User talk:C.Fred/Archive 20

Removal of Solel Congregation Synagogues

hi just noticed that this page has been deleted? Not sure why, this page was linked/created from another page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_synagogues_in_the_Greater_Toronto_Area / i just noticed that this particular religious institution didn't have its' own page so i figured i would add one to expand Wikipedia. It is no more or less relevant than any other synagoges linked from the other page including https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adath_Israel_Congregation_(Toronto) and I'd argue politely that the article i created actually had more references/citations.

Anyways hope it can be restored. thanks

(Dambock (talk) 04:35, 8 October 2016 (UTC)).
 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dambock (talk • contribs) 04:34, 8 October 2016 (UTC) 

@Dambock: The presumption is that any local place of worship is generally not notable. I did not see anything in the article that indicated any degree or significance or importance. —C.Fred (talk) 04:37, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

ok, so why then are the other 20+ places of worship listed on the page I linked from notable? (sorry just trying to figure this out). The article included multiple press mentions as citation from multiple third part sources. I'm relatively new at this, so i'd appreciate the benefit of the doubt before having an article deleted so quickly. Eager to help. Thanks(Dambock (talk) 04:42, 8 October 2016 (UTC)).

@Dambock: Other stuff exists. I've already nominated for deletion the one page you singled out, but just because other inappropriate pages exist, that's not grounds to create more. —C.Fred (talk) 04:49, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For fighting vandalism at Tom Brady. -- AI RPer (talk) 17:32, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Bosque River pronunciation

Hi, I noticed that you reverted an edit I made to Bosque River. The name of the river is pronounced as [bɒskɪ] or [bɒski], and never [bɒskʰi]. This means the second syllable must have the "y" of "happy" and not the "ee" of "fleece". I'm going to assume good faith and change it back to the short vowel. If you have any questions, let me know. --Clorox (talk) 20:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@Clorox: My bad. I misread the /i/ as /ɪ/, as in "kit". I didn't see the reduced vowels at the bottom of the table. Yes, that is a better a representation of the pronunciation—well, provided you'll accept the way it was pronounced by the Aggies I used to work with as valid. :) —C.Fred (talk) 20:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Want to help test advanced new tools planned for Recent Changes?

Hi C.Fred! I’m reaching out to you because our logs tell us you’re an active Twinkle new user welcomer. The WMF Collaboration team is working on new tools that we hope will be useful to people engaged in reviewing recent changes, fighting vandalism or supporting new users. We want to test them for usability with editors who are experienced with relevant wiki work. If you’re interested in helping to shape this new technology—we’d like to hear from you.

The testing should take about an hour, will be conducted online, and will take place during the next few weeks. To participate, please email dchen[at]wikimedia.org with the subject line Twinkle Welcomer. Include the following information:

• Username

• Email where we can reach you

• Your city or time zone

• Best time to talk to you

• Your primary use(s) of Twinkle or Recent Changes (e.g., reviewing recent changes, reviewing with a particular focus (specify), anti-vandalism, new-page review, welcoming new users, etc.)

Thanks! Dchen (WMF) (talk) 23:53, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

PLEASE Revert PATAS to its most original post since 2013...

Dear SIR; I am the TRUE FOUNDER of PATAS :http://americanhumanist.org/HNN/issue/details/2011-06-atheism-in-the-philippines-a-personal-story Another confirmation since you did not like FB. PLEASE, remove the WIKI about PATAS (Philippine Atheists and Agnostics, Society) I am begging you, the stalkers and my haters are on it again. Thanks for understanding. Marissa Torres Langseth, RN MSN Hapimarissa (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

DEAR SIR: Please remove or delete that PATAS page: too many IPs, vandalizing it. and please read the articles about me.. they are all there :I am the woman who lit the fire. stating that I am the Chairperson and Founder since it was founded in 2011. Better still, remove that page since stalkers and vandals are on it since the protection was removed. Thanks and regards, Marissa Langseh, RN, MSN Hapimarissa (talk) 19:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello there: Another source proving I am the Founder and Chairwoman of PATAS : http://americanhumanist.org/HNN/issue/details/2011-06-atheism-in-the-philippines-a-personal-story Kindly remove that PATAS page in WIKI., I am getting tired already and the stalkers and haters are on me again. Thank you for understanding, Marissa Torres Langseth, RN, MSN Hapimarissa (talk) 20:02, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Hapimarissa: The general rule of thumb is that pages are not removed at the request of a person who was (formerly) affiliated with the subject. I'll take a look at the link above and see if it qualifies as a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 21:14, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

FYI ANI - Mlpearc (open channel) 21:17, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Mlpearc: Thanks for the heads-up. I've already chimed in there. —C.Fred (talk) 21:39, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your efficient response: kindly block this IP : 182.50.30.60 Kindly block this IP always vandalizing that site :124.105.25.125 I appreciate your kindness ; Ms M Hapimarissa (talk) 21:57, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Hapimarissa: Because IP addresses may be used by multiple people, any block issued against an IP would have to be due to current and ongoing vandalism. Three edits over a day ago do not qualify as current and ongoing. —C.Fred (talk) 22:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Dear Fred, What can I do so that this PATAS page can be removed from WIKI, so that I do not have to worry again for future vandalism? Please advise..thanks Hapimarissa (talk) 22:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC) @Fred- this page has taken a lot of my emotions very recently. Those haters will come back again and again. What to do? can I implore someone to request for it to be removed ? thanks Hapimarissa (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Dear Sir: Do I need a lawyer so that this page can be removed? I am already disturbed and practically suffering from the constant bullying I get via the internet. I cannot be watching this page daily and alert you of vandalism again and again. Your protection was just for a few weeks and the vandalism resurfaced. I cannot be in pain and suffer any longer. Advise me what to do for this PATAS page to be removed. Thank you. Hapimarissa (talk) 23:30, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Hapimarissa: With all due respect, if you're suffering that much from a few random users who vandalize an article from time to time, perhaps the best thing to do is just not to look at the page. —C.Fred (talk) 00:08, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Request for permanent protection : Dear Admins, AS long as that page stays like that forever and will not be vandalized again and again..then that would be awesome. May I request for a permanent protection please. Kind regardsHapimarissa (talk) 00:10, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

@Hapimarissa: That request will absolutely not be granted. The page will be watched for vandalism, but you cannot have your preferred version left in place indefinitely. —C.Fred (talk) 00:12, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

SIR: That is not my preferred version..that is the TRUTH >I left them already, but someone alerted me again that PATAS page has been vandalized to vilify me again and again.. Thank you for watching that page for vandalism..Cheers Hapimarissa (talk) 00:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Removal of Movers & Cashmere

Hi Fred,

My page have been deleted, but it still shows on search engine with a note on violation, will that be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lesliewtsang (talk • contribs) 16:27, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

@Lesliewtsang: You'll have to request that yourself; most search engines have some kind of a link for maintenance. We don't handle how search engines index articles, especially articles that get deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 16:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Punisher braule

Hello, there is still extant, a draft for the above. Should this be deleted also? The editor does not seem to be here to contribute constructively. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 23:05, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

@Eagleash: Good point. The draft has also been deleted G3. —C.Fred (talk) 23:06, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 23:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

On another note, is the editor's username acceptable per WP:REALNAME? Roger Williamson was a racing driver who died at the 1973 Dutch Grand Prix. He has 'edited' both of those articles. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 16:07, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Musicguy420

Vandalized past your final warning. 2601:1C0:4401:F360:C849:59CD:AEDB:707F (talk) 03:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Gab?

User:ILoveCrotons seemed to pick up right where the last one left off... Crow^Caw 19:36, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Crow: ...and has now wound up where the last one did. :) —C.Fred (talk) 20:21, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Refrences

I have proposed a way to collapse refrences to the village pump. Marfyman (talk) 21:07, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Marfyman: Then wait for it to get acceptance there first. Using an inappropriate template to accomplish your goal was good faith the first time, but now it's becoming disruptive. —C.Fred (talk) 21:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Manny Taur (Monster High)

You deleted Manny Taur (Monster High), but the decision made in the AfD was to redirect. Therefore, you should undelete that article and its talk page, and redirect it to List of Monster High characters per the AfD. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 23:48, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000: Yeah, that one was a false-positive while I was cleaning up stuff created by a sockpuppet. I'm not sure why I tagged it G4, anyway; I'd have meant to tag it G5 or as an unnecessary redirect. I've restored it. —C.Fred (talk) 23:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, but I think you should undelete the talk page as well. Can you do that please? GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 00:04, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000: Yep. Done. Apparently my brain started my weekend early. :) —C.Fred (talk) 00:28, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Deleted page

Hello C.Fred you deleted the page I just worked so hard on I wasn't even done getting all the references and now it's up for references deletion any way you can help please I'm just a fan of Ladell l saw he was in the new Watch Dogs video game and I looked him up and he didn't have a wiki so I made one and not even a minute up it get's deleted please. Please what can I do to help get it up and stay I put a stub on it. Kesäkuutawwe (talk) 01:57, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kesäkuutawwe: The page you made was very similar to what had been deleted in the past. I suggest you continue to work on the draft. If you can show that Murph is significant in ways that he wasn't when the community decided to delete it, we can see about getting the article restored. —C.Fred (talk) 02:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Response to GROUP F page

Hi I now have an account and I will move these edits into mine. Please give me one more hour. I've had a very hard time and tried to respond to you. My colleague is getting in here. I have a learning challenge in maneuvering here please please hold on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UCSF HPL Group F (talk • contribs) 02:15, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

68.107.0.33 (talk) 02:19, 21 October 2016 (UTC) Hello,

We discussed with our instructor about the issue regarding our username We understand that it violates the terms, currently we as a group were just working on edits that were criticized in the assignment however, this is only a temporary space for edits.

As of now, we are just finishing our final edits and will be moving our information to an account that follows the protocol and terms set by Wikipedia

Please allow us until tonight 11:59PM to move our material before deleting our content Thank you!

Note: the page we are moving GROUP F's work on is NM.HP.Wiki

UCSF HPL Group F (talk) 02:26, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Update: we have moved the information on GROUP F's page to the account under use: iledonne

UCSF HPL Group F (talk) 02:47, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Technically, you haven't moved it. I'll check if there's anything critical that needs moved. —C.Fred (talk) 02:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything that is. —C.Fred (talk) 02:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Jakob Oakey

I could not find a way to reply to your message to me.

There may be a conflict of interest on Jakob's Voice writing about Jakob Oakey however, all information is backed up with evidence. Much more evidence can be supplied to wiki if needed in relation to ALL information being factual. Obviously all information comes from either media or the sources mouths including Jakob's himself.

If Wiki won't post Jakob Aaron Oakey's story due to a conflict is it better for someone else to write the article?

Also, when will I know when the article will be available to view? It says up to 3 weeks but wiki has obviously reviewed the article already thus your message. Will we receive an email when the article is online? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakobsvoice (talk • contribs) 00:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@Jakobsvoice: The biggest problem I'm seeing is that most of the sources are self-published. Wikipedia articles require independent sources, and they generally need to be professionally published. Anyone can post anything on Facebook or Vimeo, which is why we almost never allow them as sources. We also restrict the use of government documents as primary sources. They typically need an academic or journalistic secondary source to interpret them. There's also the problem that it makes claims about living persons, which we have the strictest standards of evidence for (no matter what is being claimed about them or what they did). Wikipedia is not a platform for advocacy, regardless of the cause. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:41, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

AGAIN - No way to respond that I can see!!! Obviously I am responding to your response:

The references maybe self published but they come from media sources (ie vimeo which is the ABC's own documentary therefore media!!!) and other documents that can not be fraudulant ie REAL and CORRECT documents.

How can I then make Jakob Oakey's wikipedia an article considering you won't accept any documents published in anything other that newpapers and EVEN media reports such as Vimeo - Behind Closed Doors which was an ABC media presentation which was run though legal innumerous times over 6 months... can you give me a wib site that I can publish ALL these legal documents and the ABC documentary to that will be accepted by Wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakobsvoice (talk • contribs) 04:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@Jakobsvoice: First, you got the replying down just fine. The way to reply in a discussion is to add your comments to the bottom of the thread.

For sources, we generally prefer to a link directly to the source rather than to another hosting site. With a print site or a web page, there's a risk that material was changed when it was posted to the other site or otherwise forged. For a video, the best source is a page on ABC's site; equally valid would be a YouTube channel that is owned by ABC (and that ownership is verified by YouTube). Vimeo should be a parallel structure. With video, there are also potential issues with copyrights if the site is not owned/controlled by the publisher. We can typically use the links within a reference, but they can't be added as external links.

If a source is a self-published source, there are restrictions on how we can use the information. For example, we'd accept the Sydney Swans' own website as a source for the date the club was founded or who the current chair/CEO is. We would not accept the Swans claiming to have the highest attendance in the league last year; we'd prefer to have a source from the league that impartially tallies attendance for all clubs—or better still, a newspaper report on the league-wide attendance, so a reporter and his/her editor would have reviewed the data. We should never use a self-published source to support an assertion about somebody else: we couldn't accept the Swans' website as a source related to the Adelaide Crows.

