User talk:Orangemike/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Orangemike. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15

Check out User talk:Nyingjenorbu, and you'll see that he's been recreating essentially the same article since Dec 2007. How long would you salt in this case? (Not watchlisting since you prefer to answer on my page) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 19:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

01:30, 3 March 2009

Hi OM, you protect this following re-creation in June 2008. Following a reasonable request from an established user to make this into a re-direct, I have done so. I've tentatively re-protected in case there's some back story I don't know here, but I can't see a reason not to fulfill. Any input? You can comment at the DRV or ping me if you respond here as I'm not watching. Thanks! StarM 02:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Please note that that user is indefinitely blocked and has since had several IPs blocked for block evasion and incivility. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice; I wasn't paying close enough attention, I reckon. Could you have a hack at the article in question? --Orange Mike | Talk 18:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

OM, you blocked RepDarrellIIssa (talk · contribs) based on my WP:UAA report. I adjusted your block to turn autoblock off, as the IP I mentioned in my report happened to be on WP:SIP as part of the known range for the US House of Representatives. This may also lend some weight to the possibility that the user was actually the US Rep in question... or more likely, a member of their staff. Your thoughts? caknuck _° remains gainfully employed 01:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Just to be on the safe side, I alerted Daniel of the block and possible ORTS issue. I try to be extra careful with sensitive IPs, as I blocked much of Qatar once. (In my defense, it was a proxy server that we had been unaware of until that time. Oops.) Cheers, caknuck _° remains gainfully employed 06:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Looks like someone is insistent upon trying to pretend Dahmer wasn't gay and thus removing the LGBT category. In comments on my talk page he is coming up with all sorts of bizarre rationalizations. I don't know if you have it watchlisted, so I thought I'd mention it here. DreamGuy (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

You both need to fallow verifiability policies, I would think an Admin would know better. CTJF83Talk 19:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

That's all I asked for to begin with! CTJF83Talk 19:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

If FAPA is worthy of including in Wikipedia, and Gordon Eklund is worthy of including in Wikipedia, why shouldn't we cross-link the articles by mentioning that Eklund is a current member? Peterkiesler (talk) 20:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you..... Bleedyroz (talk) 00:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Am I confused, or did you just username-block her because of her sig? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 01:36, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Has jumped thru all the right hoops in the unblock request and is asking for a namechange. You're block, so you're call. What say you? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The rationale for deleting the FMS page was based on advertising and the phrase "provide services" which did not exist on that page. FMS is a company referenced from this Wiki page Inqtel and should have its own page for its work in the intelligence community and its creation of an important public domain terrorist database (http://www.TrackingTheThreat.com). DataAnalyzer (talk) 04:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

You might want to revisit. DGG (talk) 06:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I started a Categories for discussion for Category:Symbols of Oregon to discuss having articles like milk in this category. Discussion here. --Apoc2400 (talk) 11:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm a newbie Mike and much appreciate your attention and assistance. I've made modifications to the article. The only outstanding is referencing our patents (waiting to get specific links) after which I'll post. Another note on Wikifying the page: what might I be missing? Thanks again, Nhbaldwin (talk) 15:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Your {{db-spam}} was removed by an anon IP. I'm reverting their edit but you might want to keep an eye on it. -- samj _in^out 22:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I was just sitting down (finally!) to clean up User:Nfitz/Gregory Richardson which you moved there a month ago, and discovered that in the meantime that someone had recreated Gregory Richardson and done a proper job of it.

Can you merge the pages/histories together ... or just nuke User:Nfitz/Gregory Richardson? Thanks Nfitz (talk) 19:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Ha ha ha... Oshaberi (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mike,

On Feb 25th user HovhanessCentre (Mr. Martin Berkofsky) had his account[1] indefinitely blocked by you "because it has been identified as an account used for promotion". Glad I'm not the only one to notice his total disregard for Wikipeida rules. BUT, two important points relating to this disruptive user:

1. His response[2] to the blocking falsely and maliciously claims that I have "stolen materials" from him and his so-called "colleagues in Armenia". This is pure, libelous nonsense and sounds like the rant of a desperate individual, not accepting responsibility for his blocking.

2. On the Alan Hovhaness Talk Page, his 3,500 word post of February 6th[3] contains an unprovoked and lengthy personal attack against me, again completely false. It also has a lengthy promotion of his organization - the very same organization advertised on his TalkPage which led you to block him indefinitely. Notice also that at the bottom of the Feb 6th post he signs his name with FIVE (count 'em!) URLs underneath. This is shameless self-promotion, not article discussion.

I regard his two attacks on me as libelous, as they are completely false and personal. They should be deleted from view immediately. Thanks.

Hovhanesswebsite (talk) 01:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Orangemilk: My apology for unintended 'advertising' on my page moorec4... I have altered it to be more appropriate. Thanks for helping me as I am a 'newbie'--charles moore (talk) 16:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Mike - saw the edits you made on Feb 27th. Thanks for the help with this.

Edtechguy46 (talk) 20:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you please undelete this page to my userspace? Based on some recent source hunting, I have a strong suspicion that he passes WP:N, and that the original deletions were likely due more to poor writing than any actual lack of notability of the subject. In the case that I'm wrong, I'll throw it on the CSD heap after a few days. Burzmali (talk) 15:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you speedy deleted Ralph R. Jones, W. H. Taylor, and Fred R. Robertson, all as A7. I just took a look at these articles, and they all at least make claims of notability, invalidating A7 as a deletion criterion. They could have been taken to AfD or even prodded, but I do not believe speedy deletion was appropriate. Aleta ^Sing 02:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I added back in the section describing the applications for IPG's lasers. However, I did not include external links. Could you let me know if this is okay and what you think? Thank you. CRanjiSMA —Preceding unsigned comment added by CRanjiSMA (talk • contribs) 15:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message earlier. I appreciate your assistance. The IPG Photonics page was created a while back by someone else (not me or anyone I know). I do work for an IR firm. I have read over the items to which you linked and will stop making edits (unless factually incorrect with sources to back it up) and will add citations to the phrases you pointed out.

I am new to editing Wikipedia and have been attempting to learn by 'diving head-first' into the program. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CRanjiSMA (talk • contribs) 17:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I do work for SHaron Merrill Associates. I am going to cease making any edits except for the citations I mentioned earlier. Likewise, I am going to stop using this user name. Thank you for you help. CRanjiSMA (talk) 18:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I removed your deletion recommendation from the Hanger page. I am new to Wikipedia and rather surprised at the intensity and speed with which other people express their opinions. I find it difficult to believe that this article is so poorly presented that it should be deleted. I am working right now to change the reference link that did not work. I also plan on having a new, credible reference by close of business today to substantiate notability of this company as the largest provider of prosthetic and orthotic services in the U.S.

I have two ideas in mind and would like your opinion on the best way to proceed: 1: Cut the article down to the bare minimum information, work on additional copy in user space and then add to the page after other Wikipedians have expressed approval. 2: Move the article from main space back to user space, rework it, and repost later in main space after more experienced Wikipedians have expressed their approval. Which way do you think I should go or do you have another suggestion? Thanks, (WBancroft (talk) 16:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC))

Iff that was the actual text, or if your paraphrasing is accurate, then there was obviously no issue with deleting it. Can you email me the actual text please? -Stevertigo 21:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I am confused. Please explain Wikipedia strategy in the area of company pages. There are a lot of such a pages, e.g: Aitech, Psiloc, SuperMemo_World that exist for months. What is the difference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcde2 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I think maybe you deleted my user page because it had an earlier version of an article on it with material that was too promotional. That material has all been deleted from the article and I understand why. May I continue working on my user page to further revise/improve this article? I don't want to (or mean to) violate a policy. Thanks for the information you left on my talk page. I have read about conflict of interest and am trying to correct my bias. Truly, my goal was not to blatantly advertise, but to include an informational article on Wikipedia as so many other companies have done. I am just a free lance writer trying to make a living and also trying to learn about Wikipedia since it is such an interesting and useful research tool. It is confusing though. For example, when I looked at today's featured Wikipedia article, it seemed very promotional in nature. Also, I see several articles where the information is referenced to a document produced by that company, such as an annual report, and it seems to be acceptable in that context, so I am not sure why it is questionable in the article I have been working on. I would like to keep trying to do this correctly, according to Wikipedia principles and policies. Any help for me? (WBancroft (talk) 22:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC))

Hey there, I see you deleted Spread the net, why was it deleted and what did it look like? I just created the page Spread the Net, and I hope it's better.--Dguenther - DGun (talk) 01:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello! When you merged this article into Midlothian High School (Texas), you were correct to redirect the title there (which pointed readers to the new location). Your subsequent deletion was incorrect; aside from the inapplicability of CSD R3, a merged article's revision history is to be retained for attribution purposes. Thanks! —David Levy 04:34, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey Orangemike. This user has requested to be unblocked to pursue a username change, and I've gone ahead and unblocked them. I hope I am correct that this is uncontroversial enough to do without checking with you first–ordinarily I would, but they look like a well-intentioned editor and I didn't want to make them wait. You obviously should be notified in any event, so here I am. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies Orangemike. I did make a sandbox, but ended up saving stuff to my user page that should have been in the sand box. Now I will use the sandbox for rough drafts and attempt to create a basic user page that explains a little about myself. I appreciate your responses. (WBancroft (talk) 17:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC))

Hey OrangeMike...I am a newcomer to Wikipedia and I edited an article on inventory referencing a whitepaper written by a consulting firm. I am familiar with the firm and we have similar viewpoints but I do not work for them. My edit was deleted...I just want to make sure I follow the proper guidelines. I read the conflict of interest info but I am still confused. What are say the top 5 things you look for in a correct edit? Thanks!! Confused in Canada HelgaHere (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

it seems youve been around awhile and Im looking for an admin to coach me,I know all the basics and AfD and Csd,I work in heavy music and chemical articles but i also work Against vandalism.If you could that would be a great help.I put my name in the admin for coaching already.Thanks and Peace Out- Permethius (talk) 20:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I will work on my grammer, and i know i need about 1500 to 2000 edits before i go for adminship, I just want to make sure i know everything by that time.But again, thanks for helping me. Peace Out- Permethius (talk) 12:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, What times will you be available? Peace Out- Permethius (talk)

Sorry, a quick question.How do you make words bold? Thanks and Peace Out Permethius (talk) 14:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I have reblocked indefinitely as his unblock request showed much of the same behaviour (allowing his politics to inform his on-wiki behaviour). I hope that's ok with you. –xeno (talk) 15:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

• You may wish to chime in here: User_talk:Xeno#.3F. thanks, –xeno (talk) 21:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
• Looks like he's now scot free Orangemike... Axmann8. seicer | talk | contribs 11:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
• Mike, I botched the block tweak and he's now unblocked, but he seems to be willing to accept a 5-month topic ban from politics related topics. Do you think we could give him a shot under those conditions? (See also Wikipedia:AN/I#unblocked) –xeno (talk) 12:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

[4] It's guaranteed the article will eventually come back, someday, eventually. I think it would be better to go the rigorous "do it right" avenue, for maximum BLP support, and also given the massive trolling fake media storm we suffered at the hands of WorldNetDaily. rootology (C)(T) 19:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Somebody wanted a right wing userbox that had a red flag so I made one. However I dont understand why a red flag would belong in a rightist userbox. The red flag is a socialist, communist and leftist symbol.--Apollonius 1236 (talk) 23:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there a way to edit the text of this page? It's nothing of major importance, but there is a phrase with a hanging preposition that bothers me. Thanks! TNXMan 14:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

See MediaWiki:Blockiptext –xeno (talk) 14:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the link. TNXMan 14:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

lol, grammar nazi'ism linguistic prescriptionism ;p –xeno (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't find such misuse of the term "naziism" even remotely amusing. Tnxman was correct in the edit; and anal-retentive has a hyphen, thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

eh, I'm one myself. hate those dangling participles! –xeno (talk) 14:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I know, I know. It's just one of those things that bothers me. You're lucky I didn't correct "that" to "those" in your above reply. (edit conflict - someone beat me to it!) TNXMan 14:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI: You blocked User:158.83.210.198 for edit warring on Spider (solitaire), but it looks like they just jumped to User:158.83.210.180 DreamGuy (talk) 14:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you take a look at Paul H. Park? He's a med student who seems to have done some good volunteer work. I'm spitting in the wind on the talk page - would appreciate another opinion. Thanks J. Van Meter (talk) 14:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

-thanks for pitching in yesterday; though another admin removed the speedy. J. Van Meter (talk) 12:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I dePRODed Gigant Neo, which you'd PRODed for Axmann. I don't consider the delete uncontroversial as it isn't blatantly clear the horse doesn't meet at least WP:N. Anyway, I also left a note for Axmann saying that he should take it to AfD if he wants, and I thought I'd let you know as well since you'd physically placed the PROD. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 15:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Greetings. Please take a look at this. These seem to be numerous user pages belonging to a single individual (self-identified as a teenage girl in Alaska) who has made oodles of accounts for no apparent reason. Thanks. - --Boston (talk) 17:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'd appreciate a look at Affluence (social network) - the article was created and speedied a couple of times for being spammy and non-notable (see Affluence (Social Network). They have added references this time (though it's still written like an advert, pretty much) but when I added reference tags just now I started wondering if those refs really show notability. I'm thinking no, but maybe that's because I saw the previous advert and am prejudiced against it :-) (also, the people working on it are SPAs - never a good sign). --Bonadea (talk) 18:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Just a friendly note about Carlson Young. I declined the speedy because there's definitely a claim of importance (starring in a TV show). It's certainly possible that she's not notable; AfD would be the way to go.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mike,

I would like you to kindly reconsider the deletion of the HyperOffice page. The cause you specified for this deletion was "blatant advertising". I went through some other pages of companies in the same domain - Zoho for example, and these pages are still up in spite of there not being much difference in tone. What parts of the article did you think were promotional? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pankajunk (talk • contribs) 20:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you please provide an explanation for your speedy deletion of 'Richard Ballerand'. The page was the subject of pathetic vandalism by individuals with negligible Wikipedia other input, who then asked for speedy deletion. I am rather concerned about your judgment on this matter, perhaps a reconsideration or discussion might be in order —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.54.103 (talk) 04:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

You might also want to have a look at [[5]]. I'm still very much in doubt about the validity of the original entry. Asav (talk) 17:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, you must be doing something wrong if you're not getting vandalism in your userspace ... slacker. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mike,

I would like you to kindly reconsider the deletion of Searchme.com page. The cause you specified for this deletion was "blatant advertising". What parts of the article did you think were promotional?

