much sense to me and he doesn't seem interested in answering what I consider to be fair, simple questions to try to deduce his meaning.
I believe I've made genuine effort to try to work with this editor. I have become increasingly frustrated and less able to assume good faith on his part, and I admit that I have been drawn into a few edit wars (including us both crossing the 3RR line) with him born from that frustration. Obviously I'm not happy about that, and I've made clear that if any reports were to happen I'd be reporting myself as well. I've had to warn him no less than five times to stop making unfounded accusations about me (he seems to believe anything I say contrary to his opinion is a personal attack or POV), including his comment that he has 'better editors' to deal with. I believe there is still a case of WP:OWN going on, but since the article has very few interested editors, for the most part it's just the two of us and I'm really struggling to find a way to productively work together with him.
I could really use some advice here on how best to proceed. TechnoSymbiosis ( talk) 05:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, can someone please evaluate consensus and close the discussion in Talk:Pat Tillman#Hew to the source?
It is a quite simple discussion about "Should we use THIS quote or THAT quote".
It had generated a lot of discussion since 8 December 2010, and so - on 9 march - I created a new heading, "Clarifying for consensus", to try and sort things out.
Without wishing to be at all biased...I think consensus is clear. But as I've actually commented in the discussion, I'd like someone else to close it off.
Many thanks, Chzz ► 07:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Heat map ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article above contains an external link to something called iMapBuilder which is off topic and seems to be only for the purpose of advertising a commercial product. The user's only edits are postings of this link to this and other articles, although this is the only article it remains on. Attempts to remove the link by previous editors and myself have been reverted by the original editor. I also posted on the user's talk page to indicate the reasons, although it is an IP user (203.198.150.93) so I'm not sure if that is significant. To continue trying to remove the link would just be to engage in an edit war. So, I'm not sure what the proper process is from here. Any guidance would be appreciated. Polydeuces ( talk) 14:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
User Platinumshore [17] has been asked several times to provide RS sources for material they have written at Peak oil. In response, they have removed CN tags, repeatedly replaced uncited and poorly cited material (ie using wikis, commercial websites, and discussion threads), called other edits "sabatoge", and ignored discussion on their talk page and the article talk page. Please help. 206.188.51.1 ( talk) 23:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Rabbi Pinto page assistance please ? A major investigative feature was written and need eyes ? http://forward.com/articles/136250/ - Feature story is here can editors assist ? Thanks much Babasalichai ( talk) 11:31, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The article on acupuncture is written from a critical, evidence based medicine perspective. And so is grossly non-neutral. Also contains some factual inacuracies. I tried to make some small amendments, I did not remove any of the critical comments, but these were reverted within 24 hours to a previous version (warts and all). I recognize that there may have been some deficiencies in my contribution in terms of sources which presumably could have been noted. I am new to Wikipedia, but I do not have unlimited time to enter into a war of editing. And I do not want to adopt an antagonistic approach. Such an instant dismissal of my work cannot be good in itself in terms of Wikepedia aims and policies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acupuncture
Examples of factual inacuracies in the first section! The comment on 'causes' of disease is not accurate. Chinese medicine includes a concept of causes of disease that would include emotional, environmental and physical factors. And so the contrast with modern medicine is less clear cut. What this article is describing is the mechanims not the causes. Possibly to acentuate the critical viewpoint. The comment on the origin of 12 channels in 12 rivers of China may or may not be factually accurate (there were 11 meridians in early text so it may not be). But this is only an historical note, and presumably intended to portray acupuncture as fixed in archaic ideas, and not real world observation. For example, the Greeks coined the term 'atom' it would make no sense for me to point this out in front and centre, in an article on modern physics (silly modern physics still believing in ancient Greek ideas) except in an historical context. Describing Qi as metaphysical is not accurate. It is not verified by modern science. But in contradistinction to metaphysics. It is intended to be a model of the physical world in physical laws. It may be disputed, but modern science, but so is 'string' theory, and that would not be described as metaphysical - simply an unproven theory.
Andy Prescott Aaprescott ( talk) 14:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
There is a slow motion edit war occurring on these articles. From my perspective, it appears as though there is a version of the first article with WP:PEACOCK and WP:POV problems. There is a group of SPAs fighting to preserve this version and refusing to engage in any discussion:
I have tried various approaches, including copy editing, removing bad sources, and tagging the article for the problems I mentioned above. I also tried getting some input from the WP:INDIA talk pages, but have received no feedback from there. I'd like to get more opinions on whether the article needs changes. The second article is having similar problems, but I haven't participated in it as much. — Torchiest talk edits 21:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
There has been a prolonged disagreement of editors on the Talk page Talk:Israel and the apartheid analogy ( | [[Talk:Talk:Israel and the apartheid analogy|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), "Section 1 New version of proposed contribution," subsection "1.1 Version 2: First Paragraph" (see the most recent postings in this subsection), regarding proposed sources and text to add to the article itself under its Section 10.2: "Criticism of the Apartheid Analogy:Differences in Motivations." In the case here on which I am asking for an independent assessment, I have proposed adding to the article some description of a book, written by a British analytical philosopher, devoted to the subject of the logic and assumptions in left liberal anti-Israel circles that readily push the apartheid analogy. That the book is notable and that there must be some reference to it in the article has been granted by other editors, but the one chiefly in debate with me about it wants to reduce the reference to a brief phrasing that removes as irrelevant the book's reference to and focus on left liberal ideologists as such, and therefore also the author's "deconstruction" of what lies behind their critical view of Israel including their claim of "apartheid." This however is the whole point of the book, as I have shown in the Talk page debate, and the author discusses this explicitly in the section of his book dealing with the "apartheid" accusations as elsewhere throughout his book. Moreover, it is essential to understanding the relevance of the book to a discussion of "motivations" behind proponents of the Israel apartheid analogy. I argue that the focus on left liberal ideology must be included in the article description, and the argument of the book concerning the cultural significance of this ideology also included as being relevant to "Differences in motivations." Tempered ( talk) 22:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
This may be the wrong place, but two days ago I asked a couple of Admins on their talk pages and they never responded. We have a pair of AfDs which have been running for far too long, and we need an Admin to come in and close them. The original issue was CoI, but I think that has been solved, and now it comes down to notability. One is about an academic society, the other is about a publication of said society. One solution which has been proposed would be to merge them under the society. That would be acceptable to me as the original author of both articles. I think that between the two we have enough sources to justify notability for at least one article, but not everyone agrees. One problem is that we have a person present (actually an admin, but he appears to be contributing just under his "user" hat) who is arguing for deletion on a very personal basis and raising the aggro level. We just need the thing finished one way or the other. Here are the links:
Would be good if someone in authority can take control of this. Thanks. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 23:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I created Floating wave power plant page Page still have "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's .." sign Please help me to fix it or advise how I can fix it myself
Ivec01 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivec01 ( talk • contribs) 23:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
James O'Keefe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have tried several times to improve the page "James O'Keefe". The edits are dismissed and removed almost in real time and whle I'm on the page continuing to edit.