Back to your specific example: "Behind Closed Doors which was an ABC media presentation which was run though legal innumerous times over 6 months". ABC media would meet the definition of a reliable source because they're independent of the subject and have an editorial review process. Their documentary programme Behind Closed Doors would be accepted as a reliable source, based on it being an independent production subject to editorial (and legal) review. If we can verify the content from an ABC-owned or -controlled page, that will smooth the process; if it's at a page not controlled by ABC, there will be issues. —C.Fred (talk) 17:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

I would go one step further. WP:SOURCEACCESS -- part of the Wikipedia policy on verifiability that you cite -- says that a source can still be considered acceptable even if it is very difficult to access. So in this case the documentary does not necessarily have to be accessible from a website (controlled by ABC or otherwise). It could perhaps be acceptable as a source if it is possible to cite the documentary name, the date it was aired and/or year it was produced, the (television?) channel it was aired on, the name of the producer and of the director, the time in minutes:seconds where the cited fact was stated, optionally a quote (transcript) of what was said about that fact in the documentary, and so on. Absence of an acceptable hyperlink does not always imply unsuitability as a source. MPS1992 (talk) 17:28, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

"Horror" vandalism

In case you didn't see, User:Phlatus XXI is yet another sockpuppet. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:13, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Defending Jeffrey Robinson article

C. Fred, Thank you for defending the article from the second attack by the same clown in three days. This is the fifth time he's tried it on. I have no idea who he is or why he's doing this but I really do appreciate your vigilance. Cheers/ JR SJR524 (talk) 09:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

AGS Deletion

Hey Fred, I noticed you deleted a post myself and a few others have worked our butts off on to make it accurate. If it wont be reinstated, could you at least leave for me on my page so i can move it to a different platform? Also, for now on, try leaving comments before deleting it, so people can explain, i notice that to be a trend among complaints. If you dont get a response within a month, thats understandable, but this caused frustration to a lot of people who use wikipedia as a source.

Thanks!

-Nate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naterybner (talk • contribs) 23:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

@Naterybner: First off, Wikipedia is not a source. People should not be coming here for information that is a summary of other sites, particularly published reliable sources.

Second, the version of the article I deleted had only been around for 2 hours. The speedy delete tag is exactly what it sounds like: speedy deletion. It's courtesy to give an editor 15–30 minutes to improve the article, but 15–30 days is unreasonable. You had plenty of time to address the concerns in the article but did not. And the deletion tag is a comment: it's a flag that the article is so insufficient in its current state that it can't be allowed to remain.

Finally, I don't do email requests, but you could go to WP:REFUND and request for a copy of the page via email. —C.Fred (talk) 23:09, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

I would like to beg to differ with you on several things. Most people i know are not on Wikipedia 24/7. I saw that someone deleted it roughly 3-4 days later, and was quite irritated. Most people use wikipedia to either research facts or to learn things. Also, whether you agree or not that people come here for information is your opinion, and i respect that. You must realize some people do regardless. If the article is blatantly obscene, then of course delete it. But this is something that had existed for several months, and people occasionally use. It isn't like Donald Trump or Hillary Clintons wikis where people look at them every day, this is like a page (if i use historical figures) that is comparable to Curtis Lemay, the VP candidate to George Wallace in 1968. People dont use it daily, but when they do, its to get a general idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naterybner (talk • contribs) 23:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

@Naterybner: It was the article's third time around. There had been plenty of time to fix things. As far as the criteria for speedy deletion, those are established as part of Wikipedia policy.

One other thing: Wikipedia is not a webhost. It's pretty clear that the article was placed on Wikipedia solely to give the game some web presence. That's not necessarily part of the speedy deletion criteria, but it's not allowed. The page was on web content without a shred of significance and without reliable sources; I stand by the deletion under CSD A7. —C.Fred (talk) 23:21, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay, i have to finish something. I will get back to you later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naterybner (talk • contribs) 23:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Deleted Page Draft:Panther Prints

C.Fred I understand what you are saying, however i don't know if you understand that scholastic publications cannot receive awards outside of this realm, and the Pacemaker is considered the Pulitzer prize for student journalists. There is no such thing as an outside award for student journalists. Further, i have seen other wikipedia pages for other scholastic publications like this one with far fewer outside sources (which quite frankly mine has ), and no different awards than these. I would urge you to reconsider the choice you've made. I'm not sure how familiar you are with scholastic journalism, but these awards are considered noteworthy. I urge you to look at the pages for "The North Texas Daily" of the University of North Texas, or "The Maneater" of the University of Missouri to understand what i mean.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by RWILL894 (talk • contribs) 23:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Please delete this again

Cameron Newton slave family history. I think I was tagging it when you deleted it and unfortunately the content stuck on. Lourdes 02:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Never mind. Another admin did it. Thanks. Lourdes 02:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Fractional Reserve Banking

Hi,

I saw that you made edits to Fractional Reserve Banking recently. I wonder if you would like to vote or pass comment on this rather important proposed change to the page => Time to change which theory gets prominence? - BTW, yes I know that this has been discussed before, but I think that there are good reasons why this issue should periodically be reviewed. Cheers Reissgo (talk) 08:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Favrice itsapoem

I've left a caution and a comment there... Peridon (talk) 13:50, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Father Saturnino Urios University

Hi C.Fred. Would you mind taking a look at this edit to check if it is the same or similar to the content you deleted as a copyvio here or that Diannaa revdel as copyrighted content per this? This particular article has been heavily edited by sockpuppets and this IP seems to have come out of nowhere to add photos and other content to the article, so it might be the sockmaster back again trying to edit the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:10, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi again C.Fred. It seems another editor JJMC89 was able to confirm the new content was a copyvio and the edits were revdel by Diannaa. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:48, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: But now I know where the copyvio came from and what to look for it it happens again. —C.Fred (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Train (band)

Hello C.Fred, I saw you edited Train (band) the other day to correct the title of their upcoming album per MOS:CAPS and were reverted. I've changed it back and written the user who reverted you a message on their talk page, but I get the feeling this isn't going to hold, because their reasoning for reverting you in the first place didn't make sense (as there were no other real instances of the title on the article besides what you corrected). Would you please be able to watch the article and monitor any further changes to this? I get the feeling users like this will listen to administrators more. Ss112 00:36, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Jared Lebowitz

Please also remove "Jared lebowitz" and "Talk:Jared lebowitz" - it was the original article, was moved, and is now a redirect. Thanks! Justin15w (talk) 22:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

edit to school bullying article

Hi, may I respectfully ask you why you took down my new section on intervention?Mokeeg (talk) 02:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

@Mokeeg: Mainly because of lack of reliable sourcing. The only reference provided was to the intervention's own website. There was no independent coverage cited. —C.Fred (talk) 04:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Jared Lebowitz

Why did you delete the page of Jared Lebowitz? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiddleburyFootball (talk • contribs) 18:39, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

@MiddleburyFootball: Because the article failed to assert his significance or importance. Your conflict of interest didn't help the situation either. —C.Fred (talk) 20:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Raymond Chan (WWII Veteran)

I have rewritten the page for Raymond (Buster) Chan/Chinese Canadian Military

The new title article (as written in my words), is as follows:

Raymond Chan (Canadian WWII Veteran) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Raymond Chan, also known as "Buster"

Born March 8, 1920, Vancouver, BC.

As a young man and throughout his life, Raymond was driven and determined. He was a welder by trade for the Burrard dry docks of North Vancouver. He came from a family of 4 children, and was an intelligent, young and adventurous man. an opportunity to sign up for the Second World War would soon make those earlier dreams of travel, a true reality. Many young Chinese Canadians, clambered quickly for the opportunity to sign up and become an integral part of the military. They were the first pioneers who broke away from social barriers and paved a better path for their own constitutional rights and world acceptance. However, it was not as easy for the young recruit, Raymond Chan. Due to his ethnic background, he was turned down twice. However, after his third attempt, Vancouver's local Army recruiting office accepted his services. Each young Vancouver Chinese Canadian recruited were soon to become known as the Special Task Force unit 136. The military training center was based in Chilliwack, British Columbia.

During the later part of the Second World War in 1944, the British were anxious to support resistance movements in the Japanese-occupied areas of South East Asia. It was then when Raymond Chan was finally deemed useful to his country. The military used his Asian looks to their advantage,, as it was thought he could easily blend into those populated regions. His mission was to gather intelligence and support sabotage operations.

Under rigorous training for Force 136 - Raymond Chan was ready for combat under the British Intelligence Special Operations Executive (SOE). SOE operations were low visibility, utilizing speed, surprise, audacity and deception to minimize the associated risks, while maximizing the results. These tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) enabled the SOE forces to accomplish missions that, in many cases, conventional military forces could likely accomplish, albeit with greater difficulty, Hence, they were the "force of choice". Therefore, Raymond Chan was trained as an SOE operator who was geographically oriented, and was able to culturally attune himself to his surroundings. He was capable fo communicating in the local language(s). This capability enabled him (and others alike) to acclimatize rapidly in exotic locales and undertake their missions from a standing start.

After an approximate two months of training sessions in the Fraser Valley, Raymond Chan was shipped to England. Whereby; another extensive voyage to Burma India, awaited him. He was stationed in the region for several months, there he specialized in wireless operations.

Raymond Chan returned to Vancouver, BC and continued to be actively supportive in his community. Once again, he would spend countless hours volunteering his services at teh Saint Vincent Hospital, to be by the bedside of many former veterans.

Recently the Government of Canada has established a commemoration of the men's valiant efforts. Mr Raymond Chan, along with his fellow comrades, have all been honored on the memorial service wall of the Sun Yat Sen Garden's in Chinatown. His name is also honored in the Chinese Canadian Military Museum in Vancouver, BC. Several years ago, he was sent to China as an honorary guest speaker on behalf of the Chinese Government. Raymond Chan was also invited as a guest by Canada's first Asian-Canadian Lieutenant-governor, David C. Lam, and received a distinguishable mention during the dinner gala. A recent documentary was made and highlights the Special Task Force 136 mission. "Buster" Raymond Chan's former regiment Force unite 136, has been published in numerous articles and tutorials. And each member has been strongly acknowledged for their admirable display of courage and strength.Heather5424 (talk) 08:15, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

References

@Heather5424: Wikipedia's guideline on whether there should be a separate Wikipedia article about an individual military veteran, is at WP:SOLDIER. Unfortunately, Raymond Chan, despite his distinguished service, seems not to meet these requirements. MPS1992 (talk) 08:39, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

@Heather5424: I think I have to agree with MPS1992. I am not convinced that Chan is individually notable enough to have his own article. —C.Fred (talk) 22:06, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

The Great meme war

Add it back — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.118.213.40 (talk) 22:32, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Not without lots of evidence that it's been covered in reliable sources. Wikipedia is not the place for made-up stuff. —C.Fred (talk) 22:50, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

AGE-u-cate Training Institute

Hello,

My name is John Brandon. I'm vice president of AGE-u-cate Training Institute. Recently, I worked on an article for 3 days and finally thought it was in keeping within the Wikipedia guidelines for submission. My wife, president of the company, is mildly featured in the article AGE-u-cate Training Institute as the president and founder. We read and re-read the article many times to ensure that it would not appear to be advertising. It was factual and informative with regard to why the company was started. We cited many independent references and tried our best to give potential readers only the facts. When I logged back in this evening to read it again, I learned it was deleted due to unambiguous advertising. I looked at many commercial organization articles in public space to make sure we weren't in violation of Wikipedia rules. One particular article I noted was ACE Hardware. While factual, it did have the ACE Hardware logo plus other "gallery" photos embedded in the text.

Is our 3 days of work in vain... that is, is our article simply gone or do we have an opportunity to fix whatever was wrong with it?

Johnhbrandon (talk) 01:19, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

@Johnhbrandon: You might want to address this message to RHaworth, the admin who actually did the deletion. I wasn't convinced that the article was pure spam, although there was some phrasing where it felt more like a promotional brochure than an encyclopedia article. It would also help if you showed where the company had been written about in newspapers or magazines—in reliable sources independent of the company. —C.Fred (talk) 01:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Ayyadurai etc

I saw your message, but I'm not sure it will help. From an AGF point of view, it is true that (elsewhere) after the settlement of the Gawker lawsuit Ayyadurai was the subject of a number of repulsive attacks; I see why people are upset about that, and why it would be natural to assume that skepticism about his claims is racially motivated. If YatesByron steps back and starts to engage more calmly perhaps then we can explore why that's not necessarily so. Pinkbeast (talk) 02:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

welcome...

Welcoming new Wikipedia editors is surely a good thing, but you should employ some discrimination. I see you just welcomed User:Mohammed Gin; a look at what they have done would have revealed that this is a promotional account set up to write a single promotional article (which I speedied, hence your welcome showing up on my watchlist).

@TheLongTone: That's why I used the welcome message for people writing autobiographies. I guess I should've used the spam one, but close enough. —C.Fred (talk) 15:36, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

So it goes. I'm intrigued by the idea of an alcoholic drink named after the prophet...TheLongTone (talk) 15:44, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Trump's Cabnet

Hi Fred I need your help adding a image of this guy https://www.wcs.k12.mi.us/Departments/Superintendent/images/Livernois.jpg to the Secretary of Education of the Trump Cabnet page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump%27s_cabinet Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobby232332 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Bobby232332: It may not be added. The image is copyrighted; Warren Consolidated Schools has not released the image for us to use it. —C.Fred (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobby232332 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Rootsville T ...