Rosario —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosariomorgan (talk • contribs) 17:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Mike

I want to create a page for Searchme that is not so 'advertising'. What is the next step? Do you undelete the page and I can edit it, or do I just go ahead and create a new one?

Rosario —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosariomorgan (talk • contribs) 04:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. This is a minor point, but you may like to consider it. I saw your signature on a comment in the discussion on a proposed guideline on populated places. Unfortunately the orange colour for a while misled me into thinking it was a red link, implying a user who had for some reason been deleted. Although you clearly have a personal thing about orange, you may like to consider whether it is unhelpful deviating in this particular respect from the normal behaviour that people are likely to expect of Wikipedia. Incidentally, I liked your comment on that talk page, and found it particularly interesting, as essentially a voice for inclusion from a self professed 'toward the "deletionist" end of the spectrum' person. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC).

Dear Mike -

I'm the guy who put up the page on Andy Williams the DJ that you deleted today, within hours of my contributing it. I scrambled to put up a few external verifiable sources for you (in the talk, not in the page itself) and when I returned to flesh out the importance of his entry as per your questioning I found you had already proceeded with the deletion, despite my following the required protocol requesting additional time, less than 12 hours since I put it up. Can you please give me a bit longer to prepare the description of his importance for inclusion? I thought was very careful to keep it clean and unpromotional, in respect of the purpose of this encyclopedia. (I'm not a promoter, not his agent, etc)

Thank you for your work at keeping self-promotional DJ scum out of a serious resource, but considering Mr. Williams' ongoing work in jazz archiving and research, contributions to disseminations of various artist's careers, I think you were a little fast on the trigger... Please reinstate or coach me on where I messed up.

Thank you for your consideration -

Aomu (talk) 06:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply! will integrate referenced content into article text instead of trying to get you to read it in talk - and no, he does not have a blog, those were other people describing his place in the industry. I'll go play in the sandbox now...

Aomu (talk) 07:18, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mike,

Rather than creating a new HyperOffice page, wouldn't it be better to edit the current entry, and tone down the promotional aspect? That way, the page would retain the credibility it has built over the last many years.

Pankajunk (talk) 16:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I just declined the speedy on this as it does at least make some claims of notability. I don't fancy its chances at surviving an AfD though. Mfield (talk) 19:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mike, Would you mind have a look at what is happening in the INSEAD page related to the alumni section of the INSEAD page, and or give me you advice how to proceed? There is indeed the need of a neutral third party. Thank you a lot in advance --Nabeth (talk) 19:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mike, Ok for the cleaning, although I believe it was excesive (we are loosing information here). But the advert sign seems somewhat excesive. Anyway. --Nabeth (talk) 19:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mike, Would you mind telling me why you removed in the INSEAD page the logo of the Alumni association? I would assume that logo is not really something related to spamming or advertizing, but is just a facet of the identity of this association. thanks. --Nabeth (talk) 20:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

You deleted the talk page before I could even respond to you. I'm TRYING to work here with you on this. I disagree that is spam per say, but I would like to work with you to be able to recreate it in a way that appeals to your liking. It is meant to be informational and not to sell people product but talk about the work being done and to help expand the project to other universities and institutions of higher learning. We aren't trying to swindle anyone, we're just college students trying to work on a project. Bkhanna (talk) 20:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I would like to write a page for the Verragio brand but I see that it is protected, what do I need to do? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by JewelPro (talk • contribs) 20:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I would like to write a page for H P Gandhi but I see that it is protected, what do I need to do? Thanks! Earlier I pasted the content written by me in another site under this same title, but it was deleted. Now I will change the style and write. --Karthickbala (talk) 10:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, have it your way I don't care that much about it. I left it as Flag of the United States, I never really thought about your point until you brought it up, so I apologize for all the troubles.

Tim5046 (talk) 15:40, 23 March 2009 (UTC)tim5046

What is your deal?

I left the URL alone, and added additional information and references. I made it Better, not worse so how about you stop deleting it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim5046 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: actually, the only links I placed were to informational sections of the website. I deeply apologize that the website happens to end in ".com", but the information that I linked to was 100% accurate and relevant. I added information to the article, thats it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim5046 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey Mike, I have a lot of respect for your work here, particularly at CSD, but I've removed your recent comment at Talk:Ayn Rand in light of the recent arbitration case. While most of us enjoy a chuckle at the expense of Rand's followers every now and again, and forum-like comments are welcome at most article talkpages, the Rand talkpage has had serious issues with civility and people expressing their opinions on the subject rather than on the improvement of the article, and is a frequently toxic environment of polarised contributors. It takes very little to be inflammatory over there, so I hope you won't mind my fastidiousness. Sincerely, Skomorokh 17:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Mike, thanks for the info. Not sure of the context... – ukexpat (talk) 19:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I posted that comment in relation to User:Sunilsaxena in this diff. – ukexpat (talk) 13:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello Orangemike. CREES-MANU (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards,  Sandstein  10:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't quite know what to make of this guy's user page. My first reaction is "tl;dr", which is not good for a Wikipedian, much less an admin. HALP! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 19:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. Done. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orange. A very persistant editor (User talk:Lesliecaron) is uploading photos to illustrate the Joe Cino article which the editor claims are his creations and therefore released to public domain. However they belong to a collection of a living person (Robert Patrick). I'm not sure how to stop this because the public domain license doesn't trip the usual photo police.

The specific photos are:

• File:Wiki2JohnTorreyJoeCino.jpg
• File:Wiki3LucySilvayTomBigorniaNeilFlanagan.JPG
• File:WIKI4CinoFront1965.jpg
• File:Wiki1JoeCinoEdwardAlbee.jpg

Thanks, Americasroof (talk) 13:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Not sure whether you did it but it got done although they placed at least one back in yet another license but at least it's one that can be properly evaluated. Thanks. Americasroof (talk) 16:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess I spoke too soon. The poster is very persistent as they are all back in the public domain. I don't see any explanations anywhere. Sorry for dragging you into this. Americasroof (talk) 17:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

D'oh! How did I not see that?! Thanks for the message. – ukexpat (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, could you please explain why Bkjproductions was blocked? There was no evidence of promotional editing as far as I can tell, so it wasn't a blatant violation of WP:U. –Juliancolton ^Talk · ^Review 17:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright, that's fair. Thanks for the clarification. –Juliancolton ^Talk · ^Review 17:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'll head over there now. –Juliancolton ^Talk · ^Review 17:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi I noticed that the article for David Choi has been deleted and protected. When I recreated the article I spoke to all of the admins that had a hand in the deletion all of the past times it was deleted. I spoke to Cirt to get the protection removed and get it moved from where I had accidently created it under "David choi". I also left messages on all of the user talk pages for these admins regarding the content of the page. The reasons for previous deletion were not repeated. ONe said that is was just a recreation of his myspace, another said that there were no credible sources to prove the claims, and a third said that he was not a person of note. If you see the page as it was written all of these criteria were met. I also had two of the previous deleting admins look at the page to see if it fulfilled a proper Wiki article, and if there was anything that needed to be done to ensure that this would not be deleted again. I am honestly unsure of why it was deleted this time besides the discussion for deletion that was for an old version of this wiki article. Please advise if there is anything that I can do to get this article reinstated as I truly think it met all criteria for a proper article. Thank you for your time, Chip MileHighCFI (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

This article is not self-promotion. You are making an error, and when you will understand, you will want to have the article, but the writer will not give permission for its publication. It will happen what happened to Bill Gates and Harvard University. It’s clear that what you guys have there is pure mafia, promoting yourselves, and filtering information. No problem because people already started to understand what happens with Wikipedia, and are already saying “NO to Wikipedia!” Keep dreaming the full’s dream, blocking others. In reality you are blocking yourselves. The sad part is that Wikipedia receives grants as a “non-profit organization”, and they dedicate themselves in using that money for personal use, paying people to censure academic articles, as the one about Dr. Walter Rojas Perez. That article had pure educational goals, and it was promoting ecocriticism and environmental protection. I am sure that Academia will see it with negative eyes, and they won’t believe in your website any longer. I have already seen that people are questioning money donations to this so-called ‘non-profit organization’. As I know, people are complaining to those who give money to Wikipedia, so that next time, they will think well before taking out the money from their pockets, as the philanthropic society that donated 3 millions this year, and other organizations that also contributed. Keep killing yourselves because there are other organizations that indeed are objectives, and that indeed promote education. No more lies! Say “NO to Wikipedia!”

P.S. Now, I understand why you deleted the article “Walter Rojas Perez”, article that was educating the world about the serious environmental issue that the whole globe is experiencing. With this your face of delinquent, pumpkin hat and cloths, one can think everything …. Hipie, drug-addict, and all negatives adjectives of a human being. Did you see yourself in the mirror? Better go and work for Halloween. What carácter were you in the movie? The ET? Or the monster? For what did you invent all those labels, if you don’t contribute with anything, but negative, destructive actions. I see that you have had a B.A. for a too long time. You haven’t learn too much about history. Shouldn’t you go back to school for a re-tuch? If Hitler was alive, maybe you would have also given him also a medal. What kind of Demoncratic are you? You should better go with Bush, and don’t make Democtratic party be ashamed with such individuals. Orange Mike (Michael James Lowrey), do a favor to Wikipedia, leave! Or better stay, so that you could do more harm and then, you will all leave, Mafia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.139.232.18 (talk) 03:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Mm-hm, finger-licking good! Do we still have a "BJAODN" section? -- Hoary (talk) 04:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

This is apparently about my deleting the hagiography of Walter Rojas Perez (possibly an autobiography or COI). The Spanish counterpart had already been deleted and salted. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

You can see here that es:User:Ugancea added an article on the user page, here that the same user ask to obtain more access from Yahoo or Google Search.

Here Ugancea says to be Uliana Gancea, and in this photograph appears Walter Rojas beside Uliana Gancea. You can see this search about "Uliana Gancea" without Walter Rojas (4 results), and this search about "Uliana Gancea" (103 results). The conflict of interest is obvious. Best regards. HUB (talk) 23:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

How long must I wait to have this address, and by different Admins they have differing standards! I can't stand this anymore!_BLuE^DOgTn 20:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks You! For Helping Me! And By the way Orange bleeds in my blood, which you would go over well in Tennessee! Good Day!_BLuE^DOgTn 20:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I am a fan of the Vol sports teams not the actual university! I think their classes are way to big went their for a semester and did not like it at all! I prefer PSTCC and LMU because I graduated from them! I love Pat Summitt for all she has meant to womens athletics and basketball! I like talking to ya!_BLuE^DOgTn 21:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

While I didn't tag it, should Talk:Queer Is Stewie? be deleted too, or does it need to be left for archive/discussion purposes? Should I copy the discussion to WP:FG and then have this deleted, or just leave it? CTJF83Talk 21:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't User S73v3n have been moved (back) to User:S73v3n? Likewise the talk page? 58.8.13.68 (talk) 00:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I saw that yesterday someone unloaded a message on your talk page due to your slavery. From what I see it is true that you are guys in a Mafia clan there, and what was told was pure truth. Shame on you and all those who are doing the same things. And be a real man, and don't delete the comments so that everybody can see what you are guys doing there.