This last time I included several citations from the Wasington Post as well as politico and media matters. Respected sources, all. They were removed in buk and cited as poor sourcing
I also removed a superfluous statement that has been without citation since oct 2010. I also added a reference from the Congressional record.
There were many more.
I took pains this time to carefully cite all my edits.
Someone is carefully watching the page and keeping it slanted in favor of mr o'keefe a controversial figure.
The gist of many of my edits was to change the page so that it doesn't refer to mr okeefes deceptively edited videos at great length before briefly mentioning at the end that the videos have been investigated and discredited
To be blunt, the right wing is watching this page and they're persistently removing any attempts to make the page more objective, even-handed and fair.
Any idea about what to do here? I don't think just undoing their revision is the right thing.
Also, I'm new to the wikipedia thing. I'm stmbling through what to do. I surfed into te page and I was irritated at how uneven it was. Gcherrits ( talk) 03:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Glenn
I notice that a horrible pencil edit thingy has today appeared on every page adjacent to the section heading. Doubtless there is a page where people are complaining about it, but I can't seem to find it. Can anyone point me in its direction as I'd like to add my dissenting voice (although it's rather late in the day), or is there a way of switching it off? Thanks, Ericoides ( talk) 10:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
List of power stations in England ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User:Stor-Börge ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I have made some contributions to an alternative to the article List of power stations in England on Thryduulf's user page and think it is mature to replace the original article as a better and more encompassing format and content. Could a more experienced user please facilitate this?
Stor-Börge ( talk) 18:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
There has recently been an edit war on the article on Magnetic reconnection, of which I was one participant. A section was added a week ago by another user entitled, "Criticism of the reconnection concept." I am a researcher in this field and have investigated magnetic reconnection in space, laboratory, and astrophysical plasmas for seven years. I can attest that the views presented in this section are held by an extremely small number of plasma physicists and astronomers, and have been discredited over the last few decades. I attempted to remove this section, but it was put back up several times. The person who posted this also had very long arguments on the talk page about this with others. It is my interpretation of events that this section was posted to put forth the author's unconventional views presented here. The tone of the author on the talk page is also a cause for concern, and suggests that compromise is unlikely. Any advice or assistance? - Spacehippy ( talk) 02:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
RE: New Category -Ecological_art
please advice how to revert to today's published article since we are working with several art historians and curators of ecological art to develop the category accordingly. Curator emeritus John K. Grande has been involved in this process and we are in the process of editing references, etc...Thanks for your immediate attention to this issue. Nohra Corredor/ECOARTNET PUBLISHER
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests&action=edit§ion=new# — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ecoartnet (
talk •
contribs)
18:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I would like to start editing, translating and making pages especially about actors and singers, or artists in general. I would like to work mainly with those two languages: italian and english, and translate pages from one page to another.
Is it possible, I mean, can I already start working on this?
Thanks — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Portanza (
talk •
contribs)
22:11, 19 March 2011 (UTC) #
Zambia Adventist University ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
i have edited this article (above named) but there is no change that is taking place. but i redirected an article "runsangu unversity" to the same page and it displays my changes why doesn't the original article display the changes?
luwii 00:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
I was searching Gemma Atkinson's wiki-page and noticed there was no link to the movie she starred in '13Hrs'. It won BEST BRITISH FILM and BEST PRODUCTION at GRIMM Up North Film Festival and peaked at number 7 on the DVD new release chart and I thought, due to that, you'd have some more information on it as I really enjoyed the movie and the actors in it. It also stars Tom Felton (who plays Draco Malfoy in the HP series) and have noticed that there is nothing about 13Hrs on his page. I've heard they may be a sequel and would like to see if there's more info on that. I also am intruiged to find out more on Antony De Liseo (who plays Luke in 13Hrs) as he has a real talent and I have noticed him on TV a few times. There is a bit of info on him on his IMDB page but thought you may have some more. Also intruiged in the Actor Joshua Bowman who stars in 13hrs (alongside Atkinson and De Liseo) as Ive seen some coverage lately on him dating Miley Cyrus. Thanks for your help Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoganRMF ( talk • contribs) 07:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Peggy Ann Adler ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Since I am the source of my own bio, how can I have copied it from someone else? The bio I submitted was written by me and is entirely info from my life and resume. Please explain. Regards, Peggy Ann Adler — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bxzooo ( talk • contribs) 09:23, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Religious toleration ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please compare the above article with Toleration. The latter is largely restricted to religious examples, and I have started to insert material at the former (to be expanded) which deals with toleration of gays, ethnic groups, political groups, etc. Both articles are now templated to indicate a merger proposal. I am aware of the merger proposal noticeboard, but it seems to be very sleepy. Eventually, I know that if no-one objects, I can boldly accomplish this myself by turning "Religious toleration" into a redirect, while pasting its content to "Toleration" (which is where I personally believe the surviving article should be). Is this acceptable, or is it better practice here to involve an admin, do a formal page move, etc? Thanks, Jonathanwallace ( talk) 14:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
I am assisting my colleague with posting his own images, he is the creator of those images, under dental articles. But, as soon as we added the images, those were nominated for deletion. So, we sent permissions to OTRS a few days ago, but it seems like no one has responded yet.
