User talk:331dot/Archive 1

Hello, 331dot, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 03:26, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply] Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

On 16 November 2012, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Hostess Brands, which you nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 19:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cumberland County, Maine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page King George II (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Presidents of the Maine Senate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Pray (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for updating the Maine House of Representatives template! I had begun working on it and then got distracted. Thanks for your hard work!--TM 11:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that. Makes me wish the Legislature was a little smaller like some wanted the last session. :) Did the information seem correct(I might have missed a political party here or there or misspelled a name)? 331dot (talk) 12:24, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Neria Douglass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Attorney (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[1] My bad...there was an edit conflict and I didn't think to look in a completely different section for the conflict. Sorry about that. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 16:00, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I too would like to apologize; my message was too harsh. No hard feelings. 331dot (talk) 16:01, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't want to derail your valid point by commenting, but that's hilarious. The RFC for the main page redesign is coming up, maybe we can get together and do an IDDB proposal to balance the right hand column, after TAFI is added to the left. --IP98 (talk) 03:12, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad it was appreciated. Aside from RFC you'll need to fill me in on the meaning of the acronyms, though. 331dot (talk) 03:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry. TAFI is "Todays Article for Improvement". There was a notice posted to WT:ITN because it's being scheduled for inclusion. IBBDR is "Injury Death and Destruction Box", which I think we could slot in under ITN and be a catch-all for those items. --IP98 (talk) 12:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still feel somewhat new here and am probably not totally familiar with everything; but if you are going to propose something like what I think you are I would be willing to be involved, even if only to provide support. 331dot (talk) 22:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 February 2013, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article February 2013 nor'easter, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 04:57, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 February 2013, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2013 Grammy Awards, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Jayron32 14:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, just ignore it. You'll get frustrated over nothing. You'll not get the last word, and your point will not be conceded. Just ask a different admin like Tariq or Spencer to collapse the discussion, and walk away. It's totally not worth it.

PS: I'm glad you're at ITN. You work on updating articles, your comments are logical and considered, and you're really polite. Even if we don't always agree on things.

Cheers --IP98 (talk) 21:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just done, but I appreciate you suggesting it. I actually value not agreeing with everyone; if we all agreed on everything, I think Wikipedia would be finished by now and things would be pretty boring. I also appreciate your kind words about me- that's what I go for. I'm not sure I always succeed, but it is my goal. 331dot (talk) 21:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 31 March 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Phil Ramone, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 03:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let's discuss the matter in article discussion; more people are going to want in on that conversation. :) - Jack Sebastian (talk) 00:33, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That was just bizarre and completely unnecessary. The sources were there to show the extent of the nomination. So I'll adapt what you said to me. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. If you have issues with what gets nominated at ITN, participate in the discussion of the subjects that are nominated. Do not delete them. AGF. HUMAN. Oh, and read NOTPOINTy. It's people like you, who misquote and distort policies and guidelines, that I've had far too much of. Talk about needing a thick skin to edit. --86.40.105.31 (talk) 15:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&diff=568261582&oldid=568261479 μηδείς (talk) 22:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I did erase your edit, it was purely inadvertent and unintentional, and I apologize. 331dot (talk) 22:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certainly not going to sit by and see the entire controversy section deleted. A read of any politician shows that Wikipedia does include controversies. I've worked on several other politicians and they all have controversy sections. The Elizabeth Warren article at one time had two screens full of it after she said that she was part Native American... After about five pages of archives we did get it pared back to one paragraph... Thanks for the good work you do! Gandydancer (talk) 00:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks for the great work you do to help inform the public about how their paid, elected officials are doing at their job. Gandydancer (talk) 01:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 October 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Tom Clancy, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

On 17 October 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article United States federal government shutdown of 2013, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

331dot (talk) 16:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are news sources in the article. But i don't know how to add it in ITN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.107.175.150 (talk) 10:27, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You used only a portion of the ITN nomination template; if you use the whole one, there is a line for sources- simply post links to the sources in that line, like this [web address of source here (followed by) Name of organization] 331dot (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an admin, but it doesn't take an admin to close a nomination if there's reason. Please don't take it as my stepping on you (I do think you're one of the better regulars there--not that that may mean much from me), and feel free to revert. In the future the template is:
Title
{{archive top|reason}}
NOMINATION
{{archivebottom}}
μηδείς (talk) 01:17, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with you doing so; I was simply not sure if an admin was needed to do so. Thanks 331dot (talk) 01:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	A Barnstar of Diplomacy for your efforts to close a nomination at ITN and thereby prevent its escalation into a bigger conflict. Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 October 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2013 World Series, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

Check again.   — C M B J   08:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Paul LePage, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Somali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm higher then you ok I'm a duke — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duke of yolo (talk • contribs) 17:20, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for diligence in front page work, namely ITN and TAFI. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate 331dot for Editor of the Week because of their continuous and diligent efforts at "In the News" WP:ITN and "Todays Article for Improvement" WP:TAFI. While updating articles regarding the state of Maine and Gov Paul LePage and providing broad-based support across Wikipedia, Editor 331dot is always polite with comments that are logical and considered.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}

Flag of the State of Maine

331dot

Editor of the Week for the week beginning December 15, 2013

This polite editor is an inclusionist and a working member of WP:WikiProject Maine

Recognized for

assisting at In The News and Todays Article for Improvement

Submit a nomination

• Thanks again for your efforts! Go Phightins! 11:34, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Your efforts are much appreciated. ```Buster Seven Talk 22:20, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to reopen item. If you are unwilling I am more than happy to proceed to more formal dispute resolution mechanisms. I am not prepared to allow you to arbitrarily close discussions on the basis that you do not approve of the proposal.