You were involved in this, sort of... You nominated Walter Rojas Perez for deletion. You are invited to see the spew that has been unloaded onto my talk page in retaliation for my deletion (towards the bottom). --Orange Mike | Talk 13:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

The entire message above, from "Proven case" to the timestamped "Orange Mike" signature -- including a long row of "=" (which I have replaced with five "#" as it screwed up formatting) -- was added in this edit by this IP. -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear user of Northland Cable Television (Seattle), do please calm down and write lucidly, persuasively and politely. Thank you. Now, if you believe that the deletion of Walter Rojas Perez was wrong, then please read Wikipedia:Deletion review. This says in part Deletion Review is to be used where someone is unable to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question. This should be attempted first – courteously invite the admin to take a second look. Note the word "courteously": accusing the administrator of being in the or a mafia is unlikely to be interpreted as courteous. If you are unable to persuade Orangemike, then you're free to bring up the matter at Wikipedia:Deletion review, but the more you say how "obvious" it is that you have "proven" your case, the less persuasive you will be. (Instead of announcing that you have proven your case, prove your case.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

The deletion of the TBM articile is not required, could you please revert it back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.222.162 (talk) 07:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Just a friendly note on Eric Cohen. Being featured in a magazine is definitely a claim of importance, so I declined the speedy deletion request. If you think he's not notable, prod or AfD would be the way to go. Cheers!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike. I think your block of this user may be a bit unfortunately and somewhat unfriendly considering they were in the middle of a discussion. they seem to have been here to discuss matters and correct errors in their organizations article, which given good faith and disclosing their interest isn't really a violation of any policy. It would be better to calmly post a note and request they make a personal account instead of instantly hard-blocking. Cheers, henrik•talk 19:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, per Wikipedia:SPAMNAME it isn't even prohibited, just not recommended. I don't think there is any grounds for a block here. henrik•talk 19:40, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Blocking, ultimately is a preventative measure, not a measure for punishment. There is nothing inherently wrong with someone using the initials of their organization for their username; and blocking someone that is in the middle of a discussion about another problem is not advisable, and only serves to make the problem worse. Bastique ^demandez 19:42, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we've got a small consensus on ANI to unblock them but require that they get a username change to something individual rather than organizational oriented. Do you object if I do so now? Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and unblocked with a request that they change account names, since I didn't see a response to the note above. Hope that's ok with you... Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Please see User talk:Tarheel95#Spam??. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Of course we are from Seattle. In the case of article "Walter Rojas Perez" I see that it’s you who are vandalizing other people's work. Several people talked to Mike Godwin, General attorney at Wikipedia who said that none of you work for Wikipedia, but from your acts, you show a network "mafia" and terrorism. Dedicate your time in doing productive things and not destroying the work of serious professionals. It would be good, in the future, that all those who are uncomfortable with wikipedia to make your own blogs and denounce all these acts of wikipedia, and to take legal actions against wikipedia and its administration. Those lawyer who can read this, I hope that you could help us get rid of this network mafia that is publishing only what they think that it is good for their interests, filter information and misinform the readers. It's sad to see how people and organizations that make donations to Wikipedia, keep donating grants to wikipedia; money that is used for personal purposes. The philanthropists, we made an error contributing to wikipedia, but with these acts we will not make the same error. And if you, my friend, who are reading me, thought of donating money to wikipedia, do NOT do it. Of course, we who are writing here, we are in Seattle, but there are many others who are uncomfortable in New York, Oregon, Texas, Georgia, Peru, Costa Rica, New Jersey, South Carolina, and many other places. If you want to know more, check the messages left to or between Matdrodes, Orange Mike, Hoak, Hub, Remata, etc (well, this if they did not already delete the messages that they did not like people to know about). People, say NO to the network terrorism and mafia in wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.139.232.18 (talk) 20:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Your summary of how we got to where we are on User:Axmann8 is not correct. He has not broken his topic ban. Those who say he has are unable to provide any citation which supports that view: They provide citations but not of behaviour which breaks the topic ban. Follow them thru: Two go to his badly-managed defence of the false charge of an illegal userbox, and the third goes to an innocuous comment re editing style. Now the invoker of the topic ban has come out to say that he too does not think the topic ban was broken. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Axmann8_late_intervention. Saying "IAR" in edit summaries is provocative but that's all it is. Axmann8, an editor who, in my view, does not contribute to WP, has been now banned in such a way to make us look like cretins. The injustice of it will mean the ban is undone, it has to be, to be fair, and if you're a Quaker (hey, I didn't bring that up!). And the user will have to be watched, like others have to. See also User_talk:Psb777#Axmann and User talk:Landon1980. Paul Beardsell (talk) 20:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Backup singer?! he's on 3 studio albums and a complete first single now on latin radio rotation-D.J Nelson Presents Erick Right-Strip Club also available on itunes......in no way a back up singer how about you google the name! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteryesness (talk • contribs) 23:23, 27 March 2009

It had been suggested to me by User:DGG to ask your advice about this issue. I believe there have been many productive responses to concerns on the deletion review page of this article as well as additional references and notability entries (#1/#2) added to the article, and I'd appreciate your input on the subject. Thank you very much for your time. CelticWonder (talk) 07:53, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

You say that "You are right, though, that the deletion should have been for non-notable bio, rather than recreation of a deleted article." I don't see how someone who has done programming on a Jordan Pruitt album, won the John Lennon song writing competition and was featured in a USA today article is non-notable. I understand fully that youtube views are not notable, but the JLSC for teens is a rather big deal. So between the fact that he is an artist with a curent album out, has worked on Jordan Pruit's album, and has won the John Lennon song writing competition I felt it was a solid base of note worthy things. Any insight on this would be great. Thanks, Chip MileHighCFI (talk) 09:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I make it only 747 who have made edits. OrangeFluffyCat was first with you coming second. I'm a respectable 31st. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 17:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike. WP:COIN#User:Noodle snacks is a page to sell his photographs will probably close with no action, unless you have something more to say. Though Noodle snacks clarified what he meant by the wording on his user page, he did not agree to change it. EdJohnston (talk) 19:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mike,

I would be grateful if you restore the HyperOffice entry into my personal area for me to work on, or "userify" it as you say. Since the entry would ultimately be published to en.wikipedia.com/hyperoffice, i guess the page wont lose the credibility it has built over the years.

Pankajunk (talk) 20:23, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mike. You deleted this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lockwood_(corporate_strategist) on March 27th saying it's because of an implausible redirect? Or were there any other reasons? I will truly appreciate more enlightenment, as it was my first time to create an article here. I truly apologize if I failed or violated some wiki standards. The redirecting process I actually left with other helpful wiki editors who I believe have been around for long. Please let me know of the most appropriate thing to do now to get it right. Thank you very much. Jxc5 (talk) 16:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I just thought I'd let you know that I have removed your WP:CSD A7 tag from this article as I think there is a credible claim for significance, even though the subject may not meet the relevant notability standards. decltype (talk) 17:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that (formatting messages error). I really need a lot more "guiding through" as I am obviously new here. Please tell me of what to do next (with reference to the deletion of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lockwood_(corporate_strategist). Thank you so much for your time. Jxc5 (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello again Mike. I've just read your comment on the Charles Lockwood article about being biased, reads like a resume and promotional. What do you suggest me to do please? Anything in there perhaps that I can just scrub out to fix it? Your thoughts would really be a huge help. Thank you. Jxc5 (talk) 20:35, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Will the recently deleted page of the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lockwood_(corporate_strategist) be completely deleted soon? - as it is still visible on search engines and unfortunately, no longer accessible. Shouldn't there be a link, otherwise to direct the readers to the right article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Lockwood_(historian)? Jxc5 (talk) 22:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

You tagged this as an advert. I don't understand. What would a neutral article about a government website about walking trails in Kent look like? I get that some paragraphs have the wrong tone; why not delete them? - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 18:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

- Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 18:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Mike, I saw that you had been working on the above. It looks like there are some circular redirect problems with the link for the Sidney Sheldon novel. I may have contributed to it, but I don't know how to fix.  – ukexpat (talk) 19:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

OK I think I fixed it: The Sky is Falling (novel) and The Sky Is Falling (novel) now both redirect to The Sky is Falling and I fixed the link to the Sheldon novel on the disam page. – ukexpat (talk) 20:29, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Though I don't think these meet speedy deletion criteria, your deletion rationales are strong enough that I sent them to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Fritz and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Saltzman for consideration. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 19:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Leopoldo Gout, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leopoldo Gout. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. CyberGhostface (talk) 20:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Since you participated in the discussion, I figured you should see the end result, for the record. Antivenin 17:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Mike

I work at Searchme.com as a business operations manager, that is why I have an interest in getting the searchme.com page back online.

Rosario —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosariomorgan (talk • contribs) 18:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Notability of Ali Mirzad

A tag has been placed on Ali Mirzad requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. AfghanGov (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there,

  I'm new to this site and I have added my article following every tiny bits of Rules/Regulations and Policies that I could find and read on Wikipedia. I was so

proud of myself for having successfully created my 1st article (even bought a bottle of champagne) for the occaison..lol

However since the posting of my article. I have received several comments. Which I have embrassed and followed thru with all of them. Though I am not sure if they were Sys admins or just a regular reader that was bored and thought it was a good idea to target my article from the humongous worldwide web :-)

Most recently I have seen your comments/objections..not entirely sure if I understand. So I came o nyour talk page and noticed that you're a Sys Admin (Please to meet you) can you help me to understand your comment and hopefully I can accomodate you and hopefully it'll be the last time that I edit this article.

I thank you in advance for your cooperation. Best Regards --AfghanGov (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I placed a hangon tag on the Jet Set Zero article speedy deletion, but wasn't able to provide an argument before its deletion. I'd like to put the article up for deletion debate, if possible. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robsward (talk • contribs) 02:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, it looks like the talk page is gone as well, so here's my argument: The referenced article in the Calgary Herald meets the criteria for the presumption of notablity. I would like to debate whether this presumption constitutes notability. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robsward (talk • contribs) 02:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey Mike, would you mind restoring this article. I'm going to establish notability established since it was deleted a year ago. Thanks, Grsz¹¹ 02:45, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

User Hank Chapot blanked out my user page, and sent me rude emails, all because I tagged one of his crap articles CSD. User:Hank Chapot 12:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by R3ap3R.inc (talk • contribs) 07:15, 4 April 2009

Hi Mike, Everything was going well until I tried to move my article from User:Bborden51/Sergio Arturo Castro Martinez to just Sergio Arturo Castro Martinez on Wiki. That's where I got in trouble. Now I have 2 articles and neither is at the location I want it. I've tried to fix it but it seems I just made it worse. Can you help me with this? Sorry but your name wa the first admin name I ran across. Bborden51 (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I look at the Gerald Fitzgerald (priest) article and added some citations and defaultsort.

• The NCR source is very important; much of the article was based on the new story of Fr. Fitzgerald's letters to the Roman Catholic clergy being made public.
• Since Fr. Fitzgerald founded a Roman Catholic religious order he being notable is established and the Congregation of the Servants of the Paraclete still exists in New Mexico.
• I link the article to Fr. Fitzgerald's birthplace, to Jemez New Mexico and the Holy Cross article so this article is not an orphan anymore.

I hope this helps. As always I hope your wife,family and yourself are doing well-RFD (talk) 20:45, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm less than amused that you deleted my profile.

You're no better than the pedantic arbiters of so called Vedic knowledge who stuff their faces with meat and take intoxication while presenting themselves as spiritual authorities. Because they never perform austerity and think the Supreme Personality of Godhead is mythological their erudition is absolutely useless. They reprimand and offend the actual devotees of the Lord and they cannot understand anything about the absolute truth. You bleat on that you think religion is a force for good yet I think you wouldn't know actual spirituality if it landed on your head. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stokakrishna (talk • contribs) 05:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

You recently deleted an article John Sherman (self-enquiry teacher) citing among other reasons 'probably self-promotion'. I have no disagreement with the deletion of this article; I know nothing of the standards for inclusion here, and no opinion at all as to the usefulness or value of this article, but since I am the actual John Sherman spoken of here I can assure you that this article was in no way 'self-promotion'. I had nothing to do with its creation and learned of its existence only through Google Alert. I would be grateful if you would remove the phrase "probably self-promotion" from the reason for deletion. Thank you. John Sherman (talk) 04:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

You're being discussed here, in regards to that Sheree Silver articles for deletion. The creator, Spring12, seems bound and determined to belittle and discount anyone who voted delete. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 04:21, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I offended you with my observations on Black Kite's talk page, I was double-checking the consensus was read correctly, and didn't mean any harm. Spring12 (talk) 15:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I wish to reinstate the article on the writer Elizabeth Eslami, deleted on April 4. My stance is that any writer with multiple publications in various national and international journals, as well as a novel to be published shortly, should satisfy at least the minimum notability requirement. Thanks for your time & the work you do here Derheger (talk) 18:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Could you possibly look into the Wilma Mankiller and Chad "Corntassel" Smith articles? -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Thanks -Uyvsdi (talk) 16:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Just deleting my material (on the basis of your subjectivity) does not hide the offensiveness of your actions. "The individual soul has to understand his position by the grace of the Lord and the spiritual master because the text of the Bhagavad Gita cannot be understood simply by academic qualifications. One has to learn Bhagavad Gita from a realized soul." (Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.64 purport) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.140.228 (talk) 16:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi OrangeMike!

I see you handling UAA at the moment, so I thought I'd run this by you, from the user creation log over the last hour:

• Sir Norman I (Created on April 7, 2009 at 14:29)
• Sir Norman II (Created on April 7, 2009 at 14:30)
• Sir Norman III (Created on April 7, 2009 at 14:30)
• Sir Norman IV (Created on April 7, 2009 at 14:31)
• Sir Norman V (Created on April 7, 2009 at 14:31)
• Sir Norman VI (Created on April 7, 2009 at 14:32)
• Sir Norman VII (Created on April 7, 2009 at 15:26)
• Sir Norman VIII (Created on April 7, 2009 at 15:26)
• Sir Norman IX (Created on April 7, 2009 at 15:27)
• Sir Norman X (Created on April 7, 2009 at 15:27)
• Sir Norman XI (Created on April 7, 2009 at 15:27)
• Sir Norman XII (Created on April 7, 2009 at 15:27)

Nothing blatant yet, but it sure set my Spidey Sense off. I may just be paranoid, but you know what they say about Eternal Vigilance and such.... Thanks! Arakunem^Talk 20:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I see you're on line - would you like to zap this article which has been AfD'd once? I have tagged it db-g4, but I'm tired of replacing the tag which an IP keeps removing. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks, now I can go to bed! JohnCD (talk) 21:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding this revert. Looks like solid contrib to me, am I missing something? The user has posted a helpme asking. //roux   20:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Ignore most of that.. I misread one of the links. Two of them look solid though; one is news reporting and the other while it is a press release it is not a press release from Coke. //roux   20:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I am responding to your answer on my talk page. Am I not allowed to edit Coca-Cola Enterprises' page? I was trying to update older information with what is current.--SNHennessy (talk) 20:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)SNHennessy— SNHennessy (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Talk I do work for Coca-Cola Enterprises in the Public Affairs and Communications department. As I stated earlier, I am new to Wikipedia and am still trying to figure out how to use it. I was tasked with updating our company information on the site as some of it was out-of-date and also incorrect. I was not trying to be biased. I may be misunderstanding the 'talk page' within the article page. I though I was being transparent with my edits by providing a brief summary each time and providing reference links.