I am wondering if there is any other things I can do, or we should just wait for a few more days.
Thank you,
Jacob-- Jacobleigh ( talk) 15:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Gijsbertus Jacobus Sas ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Good Morning,
I'm not sure how to go about this but I happened to come accrtoss an article about my grandfather - Gijsbertus Jacobus Sas. Toward the end of the article it list his rank at the time of pension as Lt. Colonel. The article correctly states that he died in a plane crash in Scotland but the article implies that he was retired (pension). At the time he was on active duty and was serving as the Dutch military attache in Washington DC. His rank was Major General (Generaal Majoor) at the time of his death. His also had one son, Gijsbertus Jacobus Sas, born 29 July 1918 died 15 November 1982.
One thing the article doesn't reference is that his efforts made it possible for Queen Wilhelmina to escape to England after Germany invaded the Netherlands on 10 May 1940. The article doesn't state that Sas' credibility was seriously in question because Hitler had cancelled the invasion 22 times prior to 10 May 1940. Even after Sas was re-united with Reijnders, the General Staff and Queen Wilhelmina in London in June-July of 1940, there was great emnity between Reijnders and Sas and the General Staff. After that Sas traveled to Canada to train Dutch forces and was promnoted and assigned to Washington DC as the military attache as a reward for his sevice during the war.
I will gladly provide citations as requested. My email address is --redacted--
Thanks, Guy Sas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.252.129.98 ( talk) 15:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Maybe it's the style, or the added external link, but I'm not comfortable with these recent additions to Azithromycin. As a layman I'm reluctant to revert edits that are not obvious spam from medical articles, so I'd like some advice on this and similar edits. Thanks, CliffC ( talk) 17:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
On the Time_Matters topic, another editor keeps reverting the deletion of his addition of irrelevant links. The External Link and Reference are to a competing product and violate NPOV.
I posted the following on his Talk page: Please post a rationale for including HoudiniEsq as an External Link and Reference on the Time_Matters page. You should provide an Edit Summary explaining the reason for reverting the deletion. When I deleted your links, I noted in the Edit Summary that the links were removed because of Neutral Point of View. To elaborate on that, one would need to include links to all competing products to be consistent with including the link to HoudiniEsq. In other articles, links to all competing products are not found.
The other editor has not posted anything in Edit Summary to explain the basis for his edits. What should I say to this editor? At what point should I go further in the Dispute Resolution process? Thank you. Wells50 ( talk) 17:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)Wells50
I Have created a new page with reference to the above, i would like to know how i post it to the Encyclopedia, does it have to be passed before it is seen ???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yaino_TV/A_State_of_Being
YA I NO TV — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yaino TV ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Super (2010 film) was renamed Super (2011 film) by Bencey ( talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), without any discussion. He then proceeded to make many changes to other pages to reflect this change. However, as the article itself says, the film was released in 2010. I have requested a move to change the name back, as it seems I can't just revert it, but wonder if an admin can bulk revert all this at once. I'd rather not chase him around and undo every edit by hand, quite likely starting an edit war in the process. Barsoomian ( talk) 03:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
OK, so 2011 it is. Would have been nice if the editor had bothered to mention this on the Discussion page. Barsoomian ( talk) 05:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.148.215.156 ( talk) 11:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,far from being an expert I have jusst read with much interest your 4 definitions quoted above and i would like you to explain what you gain or lose,when enterind a type of market or/and leaving another, what are the risks associated, etc. Of course you can also give the links i can follow to access such answers. Thanks and regards.
<<email redacted>> (Paulette Emmanuelle Essame) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.148.198.156 ( talk) 12:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
See Article on Serena Harragin...
This biography was written by Serena Harragin and it is completely false.
I tried to put a disclaimer on the article, but it was "almost instantly rejected."
Either a disclaimer is needed, or the false article needs to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acctatwiki ( talk • contribs) 15:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Serena Harragin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The biography of Serena Harragin was written by her to get herself a job.
Most of it is false.
Please either put a disclaimer on it or remove it.
Acctatwiki (
talk)
15:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello -
The page for 'Coffee Party Progressives' has been a target of a speedy delete:
10:08, 23 March 2011 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted "Coffee Party Progressives" (Multiple reasons: Speedy deletion criteria G11, A7)
I don't believe that these codes are appropriate to this article. Additionally the editor did not give time for improvement of the article.
This organization, Coffee Party Progressives, does in fact exist, being a smaller informational/activist group similar to "Move On" but formed in reaction to the "Tea Party" in the U.S. I have been a member for many months now, and heard about this deletion this morning.
It is disturbing that the editor used the "speedy delete" option without appearing to do doing any specific research. Does this person only value what he has personally heard of, or perhaps what he politically agrees with? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.152.148 ( talk) 12:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
The editor removing the page seems to be active on the "Coffee Party USA" page, which has had a bit of "bad blood" with Coffee Party Progressives. The speedy deletion and assertions of lack of notability are thus questionable.
