User talk:C.Fred/Archive 24

Diablo Cody

I have in my possession a photo that was taken by her assistant. It is not copyrighted and a free use photo. Can we use this for the entry? I can provide more identifying information but would prefer to take the discussion off-wiki in the interest of privacy for Ms. Cody. Starcader (talk) 21:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

@Starcader: The assistant will need to email the Volunteer Response Team. They'll be able to verify the donation directly from her. We can't do that through a third party, like you. —C.Fred (talk) 22:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Just so you are aware, I contacted the assistant AFTER making the change. You had told me to find a free use image so my next step was to reach out to her representatives. Why was the change reverted? Starcader (talk) 22:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

@Starcader: My bad for not assuming good faith. Too often with biographies, the person who contacted the assistant/manager/agent is working at the direction of the assistant. See the talk page for a comment on how I've scaled back what was in the lede. I'll look at the other edits momentarily. —C.Fred (talk) 23:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

it's all good. I appreciate your help. Starcader (talk) 23:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Alexis Lewis

C.Fred,

Since you were the "draftifying" admin on the Alexis Lewis article, I wanted to let you know the article has been moved back in to article space from draft, yet retains a lot of problems that probably qualify it for A7 or G11. Since you made the call to draftify in the first place, I wanted to let you make the call on how to proceed. Otherwise I'll probably tag for G11 in 24 hours. MarginalCost (talk) 21:59, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey C.Fred, I have sourced that article. You can remove the unreferenced tag from that article. Thanks Sharkslayer87 (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Remove the unreferenced tag

Hey, I added sourced content to the Jampani article. You can removed the unreferenced tag. Sharkslayer87 (talk) 01:49, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for helping me save my Wikipedia article I really appreciate it👍🏻👍🏻 ARMcgrath (talk) 20:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Sagarika Ghatge is not a Chiptavan Brahmins but a Maratha Kunbi

Hi C Fred, Ghatges are not Brahmins but Maratha Kunbis. Sagarikas forefather Shahu Maharaj was a Maratha. Holkars are also Marathas. Chiptavan Brahmins are not Marathas. Please correct the error on Sagarika Ghatge page! Shantanusingh10 (talk) 20:49, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@Shantanusingh10: As I indicated earlier, you must cite a reliable source to back up your claim. I will not make a change solely on the word of another editor when there are no sources to support it. —C.Fred (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@ C Fred do you have any reliable source which states that Sagarika is a Brahmin??

Sagarika was born to Maratha parents Vijasinh and Urmila Ghatge in Kolhapur, Maharashtra where she stayed till the age of 8.

Refer to the links below, and you cite a source which states that Sagarika Ghatge is a Chiptavan Brahmin, just because some editor wrote Chiptavan Brahmin, doesn't mean you will take their word for it without citing a reliable and correct source.

https://reacho.in/discover/vijayendra-ghatge-not-father-sagarika-ghatge

Shantanusingh10 (talk) 21:06, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

http://mulnivasiorganiser.bamcef.org/?p=408

https://www.culturalindia.net/reformers/shahu-chhatrapati.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahu_of_Kolhapur — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shantanusingh10 (talk • contribs)

@Shantanusingh10: No, but I was not addressing the content currently on the page; I was only addressing your query. I suggest that you provide your information on the article's talk page for review; you'll get a quicker response there than if you leave it for me personally to look at. —C.Fred (talk) 21:08, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Reason

What was the exact reason that my page was taken down it wasn’t bad or anything. ARMcgrath (talk) 21:16, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@ARMcgrath: It failed to assert that the band was in any way significant or important. —C.Fred (talk) 22:46, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay thanks for telling me — Preceding unsigned comment added by ARMcgrath (talk • contribs) 23:28, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Advice

Thanks for the advice and that scammers who said I “Vandalized” should be taught a lesson about pages. But thanks for saving it before he could of done something else with it ARMcgrath (talk) 00:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry

I'm sorry for the false alarm. The fire though can you not take it down because there was significant damage to the bathroom and injuries reported.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by XxNTE22xX (talk • contribs) 14:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC) 

@XxNTE22xX: Neither of those necessarily are enough to guarantee a mention. It will depend in large part on coverage of the event. —C.Fred (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft oopsie

Sorry about this. It looks like we edit conflicted and the software decided to overwrite everything you added. Home Lander (talk) 19:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Orion Allman

How is a member of the Allman musical family not notable? I have a proper source and a reason for him being there. Members of musical families are often notable just for being a part of the family. 165.134.17.37 (talk) 19:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Quite the opposite: notability is not inherited. Members of musical families are not notable just for being part of the family; they have to achieve notability on their own merits. —C.Fred (talk) 19:53, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Agree to disagree, fame by family is inherent in society today. Take the Kardashian family, for example: Robert Kardashian, Caitlyn Jenner, and Kim Kardashian made the rest of their family members famous by proxy.