I have read through the conflict of interest policies and believe the information I was providing/updating follows the terms. If you were not okay with me including awards that CCE has recently received, it is okay to leave them out. However, the other information I edited was around the company's CRS goals and measurements of where it is today, which were incorrect or old data on the page prior to my edits. Could we make those edits? --SNHennessy (talk) 22:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Save your breath, OM. I pointed her at WP:TRUTH (along with WP:OR, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:FRINGE and the rest) when she first came to the attention of AN/I. Raquel is, I think, a complete lost cause. She's unwilling or perhaps unable to understand what WP is for, let alone how to behave when editing on it. Tonywalton ^Talk 15:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Re your edit summary ... I did. Tonywalton ^Talk 16:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, just saw your edit to Cistercian Order of the Holy Cross if you look at the edit history and talk page you'll see two newbies who came awful close to being blocked. I'm now off to bed but is there any chance you could keep an eye on it and them? ϢereSpielChequers 23:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I think they're now praying for each other. I'm in Email contact with them both and I think the neutral version may stick. ϢereSpielChequers 09:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow! That was fast... barely had time to click refresh before it was reported deleted! Thanks Guy M (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Please delete this page by a user who was blocked indefinitely. Dy yol (talk) 00:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

According to you, the reason you will not correct a false statement about me that you put in the stated reason for deleting an article about me is as follows:

The comment is part of the editing history, and cannot now be deleted except in rare and extreme circumstance, which I don't think this rises to. The tone of the article was promotional in a way that often (although by no means always) is associated with autobiography. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

How strange that an organization so concerned with probity and an individual as sensitive to the higher standards of that organization as yourself, should conclude that a published comment that carries a derogatory implication about an actual, living person and is patently false does not rise to the level of circumstance that would call for deletion.

Keep in mind here that I have no interest in the article itself, whether it should or should not be deleted. John Sherman (talk) 02:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Orangemike does not have the technical ability to remove the edit/log summary you have identified above; however, your concern was brought to my attention and I have used my "oversight" permissions to remove the edit summary from public view. For other interested editors, there is further discussion of this on my talk page. Risker (talk) 17:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you deleted this article before because of it being blkatant advertising, but someone has re-created it. It still looks a bit promotional to me, so perhaps it would be good if you could have a look at it again. Thanks. --Crusio (talk) 09:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for pointing out that notably cannot simply be inherited. I understand this point, however spice is a very notable non-profit with a unique model for regenerating communities in socially and econmically deprived areas of the UK. This is independently verified in the 3 reports produced by the new economics foundation that describes 3 timebank models (2 of which it reports that have been developed by spice and timebanking wales with numerous case-studies), the Welsh national government's report: 'timebanking sowing seeds' - this report is exclusively about the work of spice and how the original timebank model has been adapted with major impact in wales and the report by the university of wales 'spice looking back' again this illustrates the dramatic impact that spice has had in communities in wales and the uniqueness of the model. Tris Dyson (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi OrangeMike. You posted a message on my talk board. How will you know when I respond or ask for assistance with your request?Brodeum (talk) 15:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I would was hopeing that you could restore the A Midnight Tragedy wikipedia page. A Midnight Tragedy is a very successful band fron NJ. They have won Battle of the Bands for Warped Tour and Bamboozle which got them performances on Warped Tour and Bamboozle. Which are two huge festivals that have wikipedia pages. They have also played with and opened for many national acts and are mentioned in other wikipedia pages which includes the legendary Misfits wiki. They have most recently put out their full length cd that is on Itunes that was mastered at Sterling Sound in NYC, by the mastering engineer who also mastered My Chemical Romace's Newest Album. Their latest album is in pre production and is being produced by Will Aiden the singer or Victory records band Aiden and William Control. Their album has been reviewed by Will Aiden and Emmy Award Winner Jeffrey Lesser. The Drummer of A Midnight Tragedy is a Emmy Award contributing Audio Engineer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.220.114.68 (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Read our standards for bands and musicians; remember that notability is not contagious, and cannot be "caught" by playing with notable bands, using notable sound engineers, playing notable festivals, etc. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:36, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I was hoping to restore the A Midnight Tragedy wikipedia page you deleted. A Midnight Tragedy is a very successful band from NJ. They have most recently got their album selling on Itunes, CD Baby, Amazon Mp3, Rhapsody, and Napster. This album entitled Reinventing the End was mastered at Sterling Sound in Manhattan NY. Sterling Sound is one of the most famous and successful mastering houses in the world. Their album was mastered by an engineer that assisted on the mastering of My Chemical Romance's album The Black Parade. A Midnight Tragedy has also competed in many battle of the bands two of which they placed and landed a spot on two major music festivals. These festivals are the Vans Warped Tour and The Bamboozle at the Meadowlands Sports Complex. A Midnight Tragedy have played with and opened for many National Acts these include Coheed and Cambria, Mayday Parade, the Black Out, and the Misfits. They are currently mentioned on the Misfits wikipedia page. A Midnight Tragedy's album has been reviewed by Emmy Award winning Producer Jeffrey Lesser, who has produced Kool and the Gang and Barbra Streisand records to name a few. The same album was also reviewed by Will the singer of Successful victory records band's William Control and Aiden. This great review led to Will producing A Midnight Tragedy's Second Full Length release which they are currently in Pre Production for. A Midnight Tragedy's Drummer is recognized by the society of television arts and sciences as a Emmy Award Contributing Audio Engineer. As a drummer he has also been endorsed by TRX Cymbals and BIB Custom Drums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Musician01 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC) — Musician01 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

I repeat: read our standards for bands and musicians; remember that notability is not contagious, and cannot be "caught" by playing with notable bands, using notable sound engineers, playing notable festivals, etc. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

On the Music Notability guidelines page under Criteria for Musicians and Ensembles states "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria" Article 9 says a musician or ensemble is notable if it "Has won or placed in a major music competition". A Midnight Tragedy has played many battles. In 2008 they played the War for Warped Tour at Live Nation's Starland Ballroom where they placed 2nd out of about 20 bands. This second place slot landed them a spot on the 2007 Warped Tour in NJ. Also in 2008 they played at "The Break Contest the Official Competition for a slot on Bamboozle Festival" at The Stone Pony in Asbury Park NJ. At this Battle of the bands they placed in the first round witch led them to the semi finals. In 2009 they again competed in the Break contest and placed in the first round on march 9th witch led them to the semi finals on march 30th. Please see link : http://www.thebreakcontest.com/winners3.php Most recently they have competed in the East Coast Independent Battle of the Bands for Warped Tour and have placed as a top band in the first round and have moved on to the Finals. Please see link: http://www.eastcoastindependent.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.106.76 (talk) 02:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

"Major music competition" means major; it doesn't mean some Battle of the Bands. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

These Battle of the Bands are competitions for Major Music Festivals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.106.76 (talk) 02:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't make them major music competitions. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

What is considered to be a Major Music Festival. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.106.76 (talk) 02:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Something like Summerfest in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, or major UK music festivals such as the V Festival, Glastonbury Festival, Reading Festival etc. which attract 50,000-100,000 or more. But this only works if the band had significant billing, or got significant press attention because of their appearance. If they appeared on a side stage and never made a ripple in the humanity, that doesn't qualify them. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Metasenta seems to be requesting an unblock from User talk:202.61.163.124 for a username change. May want to warn about possible COI if they really want to edit Irene Barberis. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, this is my fault, Dirsmith emailed me after his block and agreed to relicense his images under a free license and upload them to Commons. I do think this could be a net asset for the Playboy mansion article. I should have unblocked him but I apparently did not and he created an other account as a result. Since he used the "Dirsmith1" account to upload content to Commons, I think it'd be easier for him to keep that account. Sorry about that. -- lucasbfr ^talk 10:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

That's a fair comment. I think that there are a few answers that I hope I can clarify and word properly. Firstly, you are correct that The University originally 'incubated' Spice - it's worth noting however that the report is compiled from several research studies by other agencies over a 5 year period (As indicated on page 4)- these are the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), New Economics Foundation, PONT,and research by Mick Warden. The report by the Welsh National Government 'Timebanking Sowing Seeds' is compeletly independent and is exclusively about the work of Spice and its sister org Timebanking Wales - it is as I am sure you will agree - rare for a national government to produce and circulate a report about two organisations in this way. The New Economics Foundation (nef) report is also totally independent and from one of the UK's most prestigious think tanks - this report is about 3 models of timebanking two of which it clearly attributes exclusively and with case studies to Spice and Timebanking Wales (summarised on pages 15-16). I think that I can help with media coverage also - i include links to 2 recent national radio interviews with Spice employees [6][7]. Also, in a report last month by the UK Cabinet Office "volunteering across the criminal justice system (March 2009)" one of Spice's projects is highlighted as "having a dramatic impact on anti-social behaviour" and is recommended 'activity that breaks down the barriers to the involvement of volunteers". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tris Dyson (talk • contribs) 16:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. I saw that you removed the user Piposkinhead from WP:UAA, stating that the name isn't bannable. I read the skinhead article, and I agree, it's not necessarily offensive. However, I think a "Wait until the user edits" would have been more appropriate, as it's also somewhat likely that the "skinhead" portion refers to racism. Up to you though, just my two cents. --Gardenhoser! (talk) 19:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy deletion of Robicomb. If there's one thing I hate it's corporate self-promotion on Wikipedia. Rees11 (talk) 01:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I noticed you posted the note to Sammy Houston on my talk page. H won't see it there, because I've been responding to him on his talk page. He just copies all of my messages back on to my talk page when he replies to me. I will just cut and paste it over to his talk page. Tad Lincoln (talk) 16:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

You might want to have a word with User:67.173.235.129. He continues to revert without discussing on talk page. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you please restore iNetVideo.com or send me my draft? I wasn't done adding it and it was only the start to show why its necessary.. Albahrani (talk) 17:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I Thought that article under my user directory was my sandbox and not for public viewing? I was getting around to editing that in the near future.Septagram (talk) 03:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring the text - I have no idea how it got deleted ... Mathsci (talk) 21:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, I only recently noticed your comment. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello OrangeMike, Can you please check this link User_talk:Mickyounger/NetBox_Blue and have a look at my new proposed content? Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks. Mickyounger (talk) 06:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi mike - Im having trouble creating a new section for a political guru here in DC. His name is Taylor Griffin, which is also the name of a basketball player....

Any idea how I can upload his bio?

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharris12 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

here is the website... http://www.sulgravepartners.com/team/

im so new to this. Thanks for helping!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharris12 (talk • contribs)

Hello, you deleted User:DarthJoeyJoJo/ColU history. It was originally at ColU history, which I deleted. User:DarthJoeyJoJo then contacted me asking to undelete it, because it was his own test page. I undeleted it and moved it to his userspace, but you deleted it again in the process. I have now undeleted it again. JIP | Talk 16:09, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi!!! i dont understand. Yes i am new and not really aware of wikipedia. But i dont understand why my page got deleted...could you lpease advise? how is it different from Sungard's page?? Please explain!!!! thank you thank you!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yslane (talk • contribs) 17:45, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying the matters of the Mountain Houses in Butte and Siskiyou Counties. However, I think some conventions exist, whether written or unwritten, on how to differentiate among same-name place names.

• It seems that whenever multiple place names sharing a name exist, the lesser known ones get a qualifier set off by commas added to their titles to distinguish them from the better-known place. An example is Fremont, Yolo County, California. For Mountain House, the "other" Mountain Houses have county names in parentheses and not commas. I suggest moving those articles so that "Butte County," for example, appears between commas and not parentheses.
• It also seems that the best-known of the same-name places get the shorter simpler title and the others get qualifiers. An example is Fremont, California, which has no county name in its title, unlike the aforementioned Yolo County Fremont. In this case, referring to San Joaquin County seems unnecessary, since "Mountain House, California," is generally understood to refer to that development near Tracy.
• Generally, when topic X could be understood to refer to multiple things but almost always refers to one thing, that one thing gets the title "X" with a disambiguation note at the article's top linking to a page titled "X (disambiguation)." So, here, San Joaquin County's Mountain House should have the Mountain House, California, article with a link to a page titled Mountain House, California (disambiguation). That disambiguation page should then link to all the Mountain Houses.
• If Brush Creek has not been called "Mountain House" by anyone in a very long time, maybe the disambiguation page should not link to Mountain House (Butte County), California, but directly to Brush Creek, California, with a clarifying note ("Mountain House is a former name for the Butte County community of Brush Creek, California").
• Generally, if an article has such a disambiguation link, the article does not talk about the other thing with the same name unless it's relevant. Butte County's Mountain House is not really relevant to San Joaquin County's, so discussion of Brush Creek should be removed from the latter's article, and we'll easily find Brush Creek through the disambiguation page.
• It appears San Joaquin's Mountain House got that name because that was a historical place-name found in the immediate area, albeit just across the county line in Alameda County. So maybe Alameda County's Mountain House should not have a separate article, because it's nearly the same place (but it should be mentioned in the San Joaquin Mountain House's page).

Sorry for a lengthy, know-it-all message, but I think these ideas should be helpful for maintaining convention and clarity. Michael Patrick (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I was about to leave a comment on another subject (will post that as soon as I finish this one :-) when I saw this discussion. In general, if all the communities in a state that have the same name are unincorporated, we county-level disambiguate them all: so Mountain House, San Joaquin County, California is indeed the proper name for this one. I've upgraded the pages somewhat, sourcing them from the GNIS as well as from what you've added in the past. Nyttend backup (talk) 13:11, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for watching my talk page and helping to answer objections when I'm having trouble getting online. The user that's making these complaints is angry because I've removed the founder of Jazzercize from a "notable natives" section: as you may know, it's standard practice not to include redlinks in these sections, which this IP wants to do. Hopefully I'll be back online with my main account soon :-) Nyttend backup (talk) 13:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Do the BBC Radio interviews not count as media profile? I agree that the government produces lots of reports, but actually very rarely (as with the Welsh Government report) about one organisation and certainly not with that much design quality (although I can see you might say this about the Cabinet Office report from the UK Government). In terms of notable journals - I am surprised that reports by the new economics foundation and joseph rowntree, two major think-tanks are not thought to be notable. Your orignal response abut The Young Foundation and The University being 'hosts' and therefore having bias, also seems fair - but surely this does all help add to the weight of evidence (all from within the last 12 months). This is an organisation that develops highy effective tools for addressing poverty and achieving social change, if it is getting widespread coverage from think-tanks, governments as well as the bbc - that's kind of significant isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tris Dyson (talk • contribs) 16:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

mike - I am not an expert, so I cannot expand the article much, however I thought that was the idea of a user maintained encyclopedia? I searched for something that I did not find, so I wrote the little bit that I knew about it, in hopes that experts would see it, and say "oh, it is much more than that!" and expand it. How can that happen if it is deleted right away? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daviddoria (talk • contribs) 17:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you have a quick look at edits by User talk:Anuttamadasi. The user keeps placing some material about Direction of Management, on other pages and violating WP:BLP rules. This was further to your speedy deletion of this article that is completely POV. Thanks. --WIKIDas18:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi mike, is it possible to get another view on this please.