Sure, I've read your explanation of severe weather at the top of your talk page, but since you have edited the very page in question subsequent to my edit and chosen not to justify your actions that excuse seems moot. 31.185.225.175 (talk) 04:09, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not an "excuse", it is a warning in anticipation of an issue(hence the "may" in my explanation). Fortunately so far it has not affected me as severely as others, but you will excuse me if I have larger problems than one IP user's unwarranted issues on a website. I will make a full comment over at ITNC but in short I cannot prevent you from doing what you feel is necessary or correct- so go ahead and do what you must. If you want to make a mountain out of a molehill, go ahead. 331dot (talk) 10:39, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Penobscot Narrows Bridge and Observatory at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You might find this helpful for future nominations: Wikipedia:Did_you_know Rules. — Maile (talk) 16:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where did my edit go? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&diff=588696162&oldid=588696095

I have fixed it. Happy New Year. μηδείς (talk) 19:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry; purely inadvertent. 331dot (talk) 19:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot- New mainstream sources have been added (including ABC News) and a correction made (record price for any banknote, not just US), could you please have another look. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 05:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot. You probably should be aware of this issue at ANI as it mentions problems you had recently. Best wishes. HCCC14 (talk) 09:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, there is some filtering problem 'archive.js'. We will rectify the issue on the History of the telephone numbers in the United Kingdom that I wanted to add in. Timothyhouse1 (talk) 14:19, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Timothyhouse1, Thank you for your reply; I apologize. 331dot (talk) 14:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jaggampeta may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• publisher=fallingrain.com|accessdate=2012-10-06}}</ref> It has an average elevation of 44 meters (147 f

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:23, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re [2] which was subsequently reverted by an IP (who I reverted and then I was reverted back) I'm actually finding that the IP has a point, in that no evidence is available that Nok flies to China and Taiwan, or to places like India. Some other edits claimed even more far-flung destinations. This map[3] on its website does not show it flying to China or Taiwan as stated in your edit. Can you cite sources to back that up? Thanks, Coretheapple (talk) 20:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have no evidence or sources to state that the information should remain; the IP was not explaining their rationale in the edit summary at the time(though I see that they did later). If they have a valid reason for removing it, it's fine with me. Thanks for the clarification. 331dot (talk) 22:45, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Just wanted to be sure, as if they are flying to China etc. we should say so, but with sourcing as it seems to contradict their route map. Coretheapple (talk) 23:07, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 April 2014, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Whaling in Japan, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--331dot (talk) 02:43, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you participated in the nomination of The 160th Boat Race at WP:ITNC, I am writing to let you know that you might like to participate in the following discussion at WP:ITN/R. 86.170.98.9 (talk) 23:39, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do you want me to do the blurb? And also, I want to request an article, but I am ignorant as to the section it would go under. Many Thanks. 77.101.41.108 (talk) 15:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article requests can be posted to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Requested articles (in this case, possibly the "By country" section). I have written an alternative blurb but it is by no means final and changes are welcome. 331dot (talk) 15:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, dude honestly. What ever you want to do, you do it. I just wanted to highlight the story. I am struggling with the requests now and have done my best to make the blurb and sourcing acceptably presented. Not with much luck, but there you go.

I think the other posters suggestion of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Chilean_wildfires - 2014 Chilean Wildfires, was fine. It just needs to be written. 77.101.41.108 (talk) 15:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The IP removed your post on their talk page. Assuming they continue what they are doing at ITN, shall someone start up an ANI report? Andise1 (talk) 19:54, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted a notice to them about not editing other people's talk page comments. I can't say I would oppose any such effort to do what you suggest, though I'm not sure now is the time. 331dot (talk) 20:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why you are leaving hostile notes on my talk page, but I suggest you approach admin if you have an issue with me, as I have no wish to communicate with you in the form of private messages. If indeed it is necessary to relay issues in this way, I will be sure to express my issues with you, on your talk pages also.

If it is not, then by all means, talk to someone else about it, as in lieu of friendship or any show of common respect, etiquette or civility on your part, we literally have nothing to say.

Thank you.

PS - You made a personal attack on me 331 dot, utilising a complete misquote where you misrepresented me and added words I hadnt said. That is what precipitated our issues. I dont want to be having a private chat with you, because you already mis quoted me in front of my face and I simply dont trust you or personally respect you. I can be polite, but one can not beg trust.

Go to admin if you have an issue with me, as I have no friendship or reason to trust you. I have a long list of recorded incidents where people have acted outside of wikipedia guidelines toward me, and I will continue to record these issues for that hearing.