... is an obvious sock of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Evlekis (check the contributions, repeatedly recreating attack pages on the talk pages of a few IPs), so would you please block him? - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 20:57, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Thomas.W: Yep. A few more edits and he showed his stripes way too clearly. Blocked, talk page access revoked. —C.Fred (talk) 21:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

... and there will be more socks tonight, at least two or three more, as there always is when Evlekis gets going. Always targeting me since I've nailed scores of his socks... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 21:00, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Thomas.W: I'll add your user and user talk pages to my watchlist, so I can see if he comes trolling by there. —C.Fred (talk) 21:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. There are two more attack pages, BTW, identical to the one you deleted: User talk:94.196.95.177 and User talk:94.196.246.55. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 22:18, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

The attack pages were deleted as I wrote the post above... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 22:20, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

About ismail

Bangladeshi Top Newspaper BanglaNews http://www.banglanews24.com/national/news/142411/নতুন-প্রাণের-জোয়ারে-এগিয়ে-যাবে-দেশ-আল-মাহমুদ

Students of Multimedia and Creative Technology Department of Daffodil International University who obtained all the three 1st , 2nd and 3rd position http://news.daffodilvarsity.edu.bd/558-outstanding-performance-by-the-students-of-multimedia-and-creative-technology-department-at-13th-course-project-fair.html

Edu site Ref http://majramufazilmadrasha.edu.bd/digital-bangladesh-transformed-the-information-age-in-bangladesh/

ismail social media activity at facebook https://www.facebook.com/cmsajib121 and https://www.facebook.com/ismailofficialbd/

twitter : https://twitter.com/cmsajib

i will provide more information about ismail

own of google award doc snap http://picgi.com/8zr8dyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 22:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

and ismail was journalist Somoynews and top real news & more popular Media — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 22:43, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ismailim: That award certificate looks fabricated. That does not bode well for your claim that Hossain is a legitimately significant purpose. —C.Fred (talk) 22:53, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Sterling Heights High School

Hi C.Fred can you please Edit Sterling Heights High School and Help me becuse I was a student at Sterling Heights High School I know that my school Opened The Same year that Walt Disney Would Opened. Please keep it on there and the thing about Flynn http://boc.macombgov.org/BOC-District04 Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobby232332 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Bobby232332: No can do. The thing about opening the same year as Disney World is trivia; unless there is some direct connection between the school and WDW, it does not belong int he article. And the David Flynn you linked to went to college in Ireland, not high school in the United States. —C.Fred (talk) 23:21, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

About ismail

Dear sir how much information needed and what kind of References need !!! i will provide news link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 23:37, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

please check top newspaper of Bangladesh Rank of 18 http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/banglanews24.com

university ref http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/daffodilvarsity.edu.bd — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 23:44, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

sir i please check this link of about newspaper please don't mind https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=http%3A%2F%2Fbanglanews24.com&title=Special:Search&go=Go&searchToken=5xz4x9y3f4zkbxx9j8b9gkgj0

this link info is more source — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 23:47, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ismailim: Please review WP:BIO and WP:GNG for guidance. Remember, news links must be to an independent source, not something that the subject wrote. —C.Fred (talk) 23:39, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

And what do Alexa rankings have to do with a person being notable? —C.Fred (talk) 23:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ismailim: I don't see anything in that search about Hossain. —C.Fred (talk) 23:49, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

please sir follow the snap http://prntscr.com/d6jeb3 This is Bangla Name of ইসমাইল হোসেন (Ismail Hossain)

use link of Bangla news translate BD to EN please see the link https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=bn&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.banglanews24.com%2Fnational%2Fnews%2F142411%2Fনতুন-প্রাণের-জোয়ারে-এগিয়ে-যাবে-দেশ-আল-মাহমুদ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 23:55, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

There's no way to translate the screenshot, so that doesn't help me. Please provide me a link directly to a news story about Hossain. —C.Fred (talk) 00:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

http://m.banglanews24.com/cat/news/142411/url

search this ইসমাইল হোসেন this name of bangla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 00:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

@Ismailim: Impractical. I can't go through each story about him getting a small scholarship here and there. The burden of proof is on you to provide the link. —C.Fred (talk) 00:19, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj Picture

yes the picture have the right licenses. I add it through wiki commons and it works i don't understand why you said no — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devinciobrown (talk • contribs) 17:57, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

@Devinciobrown: Can you please point me to a specific page where it clearly states that the image has been released under a Creative Commons license? —C.Fred (talk) 17:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Request

C.Fred, thanks for this! I've been dealing with this user (I.P. originally) at the Marymount College (Kansas) article. Can we get it protected or something that is more appropriate? I've done enough reverting and given enough explanation that I'm letting someone else handle this. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@Corkythehornetfan: I've got the Marymount page on my watch list. I want to see what happens for now, but the article could be on the road to protection. —C.Fred (talk) 04:00, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

What should I do?

I want to add some post in miang kham because it one of my English class work. Any suggestion? What can I add about miang kham on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by YONGPNC (talk • contribs) 15:19, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@YONGPNC: Let's start with the problems with what you added to the article earlier:

1. Wikipedia is not a cookbook. The article should not be written as a set of instructions on how to prepare the dish. There is a general description of how the dish is prepared (ingredients, major processes). That's good, because the article should make people understand what the dish is, not necessarily how to make it.
2. Material must be written in your own words. We can take ideas from other websites, but we can't copy their words. You copied text word-for-word from https://asianinspirations.com.au/experience/mieng-kham-the-goodness-of-leaf-wrapped-delicacy-2/. In the classroom, that's called plagiarism; on Wikipedia, we call it copyright violation.

As far as what to add, one possibility would be to do more research into the history of the dish. Where did it originate? When did it originate? Who (if anybody) is famous for popularizing it? Make sure you cite reliable sources to support your text—but make sure you write your own words rather than copying the source's. —C.Fred (talk) 17:00, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The Great Meme War

I would politely request you revive the page. It is an event being talked about by more and more Internet Denizens and was decisive in the 2016 US Election. To have it not archived is an actual bash on modern history. The only reason there isn't a huge chatter about this topic at the moment is because it is new, but news stories are already popping up and close to at least 1 million people know of the event.

Pro-Donald Trump subreddit with over 250k users discussing the event

News Article.

I would also source that Encyclopedia Dramatica has a page for The Great Meme War kept up, however Wikipedia refused my link. A quick Google search finds it.

Thank you. Ryry117 (talk) 01:12, 12 November 2016 (UTC)ryry117

References

@Ryry117: We'll wait for mainstream sources—multiple ones—to cover it first. —C.Fred (talk) 01:14, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello. I would like to second this request. Other more reputable sources have covered on this issue, although they haven't coined the term "Great Meme War". I think this event was very important and should be revived.

The guardian discussing the usage of memes in the 2016 election.

Even the MSN covered the event.

USA today covered it as well.

I think their is plenty of evidence discussing of the event. To further the idea that it was a war, many Facebook groups were made to counter the pro-Trump memes. "Memes for Bernie" While it technically isnt a war. The term has been coined and is being used through internet culture. I think it would be wise to revive the article.

Pcmhdhp (talk) 18:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

References

@Pcmhdhp: Maybe, but...which of those sources mention lives lost? Which mention the alleged American intervention in the Brexit vote? There were claims in the article that were so bogus as to raise it to the level of pure vandalism. It will not be restored. —C.Fred (talk) 18:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

edit war warning

the source does not use the term "far-right" so i have removed it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74tyheg2 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 19:00, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

My Page got deleted

Hi Fred,

My Page got deleted. Im new on here and just completed the page properly i will appreciate restoring my page back after a long time and stress creating the page.

ThanksSaddamopiee (talk) 22:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I was waiting to know if i can proceed creating one and like i said,im doing this for the first time...Now im creating a new one and will appreciate it being approved

Thanks SaddamopieeSaddamopiee (talk) 00:22, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Working on fixing the errors now.

Hello,

I receive another delete nomination, can you give me time to fix everything needed to be fixed instead of deleting the page again.

Thanks SaddamopieeSaddamopiee (talk) 01:03, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@Saddamopiee: No. You should not be writing an article about yourself. If you're lacking a claim of significance or importance about yourself, any article you create can—and as you've seen, will—be deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 02:06, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

IP vandalism?

Block user:1.129.96.130. 2602:306:3357:BA0:15D8:F45A:61F9:C23F (talk) 02:16, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Not warned enough yet. —C.Fred (talk) 02:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi C.Fred.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

==Thanks for suggestion:)== — Preceding unsigned comment added by YONGPNC (talk • contribs) 09:33, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Pixie Davies

Hi, why did you remove the picture from the Pixie Davies article? I just want her to have a good article with a picture of her on it! If you think that you can do it better, then go ahead and be my guest. But I don't understand why you took it down. The image was free and I sorted all the copyright out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PixieDavies (talk • contribs) 19:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Why, oh why, did you remove the picture from the Pixie Davies article? I just want her to have a wikipedia article with a picture of her on it. The image was free and I sorted the copyright out. Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PixieDavies (talk • contribs) 19:49, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@PixieDavies: Was it free? Where did you see that AMC placed still images from their programming under a free license? —C.Fred (talk) 21:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

@cfred, I am not actress Pixie Davies. She is 8 years old. I don't know many 8 year olds who know how to post on Wikipedia. I saw her in Humans and thought it would be a good idea to set her up with a Wikipedia page (which actually comes up when you search "Pixie Davies" into Google. Please don't delete the article. I found the picture under Google Images. Once again, I am not Pixie Davies, and I am in no way attempting to impersonate her. I'm just a fan who set up the page! I just need help to make the page perfect. I can't do it all on my own! PixieDavies (talk) 08:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PixieDavies (talk • contribs) 07:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@PixieDavies: Because you are not Pixie Davies, you must change your username. Your current one creates confusion due to the appearance that you are Davies. I'll leave a detailed message on your talk page.

As for the picture, if you found it on Google Images, that does not mean it's free. Not everything on the internet is free to reuse. That's why the picture has to be deleted. The article...child actors are generally viewed as not yet being notable people by the community, but we'll see how that plays out in this case. —C.Fred (talk) 18:10, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I will try to change my username, but I do think that Pixie Davies is notable enough to have an article because she starred in Humans, Channel 4's most popular drama for 20 years since 1996's The Camomile Lawn. Humans also aired in the US on AMC, too. PixieDavies (talk) 21:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PixieDavies (talk • contribs) 21:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

American High School

How about semi protection for a week? BLP is a good enough reason. It seems to be a war on whether the physics teacher sucks or is Einstein reincarnate. John from Idegon (talk) 05:12, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, C.Fred. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Carey Price

[1] BLP mentions a lot of things. Could you please be more specific? Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 18:37, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: I'm looking particularly at WP:BLPNAME: "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons." As a general rule, babies' names don't need mentioned. The exceptions are obvious: children of royalty (Princess Charlotte of Cambridge) and children of celebrities who get extensive, wide-spread media coverage (Blue Ivy Carter). Price's daughter has not risen to that standard. —C.Fred (talk) 19:00, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Oki doki. Thanks. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 19:58, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

(Oh, and sorry about your signature. I tried to copy it for the {{mention}} template, but I think I cut instead.) —C.Fred (talk) 21:11, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

help

Yes I mean not here to promote my company only for it to show in the wolrld — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sekyere80 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

@Sekyere80: That's promotion, per the Wikipedia definition. —C.Fred (talk) 22:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Good afternoon Sir, what I did was add the updated shield to the page and updated the information at the bottom (added recent operations) since the information was outdated, all of which was taken from the official site, which anyone has access to and can check. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emjeypespinoza (talk • contribs) 22:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Also I did not create this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emjeypespinoza (talk • contribs) 22:04, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Replies to Emjeypespinoza will be placed on her talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 22:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving Eve...

... and thank you for being there to deal with that really unpleasant vandal just now while I was still flailing around trying to figure out which admins I "know" were onsite! Much obliged! Julietdeltalima (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

@Julietdeltalima: I was looking at contributions from new accounts and saw the edit in question. So I guess I was just in the right [sic] place at the right time. You're welcome, and Happy Thanksgiving Eve to you too! —C.Fred (talk) 01:31, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha

He's at it again. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:36, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Why do you constantly keep removing my edits GONNA report you! SportsLover55 (talk) 02:59, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hopewell Township

Why are you insisting that a former member of the Hopewell Township Committee's personal views about changing parties remain on our Township wiki page? by leaving him on our page, you are disrespecting all former members of the Township Committee who are NOT airing themselves on this page. If you insist on reversing our posts to delete him entirely from the site (as he is no longer on the Committee), then you need to add ALL former members on the site as well, and all of their reasons for changing parties to suit their own personal agendas. I don't think you have the history or knowledge to do so, so kindly permanently remove Harvey Lester from that site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbbshell (talk • contribs) 21:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

@Bbbshell: Why do you refer to it as "our" page? Do you have a conflict of interest with the township or the Township Committee? And it's not an all-or-nothing thing: only significant committee members or other persons get mentioned in the article. There is coverage of Lester, so that's why he's under consideration for mention in the article. If there's not coverage of other former members, that's why they aren't. —C.Fred (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

C.Fred, I've started a discussion at the article talk page, if you're interested in joining in there. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 22:27, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Where is the coverage of Lester in the page besides that one sentence? Which no longer applies to the township because he is no longer on the township committee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbbshell (talk • contribs) 22:25, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

If you're talking about coverage in the press, you can look up any of the other current members of the township committee (Kuchinski, Sandom, Blake, Hart and Brant) and you'll find many more articles about them than exist on Lester. Don't those count? Blake took Lester's place on the committee in a very heated political race last year, and there is much more information about her and that race than there is about a one-term committeeman like Lester. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbbshell (talk • contribs) 22:30, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello from BC!