The welsh government, british government, new economics foundation, jospeh rowntree and the bbc all have no vested interest in spice whatsoever —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tris Dyson (talk • contribs) 18:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

User:IntensiveNutrition WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 23:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

You took your time catching it - a good 5 minutes. This one is not worth wasting editors' time debating. Leave it a day or two and just speedy it. I will not object. Part of a debate over silly lists. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 April 17#List of unusual personal names and Place names considered unusual Aymatth2 (talk) 01:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• I would have preferred you to have left it a day or two as an example for the debate. I suppose I should not have put it in the public space. But it seemed immaculate: no original research, neutral point of view, fully referenced. The perfect silly list. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• Awww, mike, come on, you should let those discussions run their course. Sometimes someone actually manages to find a way to save the list and make a good encyclopedic article out of it (no, I can't think of any example right now). --Enric Naval (talk) 02:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• This particular list was not remotely serious, but it passed the technical criteria. Sometimes common sense has to override the rules. That applies both ways: articles that break the rules sometimes stay, and vice versa. I am sympathetic to lists in general, because people seem to like them. Obviously not this one. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:48, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Shall we assume, that Mary Loomis is Lily's adopted daughter? Either that, or Mary's father is an oriental. GoodDay (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Ya gotta admit, it may have been a casting blooper. GoodDay (talk) 18:09, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Mike can I have the information that you have deleted on the article for Cyprus-Tube in order to work on its notability? Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GiorgosY (talk • contribs) 16:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

You do have a copy of what you delete don't you? GiorgosY (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC).

Mike thank you for this. I don't know what's going on at UAA recently (well I do, I have read the recent discussions) - I hope we are not going soft on spam names where there is clearly promotional intent evidenced by spam edits. – ukexpat (talk) 15:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, could you take a quick look at this discussion. Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Gang and associated discussion on talk pages User_talk:Stevonmfl#Your_recent_edits, User_talk:Niteshift36 and my own. User:Stevonmfl seems rather unhappy with the way things have been dealt with. The issue is pretty clear in that he has added info from a book he has written to the article but he doesn't seem to see why this is not ok. I've tried to explain on his talk page but he has requested a "higher reviewer" to take a look so I thought I'd ask you. Thanks! Smartse (talk) 20:47, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Orangemike...I again request you compare my edit with Dr Stith's. We both cite our books. As I have used her style almost verbatim, please explain the difference. You have lost valuable information due to the selective and therefore mis-application of "rules". Stevonmfl (talk) 21:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)Stevonmfl (talk) 21:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stevonmfl" Hidden categories: User talk pages with Uw-coi notices

It was a direct quote, but it looks like whoever posted it made minor changes in it so as not to directly quote it (I don't know why). I've corrected the quote (which indeed uses "science fiction" and not "sci-fi") and added a ref. Ed Fitzgerald _{t / c} 03:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Shown as "22:07, 21 April 2009 Orangemike (talk | contribs) deleted "AirPampas" ‎ (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject) ", this deletion surprised me. I was in the middle of explaining my {{holdon}} when you deleted it. The article title should have been Air Pampas, not AirPampas. See this recent news item for example.LeadSongDog come howl 03:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll see if I can learn more about it now.LeadSongDog come howl 13:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: [8]. No prob; thanks! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Just a friendly note on Dino Pedrone. While the article is lacking in sourcing, and the subject may not be notable, there are claims of importance (college president, etc). A speedy was declined for the same reasons about a year ago. Cheers!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there Orangemike, Speedy deletion of Scott Haltzman was probably not appropriate. The article had existed for almost 2 years when it was deleted, the {{db-spam}} tag was added by an IP, and most importantly, there were references (in the External links section) to reliable sources such as The Washington Post and Brown Daily Herald that show notability. If anything, there should have been a deletion discussion, in my opinion. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I just looked at the content again, and while it needs better sourcing, I fail to see how it is a "promotional flyer". In my opinion, it does not meet WP:CSD#G11 at all as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Pages that exclusively promote some entity and that would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic". While parts of the article may be promotional in nature, it is not "unambiguous" nor does it "exclusively promote some entity." If there are bits and pieces that aren't sourceable, they should be removed, instead of deleting the article. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Dear orange mike, I fully understand the reason given for deleting User:Wellus/Philosophy, however could you give me any information on how I might retrieve the content of that deleted page just for myself?

Wellus (talk) 12:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I was recently contacted by Stevef214 who created the article Halff Associates, Inc. that was speedied by you on 22 January 2009. I don't dispute the deletion (Stevef214 apparently works for the company's PR department), but since Stevef214 wasn't left any warning by the nominating editor (whoever that was) and no message on his talk page from you or anyone else, he's emailed me since apparently he didn't know who to contact. Could you get in touch with Stevef214 and make him aware of the nominating editor's concerns, since the nominating editor neglected to give a deletion warning? I've also left Steve214 some tips about creating encyclopedic content on his talk page. Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 21:59, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

what was said below applies to this one as well. Please undelete. Send to afd if you like, but I think it will pass, with the references.DGG (talk) 17:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hillarious photo. Thanks for the update. (Peterbadgely (talk) 15:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)) peterbadgely

The obvious photo. The "Perp Walk" Orange jumpsuit photo. It is refreshing to know that there is some sense of humor peppered throughout this group. (Peterbadgely (talk) 18:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)) peterbadgely

Hey Mike, did you mean to revert more than you did here? I think you might've. -Pete (talk) 20:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Take a closer look -- you didn't roll her back all the way. -Pete (talk) 22:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

No need to worry about User:Wynonnastff. They seem to be a fan of her, no conflict of interest that I can see. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 01:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Scott Haltzman. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  04:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Orange Mike, I feel kinda bad about opening the DRV; I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I only did it because I feel it is "right", not because I have anything against you. I just wanted to make sure that was clear. Hope there's no hard feelings. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  04:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

OM, this one was a mistake, especially for doing it single-handed you really should have just tagged. G11s are rarely safe for single handed. I do some single-handed myself, but not for G11. I know your standards for speedy are broader than mine, but this was different from what you yourself usually do. DGG (talk) 17:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

@Mike - We've done all we can do. Now the community gets to decide. :) — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  19:44, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Any help you can give to help the edit war between Iwannafish and GeneZub would be appreciated. I proposed a compromise article and a survey on the discussion page. I am really trying to help this situation out. But, I am getting a bit frustrated. I tried to be nice and added a picture to support the current article and Iwannfish deleted it under his alias and on the edit wrote "clutter." FYI: Iwannafish uses 160.244.140.202 as one of two known aliases. ANY help, comments, voting on survey, et cetera would be appreciated. John R. Carpenter Jrcrin001 (talk) 09:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. You might want to read and/or address the message left at Talk:Sheree Ali. Regards SoWhy 19:11, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

On 18 April 2009 Orangemike deleted "Jannel Rap" because he claimed "A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject." We agree with your claim that the article (which was a stub and in the process of being worked on) did not contain all of the significant areas to meet this criterion; however, because it was in process, feel the deletion was premature. In 2008, Ms. Rap was notably recognized by Music Connection Magazine in their Top 50 Innovators, Iconoclasts, Groundbreakers & Guiding Lights in the music business for 2008 (http://www.narip.com/external/static/MC-50-Innovators-List-2008-Article-Only.pdf). We had intended to expand the article and include this and other groundbreaking sources to highlight her impact on humanity, and in particular, her selfless efforts to promote missing people through her music and her band Clementine. Her work to connect and help resolve over 300 missing cases since 2001 is a blessing to families of the missing, law enforcement, concerned citizens and many other people around the Globe that support the effort and her mission. Please restore the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tblessing4 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orange Mike, I am trying to address all the issues you have with the "Kurt Oldman" page.
- The tone is not meant to be promotional. Is there anything in particular that sounds subjective? I am trying to make it as objective as possible and I am sticking to the facts.
- There is only one reference to Oldman's website - that is for proof of where he says he comes from. The other is under "External Links".
- What are the other "Non-Reliable sources"? The citations should all lead to legitimate websites, two of which have written articles about Kurt Oldman.
- I was not under the impression that in order to edit an article on Wiki I had to edit other articles. Please understand, this is a huge learning curve. I am not about to edit other articles until I can get one article up that satisfies Wiki Rules.
- In regards to not meeting the Wiki Criteria for Composers: "has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition" "Babysitter Wanted" is very well known in the horror/thriller circuit. The film was featured at the recent "Fangoria conference in LA; the film has had a theatrical release; the score will be available on iTunes next month; the score and Kurt Oldman have been featured in two articles (which have been cited); this film won the Best Feature award at Weekend of Fear, Nuremberg, Germany
- "all but 2 of the titles in his credits section are redlinks " Actually there should be three. Overall I'm confused about the "notability" aspect of Wiki . Actors & Directors have articles on Wiki for appearing in /directing only one film that may or may not have had a wide release or success. Why isn't the same "notability" standard offered to a composer who scores the entire film? All that is required is one Notable project. Does it matter that the other credits are "redlinked"? Does every single credit need to be linked to an article in Wiki in order to list it as a credit?
- In regards to being a general mess - my apologies. I am trying to clean it up. I had this article in my Sandbox and had kindly requested Texas_Android to please review it for publishing. He never did so I published it.

Any feedback you can give to save this article would be greatly appreciated. Lexme123 (talk) 23:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

How come NO ONE wants to touch this??? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

When you moved Rival brand to Rival Brand, it looks like you unchecked the "leave a redirect behind" option, as no redirect was created.

Just wondered...why was this?

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  17:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

 Chzz  ►  20:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

That point is long gone. I will not be posting anything on these pages as I have indicated. You can read about it in your old age. I have seen many places where the COI is ignored. It all depends on the editing and editor's personal view. The point now is the ganging up on people wishing to assist non-whites in their understanding of damaging influences in an obviously white controlled environment. And how bias is used as a group weapon. Even the meaning of your comment is aimed to do nothing less. Meanwhile, nightshift36 goes on to his next battle knowing he is protected even though it is clear that the use of editing and blocking was unjustifiable and misapplied. I will participate to bring to light when and how this is done for the benefit of younger persons not yet blind to their own biases.Stevonmfl (talk) 20:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)Stevonmfl (talk) 20:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mike - thank you for your response. Can you please remove this article and place it where I can have access to it but it is no longer public? Thanks Lexme123 (talk) 21:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

hi orange, you previously left me a message regarding the WoT series and I saw you on teh page history for operation repo. there are several problems with the page as is. The information says it is scripted and staged but is completely without sources. I've tried to remove those because their is no reliable source and could actually be considered a form of libel if it is indeed unscripted. can you look at the page and help me know if i'm on track or not?—Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs)

The show says the names have been changed. I understand what you mean though. can you help me out with the person who is saying I'm vandalizing the page? I'm trying to in good faith remove things in conflict with wikipedia policy. this is libel without sources so should be removed .HellinaBucket (talk) 16:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I did 3rd party collections for 2 years trust me the at our office we had to have a glass window just to take paymnts. the things you see on that show are unfortunatly as real as it gets for that field. And adding the opinion that it is a scripted show when TRU TV labels it as unscripted is clearly libel. How can it be otherwise?HellinaBucket (talk) 16:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I can understand that what is said to be reality tv is what is shown to us after editing. My opinion is that if the show itself and tv says it is real and we go and put in electronic print it is not. per the def. In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel (for written publications), slander (for spoken word), and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image.Link title It is usually, but not always,[1] a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed Thats why I would consider this libel. I can understand what is meant by the reality tv part though. did i get the correct link?HellinaBucket (talk) 17:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I thnk that is one of the main reasons Wrestling is no longer advertised as real, just sports entertainment —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 17:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

After thinking about the whole concept of reality tv shows I do have a somewhat changed opinion. reality Tv is Real life just heavily edited to maximize entertainment value so in that since the show would not be real. HellinaBucket (talk) 18:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I have been writing my article for at least a month and have been receiving comments from your admin throughout the process. The other day I was sent a message that I needed to change my user name because it was also my company name. I responded by giving you a new user name that I wanted to use. I didn't know how to change the name and was waiting for instruction from Wikipedia. Before I received the instruction, our page was deleted. Please help us to change the user name and reinstate the page. Mdiproducts (talk) 19:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Read what you wrote dingbutt. It is the manner you people (as a group) use to address and deal with those you consider less than you...and, your dual application of "rules". Your latest attempt to make me feel small is another indication of your use of sarcasm and insult to make a case. Your just gonna have to keep trying...sorry. I am absolutely convinced the reason I am being put through all of this nonsense is because you (as a group) do not give a damn about this life and death issue as it (seemingly) does not affect you or your people. If this related to say a Columbine piece, you would be all over each other but in this cae, to get it in...sideways if necessary. I have been hit with everything your people have...which frankly ain't much. And my book is doing quite well and young people say things like, "its about time". Hey...you guys lost the damned election...get over it and move out of the way.21:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Stevonmfl (talk)