Thank you very much and have a nice evening. 77.101.41.108 (talk) 00:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I started an ANI about the IP user, which you may want to contribute to. Andise1 (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I had saw you had reverse my recent edits on Maine gubernatorial election, 2014. I know they aren't technically the nominees yet, but they are considered de facto because they don't have anyone else in their parties primary's so its usually ok to put them down as the nominees. Now if they had others in their primary's. then it wouldn't be ok. That's how its usually done on the other governors pages for example in Georgia and in My home state of Ohio . Anyone its all in good faith. And I see your from Maine so this has some importance for you. But its usually the consensus that if there is no one else in their primary. Then they can be listed as the nominee. Hope there is no harm done with all this, and I hope you have a great day. Nhajivandi (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your explanation; I will take it under consideration and perhaps look at some other pages to see what is going on around other pages. I have studied political science so it might be tough for me to refer to them as nominees when they technically are not yet. Even if they are the only persons on the ballot, I don't think we can cite them as the nominee since in order to be nominated one must go through the provided processes(a primary, caucus, etc.) As I said, though, I will try to adjust my comfort level and think about it. :) If you wish to change it back, I pledge to not interfere. Thanks for the discussion, and I wish you well. 331dot (talk) 23:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good if you read WP:POLEMIC, WP:UPNO and WP:NPA instead of reverting to a policy-violatng version on User talk:71.139.142.249. 67.220.154.178 (talk) 12:46, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize; I now understand the matter and I have also sent a report in on the user. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted; thanks for doing that and reading the policies. 67.220.154.178 (talk) 12:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good if you took a look at the history of 67.220.154.178's talk page. There you'll see a long, long, long history of vandalism, sockpuppetry (User:Epicgenius), and block evasion. 71.139.148.192 (talk) 13:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the IP is shared. 67.220.154.178 (talk) 13:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The IP has a long history of vandalism. I was blocked once. Stop making up lies, 71.139.148.192 (talk · contribs · WHOIS); you haven't been very clean yourself, and you have a history of assuming bad faith and personal attacks.
Please do not ping or mention me again. Any such posts will be considered harrassment. Epicgenius (talk) 13:10, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of this entire situation; nor do I wish to be. I have started an incident discussion here after being directed there from the vandalism noticeboard. Please take the discussion there and away from my page. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 13:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Deb (talk) 12:54, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. I didn't now this. Please study the article Darina Takova Foundation. Darina Takova Foundation is a solid and serios foundation in Bulgaria. There is not much information in English to the reference section. I consider this unfair elimination. The data presented here don't violate any copyright and are totally the encyclopedic interest. If you want, I can include references in bulgarian. Thanks amd best regards --Tutto Opera (talk) 14:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)Tutto Opera[reply]

Hi User:331dot. I have removed the prod tag from Bad born as the page's author had previously objected to this proposed deletion. While it is annoying when authors object to a proposed deletion without fixing the page, the guidelines at WP:PROD don't permit retagging articles with prod except under a very narrow set of circumstances. I've nominated the article for AfD instead. Thank you, Altamel (talk) 23:12, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; thanks for the information. 331dot (talk) 02:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if my advice at ITN was bluntly put. It seemed to me as I was reading the discussion that I was starting to filter out your comments and skip past them because I was seeing the same point over and again. I assume others would do the same. Sometimes more is less. Feel free to ignore me, though. GoldenRing (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first line of the second paragraph ("Career") indicates that he ran for office as a Republican, and that he was first elected as an independent. Even if he has changed parties now, he once identified himself with other parties as well. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 16:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had assumed only the most recent affiliation would be listed; I reversed my edit. Apologies 331dot (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I think it's usual for all affiliations to be listed. Happy editing! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:01, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, I've removed your WP:AIV report for GJ2011 because you stated "I want to withdraw this request...". Feel free to re-report if vandalism continues. Best, Mz7 (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Maine gubernatorial election, 2014 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align:left; border:0; margin-top:0.2em;" | align=center| <1% {| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align:left; border:0; margin-top:0.2em;"

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:13, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To assist those who simply count votes, could you please strike one of your two votes at the above? Many thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:30, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I clarified my first statement to say that it was opposing a blurb only. 331dot (talk) 19:47, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your helpful edits to the California Chrome article, and thank you. I expanded what you added and put in a couple more sources. Feel free to further copyedit what I did there, I appreciate having extra eyes on that article. It got another 50,000 hits yesterday, making it about 188K for the month. I'm a bit freaked, until the Derby, I was one of only one or two people quietly editing the article, and though I got it to GA mostly by myself, I am really glad to have extra eyes on it now, particularly because we have significant WP:BLP issues surrounding the people who own, train and ride (and groom) the horse. When Yogo sapphire was TFA, it got a lot of hits, but it wasn't a breaking news story like this is. So thank you again and please feel free to continue helping if you wish, you did good work there! If you have any questions in your own mind on the project-wide formatting or syntax for these race horse "biographies," check out Oxbow (horse) which was TFA on the 17th, or another FA, Mucho Macho Man, which, IMHO is a little better in its formatting and setup. Montanabw^(talk) 16:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate and thank you for your kind words; the changes you made seem great to me and I welcome any further changes. Reading it in the news, I was sort of surprised I had the chance to add anything about it when I went to the article to see what there was. As you say, the more eyes on it, the better. Thanks again 331dot (talk) 17:03, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I spent so much time getting people to help watch it, having other editors do some copyedit runs to be sure it was all "shiny" (chrome pun intended) and even then had to spend a couple hours Saturday night and Sunday morning fixing the mess that a newbie made of the thing - I was too wiped out to add new stuff. I was tracking "nasalgate," but with sort of an "oh shit, where to start?" feeling. LOL! BTW, I'm starting a #Chromie movement on Wikipedia, if you want to change your signature to be green and purple like mine, just for the fun of it! Montanabw^(talk) 17:22, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Want to take another glance at [the article for me? I just added yet more material to the article and am at that too-bleary-eyed-to-see-my own typos stage. Feel free to make any minor tweaks, post any comments about bigger stuff on the article talk page, and if you move anything, be SUPER careful that the source goes with it, this is a GA. Many thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 21:35, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. My browser crashed during editing. When I restored the session I didn't notice that a large portion of the article was no longer there in the edit window and hit Save thereby removing all the content.Zvonko (talk) 22:32, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Well, my apologies then; I'm sure you would have caught it. You may want to remove the notice, which I have no problem with. Thank you for your reply. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I found sources dated 5 months after the supposed cancellation that gave us information on casting and production,and while almost tempted to improve the darn thing and argue a keep under WP:NFF (paragraph 3, I do feel enough sources are available to justify it being written of somewhere within these pages even if not in its own article. I thus added a well-sourced short paragraph at Peter Hewitt (director)#Career, and ask that you support a redirect. Best regards, Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 09:26, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your reversion of the Clemens/Twain redirect and thought your reasoning very good. I checked the user contributions for that editor, and decided that the earlier edits made by that user at Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act / Protect IP Act were a similar error. So I attempted to revert. Unfortunately, I did not understand the redirect process, so my attempt came to naught. I reverted my reversions. Could you take a look at the results, and correct if necessary? Thanks. - Neonorange (talk) 02:55, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With the Mark Twain article that user blanked the existing article to create a redirect(as it turned out, to itself, something that user apparently did not realize); in this case, the user created a new page for the redirect. This redirect also serves a different purpose(being there to have the full, formal name of the PROTECT IP Act and not just the acronym) so I don't think it's exactly the same situation. That might be why you were having trouble reverting it(the fact that it was a new page). 331dot (talk) 09:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you removed some content earlier, on the Colyton Grammar School article. Did you go to the school? Did you write that original edit to the article, or just edit it? Sorry I didn't give a reason as to why it was removed but I did not feel that the content there was appropriate and didn't see the "Give a reason" page.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrrBobski (talk • contribs)