No; Caitlyn Jenner and Kim Kardashian are each plainly notable, by Wikipedia standards, in their own rights. (I don't know about Robert off the top of my head.) —C.Fred (talk) 20:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Robert Kardashian was one of the lawyers in the infamous O.J. Simpson murder case.

For which alone he wouldn't be notable. —C.Fred (talk) 21:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

No, that is the exact reason he is notable, that's why he himself is famous independent of his family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.134.17.69 (talk) 21:59, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

That may be the primary reason he's notable, but there is plenty of other coverage of him. —C.Fred (talk) 22:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

James Shaw Jr not NOTABLE ?

How can you possibly say that this hero is not “notable“? Are you willing to go on record over all of social media with this determination? Because I am pretty sure that you will draw major protest. He is absolutely notable. if he had saved this many lives on the battlefield he would be getting a medal of honor. I am pleading with you to reconsider your case determination Subzerochill (talk) 20:34, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Subzerochill: Read WP:BLP1E and then either tell me what else he's notable for, or show me the substantial, in-depth coverage about him. —C.Fred (talk) 20:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Dude, I have to agree with Subzerochill here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.134.17.69 (talk • contribs)

Sub and IP: this is exactly the kind of thing BLP1E covers. If Shaw draws sustained national attention, then eventually an article might be justified; but at this point, the notable topic is the attack and not the hero who stopped it. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Article Advice

Hi I recently published an article that you deleted. No hard feelings, I just wanted to kn what I need to do or to take away to have my article acceptable. If you could please give me some advice on what you seen was wrong with my article I would greatly appreciate it. :)26Production&Films (talk) 05:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Your question

Concerning your question, I can say that I have a working relationship. I went with a pic more obviously from my phone as I do understand how some may have problems with the previous. Thank you for the question.Sbearfi1 (talk) 04:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Stormi Webster ‎

Hi I think the redirection should be deleted and you should block any attempt to receate a separate article. --Panam2014 (talk) 22:47, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Panam2014: Were the name not in the article, I'd remove it right now. You're free to either discuss deletion of the redirect or discuss removal of the name from the article, at WP:RFD or Talk:Kylie Jenner, respectively. —C.Fred (talk) 22:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Republican People's Party (Turkey)

On Republican People's Party (Turkey) I putting presidential candidate but Melencron keeps deleting it because he says it not a political office I did it for the HDP and even before someone put it for the Russian party “Yabloko” The reason I am saying this is because I don’t want to deleted Pizzalover12 (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@Pizzalover12: The infobox is for leaders of the party, not candidates for major offices. Put another way, who will hold the "office" of presidential candidate after the election if Ince loses? And who will hold it if Ince wins? —C.Fred (talk) 00:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

About: Alma Dea Morani/ Alma Dia Morani - Thank you

Hi C.Fred,
If there's a report at WP:VPT about the Thank button having some technical problems in the last 24 hours or so, it may well be because I have worn it out with my appreciation for all your help about this.
Pete "I wonder what this button does?" AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:42, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Dear Fred

May you handle my request(view here) . - Best regards // KnowledgeChuck (talk) 18:00, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

C.Fred You should probably be aware that this user is definitely admin/forum shopping. here, here, inexplicably, here, here and here. I'm sure I missed a few. Also pinging Bbb23 as he was the last. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:09, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

The OP is now blocked for 48h.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:14, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Constantine B. Scouteris - draft article

Dear Fred,

Thank you very much for your kind message.

The only article I have been trying to add is an article about Professor Constantine Scouteris (my departed father), who was one of the most renowned Christian Orthodox theologians of the 20th Century. You will notice that it is already, in the very first stages of drafting, well referenced and I will certainly continue adding references and material once it goes live. At that point, I will notify his colleagues and friends to contribute to it.