If the article needs to be rewritten, that should be the comment. --the original poster — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.152.148 ( talk • contribs)
We have a series of article such as List of war films based on books (1927–1945). At first glance, I'd think the films were released 1927–1945, or maybe the books they were based on were published then. Turns out the wars took place 1927–1945. That is completely opaque. Any ideas on where to move these? "List of book-based films on wars 1927–1945", maybe. Still not very good, though. — kwami ( talk) 23:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Feminist movement ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The user, Aronoel, has mistakenly interpreted the UN HDR 2004 report, see page 233, to mean that women in selected developing countries work 20% more than men. In the same data Aronoel has interpreted the data to mean that women work 5% more than men in OECD countries. The actual numbers should be 9%, and 2.42%, according to basic calculations of percentage. Please see the WikiProject_Feminism talk page to see my attempt to explain this to Aronoel, despite them changing it back to incorrect percentages. The way that they have presented the data is false and does not reflect the data. It inflates the amount of work that women do more than men, from 9 to 20%, and from 2.42 to 5%, respectively. 175.100.127.94 ( talk) 00:08, 25 March 2011 (UTC) talk:WikiProject_Feminism#Request_to_remove_unverified_statistic—Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.100.127.94 ( talk) 00:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I have created an article with the heading "User:Hamptonhouse/First women to run around australia"
How do i change the heading to First women to run around australia
thanks for your assistance Hamptonhouse ( talk) 02:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
The article on Krishna opens with the following statement: This article is about the Hindu deity.
The term Hindu is nowhere to be found in the Vedic literatures of India. A more appropriate term would be Vaishnava Deity. The term Hindu derives from the name of the River Sindhu, and was invented by Islamic invaders to refer to the people east of the Sindhu River.
Since Wikipedia is an open source encyclopedia dedicated to presenting the truth, I implore your editors to illumine all your uses of the term Hindu with reference to more appropriate terminology and in general to inform the reading public that this term Hindu is both offensive and inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rozenthalm ( talk • contribs) 02:53, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello, I seem to have some issues with tables again. In the article List of colleges affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, which I am expanding completely, the table goes out of the normal page width. I've experimented by removing some sections, but it still doesn't seem right. Would be grateful for any help. Regards, Yes Michael? • Talk 15:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
{ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Aleksandar_Obradovic]
Dear colleagues, a few weeks ago I wrote an article about a writer and painter Aleksandar Obradovic and put it on your portal to be reviewed from one of the administrators. Cause I didn't knew the conditions necessary for publication of articles, I repeatedly changed the article, but after the precise instructions that I received from the administrator named Chzz, I have attempted to set and credible source of information or a link after each data. So, after the date of birth, I put a link to the municipality in which the author was born and where you can check the information, after the information about his studies - the link to faculty where he studied, after the data about his first employment - link to the company Radio Television Sarajevo and after citing the published book - ISBN numbers and a link to the National Library of Serbia, where it is possible to check the information etc. You must bear in mind that all these sources are not on the technological level as in America, so if you want to prove some of information, it is necessary to contact the institution by phone or by mail. In the countries of former Yugoslavia is not possible to establish another form of data verification, because the computer system is still based on undeveloped technology. Newspaper articles from the past can not be obtained through web pages or internet. Few days ago I spoke with Aleksandar Obradovic and I wrote the information about his activities in Sarajevo, Frankfurt and Munich. If I, for example, cite the fact that the author worked as a cook in Frankfurt and at the same time as a source of reference I list an address and telephone number of the restaurant "Schwarzwald Cafe, " that means that the restaurant doesn't have its own web page and that the only way to verify information is via phone call. At the end of this letter I want to say that for such an article don't exist another credible sources of information and if you want to have as a collaborator somebody who has over twenty years of journalistic experience, you should give a little more detailed look at the mentioned article and accept my arguments about data sources. Yours sincerely Nobelovac ( talk) 09:47, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I have attempted several times to include Victor "Transport" Maghakian on the list of Historically Notable Marines. However, it is being removed without clear or neutral explanation as to why. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historically_notable_United_States_Marines Victor Maghakian (aka Ear Banger Maghakian) is the first Marine ever in history to have his blood shed by a Japanese sword in China long before the commencement of WWII. He is also one of the most decorated Marines in WWII history and one of the first of the Carlson Raiders. The United States even made a movie about him called Gung-Ho! Tashjian, James H. The Armenian American in World War II. Boston: Harenik Association, 1952, p. 34-43. Apparently, the Marine Corps wants to exclude him on the list because of these historical factors to include his last name. This cannot be tolerated as it violates the neutrality requirements of Wikipedia. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 21:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
You state see below, however, you have deleted the inquiry. Why have you done that? Is it because his name ends in IAN? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I have attempted several times to include Harry "K-Barr" Kizirian on the list of Historically Notable Marines. However, it is being removed without clear or neutral explanation as to why. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historically_notable_United_States_Marines Harry is the first Marine ever in history to have the Marine Corps bayonet named after him the "K-Barr." He is also one of the most decorated Marines in WWII history and one of the first Marines ever to be awarded the Rhode Island Cross for valor. Tashjian, James H. The Armenian American in World War II. Boston: Harenik Association, 1952, p. 108-113. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 22:50, 27 March 2011 (UTC) Apparently, the Marine Corps wants to exclude him on the list because of these historical factors and because of his last name. This cannot be tolerated as it violates the neutrality requirements of Wikipedia. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 22:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
So, as I understand it, you have not included these Marines because they don't have their own articles. That is extremely disturbing as an American. Why hasn't the Marine Corps done articles for these individuals as they did for some other Marines like Chesty? Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC) Since you are a volunteer, why haven't you done an article on these extremely notable Marines? What is the problem? Based on these, why shouldn't sharpen my K-Barr? Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't think I used the word conspiracy. I rather use names and facts. Particularly, that cursed name Macbeth. If the facts lead you to treachery, then don't be surprised if Macbeth sticks Harry's K-BARR (affectionately named after him as the Angel of Death) into you. If you ever see the Marine Corps silent drill team, and Harry's K-Barr slices an ear off, then you will know who is cursed. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 17:03, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
If you are interested in prime numbers and solving mathematical problems, then you should have figured out by now in your theorem that I am a 1.5 er. Semper Fi Mac....beth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 18:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I think we're done here. I'm sure we all hope our advice will assist you now and in the future. Rehevkor ✉ 18:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Frot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm writing about a series of wide raging disputes that I have had with Flyer22 on the Frot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article. Basically, we disagree on where to place and what to call what is currently called the Comparisons to Anal Sex section of the article. This has all been documented at length on the article's talk page starting here; however, the dispute essentially centers around whether men's motivations and feelings about practicing frot should be considered factual content or perceptions and opinions and listed and labeled accordingly. Flyer22 supports the former, while I support the latter. My primary concern is that the main sources cited at length in the Debates subsection see the act of frot as a way of negotiation gay masculinity and therefore situate it in a network of perceptions about anal sex and its relation to masculinity, effeminacy, monogamy, promiscuity, and AIDS that are beyond the scope of the article.