Hey, there. Hello from a California Native, Recent Canadian transplant just learning about the CFL. :) I really want to thank you for keeping an eye on my edits today and helping to inform me. I want to reiterate that I respect wikipedia, its guidelines, its editors, and particularly the legacy of dedicated Superusers like yourself. I also really appreciate that you have a discuss-first policy. Trust me (if you can), if I were trying to get away with something, or trying to me gauche in using my bio as a puff page, my username would not be marisasolson, my edits would not be happening all at the same time on black friday, I wouldn't be using an open network, and I would have made these edits a very long time ago. I may not be a megastar, but I am now a notable enough artist that people google me frequently, and while there are many other bio's out there for me on the web, the wikipedia one obviously comes up first. I just want it to be correct because people respect this cite as an authority, despite the tendency for misinformation to sneak in (which I know is what you want to prevent) and I am constantly confornted with journalists or art historians or curators or others telling me things they 'learned' about me online, and it has a negative effect on me not only professionally but also just emotionally and creatively, as an artist and a writer. Even today, as I go very slowly trying to make my amateur updates on my ipad, I've been getting trolled and having people try to second-guess the relevance of linking to other Wikipedia pages that cite me multiple times, orr marking live links as dead, etc. I just thought I'd drop you a line, since your monitoring seems to have escalated, and ask that you please allow me the leeway to update my own info. I know it's not the same as updating my facebook wall or personal website, but for instance my last step now as to restore a very brief section on my Creative Practice that someone deleted this morning due to a lack of recent edits.... A great Catch 22! I'm not supposed to edit it, but if I don't, it will go away! If you look at the other edits I made, I actually deleted sections elaborating on specific works of art of mine because they just made me blush and I didn't even feel I needed such a long bio and I felt it set a weird precedent requiring new updates everytime I made new art--by whom, then? So I'm really trying to keep it modest, just current and honest. Thanks for looking out.

Marisasolson (talk) 02:29, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Actions speak so much louder than words. You profess to respect the community, but disregard its policies, after being made aware of them. That's not respect in my book. Kleuske (talk) 12:00, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

A note about consensus

I see your point. The change is made long before, but it does not still make sense. The sources are irrelevant and one of them is not in display. There are lots of articles involving Arabic and Turkish history that Iranian make changes with Iranian propaganda. This bothers the eyes. Imagine you see "Francophone society" in Switzerland, "Germanic society" in England, "Indian society with English origin" in British Empire etc.

Although I can and will redesign the article in a more objective manner (say, "is highly influenced by Arabic and Persian culture due to its Islamic regime.") all I will get is more reverts by the Iranian trolls and talk which won't end due to the nature of article, which is open to being subjective.

Also note that they are talking about consensus among scholars, not in the page. Which scholars are they talking about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nahçivan (talk • contribs) 23:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Nahçivan01:54, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

C.Fred, please note this "new user" is treading the same path as blocked user:Dengesizz. Which can be found on user:Nedim Ardoga's talk page.

Also, scholars go into detail as to the Ottoman's Persianate/Turko-Persian culture:

• Ottoman Turkish: Written language and Scribal Practice, 13th to 20th Centuries, Linda T. Darling, Literacy in the Persianate World:Writing and the Social Order, ed. Brian Spooner and William L. Hanaway, page 171, "In contrast, the interesting thing about Ottoman written culture is that although Ottoman Turkish was intimately linked with Persian throughout its existence, although Ottoman scribes based their organization and culture on that of Persian scribes, and although Persian literature and documents formed the most important models for those of the Ottomans, the Ottoman written language was not at all stable or unchanging."
• M. Sukru Hanioglu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire, page 35, "In a way, Ottoman resembled Latin as used in medieval or early modern Europe. It supplanted Persian, which had served as the literary language of the cultured upper classes during the first three centuries of the empire."
• Bertold Spuler, Persian Historiography & Geography, page 68-69, "However, Persian maintained its position also during the early Ottoman period in the composition of histories, and even Sultan Salim I(r.1512-20), a bitter enemy of Iran and the Shi'ites, wrote poetry in Persian."
• Idris Bidlisi's "Hasht Bihist" or "Seven Paradises", requested by Sultan Bayazid II, which covers the first eight Ottoman rulers was written in Persian(Spuler, page 69).
• "Throughout the 16th century, then, Ottoman literature and culture was still considerably influenced by the Turco-Persian literature flourishing in the courts of Khurasan and Samarkand, while themes from everyday life inevitably crept into them as well; furthermore, Ottoman society, was beginning to be influenced by the West, without being fully aware of it." -- The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol VIII, page 214, Gonul Alpay Tekin.
• "The Ottomans patronized Persian literature for five and a half centuries.[...] Unlike Iran they[Ottomans] gradually shed some of their Persianate qualities: they were the first of the gunpowder empires to give up Persian as the court language, using instead Turkish - that is, the vernacular of the western Turks..." -- Canfield, Turko-Persia in Historical Perspective, page 19." --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:33, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

C.Fred, it would appear this "new user" is now logging out to edit war. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:36, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Please help in clarifying

Hi Fred, you tagged Olobe on WP:A11. I was involved in an Afd, which was started by me after an admin told me that he had undeleted the speedy deleted article because the article did not plainly indicate that the subject was invented/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally. How does Olobe plainly indicate that the subject has been invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally? I'm pinging GB fan and JohnCD too, as they've been very helpful in clarifying these issues in the past to me. Thanks. Lourdes 16:32, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lourdes: It could probably go G11 instead of A11. Note that the article was created by LobeMaster. Frankly, I don't see why an article over a barely-used neologism warrants a seven-day prod. —C.Fred (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Of course you're right. I'm not opposing a snow delete. I just wish to know whether A11 was correctly applied here or incorrectly. I had a discussion a few days back with Brianga too on her talk page where she had also deleted an article on A11. After the Afd experience, I'm intent on understanding A11 correctly. Will await your response. Thanks. Lourdes 16:43, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lourdes: A11 is one of the newer criteria. Like just about all of the criteria, there is some degree of judgment required. In some other case, there might not have been the same indicators that there are here. So, I think it's hard to use other cases as precedent. However, I'm all for another admin looking at the situation and either deleting it themselves or declining. —C.Fred (talk) 16:46, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the response. Lourdes 16:48, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lourdes: I remember when A11 was devised. There had long been pressure for an "obviously invented" speedy, but resistance from people who thought it likely to be used to delete badly-written articles about actually notable things. The A11 compromise that was accepted aimed to avoid that, while still serving to delete "Flooble is a word invented in Year 3 by Jimmy Scroggs and Bill Twinks" where the article author was User:Jscroggs. People do tend to use it more broadly then was intended, and I have declined a number of speedies where I could see no link. In this case the username "Lobemaster" where the article title is "Olobe" (and there was also "Lobelise", tagged by Bonadea) seems to me good enough for A11. I have deleted them both, and given the author a link to WP:NFT. JohnCD (talk) 17:45, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you JohnCD, that seems to be very logical. Fred, thanks to you also for the time. I hope you don't mind queries like this as all this only adds to my (and hopefully other editors') understanding. Have a nice evening. Lourdes 00:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lourdes: You're welcome. Queries like this I don't mind at all. —C.Fred (talk) 00:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Ahwo9kgw8hye8usdhlbkdjh

Is continuing to post nonsense on their talk page after you blocked them. Feinoha ^Talk 04:00, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Well it looks like they got globally locked, so I'm not sure there's any point to revoking talk page access now. Feinoha ^Talk 04:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

@Feinoha: Yeah, not surprised he got his account globally locked. —C.Fred (talk) 04:28, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Addressing re-edits

{{C.Fred}}

Your post on my talk page brings up a couple issues that need addressing.

1) By what authority to do you re-edit and set guidelines?

2) Assuming your guidelines' validity, if a verifiable citation is used when the page is edited or any like it, then they shouldn't be re-edited, correct?

Reasonabl3 (talk) 10:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)Reasonabl3Reasonabl3 (talk) 10:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

@Reasonabl3: I do not set guidelines. The community has established, through the consensus process, guidelines for biographies of living persons; those are very specific when it comes to gender of pronouns. And if a page is edited with reliable sources added, the page can still be edited further to comply with Wikipedia guidelines or to add new material (based on new reliable sources). —C.Fred (talk) 14:01, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Secondary follow up: I've read the community guidelines page you provided and I thank you for that. Reasonabl3 (talk) 08:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Reasonabl3Reasonabl3 (talk) 08:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

curious

where is Lesphilky's warning for three-revert and edit warring? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1004:B12D:5E76:7D12:FF9:74B5:78A4 (talk) 21:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fred

Please do not delete or remove my article that I wrote. If you dispute it, then I think there is a article for deletion process so that there is discussion. Thanks. Shorwak (talk) 22:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

My apologies

Hello. My apologies for the revert here. I can see you were clearly acting in good faith. Eric-Wester (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Eric-Wester: No worried. I found the edit while reviewing edits by new users, so I can see how, on the surface, it would look fishy. —C.Fred (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Somerville Community Corporation Page and Request for Deleted Text

I am responding to a message about the deletion of the page Somerville Community Corporation.

I was surprised to find that it was deleted. I would like to have the text sent to me; so that I can rewrite it later today. I lost it once and recreated it on the spot, but I do not have a copy anywhere. i created it specifically for Wikipedia.

I will use the Article Wizard to figure out why this page is problematic. It was certainly not intended as a advertisement. SCC has nothing to sell, as a nonprofit with a very limited budget. I wanted people to know the organization exists and intended to add information over time.

I have created pages before with no problem, but the guidelines must have changed. It has been about four years since the last time I created an article.

Please send the material to me, Denise Moorehead, dmmoorehead@gmail.com, for rewriting.

I created and used the other login info, so that other volunteers and staff could add information with the same sign in. i thought that is how i had to do it for an organization.

Thank you.

Mscalafani (talk) 16:27, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

@Mscalafani: A couple of things. First, sign-ins may not be shared among multiple users. Each account is to be used by one and only one user. (As a general rule, a user should only have one account; there are limited cases where a user may have an alternate account.)

Second, the article was deleted as blatant promotion. Here are a few of the most severe examples:

• "This overarching priority drives the work of our board, members and staff..."
• "We are currently bringing more affordable housing.... Tenants are currently moving into our much-anticipated Union Square Apartment complex."
• "We are here for the long term, working for development without displacement, working for a Somerville for everyone."

The article clearly had a tone issue with overt promotion. There's is also the possibility that it was copied from the SCC website, so that could create copyright issues unless the SCC had clearly made an irrevocable donation of the text. (Even then, it would need to be edited for tone.)

Finally, I do not handle undeletions by mail. You can make a request at WP:REFUND and see if an administrator there will handle the request. —C.Fred (talk) 16:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Skippa da Flippa

I see that you were the deleting administrator for the page Skippa da Flippa I'm posting here to hopefully prove the page is worth undeletion.

I see a main concern for deletion of the page was a lack of notability, which I've since found numerous sources that support the opposing argument.

I don't believe any of these sources were included when the article was created so I can see how at the time it may have seemed deletion was logical and founded. I understand that in the current age of internet rappers, it's easy for it to seem at first glance that there aren't sources claiming notability because of the fact the top results that come up when you search for them are almost always their free mixtapes.

Should the page be undeleted I would begin implementing these sources throughout the page in hopes of creating a more thorough, unique read. Cheetoburrito (talk) 21:44, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

References

@Cheetoburrito: On the one hand, those sources were not present during the AfD. On the other, a lot of them don't seem to give substantial coverage of SdF. I don't see anything to justify undeleting the article. On the other hand, it may be appropriate to start working on a new article at Draft:Skippa da Flippa. If the article is well put together and has reliable sources that give substantial coverage, then we can see about moving the article to mainspace. —C.Fred (talk) 21:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

What are you talking about they don't substantially cover SdF? That claim alone is flat-out false. We have an entire page about a dance he created Dab (dance), I've given you dozens of sources not only citing him as the creator but also calling him one of the hottest artists coming out of Atlanta. Any of these facts could have been pointed out to you had you let more than one other person participate in the Deletion discussion, same goes for any of the sources. Also, you're expecting me to believe you read TWELVE lengthy-detailed articles in less than ten minutes? I didn't try to insult your intelligence despite your numerous questionably biased decisions surrounding the deletion of this page, most decent human being would expect the same courtesy to be extended. I feel much more inclined to report you after this exchange. Cheetoburrito (talk) 22:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Your Detrimental Conduct Has Been Reported

I tried to be cooperative and understanding of where your side of the argument might possibly be coming from, your refusal to extend the same courtesy has given me no other choice but to Report you for conduct detrimental to the integrity of WikiPedia. Cheetoburrito (talk) 23:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Purple Heart

For grace under fire at WP:ANI, you are hereby award this purple heart. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Do not ban me

Do not ban. I am not vandalizing. I am testing wiki to see how long it takes to get fixed👍 MysteriousJoey (talk) 03:06, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@MysteriousJoey: Disrupting Wikipedia to make a point is still disrupting it. —C.Fred (talk) 03:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

K👍 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MysteriousJoey (talk • contribs) 03:14, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

N0thing

I'm pretty sure that guy's notable. I reckon there's a very real chance an AfD would result in 'keep', so speedy was inappropriate. Adam9007 (talk) 01:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007: I saw the talk page links late, plus one of them barfed all over Chrome when I tried to view it. But I'm seeing PC Gaming writing about him the way Sports Illustrated would write about a football player. I'm restoring. —C.Fred (talk) 02:33, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I said there could be something significant in playing for Cloud9, and it seems there is indeed :). Adam9007 (talk) 02:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I've just seen a third A7 tagging. Do people not check the history, or just think I'm stupid? Adam9007 (talk) 02:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007: The third happened just before the speedy. —C.Fred (talk) 02:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussion with the third tagger suggests the latter, as I suspected, given past dealings with him. Adam9007 (talk) 02:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Commandants Quarters A Philadelphia Naval shipyard

C Fred My family was reminiscing about all the Naval bases/homes we have lived in over the 33 years my father served and Qtrs A was our last family home. We were also the last family to live in the home as it became a museum shortly after my fathers retirement in June 1973. The current information regarding the last Officers to live there IS INCORRECT. I attempted to add a relevant comment but you decided it wasn't relevant?Mikemaiman48 (talk) 13:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mikemaiman48: Wikipedia articles are based on reliable sources. Sources must be published (not necessarily print; broadcast or online works) and should be from reliable sources. Family recollections do not qualify as reliable sources. Further, Wikipedia does not accept any original research. So, unless you can find a published source that backs up your claim, it can't be added to the article. —C.Fred (talk) 13:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Since the current information regarding when the last Officers resided in the home IS INCORRECT I'm wondering what SOURCE was used to post INCORRECT INFORMATION? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikemaiman48 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Please stop SHOUTING. Why not look at the reference given for the sentence in question? --David Biddulph (talk) 13:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mikemaiman48: There are no details of the previous residents in the article Commandant's Quarters (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania). Theroadislong (talk) 13:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

There is actually a reference to the last Officers living in the home was 1960. since 7 members of my family lived in this home from 1969 to 1973 I'd say that information would be incorrect. additionally the Source cited for this incorrect information does not say anywhere that the last Officers lived there in 1960 and yet that is in the article and that source is listed. INCORRECTMikemaiman48 (talk) 13:51, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

The content is correctly supported by this part of the reference [2] Theroadislong (talk) 13:55, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

NFLjunkie22 did it again!