The draft is in Greek, but has been saved in the English page of Wikipedia (due to my inexperience). I hope that once it is approved, it will automatically 'travel'/appear in the Greek pages. I then intend to also publish an English Article (for it to appear the English pages).

Hope this info has been useful for your editing process.

Best regards,

Dr. Basil C. Scouteris, LL.M., LL.M.

Attorney at Law - European Central Bank — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Basil C. Scouteris (talk • contribs) 17:56, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Just a further clarification that the draft Article I'm referring to bears the Greek title "Κωνσταντίνος Β. Σκουτέρης".

Thanks again,

B. Scouteris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Basil C. Scouteris (talk • contribs) 18:01, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

@Dr. Basil C. Scouteris: Thank you for clarifying. The article is not an autobiography, but you do still have a conflict of interest in an article about your father. We prefer that neutral people write articles, not their family members, friends, and colleagues.

The article will not be automatically migrated to the Greek Wikipedia. You would need to create the article there and follow their policies over at el.wikipedia.org. —C.Fred (talk) 18:45, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Constantine B. Scouteris article

Dear Fred, thanks for the clarification re the Greek Wikipedia page. Question: will my current draft article (in Greek) still be accepted and appear in the English Wikipedia (most of the information is publicly available and also appears in the Obituary of my father published in The Times, so l assure you, despite the perceived conflict of interest, everything is fully accurate/truthful). Looking forward to your response/feedback, B. Scouteris Dr. Basil C. Scouteris (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

@Dr. Basil C. Scouteris: There's no way to evaluate that until it's translated. —C.Fred (talk) 19:53, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) But it definitely cannot appear here in Greek. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:20, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Constantine Scouteris article

Great, thanks. I'll translate it and resubmit. The Greek page has already been uploaded. Dr. Basil C. Scouteris (talk) 11:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

User edits on French people

User isn't adding a source, they are instead removing the main source used for the article and citing the numbers for French populations. I'm in the process of reporting them at the edit-warring noticeboard.R9tgokunks ✡ 05:48, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@R9tgokunks: They are adding a source, but it's a religious evangelism site. Hence my comment that it's an unreliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 05:50, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

That said, it looks like this edit does tie to the sources. —C.Fred (talk) 05:53, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Dear Fred

We being thinking about you being made about the Troy Ross about one information about Saying Troy Ross nickname was also "Spoon" was well. If you didn't information as be true because I had research at my School same one when Troy Ross went Judith Nyman and In the yearbook it said he's nickname was Spoon also I asked Troy's wife Alison Mclean about to conformed the information about so can you allow us to put that information in the wikipedia page thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by YearbookGuy (talk • contribs) 18:43, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

@YearbookGuy: Nope. It needs to have been published in a reliable source; yearbooks do not suffice for this. Further, we're looking more for nicknames during his boxing career, not from his school days. —C.Fred (talk) 18:47, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello @C.Fred, you were, I believe, the deleting administrator of one of my pages and I would like my stuff back for future references. Hunter256 (talk) 02:32, 9 May 2018 (UTC) Hunter256

@Hunter256: The material is not suitable for Wikipedia. I suggest going to WP:REFUND and seeing if an administrator there will email the content to you. (I don't handle email requests.) —C.Fred (talk) 12:27, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Richard Sale journalist wants to update his page.

Richard Sale wants to update his page and I am his wife trying to assist. in response to the need for a citation, can we note that Richard Sale is the source as a General Reference at the bottom? The information currently on the page is incomplete and in some cases inaccurate. Thank you for any assistance. Cah208 (talk) 15:11, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cah208: No, we cannot use Sale as a source for an article about himself. There are limited cases where a self-published source may be useful in a biography, but it can't be a general reference. For the page to be updated, you need to do two things:

1. First, find published, reliable secondary sources, independent of Sale, to support the changes.
2. Then, go to Talk:Richard Sale (journalist) and request the changes be made by an independent editor. Because of your conflict of interest, you should not edit the article directly. The template {{Request edit}} can be added to your request to alert others that a request is pending.