It is how you apply them...nightshift36 gets a slap on his hand, I get thrown in jail. He gets a warning, I am on death row. It is not the rules...it is how they are used and abused. Hey...some of my best friends are white people so don't take this personally. Just let some of us try and help our people for a change. You guys have had over two-hundred years so kindly step aside. (you must have lost a bunch of money in your 401k to vote for my man)Stevonmfl (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

To Orangemike. I was offered a deal from a publishing house that you would accept as a legitimate venue (I was not looking for one...they came to me). As I suspected, the book would have cost triple what I was able to do with lulu. My intent is not to make money on this subject as so many others do, especially as careers (I am gainfully retired and frankly do not need the money). Many people retire and try and forget what they spent a lifetime learning. I want to pass on what I have learned to the next generation(s) and they can "take it from there". I wish I had such info at the beginning of my career. The workforce around gang-active communities is astounding, as you are aware. My goal is to educate as to the underlying forces that birth such rage and that perpetuate it. I agree with President Obama as to finding what works and not funding maintenance of effort, which is what we do in spades. A systemic, structural change has to occur here as well as with banks and credit cards and automakers. Funds need to go to schools, parks, libraries and other family friendly infrastructure rather than cops, probation/parole dep'ts, prosecuters jails and prisons...even social services. Do you mind if I do that? Your wiki gang pages are full of criminal and enforcement related information (crapola) on "gangs". While over at the Columbine pages, info attempts to heal, to educate, learn, understand, correct, mitigate, forgive, offer resources but hardly anything on the gang aspect of the event, which it was. FYI, there is absolutely NO research being done on the provenance of violence as re: minority groups, except what we are putting forth. However, there is a tremendous amount of work ($$$$$$) investigating the criminal aspects of violence vis a vis ethnic minorities. And now NIMH is looking at genetic relationships.Stevonmfl (talk) 01:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC) Stevonmfl (talk) 01:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for being flexible on this. I have another user name to put the article under. It is nirmaljaya. I'm not sure what comes next. Can you reinstate my "foam article" to this user name? I will go in and make any editorial changes you require once I have access to the article. Mdiproducts (talk) 16:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Orange Mike - I am trying to address the COI issue you raised; explanation below, and I have posted same on the Talk age of the article. Thank you . . . Stu Segal

I submitted this article after Stephen’s nomination for a Hugo Award, recognizing he had crossed Wikipedia’s threshold of Notability. It is no secret that Stephen is my son (this is readily apparent in the public domain in many locations on the internet and, obviously given my User Name, I did not try to hide the fact from Wikipedia) - HOWEVER, prior to submitting the article I carefully researched the policies on COI, POV Neutrality and Notability. Per the COI policy someone with a close relationship is not automatically deemed to have a COI, but may have bias - therefore a Neutral POV must be adhered to. I attempted to maintain a high degree of Neutrality, including only the facts, and those facts are supported by verifiable citations. I have included no opinions, conclusions or evaluations; I have also not included any language promoting the interests of the subject or the magazine he works for. The article, and it’s citations, have been reviewed by at least 3 other Editors, as well as 4 more who were involved in the AfD process.

If my relationship to Stephen somehow disqualifies this submission regardless of the standard of neutrality which I’ve applied, then I’d suggest “undoing” my contributions to the article and letting other unrelated editors submit the facts, if they so desire. I certainly would not have submitted the article if I believed it were improper to do so, or if I believed I was unable to present a neutral POV.

Stu Segal (talk) 18:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Orange Mike you left the folowing message on my talk page...

Don't re-insert material unless you provide citations for it. The assertion that references exist, with no references provided, is not acceptable. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

However before a user removed half of the content it did have a reference i no cause i wrote it but when i undid the edit i didn't relise the other guy had removed all of the references and every time i undid his edits he re undone them so it looks like i am lieing glad to clear that up —Preceding unsigned comment added by S73v3n (talk • contribs) 16:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I did set up a new account. I read the direction about changing a user name and it said, if you haven't invested in the old user name, you may as well open a new account. So I did. Do you want me to change the name of the old account. I'll do whatever I have to do to retrieve this situation. Mdiproducts (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Orange Mike i was not referring to you when i said removed half the content i was refering to another user please look at the history for more information --Ϛŧēvěŋ 13:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by S73v3n (talk • contribs)

I cannot tell you how disappointed I am that you left me a warning. I am taking an indefinite wikibreak because of it. This is just too much for me. I work hard to remove vandalism and to avoid controversial edits.

Please be more careful in the future when taking sides. You can read my response to your warning on my talk page.

The reason this is so troubling to me is that you are a respected editor, and I used to be so proud of my professionalism as an editor.

I will log in occasionally to check my messages and make sure that my user page has not been vandalized, so I will eventually get a message if you leave it, but I am taking a long break from editing articles.VegKilla (talk) 17:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank-you for responding so quickly with your explanation and encouragement. Unfortunately, this issue, more than any other I've had to deal with, has discouraged me from editing wikipedia, but that is my problem, not yours. You made a small mistake that is similar to many I have made when fighting vandalism.

Defending the Operation Repo article has been surprisingly taxing, and it is ridiculous because I don't particularly like or dislike the show!

I responded to you on my talk page to keep that conversation together.VegKilla (talk) 17:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I adamatly deny HellinaBucket's allegations of me "still directing personal attacks." The only thing HellinaBucket said above that was true is that I have respect for Orangemike's opinion, and I have no respect for HellinaBucket's warnings because not only did HellinaBucket initially leave me a level 4 warning (skipping levels 1-3), but also I meet HellinaBucket by catching them in the act of vandalism (I don't think anyone would respect warnings left by a 20-day old account who is responding to being warned for vandalism, came close to violating the three-revert-rule, and is skipping the first 3 warnings).VegKilla (talk)

HellinaBucket, leave me alone. I'm not editing the Operation Repo article (or any article) any longer, you have no reason to contact me, or ask anyone else to contact me on your behalf. The way that I met you was by catching you in the act of vandalism, and your initial response was to repeat the vandalism. It's true that you were able to get me angry enough for Orangemike to feel that I deserved a mild warning, but don't let that embolden you. The fact that you have abstained from vandalism for a few days, does not mean that you are not a vandal, and your taking offense to my using the word vandal in reference to you is unwarranted, such use does not constitute a personal attack. You are a vandal. You committed vandalism, you repeated that vandalism, and it's only been a few days since then; it doesn't wear off that quickly. I would not do this exactly the same way if I had it to do over again, but my goal was to stop you, and everyone else, from vandalizing the Operation Repo article, I feel confident that I have succeed, and I feel that the allegations of me over-stepping the guidelines in my ferocity of dealing with you are both mild and debatable. It is an added bonus, that it seems you have chosen to become a responsible editor, and I, Once again, thank-you for all of the things you do which make you an effective editor.

HellinaBucket, your account is only a month old, why don't you just throw it away and make a new one? There's nothing wrong with that as long as you honestly intend to be a responsible editor from here on out (If you want to be extra careful that you are following the guidelines to the letter, read WP:SOCK, but the basic idea, is that making a second account is wrong if you are doing for it the wrong reasons. If you just want to change your name, or if you are embarrassed about something you did as a beginning editor that you are not going to do again, then that's fine.). Whether or not you get a new account, there is no reason for you to contact me. I began editing Operation Repo while I was checking the recent changes for vandals. I continued to monitor it because the vandalism had been common before I was able to get the article protected. Other than that I have no interest in that subject.VegKilla (talk) 16:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Since you've been involved in the reverting of vandalism on Element Skateboards, could you review this edit by an IP. Over the course of about 15 days, I've reverted these additions four times. I don't want to revert anymore (since I will violate the spirit of WP:3RR by endlessly reverting this IP), so I'm asking you to review whether or not the IP's edit should be reverted and/or the page protected. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 07:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi orange mike. I understand that you deleted the last Stereo Skyline page. I just wondered what the specific reason was. I have created a page on the band in my area but cannot make the page 'live' as the creation has been locked, any ideas how I can create the page? If my page is no more relevant that the last, feel free to delete it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam2201 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orange Mike, Hope all is well. I wanted to touch base with you on the VistaPrint page. As we've discussed before, I started the page as a PR guy and have left the page unattended aside from updating financials and removing blatant vandalism and unfounded claims. It seems like we are having a tag vandalism to the page by an unregistered user and wanted to see if you could take a look and help get the tags removed. Please let me know. --4.79.245.132 (talk) 18:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I demand an apology from you for your negligence in researching the history of the incident for which you gave me the first, and only, legitimate warning that I have ever received.

Within a couple days, I will produce a chronological document of every edit pertaining to this event. This document is being produced for another administrator whom is helping protect me form harassment, but I will direct you to a copy of the document as well.

I understand that, and thank-you for the fact that, you did the best you could with the information that you had seen, but, as a formality, I hope that you will, upon seeing these documents, recant any allegations against me.

Thank-you for your time on this issue, and for your over 30,000 edits to wikipedia, in the shadow of which, I feel humbled.VegKilla (talk) 20:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I wanted to come by and apoligize. Yes apoligize. My behaviour the last week was disruptive and immature. I had to really think about what I was doing and the purpose of Wikipedia to really grasp what I needed to grasp. The fact is that this is a site that allows people to add to the collective pool of logic and knowledge. It is non-discriminatory to your education level so long as a you contribute usefully and I had to remind myself that this IS A PRIVILEGE and is something to value and hold in esteem. While sometimes seeming arbitrary and quick the block does serve a purpose in stopping people from doing what I was doing and does help maintain good standards for everyone else. I will attempt to work on taking correction better because it is definitly a flaw of mine that I struggle to control. I once again would like to apoligize for being a pain in your buttHellinaBucket (talk) 19:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey Orange Mike. You should't have deleted the Lumino Setting page on 13:10, 23 Mar 2009? Your reason of "13:10, 23 March 2009 Orangemike (talk | contribs) deleted "Lumino setting" ‎ (G12: Blatant copyright infringement: [9])" does not make any sense because this jewelry-weblog.com clearly copied all their information from the verragio.com site to rank in the search engines. Also we would like to reinstate the Verragio page. it seems like other jewelry designers are listed here but Verragio page is deleted by you. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.233.229 (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2009

I persist in my demand for a written apology from you. You acted irresponsibly and aided in my harassment. VegKilla (talk) 17:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Please see HellinaBucket (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hi Orange Mike. I have added some material to Wisconisn journalist Ruth Conniff, a stub. While it contains accurate material from a recent Capital Times front page story, I am concerned that it goes too far for the encyclopedia. Specifically the Capital Times gave her street and assessed value of her home. This is interesting from the story's perspective (Maple Bluff becoming Democratic and progressive) but I would like advice whether this goes too far for the encyclopedia. I would appreciate your insight. Thanks. Capitalismojo (talk) 13:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks that looks better, much better. I see what you mean by notability as well.Capitalismojo (talk) 15:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, you've got to tell me really? When? Where? How many people show up? I am amazed. I had no idea that Milwaukee's old sewer socialists were still stomping around. It makes my day. Capitalismojo (talk) 01:54, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I wrote to you last week with my answer about opening a new account. I never received an answer from you if a new account was OK or did I need to change my existing account. Please confirm one or the other so I can resolve this issue. Mdiproducts (talk) 12:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey Orange I created my first article. Can you take a look and see what you think? It's Central High School (Pueblo, Colorado)HellinaBucket (talk) 15:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me make this look better. I've added some academic info and sources too.HellinaBucket (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Check this out. This is Wiki related! very important that we make sure we source everything. http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090512/ap_on_hi_te/eu_ireland_wikipedia_hoaxer —Preceding unsigned comment added by HellinaBucket (talk • contribs) 15:51, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I have opened the new account "nirmaljaya". What do I need to get my article reinstated? Mdiproducts (talk) 17:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

hi orange mike. i would like to know the grounds for conflict of interest. i am not Mark Howard. but i happen find it somewhat absurd that he has worked on some of the most acclaimed albums of the last 20 years and he doesnt have a wikipedia page. which is why i am so passionate about this. i have come up against lots of detours but continue to persevere as im really excited about wikipedia. could you please tell me why all the grammy awards and nominations were removed? they are all correct. what evidence do i need to show you? could you please return them? he is an engineer on most and gets a grammy ward of participation. please explain this to me. thankyou very much.--Charliedylan (talk) 05:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC) ps.. ok i now understand about editing my own page but i am just trying to get it all together and its taking awhile. and i didnt realse i couldnt add Marks name on other peoples wiki pages because its a conflict of interest! is that even when his name should be ther? i now understand and wont do that again. but please put the awards back up!!!!--Charliedylan (talk) 05:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

hi orange mike. i would like to know the grounds for conflict of interest. i am not Mark Howard. but i happen find it somewhat absurd that he has worked on some of the most acclaimed albums of the last 20 years and he doesnt have a wikipedia page. which is why i am so passionate about this. i have come up against lots of detours but continue to persevere as im really excited about wikipedia. could you please tell me why all the grammy awards and nominations were removed? they are all correct. what evidence do i need to show you? could you please return them? he is an engineer on most and gets a grammy ward of participation. please explain this to me. thankyou very much.--Charliedylan (talk) 05:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC) ps.. ok i now understand about editing my own page but i am just trying to get it all together and its taking awhile. and i didnt realse i couldnt add Marks name on other peoples wiki pages because its a conflict of interest! is that even when his name should be ther? i now understand and wont do that again. but please put the awards back up!!!!--Charliedylan (talk) 05:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC) [edit]J —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charliedylan (talk • contribs) 06:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

hi orange mike. thanks for getting back to me. well im not an associate but just tried to do my research before i started the page.. ie discography , award nominations etc.. i totally understand about putting his name on other pages now.. i think i thought i was contributing to the connected web of Wikipedia but i will stop that. im not trying to spam! could you please tell me why the award nominations were deleted? is it hard to find the proof ? please let me know. ok this wikipedia is very complicated but im starting to get the hang of it. appreciate your feedback about the awards. thanks --Charliedylan (talk) 16:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