My secondary concern is that, given my edit history, Flyer22 interprets the bulk of my edits to be supporting an "agenda" and continually claims that I am "hindering the article" or "tampering with the article". While little can be done to actualy alter Flyer22's opinion of my edits, I feel the repeated claims constitute a personal attack as they attack the contribution through the contributor and not the contribution alone. Mijopaalmc ( talk) 07:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Genital ulcer diseases include genital herpes, syphilis, and chancroid. These diseases are transmitted primarily through “skin-to-skin” contact from sores/ulcers or infected skin that looks normal. HPV infections are transmitted through contact with infected genital skin or mucosal surfaces/secretions. Genital ulcer diseases and HPV infection can occur in male or female genital areas that are covered (protected by the condom) as well as those areas that are not. [18]
The placement and content of the Debates subsection of the Comparison to anal sex section of the Frot article has been discussed at great length on the Frot talk page. While the current placement of the subsection is a compromise, I still question that general relevance of the subsection to the article. For instance, the general notability of the movements that provide the bulk of the source material for the Debates section has been questioned by the editor who maintains that the Debates section relevant to the article, when it was proposed that the Debates section be split off into separate articles, so I question the notability of the opinions themselves. Moreover, an editor on the Anal sex article has mentioned that the "frot vs anal sex" dichotomy gives undue weight to frot in the Anal sex article, which consequently lead to the rewording of the paragraph containing the information on frot in both the Anal sex article and the Frot article, so I question why the elaboration of opinions of questionable notability in the Debates subsection does not also give undue weight to those very opinions.
My edits and comments expressing concern about the general tenor of the Debates subsection and its appropriateness to the article have been met with suspicion and hostility on the part of the regular editors of the article, so I wondering if I could get several fresh pair of eyes to look at the article. Mijopaalmc ( talk) 20:06, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Without responding to Mijopaalmc's most recent comments, I'd like to hear from other editors about the article overall. Obviously, if the Debates section - or at least most of the content of the Debates section - shouldn't be in the article in the first place, that would moot at least some of Mijopaalmc's concerns.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 19:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Why don't you two come and discuss the article on the talk page? Mijopaalmc ( talk) 01:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
September 11 attacks ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User:Pedant ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Another editor has called me a "known POV pusher" , "who has been banned before" (I have not been banned, nor am I a POV pusher, known or otherwise) I have attempted to discusss the article's content rationally but this editor (after I have requested 3 years ago that the editor refrain from attacking me on my talk page) The issue is over an unsourced assertion of fact, which the editor in question refuses to acknowledge, dismissing the request as if it were frivolity to request a cite for the assertion as fact.
I have at all times been unable to get a rational response from this editor, and since this has recurred 3 years after it first happened, this has ceased to be a case wherein it is possible to assume good faith. I consider this behavior to be chronic, rather than anomalous. Editor in question maintains a single-purpose account for the purpose of owning a single article. User:Pedant ( talk) 09:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I suspect this is beyond the scope of this board.. I'd try suggestions at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution or WP:ANI. Rehevkor ✉ 01:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
In the future it would be nice to notify me when I am being talked about. Otherwise it's all taking place behind my back. -- Tarage ( talk) 20:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Good morning,
My name is Arnaud Masson deputy project scientist of the Cluster mission at the European Space Agency. There are two articles on wikipedia in English related to the European Space Agency/NASA Cluster mission.
One is "Cluster mission", the other one is "Cluster (spacecraft)". However, the Cluster mission article redirects to Cluster (spacecraft) one.
This does not make sense, I strongly suggest to do it the other way round. Namely that the "Cluster (spacecraft)" being redirected to the "Cluster mission" article.
I tried to do that but didn't do it the right way and don't know how to do it.
Thanks to help me out.
Dr. Arnaud Masson Deputy project scientist of the Cluster mission European Space Agency details removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masson75 ( talk • contribs) 10:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Banana Equivalent Dose ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Would love to have some savvy help with dispute resolution at Banana Equivalent Dose. There is some disagreement among editors as to the content of the article and placement of some of that content within the article. This is being worked out in the Discussion section, but I believe we may also be having some trouble with Disruptive Editing and/or a Sockpuppet which is making resolution needlessly difficult. Being a fairly new editor who is still learning the ropes, I'm having trouble finding and applying appropriate Wikipedia policies that can be applied to this situation. Thanks in advance. Belchfire ( talk) 17:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Dear Sir,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubli
I am trying to edit the page of Hubli(Industrial & Business development paragraph). We need to add our companies name (It is established in 1978 and which is India's no. 1 company www.basantbetons.com) 'Basant Floorings Pvt Ltd' in your listings and 'high quality concrete products mainly for landscaped areas'. I am able to edit but it disappears after some time.