I hope this answers your questions. —C.Fred (talk) 16:32, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Delete my Oneplus 6 links

Hello C.Fred,

I just added that links. because of some peoples in India don't know English very much. So they can't understand what is written there. So just that's why only i added that links because in that link the Content is related to the Topic (Oneplus 6). So if any visitor comes to your site. And he can't know English. so that time Wikipedia image is down in Visit eyes. So if the visitor goes to that link that I added. so he can easily know what is oneplus 6 in Hindi Language only. So I kindly request you to add my link to that article.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishabh0109 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Moving this thread to your talk page to keep it in one place. —C.Fred (talk) 17:29, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Flood Magazine and User:Anyajg

This editor continues to edit this article despite my posting the {{uw-coi}} template to their page, and after another edit of theirs the {{uw-paid}} template to their page. It is clear from the edit summaries being provided by their editing that they are employed by the magazine. There is a person at the magazine who appears to match this username (see [1]). As is, they stand in violation of WP:PAID. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: I only see one edit after the last message about COI/paid editing, so it stands to reason that they saw the message and backed off editing. —C.Fred (talk) 19:10, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

• I'm not suggesting a course of action, but rather just passing on information. Though, I do note that the first template I left them (after which they conducted two more edits) says "In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID)." I'm not concerned with whether or not they get blocked, but rather you're aware of what they are doing, if you weren't already so. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:14, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: Oh, it was pretty clear from their edit summaries what they were doing. —C.Fred (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Nilsen

Not that I've had chance to edit it, but his death is being reported in reliable sources e.g. [2] --81.108.53.238 (talk) 20:51, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

If people could just follow directions and cite the sources, then the page wouldn't have gotten protected. —C.Fred (talk) 21:01, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely, if it hadn't been being edited quite so furiously I'd have probably just left a note to say his death was being reported, I don't think his date of death has been reported yet, merely that he has died. --81.108.53.238 (talk) 21:06, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Apologies

sir, I was not aware of the speedy deletion tag, but could you please read over my reasoning on the talk page, and if you would be so kind, remove the speedy deletion tag. If you have any questions drop em on my talk page Barry Henry Allen (talk) 00:01, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft submission

Thank you for your edit C.Fred. I am new to Wikipedia and would value your input on my most recent submission. I had a bit of difficulty with formatting as I am editing from my iPad device. Thank you Hemingway2018 (talk) 20:14, 17 May 2018 (UTC) Hemingway2018 (talk) 20:14, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Elgin School District U-46 Edits

Hey C.Fred, why did you rollback my edits on the U-46 page? I'm just updating to more current information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Studiousstrwbry (talk • contribs) 14:17, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

@Studiousstrwbry: The red flag was the school song/chant thing that got added. If not a copyright concern, then that's certainly beyond the scope of a table like is in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 14:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Undeletion

Could you undelete File:SM64DSminigameshot.jpg so I can add it to Super Mario 64 DS. 71.202.112.200 (talk) 22:37, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the Žagarė Manor.

Hello C.Fred

Regarding your reverting of my edit on the article about the Žagarė Manor, I know what I was writing because that manor belonged to my great-uncle Georgiy Dmitrievich Naryshkin. See:

http://wikimapia.org/19274393/%C5%BDagar%C4%97-manor-house#/photo/1815930

With regard to the description on that above website, it was actually my great-grandfather Dmitri Ivanovich Naryshkin (Дмитрий Иванович Иванович Нарышкин) who built it. He died on March 1, 1866 at the age of 53. He was neither a count, nor a duke nor prince nor baron - our family never accepted any titles (with one single exception). His eldest son Georgiy Dmitrievich Naryshkin, my great-uncle, inherited it and was the last owner and occupant of the manor, he and his wife and two surviving children (his eldest daughter, Anna Georgievna Naryshkina, died in 1907) fled during the Revolution and settled in England where his Englih wife, Elisabeth Harriett Iossifovna Naryshkina née Knight, had relatives. His son Boris died in London in 1922 aged 48, and he passed away two years later in 1924.

We tend to spell our name Narishkin - a simplification my father made when he naturalized British in the thirties.

What better and more reliable source can there be but myself with regard to my family's properties in Lithuania? My grandfather, Alexander Dmitrievich Naryshkin and brother of Georgiy Dmitrievich Naryshkin also had an estate not far from the one in Žagarė - here is a website with photos of his estate as it (more or less) stands today:

http://nakacia.lt/dvarai/gruzdziu-dvaras/

Best regards, and I would be grateful if you would restore my edit.