hi orange mike... i really appreciate your responses. i would like to challenge you on that because i know for a fact that you dont have all the information. --firstly if an Artist wins 'album of the year' ie Bob Dylan for "time out of mind"... both the producer and the engineer receive grammys as well.. because they are the integral people that created the work. -- therefore the awards that were taken down were taken down for the wrong reasons!!!!! -- also if you were the producer which Mark was for Lucinda Williams and it was nominated that is HIS record that is nominated as well because if it won he would receive a grammy.. and if it doesnt he STILL RECEIVES AN CERTIFICATE FROM THE ACADEMY RE: ACKNOWLEDGING THE NOMINATION -- do you understand that if any record is nominated or wins a grammy both the producer and ENGINEER recieve a grammy or an acknowlegement certificate????? so all my award nominations, MOST WERE WINS!!! were appropriate -- i would appreciate if you could do some research on this and be a little more detailed in your response -- do you think you can return the awards? --let me know what you think... ok man ... rock on...i feel like ive entered a whole new galaxy on Wikipedia!!!!! --Charliedylan (talk) 22:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

ok orange mike. you obviously have no idea what you are talking about. nor do you have any experience in the music world. why then, are you editing my page when you dont know the slightest thing about the world of music at a high level.? i demand to know? i have given you ample opportunity to explain the reason you edited it but you have none! nor do you even know what your talking about. can you please tell me someone else that i can talk to about this. you have been very unhelpful and i have been very patient and nice and you have been quite rude.--Charliedylan (talk) 00:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Orangemike, is there a way to renominate Putinjugend? I tried following the AFD how-to, but it linked the entry back to the last debate – I'd be grateful if you could help. PasswordUsername (talk) 02:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. How soon is too soon? PasswordUsername (talk) 02:36, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

hi orange mike. it was brought to my attention that my last post to you was inappropriate and suggested i read 2 articles on good faith and being civil in the wikipedia worl. i did that and i must admit my initial reaction was i didnt feel like you were doing things in good faith. i felt like i was being attacked. this obviously isnt your intention. so i wanted to apologize. ok thanks for your constructive criticism..!!!--Charliedylan (talk) 02:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Its about time someone took notice of that userpage/advertisement. What makes it worse is that unfair trade makes the situation worse, yet no one mentions it in articles about imports. A.B. Moon (talk) 19:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

It's probably not important, since this guy is no longer editing, but I wouldn't really consider this a good candidate for a spam username block. I think it's just somebody that likes hondas. Friday (talk) 19:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly... that user was a good-faith editor for quite a while until, if I recall, he left due to unending harassment. I doubt it matters but you may consider unblocking the account. --Sable232 (talk) 23:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I look at the obituary for Arthur A. Bentley on November 14, 1935 in the La Crosse Tribune. The article mention about his photography career in North Dakota and that he founded the town of Bentley, North Dakota.The article mentioned of he being Mayor of La Crosse until his defeat in 1923. In 1924 he moved to Iowa where he died. The obituary mentioned nothing about Bentley running for governor in 1922 on the Democratic ticket.The obituary is in the archives at the La Crosse Public Library newspaper clipping file.I hope this helps.As always I hope your wife, yourself and your family are doing well. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 16:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Let me do some research at the library and see what I can come up with. The Trib is on microfilm. There is probably info about the 1922 election in the Trib.Also I check the Wisconsin Historical Society and there was nothing about Bentley.Thanks-RFD (talk) 17:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I added a template to the Bentley, North Dakota article the Hettinger County navigational template.Fortunately, no problems-Many thanks-RFD (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I read science fiction especially alternative timelines,etc., however, my younger niece is graduating from high school in Davenport, Iowa and I will be there.Many thanks for the invitation-RFD (talk) 20:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It's hard to talk when some completely different person deletes your talk without any explanation whatsoever. Why isn't there some announcement on that page regarding talk, and the absence thereof? After all, it is called a Talk Page. Forgive me my ignorance.

The self-centred arrogance of people at Wikipedia is unbelievable. Just an unavoidable opinion I have formed over years of contributions.

Don't bother replying. I've got better things to do with my time.

Varlaam (talk) 19:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Orangemike, I'm not challenge your opinion on purpose, just don't understand the rules or standards. Under this list Business intelligence tools, there are a lot of short articles even without any references, and they wrote those articles with a lot of peacock terms. I tried to remove all the promotional terms in my article and added some reliable sources. Please help me to understand the rules and differences. Thank you for giving me your valuable time. Analyzer2004 (talk) 20:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

and moving that stuff to my talk page. Cheers, Pegship (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

S/he should know. Pegship (talk) 00:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey Orangemike. Per my comment here - would you mind me accepting the user's request for unblock? Best wishes, — Aitias // discussion 20:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orange I was needing a little guidance again. I'm writing an article about Lake Pueblo S.p. and there is currently a big issue in colorado with zebra mussells and all boats are being inspected prior to entering in the water. do you have any suggestions how to write this in an encyclopeadic manner. As always your help is appreciated. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

This is actually a problem that is now two years old and all resevoirs in colorado are trying to handle theZebra Mussells. I do live in the area so this might mean a bias but if you do a yahoo or google search with zebra mussells and you'll see a plethora of news articles, university studies and also is addressed on the Colorado state sites. Do you still suggest I not include it? If you do letme know and I will not add it. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

In Colorado Water Contact activities means, swimming, skiing, jet skiing etc. Thank you for looking into it, I appreciate your time as I can see you are very busy here on wikipedia!! Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Orangemike! Sorry to bother you. I have two questions. The first regards Andy Gussert a good progressive Wisconsin politcal operative whose article I have tried to improve. I just noticed that it looks like he started the page himself. Does that mean we have to delete it or do we warn him or ...? The second question is Gerald MacGuire. I proposed that it merge or be redirected on the page. No one comments. Is that redirect something I could do, or is that an admin function? Capitalismojo (talk) 04:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. Capitalismojo (talk) 15:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

...why we bother. – ukexpat (talk) 20:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

First I would like to apologize for not reading the rules before editing the external links of the mentioned article. It was not my intention to become a SPAMMER. After thinking long and hard I can clearly see why the rules are here.

There are some broken and none functioning links and I think the last link violates the same rule that I violated. I think the first link should be changed from http://www.kneeguru.co.uk/KNEEnotes/node/875 to http://www.kneeguru.co.uk/KNEEnotes/node/1768 The third link is broken and should be changed from http://www.mrsampath.com/video3.html to http://www.mrsampath.com/animations.asp The fourth link is a duplicate of one already listed in the references. The seventh link has nothing to do with ACLs just an overview of the hospital. The eighth link should be changed from http://ismoc.net/aclr/ptbook.html to http://ismoc.net/knee/patientACL.html SmokinCache (talk) 03:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Yo. It's not the most horrible of slander but the original author of an article that I tagged for speedy deletion and you deleted is saying that our judgment was "seriously flawed." I thought you might want to see it and respond if you want. I explained why, and cited policies, as to why our judgment wasn't seriously flawed but feel free to add your two cents if you want, obviously. OlYeller^Talktome 16:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I have removed your edit here as it's a blatant violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:BITE. Please tone down your warnings/messages to blocked users. All it does is aggravate the situation. Antivenin 16:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I am perfectly aware of what that particular user did to Dank (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) 's user page. Don't sink down to his/her level and respond in a bite-y fashion. The user was already blocked when you posted that particular message. It does nothing to improve the situation, it just aggravates it even more. Like adding salt to a wound. Antivenin 17:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that's all I ask. Antivenin 17:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I am compiling list of the published works for the AUTHOR Frank Camper and wanted to know if it's ok to cite one website as a source for all his books or if I should get seperate sources for each. Thanks for your time and help Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:16, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Frank camper did an interview with Penthouse magazine about training sihk terrorists. Is this considered a reliable source?Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

My article regarding KEIGWIN+COMPANY was tagged as a promotional article; it was also assumed that I, as the author, has a conflict of interest in writing the article. However, I modeled this particular site off of that of numerous other dance companies' Wikipedia pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsons_Dance_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ririe-Woodbury_Dance_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Ailey_American_Dance_Theater

Those were just a few of the many dance company and dance company choreographer wikipedia pages I researched and worked off of in creating my page. In creating my own and seeing these I don't quite understand how mine is promotional VS theirs and why I need particular links when these don't seem to have them...I know that I need to authorize the images I'd like to upload to the page, but I'm still waiting to hear how to go about that. If you could please let me know exactly what I need to adjust in comparison to other dance companies' pages so that I can finally release my page to the public I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks so much!

Liz Beres (talk) 19:08, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I am alterring what I found to be promotional in our article; I guess our mission statement is just that, a mission statement. I am still having trouble figuring out how to change the page name from Liz Beres:Keigwin+Company to simply Keigwin+Company and how to authorize our photos...thx so much

Liz Beres (talk) 15:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I added a link to reviews, ranging from 2003 onwards, in the external links. I also deleted the adjective "ground-breaking", but I left the rest of the wording because, as a member of the NYC dance community, I know that these descriptions are objective, rather than subjective. Any advice for the images and page title? Liz Beres (talk) 15:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I reverted the change you made of Hard-shell Baptists to Primitive Baptists on the Abraham Lincoln page. I agree that "hard-shell" may be pejorative, but one could argue that "primitive" can as well. The Hard-Shell Baptist page specifically discusses Lincoln and his childhood churches, so it seemed inappropriate to sever it from his page. It looks to me as if there's a need for some reorganization in the pages on Baptist sects, as both the "hard-shell" and "primitive" pages acknowledge the other term as a possible synonym. Maybe they should be merged and redirects used? Agathman (talk) 17:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

"Hard-shell" is a slang term; "Primitive Baptist" is the name of the actual denomination, and is not pejorative (they mean something different by the term "primitive" than common speech does). Primitive Baptist is the name of the church in question that his family was associated with. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I take your point. I've proposed merging Hard-shell Baptists into Primitive Baptist so that the appropriate term can be used, while preserving the additional material about Lincoln's childhood churches. Agathman (talk) 18:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Would you please look at the new article:Global Media Films? My gut feeling is the article is not what it appears to be. On a personal note-my niece's high school graduation went well;it was nice to see family. I hope your wife, yourself and family are doing well-Many thanksRFD (talk) 18:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I redirected Physics of the Impossible to Physics of the Impossible: A Scientific Exploration Into the World of Phasers, Force Fields, Teleportation, and Time Travel. Hopefully this is acceptable. Have you seen the new article yet?

I did the redirect because the title of the article did not match the title of the book, now it does. In addition, there were no citations or references anyplace in the article, and therefore did not meet the notability requirements. So, I re-wrote the intro - with references. One more thing, the reference section for this article had been removed and I restored it.

Feel free to contact me at my talk page if necessary Ti-30X (talk) 01:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC) By the way if you have any suggestions about the article please feel free to suggest. Hopefully now it meets notability requirements.

I did contact you before about the orginal article but I did not know about the redirect function. It says any editor can do it.

There is one more problem, and maybe it's not. When doing a google search "Physics of the Impossible wiki" it says recommended for speedy deletion. I am not sure what this means? [[User:Ti-30X|Ti-30X]] (talk) 01:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

The short title is almost always the better title for the article, according to Wikipedia naming conventions; I've moved this article back to the short title, while leaving a redirect. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Orange Mike. I was going to confer with you admin types, sometime later, about changing it back to its short title - after Gavia Immer pointed out that the short title is better than the long title and that it is perferred. And, I also read some of the Wikipedia naming conventions, and really wasn't sure if my previous redirect was needed Ti-30X (talk) 12:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Orange mike - I was reviewing this article, creating some internal links, and saw your comments on the talk page. I will work on the notability requirements and references. The introduction might be better suited to be in the body of the article (somehow).

Anyway - I came across a few articles that you might want to look at:

• History of science and technology this is not about the history of science and technology. It is more like a list and I think it should say so somewhere. I hate to be crtitical, but it looks more like a PR page for a list of colleges (at least in one section). Also, there are no citations in the article. Anyway, you are the administrator so I will let you decide.
• Advances in Physics this page is just taking up space. When you look at this page you will see what I mean. LOL!
• Technological change this page is seriously lacking citations

Have fun! And, I will notify Gavia Immer too, about this. Ti-30X (talk) 04:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC) Ti-30X (talk) 04:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I got rid of some of the windy phrases that I wrote. (I read the revision history comments too - it's cool.) Ti-30X (talk) 04:30, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi.

I don't think that X+1 should have been a speedy delete. I had worked on it a bit, and I think it asserted some notability.

It would be very easy to add other assertions or notability if required, such as this CBS News article.

Therefore, could you please either restore it, or else userfy it and I will add refs before recreating. Please let me know on my talk. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  00:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

This is the FAQ for the article. Please restore it as we need it. I mistakenly placed it at Autofellatio/FAQ but unless you intend to take out Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ and others as well please revert this deletion. Thank you! -- Banjeboi 02:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

It might be better to first reach some consensus here.Ferrylodge (talk) 02:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Nonsense. We put FAQs on articles to help stop circular discussions. Your efforts to continually discuss the same issue are duly noted. The existence of a {{FAQ}} is neither condoning or comdemning any POV and should strive to be NPOV. Deleting the FAQ is only propogating further circular discussions on which you seem one of the few in favor of. Most editors simply want to know why the image is there, etc. If you wish to discuss every conceivable reason not to have it that is your option but the community's consensus is to leave it as is and move on. You can choose to continue discussion but the same discussion has gone on since 2005 with the only result being to leave the image as is and not censor in any way. Hence the need for a FAQ for thse editors who wish to ask the very same question. -- Banjeboi 02:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't say we shouldn't have it. Its contents should be supported by consensus.Ferrylodge (talk) 03:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll read up on the Guidelines. We were attempting to use the RC Sproul Page as a template for my son's information, but had not completed the editing. I am the Wiki admin for my work WIKI, but this is the first attempt at the public site.