Paragraph after editing will read as below:
Hubli is a developing industrial hub in Karnataka after Bangalore, with more than 1000 allied small and medium industries already established basically located in Gokul Road[4] & Tarihal[5] regions of Hubli. There are machine tools industries, electrical, steel furnitures, food products, rubber,leather industries,tanning industries and high quality concrete products mainly for landscaped areas. With the establishment of K.E.C, Bhoruka textile Mill, Universal Group of Industries, Microfinish Group, Apace Life Sciences, N.G.E.F, K.M.F, BDK Group of Industries[6],Murudeshwar Ceramics[7][8],Basant Floorings Pvt ltd. It has gathered momentum in industrial development. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.115.243 ( talk) 12:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Please see this edit.
An SPA is reverting the article back to "his" version and remaining silent to requests for discussion both on the article talk page and on the user talk page. I'm tried requesting that this user be blocked until some discussion can be had as to the nature of the edits and concerns I raised on the talk page (POV, ADVERT, WEBHOST, OWN). For some reason my request was dropped from the RPP page so I may have posted in the wrong place. Perhaps someone can help me out with proceeding. For the moment I have not reverted his edit again so as to avoid warring. Thank you.
Joe407 (
talk)
14:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Ref The article English Defence League ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). The article described the EDL as 'Far right' and in several places as 'Hooligans'. Since both of these descriptions are entirely subjective, I edited them out of the article. Almost immediately, user 128.40.128.87 undid my edits. Pete ( talk) 14:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Led Zeppelin ( | article | history | links | watch | logs) User talk:Revan ltrl ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
I was recently blocked for 24 h because of my posting on another user's (LedRush) talk page without his consent; furthermore, I was recommended to act "as if he didn't exist" in the future (this recommendation by the administrator who blocked me, the whole thing punitive rather than preventive). We were in dispute on the Led Zeppelin talk page, and now, after my block has expired, and after I wanted to contribute to the same discussion, he keeps bringing up the dead issues we had, in a condescending discourse, reminding me of my block, both on the article's and my own talk page. He has done the following: he thinks I should stay away from the entire Led Zeppelin article because he thinks that it is synonymous with staying away from him; he makes up theories about why I post, believing I have a hidden agenda; he deletes posts I make on the talk page; he repeatedly posts on my talk page, both before and now after my initial block, imploring me to stay civil and stop attacks I haven't made. I have repeatedly told him to stay away from my talk page because I don't want anything to do with him. I have also reminded him several times that he keeps bringing up a dead issue. I feel that I have been mistreated and that he grants himself too much freedom with what he can accuse me of because of his better orientation with WP policy and regulation. Revan ( talk) 15:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
It's curious how new sections keep getting added and dealt with while mine remains uncommented on. Revan ( talk) 22:38, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I sent you a while ago a message regarding to add some links to complete the page for John M. Florescu - executive producer. If I send you the links to the materials- articles are you willing to add them as references ?
Thank you, Wait for an answer from you, Dana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 15:59, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
Regarding the previous message that I have send it to you - for example if I send you links, as this one, for example :
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/boston/access/40103250.html?FMT=ABS&date=Mar 29, 1999
are you willing to make the connection to the link, please, for the readers ?
Thank you, Wish you a beautiful day, Wait for your answer, Dana Gliga. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana83art ( talk • contribs) 16:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Rabbi Pinto ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A major feature story ran on Rabbi Pinto, the largest story ever written about him and the few editors who control the board didnt allow neutral entrees to be placed. Need assistance from curious non interested parties.
The article was syndicated and picked up by Globes a major Israeli paper, The Real Deal a major NYC real estate publication and Vos Iz Neas Religious news service but entire chunks of article werent included. Can we have new eyes please ?
Would suggest adding: "Considerable questions have risen regarding Pinto’s organizations finances. A report by a leading New York Jewish newspaper has revealed a “contrast between the rabbi’s lifestyle and his reputation for modest living, and questions about the rabbi’s image as a business guru when his own not-for-profit faces financial problems.” The Forward stated: “The business troubles at Mosdot Shuva Israel could be seen as ironic, given Rabbi Pinto’s reputation as an adviser to businessmen, and particularly to real estate brokers.” 65.112.21.194 ( talk) 13:24, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Is is possible that one of you hear can confirm my name so that I can upload images to Wikipedia? If so that would be very helpful Michael Power 2011Michael Power 2011 22:52, 26 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaela Power 2011 ( talk • contribs)
I want the full details and pictures of RAF Dhubalia during Second World War. Please send this to my email --redacted-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aritrac4 ( talk • contribs) 20:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Someone should fix the message it gives you when you register. Sindragosa ( talk) 16:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
You should not have quotes in the Word of the Day on Wiktionary. Saw the Homer quote. No. That's the last thing anyone needs is a confusing messeage. NO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selena George ( talk • contribs) 04:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I've felt for awhile that it would be useful to create a page listing the times that the term "spring" is used in a political context to referred to a period of political liberalization, ie, Prague Spring, Beijing Spring etc. I added these events onto the Spring (disambiguation) page but another user removed it saying, quite rightly, that no one searching for just the word "spring" would be interested in all of this. I just created a new article, Spring (political liberalization) which at this moment is merely the same listing of events I had put on the disamg page.