Vera Narishkin

https://geni.com/people/Vera-Vadimovna-Narishkina/6000000010532989954

Vierotchka (talk) 01:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Vera Narishkin: First, you did not cite a published reliable source. Second, since you have a conflict of interest, you should not be editing the article at all. —C.Fred (talk) 01:32, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Why?

Why are you doing this? You told me i can't revert 3 times and u did too? whats the poing? I didn't do anything bad, i just did what id had to be done providing reasons. There isn't a wikopedia rule that says that all changed need to be discussed first, lol? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notearsleftocry (talk • contribs) 23:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Notearsleftocry: First, I've only reverted the page twice. You made an initial sequence of edits, reverted by ClueBot; a revert of that, reverted by RetroCraft314; a slightly different edit that could be deemed a revert, which I reverted; a clear second revert, which I reverted; and your current most recent edits are a third (or depending on interpretation, fourth) revert. Because you're in peril of violating 3RR, that's why I advised you about it. You're now subject to being blocked if you make any further reverts within the 24-hour window.

Second, while WP:BRD isn't a rule, it's a standard of behaviour that should be followed. You made a bold edit, and you were reverted, so you should now discuss your desired edit. —C.Fred (talk) 23:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Update: General Ization has reverted your most recent edit, so any further removals by you would be a violation of 3RR. —C.Fred (talk) 23:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

And all of that was predicated on you editing in good faith. This shows you aren't, so any further removal by you will be dealt with as block evasion and vandalism. —C.Fred (talk) 23:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Adrian d'Hagé

I am attempting to conform with wikipedia's standards, but we now have conflicting edits - which is making editing somewhat difficult. As I've previously stated, I'm not a fan of self promotion, and the original site stayed deficient for years. I've only come on here because I'm receiving multiple complaints about the poor entry. In addition to not being a fan of self promotion, I'm not a fan of birthday wishes, so I do NOT want my date of birth shown on this site, which you have re-inserted. Adhage01 (talk) 02:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Adhage01: Actually, you re-added the date of birth. Further, it's a bad idea for you to be editing your own article, as was clear with the heavy promotional tone of some of your earlier edits today. —C.Fred (talk) 02:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm fully appreciative of the need to be neutral - and I'm also cognisant of the undesirability of editing this page - that has only been resorted to in light of the criticisms I've received about Wikipedia and I've had to attempt to rectify things. I'm also fully aware of the "promotional tone" of earlier insertions - something I was attempting to rectify by going back to earlier versions (which contained ribbon bars) and removing the "promotional issues". It might be easier to delete the page altogether. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhage01 (talk • contribs) 02:24, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I am also puzzled as to why, under the "Honours and Awards" section, the medal ribbons have been removed. It is standard practice for Wikipedia to allow ribbon bars (see for example, Peter Cosgrove, another holder of the Military Cross). Perhaps you can explain this for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhage01 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Adhage01: I saw that in an earlier version, but I hadn't figured out when it came out. —C.Fred (talk) 02:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I found the edit where it was removed. The editor removing it said the section was unsourced. you might want to address that question to Abraham, B.S. —C.Fred (talk) 02:20, 23 May 2018 (UTC) .

That too is more than puzzling - the current page clearly shows the sources for the Order of Australia and the Military Cross. Whilst I'm aware that some claim gallantry decorations for which they're not entitled, I don't fit into that category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhage01 (talk • contribs) 02:36, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

edits to Filipino American theater entry

hi fred, i deleted paragraphs in the Filipino American theater entry because they were not relevant to the entry. i apologize if i was not able to leave any notes as to why i deleted them. am not sure where i should have left the editing notes. is it okay if we "restore" the deletions? thank you. 173.90.219.248 (talk) 15:10, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

They look relevant to me. I suggest you discuss the matter at the article's talk page and get the opinion of other editors. —C.Fred (talk) 16:34, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Zonk-LetsMakeADeal.svg

Hi, why did you delete the photo from the article? It helps the readers to understand the idea. Is it because of copyright issues? How can I keep the file on Wikipedia? Tal (Ronaldinho The king) 17:40, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

@רונאלדיניו המלך: Ultimately it's a copyright issue. Because the image is not free, it must comply with the non-free usage criteria. In this case, we already have a picture in the article showing the Zonk image, so we don't need a second. The photo we already have is better, because the photograph is a true representation of what it looks like on the show, rather than a recreation. —C.Fred (talk) 21:53, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