I was just passing through so to speak; I had never visited that article before, but I noticed the change on the Recent Changes page. I reverted the removal because the passage had what seemed to me to be a valid citation and no reason was given for the removal. I'm not sure what you mean by "not appropriate" in this instance but Wikipedia is not censored. 331dot (talk) 20:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help recently when I tried to create a webpage. Your on-going help would be appreciated. How do I find and talk with other people? Regards Helen

Helen delaney (talk) 10:56, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can visit the Teahouse to talk to other new and experienced editors; if you just want a forum to ask some sort of question you might be able to find it on this page. 331dot (talk) 11:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete my page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 10liamsl (talk • contribs) 11:44, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did not delete your page; I tagged it for speedy deletion per the information in the template. If you want to contest the deletion, please follow the instructions on the template. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you can't use A7 on books. Authors, yes, but not books. The 'mustn't make value judgements' brigade at the CSD talk page keep squashing attempts to get a CSD for books/records and such. I've retagged this one as spam. If that doesn't work, I'll prod it. Peridon (talk) 16:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; thanks for the information. 331dot (talk) 16:18, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot, just letting you know that you tagged File:Troy-Jackson.jpg for deletion on this wiki, even though it is hosted on Wikimedia Commons. If you wish to nominate this file for deletion on Commons, you will need to use the "View on Wikimedia Commons" tab at the top of the file description page, and interact with the deletion processes there (in most cases, you can use the "Nominate for deletion" link in the left sidebar, which is similar to our DI and FFD processes here). — This, that and the other (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This, that and the other thanks for the information and assistance. 331dot (talk) 12:33, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot I would just want to show you few links if you can consider as enough notable then we can put the page back, kindly have a look on the same and share your concerns. SimplyMarry

	Hello fellow WikiProject Maine members!
I'm trying to breathe a little new life into WP:WP ME and as such I have posted a few questions on the project's talk page that I would like to get some feedback from all of the project's members on! There are apparently a lot of inactive members on our participants list (and even a user that has been blocked for years). What do we as a project want to do about inactive or blocked users? I have some ideas on the issue, but would love feedback from others. Remove blocked users that appear to be no longer interested in participating in developing Wikipedia. Users with zero activity at all in three years are unlikely to come back. I suggest that we remove them from the mailing list and deactivate any categorizing feature of a userbox on their page. When doing this, we must make sure to leave a note on their talk page explaining that since they have been off-wiki for three years that they have been removed from the list as a purely technical measure and they are more than welcome to add themselves back to the list if they choose to start editing again. Users with zero activity on wiki for 18 months may come back, despite it being unlikely. I would suggest that we mark those users as inactive on our mailing list, and stop sending them messages like this one to prevent their user talk page from filling up with irrelevant notices. Users with zero activity on wiki for at least six months should be marked as inactive in the mailing list template, but should still receive mailings. I'm also trying to gauge some interest in there being a Great American Wikinic in Maine! If you are interested, possible locations might include Portland, Augusta, and or Bangor, please make a note in the appropriate section on our talk page! We should create a template to use for mass mailings from this wikiproject so all we need to do is enter our message and signature and the general format of the box and image and title and stuff will stay familiar. What is your opinion on this idea? Do you have any preferences to what that may look like (because I think this looks horrible compared to some I've seen from other projects)?
This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) at 17:26, 11 June 2014 (UTC). To remove yourself from this list, please remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiProject Maine/members, remove the WikiProject's userbox/category from your user page (rarely used for mass mailings), or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.[reply]