However, I am not quite sure if the article as it currently exist meets Wikipedia standards. I've just been upgraded to a Wikipedia:Autopatrolled status and do not want to jeopardize it by adding a non-encyclopedic article. Where should I put this listing? Combine into another article? Create a "spring" category? Open to suggestions.-- Dudeman5685 ( talk) 16:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I developed a new concept concerning authors. Can I submit an article describing what it is and who practices it? I am the originator of the concept, so there are no other references available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharoncjenkins ( talk • contribs) 01:25, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Wine ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have several times attempted to resolve or discuss the issue of the origins of wine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine The page states that it originated in modern day Georgia without stating that the territory was previously ancient Armenia. Moreover, there is a lot of confusion and contradictions as to the origins of wine. I have attempted to remove the wild speculationsItalic text of Georgian paid scholars. Speculations should have no place in Wikpedia once the archeological evidence contradicts them. Yet, the editor insists on maintaining those speculations. The Georgian language is neither Indo-European nor Semetic therefore their language was not used to pass on the technology to other neighboring tribes. The editors are misleading readers to believe that some how this technology was passed on to other tribes by the Georgian language. I have several times attempted to include the latest archeological discovery in Armenia of a wine making operation dating back 6,100 years ago as the first origin which contradicts the speculative Georgian origins. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12158341 However, it continues to be deleted because the editor believes that the "BBC" news report was "shady." Moreover, the editor continues to delete the Indo-European Armenian word for wine "Gini" (pronounced Keenee) without explanation. This conduct cannot be tolerated as it violates the neutrality requirements of Wikpedia. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 22:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I think you need to apologize to me for stating that I went over the top when I said "Stalin is the Devil himself." You need to do a lot of research on Stalin and Georgia before you ask me to give you apologies. Don't you ever say that I went over the top regarding the Devil himself and Goergia's Stalin. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 18:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
You may also wish to consider reposting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wine. The WP:WINE is an extremely active project run by knowledgeable wine historians and professionals, and you can be sure that they will look into it. -- Kudpung ( talk) 00:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Please in the future, do not delete my comments about the Devil himself Joseph Stalin and his beloved Georgia. I find that kind of conduct deceptive and to be extremely insensitive and disingenuous. Be very careful with regards to glorifying Stalin's Georgia or Adolf Hitler's Germany. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 01:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Please stop making personal attacks. That no place in this forum. You either haven't followed the preceding comments, or , you have purposefully mischaracterized them. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 04:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Please stop making unfounded accusations. Moreover, I am not done yet with attempting to resolve this matter through discussion. Therefore, don't close the thread just yet. I will have to weigh all of your so-called suggestions with other neutral bodies to determine whether indeed it has been neutral. These discussions will have be considered on either arbitration or mediation to be determined relatively soon. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 04:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
There is no citation for it anywhere yet. I am uncertain how to proceed, as I feel this term is a genuine contribution to the ongloing endeavors here. New things require indentifying terms; as I have searched extensively for any referent term for the subject matter it is intended to describe, and found nothing, it is my hope this new term can be accepted without a citation available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CinDan ( talk • contribs) 06:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I have attempted several times to include Arman T. Manookian on the list of historical Marines. Inexplicably, the discussion and his name are being removed from the list without response. Just recently as I asked again regarding the discrepancy, it was moved all the way on the bottom of the list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_historically_notable_United_States_Marines. Please see page 9, first center incomplete paragraph of this article. http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf The editors of the Historical Marines page continue to violate the neutrality requirements of Wikpedia. Arman does indeed have his own Wikpedia page and no valid grounds for exclusion. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 19:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
First of all, no one is shouting and no body at this point is alleging a conspiracy. That was an unreasonable and unprofessional characterization on your part perhaps to instigate a belligerent response. Secondly, your statements made no sense. Note that Arman is listed, as cited above, a Historically Notable Marine by the father of the Marine Corps History himself, Maj. Edwin N. McClellan. Please respond appropriately and succinctly to the questions posed and don't skirt the issue. If you try to skirt the issue, then it leads people to believe that indeed you are part of that so-called conspiracy as you stated. Semper Fi Mac..beth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 23:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
As I read the article cited above, and I quote from it: "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf [p.9, first incomplete paragraph, Maj. Edwin N. Mclellan]. Are we reading the same articles? How do you justify this glaring inconsistency with your statements? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 00:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I also want to note something that has become glaringly obvious. It seems to me that these so-called volunteers have a particular bias for Marines who volunteer for suicide missions or ended their lives in suicide and having their last names ending in IAN. Do you see the same pattern? I consider myself an expert at recognizing trends and patterns. Do you agree with my observations? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 00:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Well, then in the context of the first Marine Corps Artist in Marine Corps History, what does this quote mean? "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf [p.9, first incomplete paragraph, Maj. Edwin N. Mclellan]. Are we reading the same articles? How do you justify this glaring inconsistency with your statements? Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 00:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Are you people English speaking Americans? Your bias is really inappropriate. As I read the article, The Genesis of The Marine Corps History was with Mclellan. Those weren't just merely nice words about Arman T. Manookian. Please read the article again. Moreover, please indicate your level of education with regards to English so I can determine your level of expertise on the subject of English, Art and History. Do you really think people will not read the article cited at page 9? I quote from it: "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 02:24, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Englishmen, with regards to Marine Corps History, are truly inappropriate experts. Moreover, it is common practice in our Anglo American scheme of fairness to test the credentials of so-called experts opining on these pages. I am sorry you feel that somehow you have been offended. But, in America, we always ask for credentials and don't believe in biased opinions. In the future, please provide your credentials. I can tell you this, I majored in English as an English speaking American. So, is there an American Marine, with an English, Art and History out there who can tell me what this quote means? '"As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian
Let me make a suggestion for you. Why don't you apply a little common sense and realize that your statements are totally out of line. If you don't have proper knowledge regarding Marine Corps History, you then should follow your own advice and stop giving baseless opinions as to what the speaker had in mind when he made the comment. So, my question remains the same. Namely, is there some one out there, applying the plain meaning of English, who can tell me what this quote means? '"As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian —Preceding undated comment added 04:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC).