Hi C.Fred! Thank you for replying to NFLjunkie22's question on his talk page about his edit war warning. However, it seems that he has called Zara Larsson a misandrist again (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zara_Larsson&action=history). Do we warn him again for this? Jith12 (talk) 23:09, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@Jith12: That's an edge case, but I'm going to leave a message. —C.Fred (talk) 23:10, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Scg international -

Hi Fred The info on Jamie Smith is slightly misleading - to say the least. For example, there's an employment contract between Smith and Prince where prince signs that Smith is the VP of operations, that's not a "low level" position.

The outside magazine piece is the subject of a $30M federal slander / defamation / libel lawsuit in Florida. That should be removed pending the outcome of the suit.

The information about Smith claiming to be a SEAL is disputed by Smith's own autobiography (Gray Work: confessions of an American Paramilitary Spy, published by HarperCollins, 2014).

Lastly, there's a letter from CIA to Smith dated 1990 welcoming him to CIA employment.

The info about him, aside from the lawsuit from Sanford, appears to be a one-sided smear campaign in which Wikipedia should avoid participating. Ebarucha (talk) 01:14, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ebarucha: Then you'll need to go to the article's talk page and go through, point-by-point, to get consensus for removal of the information. I note that you've provided no sources on the lawsuit or the CIA letter; autobiographies are self-published sources and can be used in articles for limited purposes only. —C.Fred (talk) 01:17, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Myth

Dear administrator,

I seem to have messed certain things up just in order to correct a bad link. I need to talk to a high ranking wikipedian! I was correcting an inter-wiki link. The page Myth was linked to the wrong page in Persian (farsi) wiki. I managed to correct it. But all other languages disappeared. I'm sorry. Can you help to restore things back to normal while keeping the new link to the page in Persian wiki?Salarabdolmohamadian (talk) 20:49, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

@Salarabdolmohamadian: I think I fixed it over at Wikidata. Does the Farsi link work now? —C.Fred (talk) 20:56, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

God! Thank you! I just panicked so bad. I wrote to a number of users . . . . It works beautifully. Thank you!Salarabdolmohamadian (talk) 20:59, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

But there must be other links to other languages too. For example French. No French yet. I think I messed up in two or three stages . . . complicated. Because the Persian page in question was wrongly linked to Legend and therefore I needed to dissociate it from there and associate it with Myth . . . . I am very sorry.Salarabdolmohamadian (talk) 21:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

@Salarabdolmohamadian: You'll need to consult with the administrators at Wikidata for more help in that regard. I know the basics of how the system works; they can get more in-depth with the process. —C.Fred (talk) 21:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

2602:306:3796:ABD0:98AF:8228:A6F5:B4F

Block user:2602:306:3796:ABD0:98AF:8228:A6F5:B4F for vandalism please. 2602:306:3357:BA0:98CF:8FBF:44AA:41A1 (talk) 01:43, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Seth Adelsperger

May I please, your highness, request why thou hath removed article Seth Adelsperger from the technological wonderland that is Wikipedia? As a lover of all things good and true, I simply wish to have this article reinstalled for public viewing immediately in order to form a more perfect union. Thank you, good sir, and continue the good fight.Ldc997z (talk) 02:34, 8 December 2016 (UTC)ldc997z

Hay man why did you remove Clogshone it is real math done by my grandfather, and has recently been used with relevance to encryption, this is BIG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencerwoolfso (talk • contribs) 02:02, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Reply at your talk page. I'll be watching, so you can continue the thread there. —C.Fred (talk) 02:08, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Dan Blumberg

Just wanted to let you know that I suspect the user in question for the most recent edit to be a sock for several other image related vandals. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ברהראלערקברהראלערקברהראלערקברהראלערק All have same M.O. and edits on same article(s) Cheers! Chrissymad ❯❯❯ Talk 14:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@Chrissymad: I had not realized there was a sockpuppet investigation, but I do find the image-related vandalism at Migdal Synagogue to be showing a pattern. I'd added that page to my watchlist and am ready to semi-protect it. I think I'll check out the other editors on that page and the SPI. Thanks. —C.Fred (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Just semi-protected it after an IP edit. —C.Fred (talk) 15:12, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Counterwave

Hi, C.Fred! You and I are agreed that Counterwave Inc. does not deserve an article but could be a redirect. The author is determined to make it into an article. I can see two avenues here: Either we could overrule them and lock the redirect, or I could take it to AfD with a redirect recommendation. I don't think we can leave it in its current state with a minimal article and some tags. Any thoughts? --MelanieN (talk) 16:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@MelanieN: Well, with two products, I'm not sure the redirect route works any more. I hate to say it, but I think AfD is the best route forward. —C.Fred (talk) 16:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Looking a little deeper at the two games, it turns out they didn't invent either of them; they simply market one version. So delete is appropriate. --MelanieN (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@MelanieN: You'll have my support, then, whichever deletion route you go. —C.Fred (talk) 16:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Rinnovare

Let me make sure I am clear. So, If we make donation to Wikipedia we have restrictions because our interest to donate and help Wikipedia is in conflict with our content. Is this correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rinnovare13 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rinnovare13: what you said was "We are also paid contributors to Wikipedia" which C.Fred quite reasonably understood as meaning that you are paid for your contributions to Wikipedia. Perhaps what you meant was "Rinnovare Realty, LLC., makes financial donations to the Wikimedia Foundation". This would be a different thing, although it still would be irrelevant as to whether an article was kept, deleted or otherwise edited. MPS1992 (talk) 00:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I am a donator to Wikipedia...sorry I did not know that I was restricted for this purpose. I will remove my content according to this restriction. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rinnovare13 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rinnovare13: Please re-read what MPS1992 said. Making financial contributions to Wikipedia does not affect your ability to edit: it does not restrict you from editing, but it also does not give you any special privileges. What does affect your ability to edit is your connection to the subject you are trying to write about. —C.Fred (talk) 00:37, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

CSD Criterion Modified

[3] --JustBerry (talk) 20:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Deleted Article

I was wondering why an organization article was deleted by you earlier this morning. It was cited for vandalism and I am curious as to what the vandalism was. I run the organization so the sooner we can get our article back the better. Thanks Scsch94 (talk) 19:59, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Scsch94: It would help if I knew what the article was. —C.Fred (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

But, if you are involved with the organization, you should probably not be writing its article. —C.Fred (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

The article was for the National Association of Engineering Student Councils. Why do you say that I should not be writing the article? Scsch94 (talk) 23:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Scsch94: As the leader of the organization, you have a conflict of interest. You're not prohibited from writing an article about the organization, but it's strongly discouraged.

As for the previous article, the editor who created it added so much disruptive content that there was really nothing worth salvaging in the page history. —C.Fred (talk) 23:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Is there any way to retrieve the content so I can see what was added? We had been working on building the article for a few years now and we'd like to get it back up to where it was before someone added the disruptive content. Scsch94 (talk) 23:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Scsch94: The page was created today; I don't know what you mean by "where it was before someone added the disruptive content." —C.Fred (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

The page was created over a year ago. I don't know how it was created today if we have been building it over the past year. Scsch94 (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Scsch94: I'm going by what the log says. The first edit to National Association of Engineering Student Councils was today. —C.Fred (talk) 23:44, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

New pages patroler

Hey C.Fred! How does one receive the privilege of being a new pages patroller?

Thanks! Ericf505 (talk) 21:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC) Ericf505 (talk) 21:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ericf505: Given your edit history, just worry about the basics of editing before you worry about patrolling new pages. —C.Fred (talk) 21:29, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Please remove Erik bonino infor

Hello c.Fred Please could you delete Mr. Erik's information.

He has reached out to me and is very upset that his personal information is on here.

Could you please remove.

Many thanks for your help. Kind regards Ayad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghost216d (talk • contribs) 00:01, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ghost216d: There was some information in the article that was unsupported by a reliable source or that appeared to be incorrect. That has been deleted. However, information that is verifiable and relevant—and that includes date of birth and tenure at Shell—remains. —C.Fred (talk) 00:03, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Obvious sock

I saw that you responded to an edit request at Talk:Chappie (film). The person who made the request, Sethstewart2 (talk · contribs), is an obvious sock of SethStewart56 (talk · contribs), who was an obvious sock of CommanderShinzon (talk · contribs). You can see a bit of the drama at User talk:CommanderShinzon#Blocked and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CommanderShinzon. Can you block Sethstewart2 before he adds any more hoaxes or goes on another blanking spree? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:28, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Thank you for connecting the dots on that one. Something smelled rotten with that edit, but I wasn't quite sure where to look. Thanks for pointing me in the direction of the stinky sock. :) —C.Fred (talk) 01:31, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

CommanderShinzon (talk · contribs) has made a new sock: H23457 (talk · contribs). The user is repeating their claims that there is a Chappie 2. They've cited a Twitter message from Neill Blomkamp [here] as proof. The same user has badgered Blomkamp on Twitter about the subject so it might not be a serious response. Blomkamp just blocked the user on Twitter. Crboyer (talk) 02:02, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Mr. Blomkamp was being serious about it and i am not lying at all! H23457 (talk), 6:05 PM, 3 December 2016 (PST)

@Crboyer: Obvious sock is obvious. In about 30 seconds, obvious sock is blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 02:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

So obvious I was able to make the block with no prior awareness of the situation. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Another one: Chappie5216 (talk · contribs). It might be time to semi-protect {{Neill Blomkamp}}. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Yep, I agree. —C.Fred (talk) 01:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Another one: G51521 (talk · contribs). Also, Chappie 2 (film) needs to be deleted as a hoax/recreation. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:54, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

• And locked. (Unless Chappie 2 does happen)Crboyer (talk) 02:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Crboyer: Thanks for pointing out the pattern. Blocked, back to redirect with protection. —C.Fred (talk) 03:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

• https://www.instagram.com/p/BN2dpmCBK5E/?taken-by=neillblomkamp&hl=en — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chappie52161 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • That photo says nothing about Chappie 2. It just says "shooting in the cape." For what? He's not saying.Crboyer (talk) 03:24, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback but if I can not use the talk and the people in there are non neutral what am I to do?

See WP:BRD. When your edits get reverted, it's time to explain the rationale for those edits on the article's talk page and to discuss with the other editor. Huon (talk) 03:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I was not allowed to respond in the talk page some error came up what I had said was that the page was misleading and one sided. Creep Catchers are not a non for profit organization they are not registered anywhere, there is no physical location or business associated with it, there whois information is either private or falsified one is for a rowing company in Edmonton and most use false names. They have been involved in illegal activity as outline by one of my sources and many have been charged with other crimes. They lied about their involvement with police. I only added or corrected information gathered from legitimate news sources. Please helpTruthitmatters (talk) 04:09, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

There is currently not a Talk:Creep Catchers Talk:Creep Catcher yet; you would create it when you leave your first message.

It is hard to prove statements that a business is not registered anywhere; however, if an investigative journalist has done the research, we would likely accept that. To call an organization a vigilante organization is probably against guidelines; you would have to have multiple, very reliable sources that use that exact wording before it could go in the article.

On the surface, it does look like you've found some useful sources. However, the tone of your edits is such that I recommend discussing them in the talk page first before making the changes. —C.Fred (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC) amended 16:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I think that C.Fred meant to refer to Talk:Creep Catcher (without an s on the end). --David Biddulph (talk) 09:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Correct. Sorry about that. —C.Fred (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

So I have found a bunch of additional sources supporting my changes, tried my best in my sandbox to do it properly. I also tried to address how I could better make the suggest changes so that is would be better formed and more neutral. Every time I post something in the talk page it gets deleted. What is going on? I thought this was the proper process? Essential all the info on that page is from their own website Truthitmatters (talk) 01:40, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Materialscientist: One of the two removals today was by you. Would you care to chime in on why you removed the content that Truthitmatters added to Talk:Creep Catcher? —C.Fred (talk) 01:49, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

FYI: Materialscientist has notifications for mentions disabled. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:49, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

I was getting alerts for some of my cites or links as being on the blacklist. So did it as recommended in my sandbox as many of them where not from the direct source but rather from the google search page of articles I had read. I ran the error test and no errors came back. I have gone back to the tea house to see if there is a way I could check them again just to make sure it is not my error. It is a large amount of information as well is there a limit that could be having me flagged as well? How much info can I add character wise? I will ask that at the tea house as well. Thank you so much for your time and help. Truthitmatters (talk) 17:27, 10 December 2016 (UTC) My talk suggestions where reinstated how do I now get consensus should I be asking the original author to provide feed back on his talk page? I did read many of the articles but it all seems a bit vague and want to follow process. What is the best way to achieve this or get involvement from other editors in an appropriate manner? Truthitmatters (talk) 17:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

One problem is, it's not clear what you're suggesting. Your talk page comment reads like a wall of links. I would pick one small, specific change where you can say clearly what the text in the article says now, what you want it to say after it's changed, and then cite the reliable source that supports the change. Presenting the following as a fictional example: "Please change the description of Batman's outfit from blue to black, based on the news story http://www.gotham-newspaper/caped-crusader-in-black-seen-over-city.html." It's clear, it's specific, and it makes it easy to find the exact source supporting the change.