Hi 331dot, I hope you don't object to my blanking the page and your comments, but he's a known vandal who'll just waste time. I've revoked his talk page access.  —SMALLJIM  16:36, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Smalljim I do not object; thanks for the information and your efforts. 331dot (talk) 17:23, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am uncivil? TRM is constantly sniping at editors he disagrees it. Anyways, I don't see "mad" as an insulyt, when ATG has gone on and told someone to "Fuck off and sie" and not be blocked for it. Also bulurbs are changed in the nom by the ALTBLURB clause.(Lihaas (talk) 08:08, 22 June 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Yes, you are directly rude and barely legible. Please address both issues. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:13, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need to go through the formality of an altblurb for an obviously improper blurb suggestion even if just done for humor(you stated you had no intention of seeing it posted). Saying other people are behaving badly too (whether that is true or not) is a poor argument in support of your behavior; you can only control your behavior. Two wrongs don't make a right. I stand by what I said and hope that you change. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Alloy Apparel & Accessories, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi the author of the above article blanked the page which they are entitled to do this will allow the article to get deleted using CSD G7, so I will revert you to the blanked version and add the speedy tag, best Mo ainm~Talk 11:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just figured that out; thank you very much for the information and correction. 331dot (talk) 12:00, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Mo ainm~Talk 12:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

hi, i saw you reviewed my first article. it's a joke, you can delete it now. sorry, i'd delete it myself but i don't know how.

cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryuuzakilawliet3666666 (talk • contribs) 10:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, if you wish to experiment or make test edits, please use the sandbox, a designated area for test edits. Only administrators can delete a page; they likely will shortly. 331dot (talk) 10:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alloy Apparel & Accessories is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alloy Apparel & Accessories until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 06:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the article has been deleted once, it will be deleted again. There is no point in me trying. Namilata (talk) 16:34, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you repost essentially the same article that was deleted before, yes, it will be again. If you believe that there should be an article about that musician here, you may want to take the time to learn why it was deleted and see if you can address the concerns. If you don't feel you can, that is your choice, but if you really think Wikipedia would be better with an article like the one you want, you may want to try. The way the article seemed to me(and others) that it did not indicate why the person was notable or significant. I might be wrong; I don't know everything.

I might start if I were you by reviewing the notability guidelines for musicians and bands to see if the person meets any of them. 331dot (talk) 16:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Regarding this edit. It seemed to me that 'I don't like it' arguments are by no means restricted to deletion discussions. That's why I re-directed it to the more generic essay.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand(and feel free to revert it back, I will not change it again), though the new target page might need to be rewritten to adjust it(and the link removed from the old target page). What you say makes sense, though- it was just unexpected. No worries 331dot (talk) 22:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The edits were not vandalism. Look into the sources posted on there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.0.115.0 (talk) 23:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can certainly believe what you wish, but I stand by my edit and believe it would withstand the scrutiny of the community. I would suggest you take any further discussion to the talk page of the article. I will have no further comment here. 331dot (talk) 23:59, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on your user page, User talk:Malis Dental Clinic, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages; user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you can indicate why the page is not blatant advertising, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: Click here to contest this speedy deletion which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy deletion candidate). Doing so will take you to your user talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also edit this page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would help make it encyclopedic. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Passengerpigeon (talk) 11:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've just re-opened this nomination because I believe it was completely improper to close it at so early a stage. I don't support that nom but it should be allowed a proper run. If you object to the nom then file an oppose argument as is usual practice. 3142 (talk) 06:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That was certainly your prerogative as I cannot prevent it, but I feel that it was completely proper to SNOW close given the circumstances; a simple murder of two people- while unfortunate- is not suitable for ITN and I saw no need to run through the process. I would do it in a similar situation again. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is borderline spamming and probably a rude thing to go to someone's talk page for this, but are you willing to support Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Pacific Islands Forum now that I have created a fairly thorough article at 45th Pacific Islands Forum? Thanks. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is spamming or rude to request that I give a clearer opinion than the one I gave. No worries 331dot (talk) 21:40, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice that youve removed the WP:SPEEDY tag from the above article. I understand that if we had a source that this person had actually been captured and was indeed a prisoner then it would give notability as per your edit summary. My understanding though is that it has not been confirmed so at present is no more than rumor or hearsay. This is why I tagged it for CSD. I wont reapply the tags but would ask for your consideration to self reverting or providing sources to confirm his capture. Many thanks. Amortias (T)(C) 17:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did put a source (CNN) stating he was indeed captured(though likely in a manner in which you didn't see it, no problem). 331dot (talk) 17:52, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(ISP ParkCity (talk) 10:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)) Thank you for your reply. but my page showing as user-page not article. how can change that. I really need the page up running. please advice.[reply]

If you are trying to create an "ISP ParkCity" article, you can visit this page for help in doing so. If you represent "ISP ParkCity" and it is the name of a business, you will be asked to change your username as the username policy does not permit usernames that represent a business or organization(though a username may contain a business' name as long as it is identifiable as one person's name). I would also suggest reviewing the conflict of interest policy as writing articles about one's own business is strongly discouraged. 331dot (talk) 10:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm SmileBlueJay97. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, I Like to Play Games, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.  SmileBlueJay97  talk  12:05, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Wikicology. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Devel Sixteen, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 00:31, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed a recent edit of yours. An article does not require any links to external websites in order to be considered referenced. All that is required is sufficient information to identify the source. Books and other printed documents are acceptable as references and they cannot be linked to because they are physical objects. The short title of a piece of legislation is understood as a reference to official copies of that legislation published by the government printer. It is well known that such copies are available for purchase. Best regards. James500 (talk) 06:42, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I declined your speeedy deletion of VMware NSX as invalid, since the fact that an article was previously speedily deleted for being promotional does not automatically qualify a repost for speedy deletion, if it is not clearly promotional. The current version does not appear to be blatantly promotional. However, if you want to propose it for deletion or nominate it for deletion on other grounds, that would be fine. But right now, I see no valid criteria for speedy deletion that would apply. Safiel (talk) 23:43, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), or content (CSD A3), moments after they are created. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Chris55 (talk) 14:51, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice Chris55. 331dot (talk) 14:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted him on one article and then he started bombarding my talk and user page. I appreciate the report to ANI and your help in reverting my talk page. Vertium ^{When all is said} _{and done} 23:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. 331dot (talk) 23:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am PhD student in political science at UofT, why do you keep undoing my edits on the James Foley article? My first source states quite clearly that Foley worked for USAID "I got to know Jim Foley in 2009 when both of us worked on USAID-funded development projects in Baghdad." http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/james-foley-1973-2014_803537.html. The second source quite clearly shows that USAID fomented rebellion in Cuba "the perfect excuse” to groom Cubans for anti-government activist" and that compared USAID with the CIA "Bolton, who once worked at USAID, supports U.S. plots to undermine the Cuban government and hopes the CIA is conducting more professional operations" http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/08/04/another-usaid-cuba-spy-program-exposed. Another source I was about to post more directly compares USAID with the CIA "Is USAID acting too much like the CIA?" http://www.abc2news.com/nct/video-is-usaid-acting-too-much-like-the-cia. Please stop undoing my revisions, my sources directly support what I have written, and all of my sources are legitimate American news sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎76.10.153.156 (talk)