Well then, in the context of Arman being the first Official Marine Corps artist/illustrator for the Marine Corps Historical Department, what does this quote mean? "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it."Italic text[Emphasis Added] http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth Monte Melkonian ( talk) 05:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Moreover, there is no requirement of inside information as alluded to in your comment. The entire article that I keep citing to on Mclellan and Manookian speak for itself if one simply reads it carefully. The frustration is instigated when one does not read it carefully. Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 05:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Moved from top to follow convention Why do you have this discussion alleged to have been Answered when there is a pending question? Monte Melkonian ( talk) 04:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Please stop making unfounded accusations about tone. You are starting to look defensive and silly. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 21:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Please answer the question posed above. Namely, in the context of Arman Manookian being the first Marine Corps artist/illustrator to ever do Marine Corps illustrations for Marine Corps History, please explain what the following quote means?: "As far as Marine Corps History is concerned, his name and fame are intertwined in it." http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian ( talk) 21:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
The article I have been working on is: Almine De Villiers, The Countess of Shannon (Almine Barton) I have been editing for almost two days to clean up my article reference links and citations. There had been someone editing whom never cited that they were editing in the user talk discussion so I was unaware that there was a editing dispute going on. On top of that, this user started jumping to conclusions and gave me a warning to be blocked if I didn't stop editing my own article...I was only trying to fix the issues stated in the tag of the article. Now I am getting threats of being blocked when there was no notice before I was editing the article. It took me this long to get all the links changed. Also the editor is taking out verifiable sections of the article and changing the name of the person in the article which totally changes the validity of the section in question which is articles about Almine Barton, not articles about De Villers. Please can someone mediate this. This person seems to be on a mission and I don't understand why they are working so hard to change my article when I have not been given a chance to fix the issues on top of the fact that this person is doing this edits without telling me. Then out of the blue, I get a warning! Please someone help! I have worked so hard on this article. I have spent hours upon hours researching and redoing the reference links to the article. Thank you. user:theonelife Theonelife ( talk) 20:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
We have a problem with these two pages. Dr Martin Cawley (Neautone), an American citizen, has recently purchased what he believes to be the "manor" of Newton-in-Bowland, Lancashire from a company called Manorial Auctioneers. Unfortunately, for Dr Cawley, the "manor" does not exist. All manorial rights relating to Newton-in-Bowland were subsumed into the Manor & Liberty of Slaidburn, West Bradford and Grindleton after 1399. The Manor of Slaidburn was bought by the Assheton family out of the Second Schedule of the 1885 Towneley Estates Act in 1950. The current Lord of the Manor and Liberty of Slaidburn, West Bradford and Grindleton is Thomas Assheton, nephew of the second Baron Clitheroe. Mr Assheton owns the manorial rights relating to Newton-in-Bowland.
This can be proved by reference to HM Land Registry documents from 1950, 1977, 2003 - copies of which are held by Ingham & Yorke, land agents to the Clitheroes. The claim made by statutory declaration upon the "manor" of Newton by Lord O'Hagan and his agent Manorial Auctioneers is a false one and the sale to Dr Cawley was invalid. Dr Cawley is a victim here but unfortunately, refuses to accept the facts. He will not look at the evidence or engage with the experts in the area.
Dr Cawley is repeatedly amending the Newton-in-Bowland and Slaidburn pages to demonstrate that he is "Lord of Newton". This is a misrepresentation and cannot be allowed to stand.
For the record, I have no relationship with the Assheton family. I am an academic and a historian of Bowland based at the University of Cambridge. I co-authored the definitive history of manorial Bowland with local historian CJ Spencer in 2010.
I need help to protect the integrity of the pages for Newton-in-Bowland and Slaidburn.
Manorial ( talk) 13:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Mudflap ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm fairly new to Wiki (and I apologize in advance for posting from an IP), but I somehow ended up on Seaphoto's user talk page and then wandered over to the Mudflap article and tried to help it, but the user Avgjoejohn316 is having some problems with COI and self-promotion issues and keeps putting what I would say is irrelevant and frankly false information in the article. Seaphoto got on this first and has posted on User_talk:Avgjoejohn316 as have I (along with the article's talk page and Seahoto's talk page), in an effort to resolve the problem, but seemingly to little effect. We've tried to explain the issues and I've tried to post evidence to refute Avgjoejohn's claims, but he just keeps on going. :)
I don't really know what to do at this point, and don't want to get into further reverts, so I thought I'd look for some advice. Could you look at the article and talk postings and see what you think? Thanks. 96.238.148.17 ( talk) 20:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC) Just removing misposted text from below request... 96.238.148.17 ( talk) 22:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, my name is Hannah. I play the double bass (upright bass, contrabass, ect.) in my high school orchestra as well as in the school jazz band. I've been looking into getting a new bow, of a better quality than the student one I'm currently using. Thus I have looked into the materials and craftsmanship that go into making a decent bow. So I looked up the original bow(music) page, the pernambuco wood page, and finally the ebony page. I noticed that on the bow page stated that, "For the frog, which holds and adjusts the near end of the horsehair, ebony is most often used". However, on the ebony page, though there is an extensive list of musical instruments, not only was the double bass not listed, neither was the bow! Well, seeing as how ebony frogs are used on violin, viola, and cello bows as well as bass ones, I wanted to rectify this oversight. So I signed up for an account, and didn't really read through the guidelines. I learn quickest by doing, you see. Well, after some rookie mistakes, (for instance, I had a link on "frog" that led to the page on amphibians, not the bow, and I now know to test such things in the sandbox first) I finally had a working edition that added the information missing from the article. And then it was deleted. I'm not entirely sure why, perhaps I missed some essential protocol or something. But if I can't add this information to the article, can someone else? It bothers me that the page on musical bows doesn't match the page on ebony. 123Hannah65 ( talk) 03:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)123Hannah65 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123Hannah65 ( talk • contribs) 03:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. The edit is up- turns out that only the early edits with really blatant mistakes were removed. It was still kind of funny to see my work branded "vandalism", though. :P 123Hannah65 ( talk) 17:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)