IP blanking

Thank you very much for your help in reverting the disruptive IP 95.121.153.81 at List of songs recorded by Katy Perry. I have a feeling it could be the same person as the (currently blocked) IP 193.153.220.51 that made suspiciously similar deletions yesterday at List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga that you also helped revert. Can you please semi-protect the former page and perhaps block the IP who blanked parts of it if the bad removals keep up? Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:31, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Never mind, Hut 8.5 already did both. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: I felt like I'd seen this list blanking before. Thank you for reminding me of when/where. —C.Fred (talk) 17:06, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

My pleasure. It's a good thing that user (who I can now safely say used both IPs) won't be able to resume such activity so soon with both articles now semi-protected. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:17, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Turan

Thank you for helping my students create the Turan University page. They are non-native speakers and had had no experience editing on Wik. They said they learned a lot from this project. Kdammers (talk) 05:57, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

MJJ

No one is saying anything at the Jackson page. Here's the rundown. Talk pages are not used that often; I suggested a couple edits and yeah, not much is being said. However if I put those edits in then four people will automatically say something. Bleucheeses (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Platt Tech

My changes were incorrect. There is a different Platt High in Meriden. Thanks for catching this so quickly and making the corrections. Sorry for the confusion. Tcwndsr (talk) 23:40, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Editing permission

Hi C.Fred,

Thank you for reaching out. As I am new to this, I would very much appreciate your assistance. Could you please let me know how I can make changes without the amends being reverted back? All the content I am loading is factually correct and removes gossip and inuendo that is incorrect.

Thanks again for your guidance on the matter.

Kind regards, Tatiana — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatiana48 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@Tatiana48: Much of the material you removed was backed up with reliable sources. So, you'll need to provide counter-sourcing that shows that the material is incorrect or has changed over time. —C.Fred (talk) 01:51, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Upload image for Volcán de Fuego page

Hello! Sorry to bother. I was the dimwit who tried to update the page for the Volcán de Fuego, and just made it worse. I tried to upload an image of the initial eruption of yesterday, right when the ash and lava started going down the volcano. So I was wondering if you can do that, so that a lot of people can see it. Thanks VictorVance1738 (talk) 01:59, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@VictorVance1738: No, I can't, because I don't see where you uploaded an image. —C.Fred (talk) 02:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Your message

I got your message and thank you. Having an MA in medieval philosophy, and having written my thesis on the ontology of promise in Aquinas, the middle ages are a passion for me and I hate to see people use it as a blank slate on which they can allege anything they want. So if I get hot under the collar when people make dubious assertions with no support, you'll please forgive me. I still think I'm right to edit the article to be more factually justifiable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nccsa186 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

See above. —C.Fred (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

St Aelred

Your insistence on restoring a paragraph full of unsubstantiated assertions about Aelred's sexuality, homosexual or otherwise, is unscholarly and demonstrates a clear bias on your part. The most objectionable sentence is "his own conscious homosexual orientation", which I would allow to stand if it actually had some textual support, even secondarily, but it refers neither to a primary text by the article subject himself, and the only secondary reference is to "American Council of Learned Societies: Dictionary of the Middle Ages, volume 4" with no page cited. Again, your insistence on leaving this allegation included with no scholarly support causes me to think you have some emotional interest in this assertion, which has no place in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 21:58, 7 June 2018‎ (UTC) (talk • contribs) Nccsa186 (UTC)

@Nccsa186: On the surface, the text is cited. Since you have some criticism about the sourcing, I suggest you take the matter up at the article's talk page and get consensus before you remove the text.

I have no particular interest in the topic. However, when a brand-new editor and an editor with a low edit count both remove the same text within minutes, it is either coincidence or suspicious. —C.Fred (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Is this the proper way to make replies? Not sure who the other editor is. I don't use aliases, this is my only account, wherewith I have financially supported this wiki. As for sources, whether to let dubious statements about someone dead for almost 1000 years persist isn't really something that merits the building of consensus. I didn't delete any of the statements about modern LGBT organizations claiming him as their patron, which is factually true and easily verifiable. Even Mr Crompton's assertion is, well, HIS assertion and so I have no objection to its being included, provided the sources are cited. But a vague reference to volume 4 of a text is beneath the dignity of this important resource. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nccsa186 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