I prefer to discuss any issues with the article on the article's talk page- but you are linking two disparate sources together with your own conclusions, the very definition of original research. Unless you have a source directly saying "James Foley was in Cuba fomenting rebellion" or something like that, you cannot put such a claim in the article. 331dot (talk) 18:44, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday you nominated this page for speedy deletion stating that it is not significant as an encyclopaedic content. But I would like to bring to your notice that Green Earth is the only Green Company in the region and has been working towards protecting the local people from various factors including pollution, poverty, educational degradation and political instability. This company has begun construction of 80000 sq ft Biodiversity park. It will be first of its kind in the area which will educate people about the flora and fauna of the region. There has been no such initiative since last 65 years. This is the reason I want to create a page to provide information about the company and its work. There are 3100 people which are associated with this project and are voluntarily helping to reach out to the people outside our sphere of influence. In order to accomplish this other people need to know the basis of this revolutionary work and there is no other place better than Wikipedia to share this knowledge. This company is also related to many of my recent edits and new pages related to temples, forts and clans in the surrounding area. I would like to see a page dedicated to such a work. Please make sure that this page is accepted as it will provide a common link to all the people and places in the area of its influence. By denying its presence on Wiki, you will deny 3100 people from coming forward for a better future. Abhishek Pujari (talk) 04:47, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for promoting companies or causes, it is for encyclopedic articles about notable and/or significant subjects. Please review the notability guidelines for businesses and companies to see if this one meets them. It's great that 3100 people are involved in this business, but that is not a reason in and of itself to have an article about it. If you have some reliable sources outside of the business which discuss it, feel free to recreate the article; but I might suggest submitting a draft through Articles for Creation first. 331dot (talk) 09:19, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the guidelines. Does this mean that our non-profit organization can be listed on Wikipedia and not our commercial branch? A different non-profit branch works in 4 States across India. This includes providing free teaching and stationary for poor students, social awareness programs, workshops and seminars related to environmental issues. We can provide links to National and Local News sites for the same as we cannot alter their views. Let me know if those sources can be treated as valid. Also, some government organizations support us and publish articles locally as well as on state level. Will these articles be of any relevance? This will provide information about the government's as well as the organization's work in all the 4 states. This may also help in infrastructure development with regards to education and social connectivity. Let me know if I can list it under Category - Environmental organisations based in India or Non-Profit Organizations in India. Abhishek Pujari (talk) 13:01, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can write about even the commercial aspect of the business(there are countless articles on commercial businesses) as long as it seems to meet the notability guidelines for businesses that I linked to above, and as long as the purpose in doing so is not to promote or advertise the business. News sources would be a great help to show notability. If there are government sources, that might help too.

If the business is yours (you said "our commercial branch") above; writing about one's own business is highly discouraged per the conflict of interest policy. If you still would like to do so, I would submit a draft to AfC as I suggest above. Or, you can submit your sources and information to the requested articles page to request that someone else who is impartial write the page. 331dot (talk) 20:42, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I get the point. Thank you Abhishek Pujari (talk) 19:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah man. this revert is indeed nonconstructive. First of all I fixed the spelling of "nulear" to "nuClear". Then I wikified some external links which is obviously not nonconstructive. But if you don't think so you got that right. All in all I think you should better do some constructive edits yourself instead of reverting somebodies. For example think of unsourced statements that are still in this article since 2010. Thanks a lot, --195.50.31.213 (talk) 10:27, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I truly apologize if the edit was legitimate, but it was hard to tell with the unnecessary portions of the citation templates that were present. No offense was intended. I have reverted my edit, though I might suggest removing the unnecessary wikicode. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what's going on here, but that's not my IP. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm.....Chase that IP user attached your name to a talk page post that they edited with this edit. Have you posted to that page before or that subject matter? If not, I'm not sure where they got your name or why they wrote the post with it. 331dot (talk) 00:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IP was removing the closing comment at the top that declared consensus as being to merge. I was the one who launched the merge discussion. –Chase (talk / contribs) 03:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I get it now- I apologize for my confusion. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Someone used my iPad to create that page "Richalism", it was not me. And do you know how you can change your password? -- Ababcdc (talk) 03:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is no way for me to know if you are who you say you are, I would suggest simply creating a new account. For all I know, you are the person who took over Ababcdc's account and want to know how to change the password on them. I have reported that username to the administrators noticeboards as a compromised account; if they decide to block the name as such, you may be able to prove to them you are indeed Ababcdc. Best wishes 331dot (talk) 09:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I figure you've read WP:NFF (paragraph 3). Pardon, but how deeply did you search for sources? It seems Lina Esco is getting quite a bit of her attention for this film... perhaps because of its notoriety.