So, post one of those on the talk page of the article. If nobody responds after four or five days, make that change—but don't panic if it gets reverted; instead, either see what that user said on the talk page or invite them to comment there. If one person responds and opposes, and the discussion goes nowhere after a week, you can request a third opinion. If multiple people oppose, so that the results are overwhelmingly against you...you tried, consensus went against you, but you can try again in another area. If multiple people support you, congratulations, there's new consensus. If multiple people respond and it's a split, then there may be a need to get more comments. —C.Fred (talk) 17:36, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Truthitmatters: The article talk page is the place to discuss the changes. You can't get widespread discussion if it happens at a user's talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 18:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I have included my suggested edits at the bottom of the page which include specific cites from the list I did have that originally but my post was being reverted faster than I could finish my comments. I did leave the other links to help with the media section but thought I would first just suggest a few minor changes. Other than reverts I have had no feedback on the page which is why thought it might be ok to contact the original author. I have not and will not based on your feedback. Thank you so much for your time and help. I can remove the other links if it has cluttered the page too much and save them for a latter date. Truthitmatters (talk) 21:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016

Hello C.Fred. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at The Untitled. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 20:50, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

@MordeKyle: If they weren't just here to flog the band they formed last night, I wouldn't have tagged it so quickly. —C.Fred (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

I understand, but let us also WP:AGF as well as not bite the newbies. Have a good day and keep up the good work.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 20:57, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

@MordeKyle: I keep those in mind; it's a balancing act sometimes. Also, WP:DTTR. ;) —C.Fred (talk) 21:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Answer to Sofía Espinoza Álvarez article

C.Fred I don't know if it would be appropriate to move it to Sofía Espinoza Álvarez and mention the following: This name uses Spanish naming customs: the first or paternal family name is Espinoza and the second or maternal family name is Álvarez. I will just follow your advice as I myself am not certain what would be best.

With admiration and respect, VonEdit (talk) 23:36, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

your recent post

I have no idea what is going on here. I try to make an edit and I get hit for not adding a source. I add a source and then you write me. I am not even sure if this is how to respond, but instead of assuming I am being malicious, could you please assist me so I am going about this the right way. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Outpost173 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 21:00, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

updated Betty Friedan image

C.Fred, LynnGilbert5 here. Thank you for the welcome. I have replaced the Betty Friedan image with one without the watermark. It is not appearing on the page. Can you look and see if I've done it properly? Many thanks. LynnGilbert5 (talk) 22:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)LynGilbert5LynnGilbert5 (talk) 22:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

@LynnGilbert5: It looks like it's in there now. I did have to adjust the image code. Also, photo rights are usually noted at the image file and not in the caption. Thanks for the re-upload. —C.Fred (talk) 01:10, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Cleveland Sports Curse

I live in Ohio and I understand full well what the Monsters achieved for the city of Cleveland. The news media and the fans agree that they broke the curse by winning the Calder Cup earlier this year. Your editing is biased when you state that the curse is about "major" sports teams in Cleveland. It has never been that way. Calder Cups and the American Hockey League have a long and proud history in Cleveland. They are professional, get paid a large amount of money and they play coast to coast and in Canada. Whether they feed the NHL or not that is about as "major" as it gets so please get your information correct.Amcflfan (talk) 03:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

@Amcflfan: It's pretty clear's there's established consensus to only include the major leagues—MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL—it defining the curse. If you want to change it, you'll have to present sources at the article talk page and get consensus for the change. —C.Fred (talk) 03:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

There are no sources when it comes to personal opinions...And that's all it is when it comes to professional sports. You remove my factual statements in the article yet YOU include an AMATEUR soccer club??? We're talking about PAID athletes. Of which..the Monsters fall into that category, making them professional. You just need to put your personal feelings aside and realize that the Cleveland Monsters broke the curse and the city of Cleveland recognizes that as well.Amcflfan (talk) 04:08, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)(Non-administrator comment) Hi Hi Amclfan. Since you seem fairly new to Wikipedia editing, you might not be familiar with its various policies and guidelines. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project with people participating in it from all over the world, so an editor does not have to reside or be from Cleveland to edit an article about the city. Since there are so many people contributing, disagreements over article are inevitable and when that happens the worst to do is engage in edit warring. Wikipedia wants its editors to be bold and make improvement to articles that they feel are needed, but when those changes are reverted the thing to do is to follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and use the relevant article's talk to discuss them and see if a consensus can be established for them. If you look at Talk:Cleveland sports curse, you will find that there has already be some discussion about when the curse ended and who ended it which means there are other you might be willing to discuss this with you. You were bold when you made your initial edits and when C.Fred reverted you the first time his edit sum asked you to discuss things on the article's talk page. This is basically how we work through differences on Wikipedia when it comes to article content as explained in Wikipedia:Bold, revert, discuss. Just for reference, when you discuss things on the article's talk page it would if you do it according to Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. It also would help if you can provide information of specific reliable sources which support the changes you are trying to make. If as you said above the Cleveland news media agrees that the curse was broken last year, then please provide information about any stories/articles where such statements were made (including online links if possible) so that others assess them and determine if the changes you are proposing should be made. I have reverted the article back to the last stable version before you made you're intiial change in accordance with WP:STATUSQUO. I suggest that you now try and use the article's talk page to establish a consensus for the change since any further attempts are likely going to lead to a discussion being started at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. You've already reverted edits 6 times on this article within 24 hours and it usually only takes three such reverts to typically have your account blocked by an administrator. Nobody wins when it comes to edit warring, so please discuss things on the article's talk page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

@C.Fred: I know you are an admin and your reverts would perhaps be seen as OK per WP:NOT3RR, but maybe it would've been best to bring this straight to WP:AN3 once Amclfan crossed the 3RR limit. Amclfan is a new editor (at least according to their edit history the account was created to today) and it's very easy for new editors unfamiliar with Wikipedia to get caught up in the heat of the moment and start edit warring when they think they are right. Hopefully, Amclfan will now decide to use the article's talk page to try and resolve this. If not, then they will end up at AN3. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:50, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi SamiChivas (talk) 23:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Let Us Return USA

The written content is completely different...what sources would you accept?Kk3619a (talk) 01:06, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

@Kk3619a: pardon my interruption here, but the answer you seek lies in these following policies: WP:GNG, WP:IRS, and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies).  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 02:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

@Kk3619a: re-ping due to typo.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 02:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Amah Mutsun

Hi, I noticed that you deleted the page Amah Mutsun under G7 even though it looks like there were multiple editors on that page and it was blanked by a completely new user. Could you please explain your reasoning? AlexEng^(TALK) 02:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@AlexEng: Although several editors had tagged the page and done maintenance, only one editor, Ruochuanwang, had actually contributed substantive content. So when s/he showed up and blanked the page, after I initially reverted it, I realized that it does qualify under G7—so I deleted the page. —C.Fred (talk) 03:13, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't see the blanking by Ruochuanwang. AlexEng^(TALK) 03:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@AlexEng: Yeah, it happened pretty quickly before I deleted the page. —C.Fred (talk) 03:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Recent Page Deletion

I don't debate that this page should have been deleted, but why under G7? "If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page, a category page, or any type of talk page, this can be taken as a deletion request." (WP:G7). I marked U5, G11, G12. Thanks for the deletion, but just wanted to check in. --JustBerry (talk) 03:19, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

@JustBerry: Coupled with the "delete me" message on her user talk page, I interpreted it as she wanted the user page deleted. Plus, G7 is a kinder, gentler delete than U5, G11, or G12, so I gave her the benefit of the doubt. —C.Fred (talk) 03:29, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

African Bird Club draft page

Hi, I'm the secretary of this registered UK charity and I note the "multiple issues" that Wiki has with our first draft. I haven't got a clue as to why it should be seen as a "promotional piece" as all it does, from our point of view, is to explain who we are and what we do. I'd be grateful for specific and expert editing advice as I find the different sections on this in Wiki rather dense and not easily understandable. Philip Hyde, ABC SecretaryABC Editor 2016 (talk) 12:52, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@ABC Editor 2016: There are six issues currently identified. I'll go through them one by one:

1. Close connection: This alerts other editors that one of the main contributors to the article has a conflict of interest with the subject. You have made the bulk of the substantive edits to article, and you are the secretary of the organization. Officers always have a conflict of interest with the organizations they serve. The only way for this tag to be removed is for independent editors to review the article and determine that the tone and content satisfy our neutral point of view requirements.
2. Written like an advertisement: IMO, this tag is there because of the tone of the article. It does not feel like an encyclopedia article about the club; it feels like an advertising brochure. When an independent editor, unaffiliated with the club, has the chance to rewrite the article for tone, that will get rid of this tag and the close connection tag.
3. Additional citations: Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable sources; whenever possible, the sources should be independent of the subject. There is currently only one outside source cited, the British Natural History Museum. The other footnote is actually a reference to another section of the document. That needs completely overhauled. The article needs to cite more journals, magazines, newspapers, or other pieces that have been written about the club.
4. No lead: This should probably be changed to say the lead is too short. This article has an introductory section, but it's minimal and barely provides context about the club.
5. Improper use of external links: Wikipedia has guidelines on the use of external links. One of these guidelines is that links should not be scattered throughout the article, as is done in the ABC article.
6. Not meeting the notability guidelines: Wikipedia has guidelines on the notability of organizations. Any group or company that does not meet this criteria should not have an article; the failure of the article to meet the guidelines are a rationale for deleting the article. A charity is not notable just for getting a registration number; the article needs to demonstrate that it has engaged in activities that are significant at a national level (or at least regional, in many cases). As I read the article, I see that the club has members from many nations, but I don't see where the club does anything other than send them a newsletter.

Finally, note that these are maintenance tags. The article may be written like an advertisement, but it wasn't so severe that it needed to be speedy deleted as blatant promotion. The article may not make clear how the organization is notable, but there enough of an assertion that it wasn't speedy deleted. So, in that respect, the article about ABC is in a lot better shape than articles I've seen about other organizations. —C.Fred (talk) 20:07, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Money Mike Sandberg

I created a page called "Money Mike Sandberg". You said it may be removed because it does not meet one of wikipedia's guidelines. What might that be?

Sandman789 (talk) 23:13, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 23:13, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I understand that this article is not of a famous person, but is there a way you can reinst Sandman789 (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Lavash

I'd say that indefinite semi-protection at Lavash is overdue. What you think? Étienne Dolet (talk) 00:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

@Étienne Dolet: Or there's certainly plenty of justification for it now. —C.Fred (talk) 18:56, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Jorge M. Perez

Good day @C.Fred, I am attempting to update the profile of our CEO and used the references provided by our copywriter. This is my first time editing via Wikipedia and having difficulties with the credible resources entry, can you assist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgomezgcb (talk • contribs) 16:33, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

@Pgomezgcb: Frankly, you should not be editing the article directly because of your conflict of interest. Please review those guidelines; after you have done so, make sure you request changes at the article's talk page rather than making them directly. —C.Fred (talk) 16:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Outback Steakhouse Extreme

Outback Steakhouse Extreme is real. The video cited is an ad for Outback Steakhouse Extreme. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B10B:62DB:F401:39EC:56AF:2946 (talk) 17:29, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

The video cited is a joke from a Family Guy episode and does not support anything related to the actual Outback Steakhouse. —C.Fred (talk) 19:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Neville Morgan

I wish to create a page about Neville Morgan who died earlier this year. He was a Limnologist and Conservationist who was instrumental in setting up nature reserves across the UK, Europe and Africa. He was well known in the world of conservation. I tried to create a page earlier, but it was deleted because I had copied his obituary, but I am happy to write new content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickMorgan (talk • contribs) 21:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@NickMorgan: Make sure you've read WP:BIO and that Morgan qualifies as a notable person. Also make sure you cite independent reliable sources in your draft of the article. Finally, based on your username, do you have a relationship to the subject and thus have a conflict of interest? —C.Fred (talk) 22:21, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Matt Bruce

I am sitting right here with Matt Bruce watching the Bama game and you're gunna tell me that his nickname isn't Matty B. Also look on instagram for Brute Strength and you will see Jeff Wittmer in fact picking up quarters with his butt cheeks. He does it all the time. Runawayfacttrain (talk) 23:29, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, C.Fred!

Happy New Year!

C.Fred,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. -- Dane ^talk 02:30, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

New wiki editor - note to c.fred

I will review your feedback, wiki examples, and wiki guidelines as you suggested.

Regards, engkov1092 Engkov1092 (talk) 03:43, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Kelley Wise

Just FYI, per guidelines, since there was a legal threat, have reported it at ANI. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:28, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Did you notify Runwayz? —C.Fred (talk) 03:29, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Never mind, I see it now. —C.Fred (talk) 03:30, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Notability Guidelines

Hey! I was thinking about writing an article on a school district from my home town that has seven schools and has a decent amount of history. Does this meet the guidelines for a Wikipedia article?

Thanks!Ericf505 (talk) 23:11, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ericf505: Probably. Depending on what's in the history section, you may need to cite some independent reliable sources to support the material. Without seeing it, I can't really say anything more definitively, but it's probably worth starting the article. If you're unsure, put Draft: in front of the name and start it in draft space; we can help you move it to the main encyclopedia once it's up to standards. —C.Fred (talk) 02:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hey, C.Fred....I hope you don't mind me interjecting here. Was chasing around the trail of the section below and saw this.