Thanks

Steve —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.10.181 (talk) 03:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I notice that several pages (Lacnor Mine, Denison Mine, Nordic Mine, and Can-Met Mine) have all recently been deleted. I would line to ask that they be restored, rather than me having to recreate the data that was already there. I created them several days ago as part of a list of 12 other mines in the Elliot Lake area that I am documenting, and have the necessary information for. I was reminded recently that I never got back to them after creation (other priorities pop up ocassionally), but they will be improved very soon. Thank you for considering this request, Turgan ^Talk 06:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Cc: User:Erik9

Hi. {{WikiMapia}} was orphaned and deleted but did the information in the template was put in {{GeoTemplate}} as the discussion in Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 May 18 indicated? Maybe it was my fault that I didn't give some specific instructions of what it had to be done. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello,I have been recently updating my school's wiki (Desborough school) and added in a detail about a DJ (John B) who is an alumni of my school. It came to my attention that the wiki about him had been deleted and I wanted to start it back up again with credited information from websites, interviews and other sources etc. Is this a possibility? I really hope it is as he diserves a valid articale and a representation on Wikipedia just as his contemporaries such as Nu:Tone or Goldie have been able to have. I look forward to an email from you. Thank you. 09:56, 24 May 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonzo1990 (talk • contribs)

I have been able to source information and believe that the he can fufill criterias 1,6 and 7 and there is much more relevent information on his personal history as well as collaborative projects and artists that he has worked with who are of prominent status in the genre as well. I think with the information and knowledge I could create and later expand on what is potentially a strong articale minus the irrelevant commentaries about wild hair and so on. (Jonzo1990 (talk) 17:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC))

Point taken, however if you read my note more closely you will find I have said nothing of the sort. The fact is with basic research on the artist in question you will find he is highly notable in this genre notable friends or no notable friends. I have also noted that he meets both the criterias for people articales and well as the sub-section on entertainers. Are you willing to lift the ban on a wiki for DJ John B, or not? (Jonzo1990 (talk) 19:03, 25 May 2009 (UTC))

I haven't recieved a reply yet. Given the fact I have offered a fair argument and been non-hostile I believe I'm owed a reply. (Jonzo1990 (talk) 23:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC))

Hello again, I can now offer you a first edition of the John B wiki. I have cited as many references as I can currently find and I don't believe that I have made any unsubstantiated claims. Please have a look at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jonzo1990/JohnB . I hope this first draft meets your standards, bearing in mind this would be the original of which I will and I am sure others will build upon in the future. I hope you like it as I have, even though it may not seem it, spent hours on it. I look forward to your reply Many thanks. {Jonzo1990 (talk) 20:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)}

I see you have made some contributions and "cut of the lean" so to speak. Thank you. May I have feeback from yourself on what you think, were to expand in the future and whether or not you will allow this to be an open articale for all. Thanks {Jonzo1990 (talk) 20:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC))

I understand were your coming from. The trouble with this particular genre the press is rather limited. I can put up several links that show he has been noted however, they are cuttings on his personal website, but are from indipendant sources. Would this be acceptable? Also some articales from the drum and bass website Dogs on Acid have several articales on this such as http://www.dogsonacid.com/showthread.php?threadid=224190. As far press coverage goes it is a very difficult issue for the reasons I may have stated before, it is a very underground 'scene' and there for coverage is limited and hard to get a hold of. Any more advice on this I would greatly appreciate. (Jonzo1990 (talk) 21:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC))

Made some further changes relating to collboarations with references. Also any further thought on the issues I spoke about above? Many thanks {Jonzo1990 (talk) 19:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)}

I haven't recieved any replies from you yet OrangeMike. Your knowledge will be helpful in developing this wiki. {Jonzo1990 (talk) 15:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)}

Hi, You deleted the Wierd Records page, and had it locked because of spurious recreation. I would like to create a new page for this label, and have made a request to have it unlocked. I plan on using the following reliable sources: [10] [11] [12] Aryder779 (talk) 20:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with this. Aryder779 (talk) 15:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike. I would like to contest this one. The band has received press coverage in Exclaim! [13], in Chart [14] and in Pitchfork Media [15], so there's the possibility it meets our WP:GNG notability guideline. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 05:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for userfying it. With all due respect, I would still contend that it was an inappropriate use of speedy delete, since it cited two third-party sources at the time you deleted it. When sources are cited, prod or AfD is the way to go if you are dubious about the subject's notability. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I suspect we vary in the extent to which we consider a Pitchfork Media mention evidence of notability. Glad it all turned out for the best. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Your suspicions are no doubt correct! Cheers, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Orangemike,

I wanted to know why you deleted the page "Swisha" that I attempted to create yesterday. I provided articles written at universities about the artist as well as myspace and facebook pages of more than just the artist that I was writing about. The artist also had sufficient information on his own facebook and myspace page as well as video footage. furthermore, more can be found on youtube about the artist and all of the affilliations written about the artist. These websites are relevant information for artists and public figures and this is where a large part of the media gets their information about artists. Also, there are wiki pages of artists that use myspace and facebook as credible sources so why not now?

Messithegreat (talk) 16:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Right............so words coming not only directly from the source but also had links from articles written at university papers isn't enough?? oh ok, so when the next artist blogs about something on either of these sites and the media catches it and reports on all other sites then we'll write it off as not relevant by your logic. it's obvious you have no clue what you are doing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Messithegreat (talk • contribs) 15:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

This guy obviously has a COI, but the template was un-neccessary as I was already trying to work it out at EAR, and he hasn't edited that article at all since then. Just wanted to let you know that he is making GF edits, so we should work with him, instead of templating him.Drew Smith What I've done 03:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I see that you've blocked USA12345 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Since he now can't edit the talk page of Julie Myers (though I didn't expect that he would), that makes page protection moot since it seems he was the sole edit warrior. You may want to remove the protection. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 05:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Why did you block him? I was trying to work with him and the other edit warrior to reach consensus. See WP:EAR for relevant discussion.Drew Smith What I've done 05:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see that you blocked him before I ever became involved in this...Drew Smith What I've done 05:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Why did you delete this page with the rationale of 'Expired PROD' when the PROD notice was only placed on the page minutes before the deletion? PROD is supposed to be uncontested for 7 days. Additionally, I don't believe that redirects are eligible for PROD deletion. Please advise. Thanks. Brianga (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Orangemike, you have deleted a page about the OpenMI Association with the rationale that it is an "Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject." The OpenMI Association are the developers of the OpenMI modelling standard (there is a new article about this in wikipedia) which is used extensively for integrated modelling (mostly in environmental applications). The article about the association was very similar in concept (at least as a wikipedia article) with the article on the Open Geospatial Consortium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Geospatial_Consortium) which is another association that maintains various standards (mostly on geographical and georeferenced data). I would have thought that as far as wikipedia is concerned there would be no reason to keep the one and delete the other (just to be clear - i am arguing that both are interesting and should be kept!). Any advice on elements that perhaps need to be included in the OpenMI Association article to make its importance more obvious would be much appreciated.Bridge2009 (talk) 11:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Good Morning Orangemike

I am a relatively new editor, and I would like to have someone more experienced review something I just did. I address myself to you as you are on the talk page.

As a theatre buff, I am working on the "Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company" page, attempting to remove the blatent adverizing and rewrite it from a neutral point of view. My first step was to add a Theatre Group Infobox to the page. For this type of theatre, the Artistic Director is a significant entry, so I then edited the "Infobox Theatre Group" and added an "ArtisticDirector" line. Everything seemed to work properly and I don't feel it is kludged.

Would you please review my edits and give me feedback before I proceed

Thank you in advance

ed Ecragg (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

orang ca you take about 8 minutes and listen to the cbs digital archive interview I have as a source for Frank Camper that is about as credible as it gets for the sikh bomber info. I had multiple sources for that. Let me know what you think. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Since when is CBS not a reliable source? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Isourced two sentences and changed the verbage that Frank Camper per CBS trained one Sikh bomber and was acknowledged by the FBI aas an assisting role. If we still disagree I suggest we ask for further comment. let me know. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Try this link directly should take you to archives. http://archives.cbc.ca/society/crime_justice/clips/5700/

You've mixed up the CBC with CBS! --Orange Mike | Talk 18:40, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

yeah I did screw up cbc oops, is this still reliable or is this not? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:41, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

It also sounds like you have a few more interactions or knowledge of Frank in areas I may not have, Is there anything you can add to the article?

Makes sense, just curious. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike - I missed the chance to say "thanks" for your advice on my help desk query before it was archived, so: Thanks! I'll have a look at the article again with a view to integrating my editions as you said. --Kateshortforbob 14:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Orange mike - I apologize for reverting your edit. I should have messaged you first before I did that, and then gotten some input. I have an argument for keeping what I had, but for the moment it seems that Immer has made a good point on the article's talk page. Something for me to think about. I might get back to you both, and be clear about what I would like the article to say, and that it would be a contribution to Wikipedia - within wiki guidelines.

Just so you know I was about to present my argument just before I wrote this. But I changed my mind. Talk to you later. Ti-30X (talk) 04:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in. I just came across this article, asked any evidence of its notability and got an answer from user:Ti-30X that he doesn't know, but he believes it is the notability of the book's author. I do disagree with this reason and suggest Afd-nominating the article. What do you think ? Materialscientist (talk) 04:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I have Afd-nominated Physics of the Impossible here. Materialscientist (talk) 09:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike! You're an admin, right? There has been some confusion about how best to proceed with importing an image over from de.WP, and my query at WP:Help desk#Importing Ansfelden heraldic image from de.WP has yet to receive a response. If you're not too busy, I wonder if you would be inclined to help out with this. Please see Talk:Ansfelden for more details. Thank you. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 11:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Another user has imported the picture. Thanks anyway. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 01:08, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Orangemike-- I'm the web guy for Boston Review, and I'm writing to inquire about unblocking our account. We got banned a couple months ago, and I wanted to appeal on the promise of better behavior in the future. Our wikipedia editors are typically interns, who're instructed to cite notable articles on WP and play by the rules. This typically results in a flurry of unsupervised editing every few months, which is what I suspect got us the current ban.

Boston Review is a nonprofit, available free online since 1996, and we take our responsibility as a public resource very seriously. In the case of Joseph Carens, we cited his recent 5500 word article in the magazine where he details how his political theory relates to immigration, a major topic of his research and writing. As his entry stands now, there is no other freely available Further Reading resource linked.

Would you consider unblocking our account if I caution the interns to remain above-board, read the COI policy and be restrained in their citations? I can be reached at will at bostonreview dot net.

Thanks,

Will Fertman, Boston Review —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.126.178 (talk) 18:43, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Assuming we are talking about User:Bostonreview: that account should never have been created in the first place, because its name is that of a collective entity, and only individual human beings are permitted to have editing accounts here. Additionally, that account has a history since 2006 of only being used 1) to edit articles about Boston Review, in violation of our rules on conflict of interest; and 2) more recently, to add links to articles in the Boston Review, an act we call "spamlinking". The individual human beings at the BR, interns and otherwise are welcome to become individual editors here, subject to our rules on conflict of interest, spamming, etc.; but we will not unblock a "role account" for these reasons. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

This is a copy of a response I made to you on the talkpage for Shaiya. This is to make sure that you have seen it and you have read the entire comment.

Orange, You failed to mention the first part of the paragraph where EABoz mentions the fact that he has reveiwed the article and changed it. Please make sure that you read the entire post of a user before commenting on it. ~munkee_madness talk 23:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

A while ago, you asked my if I was going to add this year's Sidewise nominations to Wiki and I commented I wouldn't because it would just be reverted. As an example, take a look at my edits today to David Eddings (and similar entries) and the response I got from TheRedPenOfDoom. Having maintained a news site for 7 years, it just feels so wonderful to be told it isn't reliable. Shsilver (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question:

Is it acceptable to leave the full street address on the location line in the infobox?

Ecragg (talk) 16:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Since you are one of the admins who deleted Searchme, I've come here to ask you userfy the contents of that deleted article to User:Cunard/Article/SearchMe. I'm certain that I can source and expand the article with the large number of sources found in Google News Archive. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 17:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Good catch with this. Sorry I missed it when I was processing requests at WP:RFPP. — Kralizec! (talk) 18:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Orangemike, you deleted the Total Annihilation: Twilight page under this reference: "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion". The article was not meant as simple advertising or promotion, it was meant as an entry for a modification of the game, Total Annihilation. Other game modification entries, such as Firearms_(video_game), seem to be acceptable, and so I'd like to know how we can resolve any objections to or problems with the entry. There was no discussion, just a rapid deletion, so there was no time to address any concerns there might have been with the entry. How can I help resolve the issues with this entry? Twilight (talk) 02:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I just read your initial entry on my talk page (Didn't seem to show up when I checked there earlier). You mentioned the potential conflict of interest. I agree that that could be a potential issue, but the reason I wrote the article in the first place is that I noticed someone else (Dekimasu) had written an entry for the mod, but essentially just by copying and pasting most of the mod's webpage, which had gotten it deleted, so I decided to create the entry and rewrite things so it wasn't just a copy of the mod's web page. Additionally, I'd like to see some of the other Total Annihilation mods get entries, such as Uberhack, which certainly was notable due to it being so widespread. I had planned on working on the Uberhack entry next (Which I do not have a conflict of interest on), but then you deleted the entry. As I said above, is there any way to resolve any potential conflicts, perceived "advertising", etc? Any sort of compromise or rewriting seems preferable to just outright deletion. As mentioned above, the Firearms mod for Half-Life has an entry. What makes it different from this? In other words, how can I or someone else adjust the article so that it meets the criteria that seems to allow the Firearms mod, but not this one. Can you advise me on this? Thanks, Twilight (talk) 02:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)