AKA:(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cheers, Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 22:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot. A quick question about this article - is it classed as a ballot measure? I'm not exactly sure of how the term is used in the US. I ask mainly because I wonder whether it should be in Category:2014 ballot measures. Cheers, Number 57 09:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57:I put the category "Maine ballot measures"; I was not aware of the category you mention but it probably should go there as well. The legal term used by the State is "citizen initiative" [4] because it was put forth by the public and not the Legislature, but the press here often calls it a referendum or ballot measure. Other states are different(on the Pacific coast they tend to be called "propositions", for example) but that's what we do. 331dot (talk) 20:16, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, cheers. I just wondered whether there was some difference between a ballot measure and the referendum in Maine. Thanks for the answer – I've removed it from Category:2014 referendums, as the ballot measure categories is a sub cat. Cheers, Number 57 21:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you so much for help. I am new here so i dont know clearly. Ashesh.bhusal (talk) 08:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you so much for help. I am new here so i dont know clearly. Ashesh.bhusal (talk) 08:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Vonnaa, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The owner has made most of her edits outside of userspace. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 19:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Kk requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an unambiguous misrepresentation of established policy.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 13:25, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Loriendrew:I'm not really sure what happened; I was attempting to communicate with the user whose page redirects to that template. I'm not sure if I did something wrong or not. Please advise. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The user's talk page was somehow changed to a redirect to a new template. Don't worry, it will be cleared up soon.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 13:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, WP:AIV states that you shouldn't report talk page abuse there because the bots automatically remove blocked users whether abusing talk page or not. WP:AN might be a better venue if no admin notices soon. On that note, it's probably useless to tag the page or to revert until an admin cuts off access since the vandal will just re-add the gibberish and/or remove CSD templates.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:43, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasper Deng: Thanks for the information, I overlooked what you mention. I also apologize for the trouble on your page. 331dot (talk) 06:45, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. An admin will notice anyways, the vandal will also get bored eventually. In the meantime, we've done what we could - so let's ignore him and not give him the attention he wants.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:46, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you tagged the above article for speedy deletion A7 (correctly), but decided to give it a second chance after the author appealed (fair enough). However, the article was an unsourced BLP stating that the subject had been convicted for serious criminal activities (5 months imprisonment). If you notice such claims (or even alot less serious ones) in an unsourced BLP article, please always tag it as G10 (unsourced negative BLP) and preferably blank the page as well. Fram (talk) 09:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information and assistance. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I have changed my section header, to avoid the problems I tried to discuss here (no use linking the name and "criminal activities" here if I want to avoid that information to be spread through Wikipedia). Fram (talk) 09:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Barring an admission by the creator, it's absolutely impossible to prove that something's been made up by the article creator and/or associates, and I didn't see any such admission, although of course you're free to point out such an admission if I overlooked it. At any rate, the creation of this criterion was implemented highly recklessly, without due regard for intentional or unintentional abuse, and in only the most blatantly obvious cases will I consider deleting anything under it. But once again, if I overlooked something, I'll listen when you point out my error. Nyttend (talk) 23:51, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly respect your prerogative on this. Thank you for your reply. 331dot (talk) 23:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and you're welcome. Bear in mind that I've opposed deletion because it doesn't qualify, not because I disagree with deletion. Have you considered prodding it? I would agree with such an action. Nyttend (talk) 00:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't thought that far, but now that you mention it, that is probably what I will do next. Thanks 331dot (talk) 00:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied with my grounds for contesting your speedy deletion request on my asset health management article. I wondered whether your concern was because the article is currently rather thin? It is my intention to improve it substantially as an ongoing project and it is certainly not spam or intended to promote any single entity but rather to help more people understand the field of asset health management within which I am a professional researcher working on my PhD. Regards JPelham (talk) 17:56, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would you agree that the introductory explanation tag can now be removed? I still need to add some sources but I hope you will agree the article is well on the way. There is an outstanding issue with this area on wikipedia in terms of taxonomy of asset health management. I hope as a more experienced use you might have advice on how to help restructure this within wikipedia. The maintenance disambiguation and category pages in particular merit some work so that there can be a clearer understanding of how maintenance fits within asset health management and the management of assets in general. Regards JPelham (talk) 12:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have done so. For future reference as long as you explain why you feel the tags no longer apply, you can remove them yourself. Only speedy deletion tags cannot be removed by the page creator. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just wanted you to know I couldn't find any evidence that Robertsdale Elemntary is a historic building. Here's the link if you don't know what I'm talking about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Baldwin_County_Board_of_Education Crazy131 (talk) 14:45, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I think an admin has to perform the merge, because it will require temporarily deleting a page, so I will leave it for one of them to do. 331dot (talk) 14:47, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - I recently uploaded an article entitled "Thrisday" It was removed. Yes, I admit it was a hoax, and I'm sorry for wasting Wikipedia's bandwidth. Is there any way you could find it in your heart to send me the deleted text? I forgot to save the text to a Word Doc. I will post the article on my personal blog. Thanks for your time. KatherineGhostBarfield (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You would need to contact the deleting administrator, Deb. Only administrators can do something like that. 331dot (talk) 16:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Thanks for the info! KatherineGhostBarfield (talk) 17:36, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 331 dot. My watchlist has stopped working for my userpage (why on earth?), as it did once before, so I don't see these things. I guess I'd better semi it for a while. Bishonen | talk 13:33, 4 November 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Can I respectfully suggest that the firefight over the mid-term elections on WP:ITN/C would be a lot calmer if we waited for the result to be known before nominating? Then we can point to global coverage of the nasty right-wing tin-pot tea-party so-and-sos taking control of the government of the world's largest economy, rather than have a hand-wavy argument about how significant it might be. GoldenRing (talk) 00:00, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion; I probably wouldn't have said much more until then anyway. Thanks again 331dot (talk) 00:04, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Angus King page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did not include a source for the change I made because these were public statements from Patrick Calder, who lost the 2012 primary by only 265 votes to State Sen. Jon Courtney. Mr. Calder, despite entreaties from several members of the Maine GOP, elected not to run.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.114.124.217 (talk)