Ericf505, except for very small one school districts (where the district could be covered in the school's article), US school districts are almost always notable. You'll find guidelines at WP:SCH/AG, altho they primarily apply to schools, there is a small section on districts. If I can help, I'm willing. Leave me a note on my talk page. Oh, and I second C.Fred's advice about constructing it in draft space. John from Idegon (talk) 05:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Skippa da Flippa

Inquiring again to see if you will undelete Skippa da Flippa, revisions have been made to Draft:Skippa da Flippa. Cheetoburrito (talk) 05:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@Cheetoburrito: There is nothing to undelete. You need to get approval for the draft. —C.Fred (talk) 01:24, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Is there a certain reason you keep choosing to be as unspecific, unproductive and unhelpful as possible? Cheetoburrito (talk) 02:16, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

@Cheetoburrito: I doubt C.Fred is trying to be unhelpful -- I imagine it more likely that he is not aware there is any uncertainty, and also is busy. It is not C.Fred's responsibility to make the decision about the article. If you and whoever else is working on the article feel that it is ready, you should put {{subst:submit}} at the top of the Draft page, and then a reviewer will consider it. If the reviewer decides that it should become an article, the reviewer will then make the arrangements for that. Unfortunately it can take several weeks for a reviewer to make that decision, even after you submit the Draft. MPS1992 (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Will Muschamp photo

Hi, C.Fred wondering why my photo was deleted and what guidelines does it not meet. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henders1990 (talk • contribs)

@Henders1990: The photo was deleted from Commons as a copyright violation. The uploader claimed it as his own work, but it was clearly a copy of a photo taken from the internet. I found it in a newspaper article credited to a wire service. —C.Fred (talk) 21:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Thoughts?

Do you think there might be possible meatpuppetry between 86.178.110.23 (talk · contribs) and filing user PeopleEater143 (talk · contribs). Although the suspected sock master has admitted to logout-editing via the 73.* IPs listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/PeopleEater143, the 86.* IP ^{(contribs: Special:Contributions/86.178.110.23)} seems to have been quite involved at Special:Contributions/86.178.110.23 and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PeopleEater143. For example, see this diff. If I'm a third-party person commenting on an SPI case, I usually don't need to say I am actually nothing at all to do with the issue or articles between Kellymoat and PeopleEater143. Also, the IP goes to both SPI and the edit warring noticeboard in a somewhat timely fashion. The reason why I brought this up is that the user seems pretty experienced, and there might be more socks of this user lurking... --JustBerry (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Kissy Simmons

I just neeed to delete the wrong birth year on Kissy Simmons page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1rooskie (talk • contribs) 01:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@1rooskie: Except I don't see the wrong birth year mentioned at all. If it were there, what you should do is add the right year with a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 02:10, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Chinnajeeyar

• Chinna Jeeyar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This is VegetarianSatvic Please do not edit HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji's Wikipedia Page as I have cited it correctly Just please this one time I am a follower of Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetarianSatvic (talk • contribs) 20:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi C.Fred I have worked so hard to edit HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji's Page can you please let me edit his page I will cite it and do everything by the end of today.Please I am his follower so can you please let me edit his page at least. Sincerely Vegetarian Satvic — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetarianSatvic (talk • contribs) 21:08, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@VegetarianSatvic: If you are his follower, then that probably means you have a conflict of interest and should refrain from editing the page. —C.Fred (talk) 21:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I know it now just please let me give real source information I am not affiliated with these organizations.

@VegetarianSatvic: Please clarify. Are you a follower of Jeeyar or not? —C.Fred (talk) 21:58, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I am a follower of the Hanuman Chalisa and the truths. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetarianSatvic (talk • contribs) 22:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC) Can you please just let me add information please just let me add the information I am not affiliated with any other organizations.I do not want to harm your work so please just let me add information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetarianSatvic (talk • contribs) 22:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

So I really want to humbly add information to this wikepedia page.I really like researching and just started wikepedia.I never knew that there would be so many rules, and I just started learning them so can you please give me one edit I promise that I won't mess it up?

@VegetarianSatvic: Let's consider what happened with your last addition. There was some useful information. However, a lot of it was flowery and just too over-the-top for an encyclopedia article. So, I condensed it down. So, part of what you added has been incorporated to the article. —C.Fred (talk) 22:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Okay I have some information can you please see this About HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji

HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji (Born on Diwali Day November 1956) is an Indian Scholar known for his spiritual discourses on Sri Vaishnavism. He subscribes to Thenkalai tradition of Sri Vaishanvism. It was the call of the Divine that made the young HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji to take up the ascetic order of JEEYAR(Lion).[1]

HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji was trained in the Vaishnava Tradition. At the age of 23 he took the oath to become an ascetic.[2]His message is that we should always Worship our own and respect all. He thought that young people play a big role.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji is one of the youngest acharyas in India, who mastered Rigveda and many more scriptures.In this connection H.H. has been visiting USA since 1994, where He inspired a large amount of people to whom He taught the principles of Universal Love, Peace and Fraternity.[3] HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji visited London, Singapore & Hong Kong , and Canada , where He performed Yagnas for the benefit of the people.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji had a plethora of discourses on Ramayana, Srimad Bhagavad Githa, and the Upanishads delivered to people all over the world.

Caste Statement

According to Hinduism's puranas and other scriptures there has always been acceptance of all people by Vedic scholars.Showing discrimination on other castes is not right. Everyone is equal at the eyes of god according to the vedas.Even sages didn't allow caste based discrimination.Those Vedic sages wanted the whole society to have a relationship with god.

More About HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji

HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji makes people have hope whenever he visits other places.Even a child can understand his discourses. The acharya is the one who practices first, and then preaches. HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji implements what he preaches.He wants to incorporate hope into the future generations and preserve the Vaishnavate tradition At times, when southern parts of India had many droughts, H.H Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji applied ancient Vedic techniques to bring rains.

What Has HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji Done?

When there were earthquakes he helped out with his organizations. Under his guidance there were free educational services, free health services, free food services, cancer awareness activities, relief activities and services for environmental protection throughout the world[4]. Even collages for the blind children were opened in India.He has inspired a plethora of people by, Vedic teaching, schools for children of tribals,collages for the blind.

He even went out of India.He still followed the rules of being a Sanyasi.He has created collages,he has conducted many Vedic rituals Yagams and Homams for the welfare of the society. He has motivated the young society about Sri Ramanuja's message.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji has spread many morals to people.[5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetarianSatvic (talk • contribs) 22:45, 15 January 2017 (UTC) Also for respect for him can you please refer him as HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji and replace it with Jeeyar.And please take out the critisizing west culture part he doesn't look good if you say that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetarianSatvic (talk • contribs) 22:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

About HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji

HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji (Born on Diwali Day November 1956) is an Indian Scholar known for his spiritual discourses on Sri Vaishnavism. He subscribes to Thenkalai tradition of Sri Vaishanvism. It was the call of the Divine that made the young HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji to take up the ascetic order of JEEYAR(Lion).[1]

HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji was trained in the Vaishnava Tradition. At the age of 23 he took the oath to become an ascetic.[2]His message is that we should always Worship our own and respect all. He thought that young people play a big role.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji is one of the youngest acharyas in India, who mastered Rigveda and many more scriptures.In this connection H.H. has been visiting USA since 1994, where He inspired a large amount of people to whom He taught the principles of Universal Love, Peace and Fraternity.[3] HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji visited London, Singapore & Hong Kong , and Canada , where He performed Yagnas for the benefit of the people.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji had a plethora of discourses on Ramayana, Srimad Bhagavad Githa, and the Upanishads delivered to people all over the world.

Caste Statement

According to Hinduism's puranas and other scriptures there has always been acceptance of all people by Vedic scholars.Showing discrimination on other castes is not right. Everyone is equal at the eyes of god according to the vedas.Even sages didn't allow caste based discrimination.Those Vedic sages wanted the whole society to have a relationship with god.

More About HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji

HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji makes people have hope whenever he visits other places.Even a child can understand his discourses. The acharya is the one who practices first, and then preaches. HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji implements what he preaches.He wants to incorporate hope into the future generations and preserve the Vaishnavate tradition At times, when southern parts of India had many droughts, H.H Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji applied ancient Vedic techniques to bring rains.

What Has HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji Done?

When there were earthquakes he helped out with his organizations. Under his guidance there were free educational services, free health services, free food services, cancer awareness activities, relief activities and services for environmental protection throughout the world[4]. Even collages for the blind children were opened in India.He has inspired a plethora of people by, Vedic teaching, schools for children of tribals,collages for the blind.

He even went out of India.He still followed the rules of being a Sanyasi.He has created collages,he has conducted many Vedic rituals Yagams and Homams for the welfare of the society. He has motivated the young society about Sri Ramanuja's message.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji has spread many morals to people.[5]

Please Call Him HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji not Jeeyar that is not respectful.Also please delete that he criticized western culture I feel that people might express hatred towards that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetarianSatvic (talk • contribs) 22:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

@VegetarianSatvic: Wikipedia is not a rehash of Jeeyar's website. The information you want to add is of an overly promotional tone and inappropriate for Wikipedia. Also, articles are written from a neutral point of view. That means good and bad material is included, provided it's sourced. "He doesn't look good if you say that" is an inappropriate reason to attempt to remove the material. Finally, Wikipedia's Manual of Style is clear on names. A full name is usually appropriate on first mention, but not necessarily every honorific. Subsequent mentions should all be a short form of his name—which, based on the article title, is Jeeyar. —C.Fred (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Can I please just add some information to the wikepedia chinnajeeyar website and can you just look over it I'm just an amateur at this so yes or no?

@VegetarianSatvic: No. You've admitted a conflict of interest. You can request changes at the talk page, but you should not edit the article directly yourself. —C.Fred (talk) 23:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Also can I change the picture?

@VegetarianSatvic: Probably not. You'd need to have a picture that you can conclusively show is clearly under a free license. You can't just copy a picture from his website. —C.Fred (talk) 23:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I humbly Request to edit Chinnajeeyar Swamiji Page

About HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji

HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji (Born on Diwali Day November 1956) is an Indian Scholar known for his spiritual discourses on Sri Vaishnavism. He subscribes to Thenkalai tradition of Sri Vaishanvism. It was the call of the Divine that made the young HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji to take up the ascetic order of JEEYAR(Lion).[1]

HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji was trained in the Vaishnava Tradition. At the age of 23 he took the oath to become an ascetic.[2]His message is that we should always Worship our own and respect all. He thought that young people play a big role.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji is one of the youngest acharyas in India, who mastered Rigveda and many more scriptures.In this connection H.H. has been visiting USA since 1994, where He inspired a large amount of people to whom He taught the principles of Universal Love, Peace and Fraternity.[3] HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji visited London, Singapore & Hong Kong , and Canada , where He performed Yagnas for the benefit of the people.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji had a plethora of discourses on Ramayana, Srimad Bhagavad Githa, and the Upanishads delivered to people all over the world.

Caste Statement

According to Hinduism's puranas and other scriptures there has always been acceptance of all people by Vedic scholars.Showing discrimination on other castes is not right. Everyone is equal at the eyes of god according to the vedas.Even sages didn't allow caste based discrimination.Those Vedic sages wanted the whole society to have a relationship with god.

More About HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji

HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji makes people have hope whenever he visits other places.Even a child can understand his discourses. The acharya is the one who practices first, and then preaches. HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji implements what he preaches.He wants to incorporate hope into the future generations and preserve the Vaishnavate tradition At times, when southern parts of India had many droughts, H.H Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji applied ancient Vedic techniques to bring rains.

What Has HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar Swamiji Done?

When there were earthquakes he helped out with his organizations. Under his guidance there were free educational services, free health services, free food services, cancer awareness activities, relief activities and services for environmental protection throughout the world[4]. Even collages for the blind children were opened in India.He has inspired a plethora of people by, Vedic teaching, schools for children of tribals,collages for the blind.

He even went out of India.He still followed the rules of being a Sanyasi.He has created collages,he has conducted many Vedic rituals Yagams and Homams for the welfare of the society. He has motivated the young society about Sri Ramanuja's message.HH Sri Chinnajeeyar Swamiji has spread many morals to people.[5]

@VegetarianSatvic: This looks like what you already added. The usable stuff is already in the article. The fluff is not. —C.Fred (talk) 23:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Blocked user

Hi C.Fred, yesterday you blocked a User:MaxSeen, now a new account User:Maxisem is making the same random changes, and claiming to be an admin, and has also posted an email and phone number for another user on his talk page. I was going to revert, but since it will likely need more than just a revert, I thought it was better to let you know. Cmr08 (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

@Cmr08: It might even need more than a delete, but talk page deleted, user blocked, TPA revoked. —C.Fred (talk) 17:53, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:ANKIT JAIN

A tag has been placed on User talk:ANKIT JAIN requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. bonadea contributions talk 06:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Re: SGK userspace pages

Sorry if I seem rather pushy here, but I actually filed for a CSD on Khan-related userspace as per an earlier consensus, as leaving messages on a nuisance user like him would only give him the attention he craves, and yet a number of editors declined or questioned the speedy requests I left on these pages. I believe it is best to just observe RBI rather than play cat and mouse with this guy. Blake Gripling (talk) 08:13, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

New Wikiproject!