I believe that what you say occurred, but to be posted on Wikipedia such a claim needs some sort of documented source. I'm sure that you could understand that anyone can post on any Wikipedia page that someone said something. 331dot (talk) 11:22, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Helperbot is trigger happy and will remove any already-blocked users, but I saw your message. That specific IP's talk page has been semi'd for the duration of the block, as rangeblocks work differently when it comes to restricting talk page access. Best, m.o.p 13:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Master of Puppets:; I'm sorry, I forgot about that. Thanks for seeing the message, though. 331dot (talk) 13:15, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331 Dot. I am trying to get some facts up on the Ira Hansen wikipedia page and I want to make sure I do it in a way that conforms with your criteria. Help me understand the best way to ensure I only put good content on the page. Also some of the content on the page now is VERY one sided and the wording used is intentionally attacking Mr. Hansen. How can I address these issues? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredpoop86 (talk • contribs)

Please understand that it is not my criteria, but that of the entire Wikipedia. I would suggest posting your concerns on the talk page of the article (Talk:Ira Hansen) so that others can comment; if you can, cite the specific text that concerns you. Keep in mind that Wikipedia deals in what is verifiable, which includes both "good" information and "bad" information. Given that the things Mr. Hansen wrote about in the past(regardless of if he wrote it to be intentionally provocative or he has since changed his views) affected his political career, there really isn't a way you can keep the information out of the page. What you can do is post information from reliable sources which discuss his responses to or comments on the accusations(which you have done). If you feel it could be worded more neutrally or have other concerns, again, feel free to say so on the talk page.

I would add that your paragraph that you just added containing Mr. Hansen's comments was done reasonably well in terms of tone and content. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

_________

Thanks so much. I understand. I actually really want to comply because I know the facts and have sources to back them up so I am not worried. I just need to be sure they comply with policies. I will certainly follow your guidelines. Thanks for your help!

• For the record my personal attacks were not directed at you but at Rambling Man who is indeed an ass, believing as he does that news is baseball results, and not major political events in the world that he just happen not to understand.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:38, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Then if you want to restore them, that's up to you since it doesn't involve me- but I don't think it for the best. 331dot (talk) 22:48, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for watching and protecting my talk page! Much appreciated. That was another proxy and has been blocked for a year. Probably because I rev/del'd some of their bile. Dougweller (talk) 10:47, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, again. I am no supporter of ITN/R, but your comment was, as ever, quite helpful. μηδείς (talk) 03:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Recently I saw that you made Here. While the user is now blocked, I want to remind you, even to users acting in bad faith. To please be civil in your comments. Thank you. Lor^Chat 23:28, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lor: I don't understand what you are getting at or referencing. 331dot (talk) 23:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. Just worked out that the uncivil comments in question were added by the blocked editor. Lor^Chat 23:33, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. 331dot (talk) 23:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you block those sock puppets? There's no way that they aren't connected. Khazar (talk) 10:45, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin, unfortunately. I too believe they are the same person. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help though. Khazar (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BTVT is a personal site, and full of Russian exaggerated figures. So it is not credible at all.M60a3tts (talk) 11:02, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@M60a3tts: If that is so, then discuss it on the talk page instead of edit warring. 331dot (talk) 11:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: What I'm editing now is just removing the NAROD and adding a protection level of basic T-90A(without K5). These figures(KE 550mm CE 650mm) can be seen in current references.

@331dot: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/t-90-specs.htm Read this.M60a3tts (talk) 11:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't know if you are correct or not; all I know is that the issue should be discussed on the article's talk page and not in edit summaries, nor should an edit war occur. If you are correct, it should be easy to obtain consensus for your changes. 331dot (talk) 11:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot:I talked to Khazar and gave him the ref. Ref says that 550mm for basic T-90 Armor + 250~280mm for Kontakt-5 = 800~830mm for T-90A with Kontakt-5. But he did not admit and deleated the whole talk page.

Did we improve Wikipedia by posting the Sydney hostage per ignoring all rules? --George Ho (talk) 09:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My support of the nomination speaks for itself- but I don't feel any rules were ignored anyway. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I have revised the page for Fried Rogers Goldberg and addressed the issues you raised that are at the top of the page. Thanks for the help. Musicforairports (talk) 18:33, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me. In the future, as long as you can demonstrate that the tags are no longer applicable, you can remove them yourself.(Only speedy deletion tags cannot be removed by the page creator.) 331dot (talk) 18:35, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 331dot. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User talk:The Rapper Nyn T, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Early revisions contain messages left for the user. Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:38, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing Walkover Web Solutions Pvt. Ltd., 331dot.

Unfortunately MrX has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

I'm unreviewing this so other editors can look at it. No action required on your part.

To reply, leave a comment on MrX's talk page.