Hello, C.Fred! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. Me-123567-Me (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

SPI re: Dinanath Bhaskar

Mentioned you at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Adbhaskar regarding the Dinanath Bhaskar article. - Sitush (talk) 20:16, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Perfect Potion page

Hi C.Fred,

As a new comer to Wikipedia, I really appreciate your feedback. In relation to the deletion of the page Perfect Potion, is it possible that I am able to recreate this page if I disclose within the article that I am an employee of the company? Is it possible to resurrect the original one created and add this in as it took some time to format it. Were there any other reasons that the article was rejected?

Thank you very much for your time. Very much appreciated. Janetspp (talk) 04:48, 24 January 2017 (UTC) janetspp

@Janetspp: As I noted, the reason the article was deleted was that the text itself was overtly and blatantly promotional. If the company is significant enough for an article, I would suggest starting from scratch, writing with a neutral point of view and neutral tone, focusing on what independent sources have said about the company. Remember, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a publicity flyer. —C.Fred (talk) 02:06, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

@Janetspp: Rewriting and resubmitting. Janetspp (talk) 02:35, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Reason/Message to Fred??

I was just showing my buddy tori here how anyone can write on a page that is all I would like for this account to be removed as I do not intend to make any real edits

Thanks Poppyman

PS I was only doing this for show and tell — Preceding unsigned comment added by PoppyMan101Tech (talk • contribs) 06:36, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi PoppyMan101Tech. User accounts are not deleted because doing so would remove any record of the edits the account made, which may be something of value to the encyclopedia as a whole even if the edits per se weren't very helpful. If you no longer want to edit, then simply just don't edit anymore. You can officially retire or even request a courtesy vanishing if you like, but the former is probably just for show and the latter is really only allowed in certain specific cases, which I don't think apply here. Another option is that you can continue editing, but only more constructively and in accordance with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. Maybe you should take the Wikipedia:Adventure before you make up your mind? You might find out that you actually like editing and find out some ways you can help contribute to improving the encyclopedia.

Finally, if you by chance you've got another buddy who wants to see how easy editing is, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Fix common mistakes#Instructions and try and fix some of the errors you find listed there. You will not only be showing your buddy how easy it is to edit, you will also be helping to improve the encyclopedia. That would be good for everyone involved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:29, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Skippa Da Flippa

Hi C.Fred. Please delete Skippa Da Flippa per WP:R2. WP:SALTing afterwards would be a good idea since the redirect is protected. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:04, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@JJMC89: I meant to have moved without redirection. For some reason, that's not what happened. I've deleted and protected against creation. —C.Fred (talk) 15:33, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Lilly Amoure

I have had enough A7 nominations declined on grounds that there was a credible claim of significance, and typically taken to AFD by the declining admin, that I decided I would just go straight to AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:42, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Yeah, it's borderline. If there were any secondary sources, I'd have probably let the AfD run. —C.Fred (talk) 01:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

why keep track of redirect pages?

Hi! I'm a newbie, so please help me understand. I took the wikiproject genetics banner off of the S/MAR talk page, and you reverted it. I don't understand why redirect pages need to be kept track of by projects. I increased the ratings of the page Scaffold/matrix attachment region for the genetics project (I'm in the midst of trying to look/glance at all of the pages with the genetics tag) and I just don't see why redirect pages should clutter, IMHO, the list of articles in the project. If you have time, please explain the benefit(s) of tracking redirect pages. Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 15:52, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi C.Fred!

I can understand how conflicts of interest could be an issue, though I feel I added a concrete, not subjective fact. Maybe I'm not seeing it clearly, though Mr. Schultz made sure everyone got a clear view of me :( If I cannot post this fact myself, because it was my privates Howard Schultz aired on VH1's Dating Naked, can you add it? Thanks for your time! <3 Jessie JNizewitz (talk) 04:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

@JNizewitz: No, I cannot. I do not have access to a published, independent, reliable source to verify the claim. —C.Fred (talk) 04:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh well, at least he's dead and if there's a hell, he's there. While I'm alive and a social worker, so basically the complete opposite. Thanks anyway Fred! JNizewitz (talk) 05:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Any World (That Is Welcome To)

I can't edit the page and it just redirets to Katy lied. I didn't get to finish the article Echo9001 (talk) 03:22, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Echo9001: What makes the song notable enough to have its own article? What awards did it win? Where did it chart on a singles chart? —C.Fred (talk) 03:23, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

I understand what you mean, and in this case you're right, but remember that success doesn't measure the importance of a song. Not trying to talk down to you or act like I'm smarter than you or anything. Echo9001 (talk) 03:26, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Echo9001: True. A song could be notable through the general notability guidelines as well as the specific guidelines for music. —C.Fred (talk) 03:41, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

But you were right about that song Echo9001 (talk) 03:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Steve Mason (Actor)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Steve Mason (Actor) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Amortias (T)(C) 22:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Ignore this if you want looks like you moved it as I was tagging it for deletion and it hit the redirect instead. Amortias (T)(C) 22:21, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Curious what I did wrong

Hi, I was trying to add a page about myself. I understand that everyone in the world would like their own Wikipedia page, but I am quoted in a newspaper as well as having 2 dozen film and television credits on IMDB. I left links to both for verification, but I was still immediately removed... Any suggestions for me, on how to get verified and to have my page remain active? I really appreciate you for taking the time out of your busy schedule to help me, in any way you can.

With appreciation and respect, Steve Mason Stevemason (talk) 22:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

@Stevemason: Honestly, the best thing to do would be to go to WP:Requested articles and let an independent editor create it. Make sure to supply any newspaper stories and other independent reliable sources that have given you substantial coverage. IMDB really isn't enough for an article; about all we rely on it for is movie roles. —C.Fred (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

PLUR Angels

My intentions were not to promo/spam about our non for profit i will make sure to re-post very carefully

We are a non profit peer to peer harm reduction origination we do volunteer medical care at music events

we are very simmer to dance safe but we are hands on and more about keeping people save vs education only https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DanceSafe

with much respect, Antony Bonnett

@Anthonybonnett: It's hard to write neutrally about an organization you're involved with, because of your inherent conflict of interest with the group. Not only did you fail to show that the group is significant per Wikipedia standards, but the tone of the article is excessively promotional. —C.Fred (talk) 01:09, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Deputy Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and Ambassador to Canada

Hello Someone is takeing away Jimmy McMillan and Ted Cruz away from Deputy Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and Ambassador to Canada can you please help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobby232332 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

@Bobby232332: Replied at your talk page, where there's already a thread about you needing to cite these claims. —C.Fred (talk) 18:35, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Toronto Maple Leafs

If you look at the Talk Page for Toronto Maple Leafs, you will see this issue has been brought up multiple times and a consensus has been reached. The Toronto Maple Leafs only have 11 Stanley Cups. The Arenas and The St. Patricks were different Hockey Teams. They might all be part of the same Franchise but they are not the same Hockey Team. Wikipedia even recognizes them as being different hockey teams and has given each of them their own dedicated page, with their own Championship Records section as well, same as every other NHL Team. It would be like saying, if the Quebec Nordiques had won a Stanley Cup and then saying that Stanley Cup also counted towards the number of Stanley Cups the Colorado Avalanche had won as well. Same franchise, different team. So what is the point of reaching a consensus on the Wiki Talk Page only to have people come along and undo the edits made after reaching the consensus? Sparhawk85 (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Sparhawk85

@Sparhawk85: What's the distinction between the Nordiques and the Avalanche? Different name? Different ownership?

It's clear from the article that the Leafs claim the "predecessor" teams wins as their own. Accordingly, it feels like novel research to say they only have 11 wins unless multiple sources quote that figure. —C.Fred (talk) 17:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Do you know hockey? Serious question here. The Quebec Nordiques was an NHL Hockey Team based out of Quebec City. They didn't do too well and didn't make a lot of money and was sold to a new owner. That new owner relocated the team to Denver Colorado and changed their name to the Colorado Avalanche. It's the same thing with the 3 different Toronto Teams. The Arenas were around for 1 season in the NHL, where they won a Stanley Cup, before being sold to a new owner, who renamed and rebranded them to the Toronto St. Patricks. Once that happened, they became a new team, with a new logo, new team colours, new ownership and a new name. About 9 or 10 years later, the St. Patricks were sold to Conn Smythe, where he once again rebranded the team. He gave them a new name, a new logo and new team colours and thus the Toronto Maple Leafs were born. He even had a new arena built for the team, which he moved the team to just a couple years after he bought them. The Toronto Arenas and the Toronto St. Patricks have their own pages on Wikipedia, and just like every other hockey team, they have the banner/table on the right hand side that lists all the Championships they've won and both of them claim 1 Stanley Cup each. When you go to The Toronto Maple Leafs page, it gets a little more confusing because whoever wrote the page wrote it as if the other 2 pages for the other 2 previous teams didn't exist and then claimed the Stanley Cups that The Arenas and The St. Patricks had won, as Cups also won by the Toronto Maple Leafs. So anyone looking at those pages could get confused as they will see one page saying The Toronto Arenas won the Stanley Cup in 1917-18 and then they'll see another page, The Toronto Maple Leafs page, claiming that The Toronto Maple Leafs won the Stanley Cup in the 1917-18 Season. And imagine the added confusion when the person in question goes to research this more and they can't find any record of a Toronto Maple Leafs team even playing in the 1917-18 NHL Season. It's fine to talk about the Toronto Franchise as a whole on the page for the Toronto Maple Leafs, as that is part of their history but when talking about the current team's achievements, it would be wrong to claim championships won by other teams as championships won by the current incarnation of the team. Sparhawk85 (talk) 17:39, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Sparhawk85

@Sparhawk85: My point is, what makes the change in teams that you allude to? New ownership? New name? Are the Winnipeg Jets and the Atlanta Thrashers the same team? The current Jets and 1972–1996 Jets? (Or are the latter Jets part of the Coyotes? Then again, they do have their own article...) The Blackhawks and Black Hawks? The Blackhawks/Black Hawks under Wirtz ownership and the Black Hawks before the Wirtz family brought the club? I'm not convinced that there's a clear distinction that can be made other than how the history of the franchise is recorded by the league and the club ownership. The pattern holds across other sports, too: that's why the Montreal Alouettes are credited with 7 Grey Cup wins, not 3 or 4. —C.Fred (talk) 18:32, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't know Football so I can't comment there and all the teams that relocated didn't win Stanley Cups... however... Look at Winnipeg Jets (1972–96) and Arizona Coyotes. Notice how the Winnipeg Jets won 7 Avco World Trophies and 3 Division Championships. And then notice how for the Arizona Coyotes, despite being the same Franchise, they are not credited with any Avco World Trophies and only 1 Division Championship. There is a clear distinction between Franchise and Team in the NHL. For a lot of teams, this distinction doesn't matter as relocating a team is a somewhat rare event, so most current NHL Teams still have the same name they had when they were first created. But to answer your question: Any time a team moves or goes through a significant rebranding/renaming, along with a change in ownership, they become a new Team but still part of the same Franchise. Blackhawks and Black Hawks isn't really a name change, they just got rid of a space. The current Winnipeg Jets are part of the same Franchise as the Atlanta Thrashers but not the same Team. So when talking about the Franchise as a whole and their entire history in the NHL, you can talk about championships other teams won in that franchise, or other things other teams in that franchise might have done but if you want to talk specifically about that Team itself, then you only look at their current incarnation under their current name. An example could be... Take a Broom, for instance. Now you sell that Broom to your buddy and he decides he doesn't like how the Broom looks anymore. So he takes off the bristles that form the broom head and he replaces it with a sponge, and then he takes your dreary grey handle and paints it Red. Would you still call the broom you sold him a broom? Or would you now call it a mop? His mop was made from your Broom but it is no longer the same Broom that you sold him. It's the same thing with Sports teams. If you sell the team to someone else and they decide to rename the team, give the team a new logo and give the team new colours... well is it really still the same team? That is what happened with the Toronto Maple Leafs. They got sold, they were completely rebranded, logo changed, name changed, colours changed. The only thing that stayed the same were the players (mostly) and the location the played at but everything else was different. If they had simply moved to Hamilton instead of staying in Toronto, we wouldn't even be having this debate right now. But then in 1927 it changed even more. Conn Smythe had the Maple Leaf Gardens built and by 1931 the Maple Leafs had moved to the Maple Leaf Gardens. So this time not only did they under go a name change, a logo change, and a colour change but they also changed Arenas. Moved to a new Arena that was even named after this new team and built specifically for them. I strongly suggest you go look at that Toronto Maple Leafs talk page as well. This has been brought up before, twice before. If you include my comments we had something like 5 people, I think saying it should be changed to 11. 1 person just out right disagreeing but not adding anything to the debate. Another guy simply stated the guy was wrong and went on to clarify about the Arenas and St. Patricks, even call them "Different Nicknames", but same Franchise. And then you also commented on this one and you clarified how the "Toronto Maple Leaf Hockey Club has won 13 Stanley Cups", and while I disagree a bit on the wording, as I believe it should simply be called he "Toronto Franchise" or "Toronto Hockey Club" if you want, the main essence there is the same. You clearly noted a difference between "Team" and overall "Franchise/Hockey Club". Further down on the Talk Page it was brought up again. The consensus on that page, for a long time, has been that their Stanley Cup Championships should read 11 and not 13. Also keep in mind, if you will, on the Winnipeg Jets (1972–96) page it has a link to the current Arizona Coyotes Page on Wikipedia but the "Phoenix Coyotes" page no longer exists and redirects you to the Arizona Coyotes, showing that, in this case, The Arizona Coyotes and the Phoenix Coyotes are recognized as being the same team but the Arizona Coyotes and the Winnipeg Coyotes are recognized as being different teams. This is the exact same set up that is used for the 3 Toronto Hockey Teams. All 3 of them have their own page, denoting the fact that they are considered to be different hockey teams. Sparhawk85 (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Sparhawk85