@Nccsa186: These would be good matters to bring up at the article's talk page, where other users can add more detail to the source, if they're familiar with it. —C.Fred (talk) 22:16, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Can you proofread my recent edit/contribution

It claims I have a conflict of interest. Thank you Clvdmediagroup (talk) 21:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

@Clvdmediagroup: Based on your username, you do. You're probably also in violation of the username policy. —C.Fred (talk) 22:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

As for the content of the draft, it is not overtly promotional, but it lacks any independent reliable sources and makes no credible claim about the significance or importance of the subject. —C.Fred (talk) 22:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

What type of credible claim about the significance or importance of a musical artist could be made? Clvdmediagroup (talk) 22:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

@Clvdmediagroup: Charted single or album, national tour... WP:NMUSIC has a whole list. —C.Fred (talk) 00:44, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Mr. Lem's hate for Evolutionary Theory of Sex

Thank you for checking the time line of the deletion of the 1st version of this page - what I meant is that Mr. Lem, who was hammering this page for about an year, consistently vandalizing it, posted it for deletion AGAINST the opinions expressed on the Talk page. Thus he clearly used his position to push his own agenda, even though Editors should be neutral. Then (lucky him) within a space of 24 hours there were 2 "delete" opinions posted under that notice. The whole community that was discussing the appropriateness of cuts and changes was left out of the discussion, and their contribution on the Talk page was ignored by Mr. Lem. 2 opinions are hardly a consensus on such a complex topic as mathematical biology, and if an Editor has a clear bias against the theory (observed from the Talk page) perhaps a decision about a deletion should be done by someone neutral? What are the mechanisms of filing a complaint against biased Editors? KaiStr (talk) 22:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

@KaiStr: Let's go through this piece by piece:

1. "…posted it for deletion AGAINST the opinions expressed on the Talk page." All those people involved on the talk page could have easily gone to the AfD page to chime in. I don't see where anybody did.
2. "Editors should be neutral." There's nothing that prevents an involved editor from nominating a page at AfD—just like there's nothing that prevents an involved editor from explaining why the article should be kept.
3. "within a space of 24 hours there were 2 'delete' opinions posted under that notice." Not surprising: there's often a flurry of activity early in AfDs, because people see them on the current-day list of nominations. Also, when I nominate an article for deletion, I'll often look down the list, review one of the other nominations, and weigh in on the matter.
4. "The whole community that was discussing the appropriateness of cuts and changes was left out of the discussion…" They would have seen the AfD notice on the article and known the deletion discussion was going on; why they chose not to participate is up to them.
5. "2 opinions are hardly a consensus on such a complex topic as mathematical biology…" The nature of the topic doesn't require a large consensus. Remember that the nomination is an implicit !vote for delete, so there were three editors who favoured deletion of the article. That said, contact the deleting admin about this; this might be worth asking about at WP:Deletion review. I'm not saying I'd !vote to overturn the deletion, but I think you can make a case that this is not consensus or a soft delete (which would allow recreation).
6. "a decision about a deletion should be done by someone neutral." You mean like uninvolved administrator Malcolmxl5? That's what happened.
7. "What are the mechanisms of filing a complaint against biased Editors?" If you felt an editor were editing an existing article to present a biased picture, then WP:NPOVN, the neutral-point-of-view noticeboard, would be the place to go. There the discussion would be on whether the content of the article were presented in a fair, neutral matter. The nomination for deletion was policy-based, so you'd have a hard time arguing that the deletion nomination were biased or in bad faith. You might have a case in deletion review (WP:DRV) that there really wasn't a consensus, but before you file a DRV case, you need to discuss it with Malcolmxl5, who closed the deletion discussion and deleted the article. (@Malcolmxl5: Hey, don't be surprised if KaiStr contacts you about this; I'm pinging you so you see this discussion.)

One other thing: you should really focus on the content of the article and whether the AfD followed procedure. I suggest against bringing the motives or anything else about the character of another editor into the deletion review. If you do, expect the same lens to be held up to your behaviour and motives. And as I said before, a DRV claiming that the nominator is biased will go nowhere; a DRV claiming that three editors is not enough to establish consensus has a chance. —C.Fred (talk) 01:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

OK, now imagine that AfD was conducted by a person who believes that the Earth is flat, and who wanted to delete a page on, for example, a a specific device to measure a curvature. Most public doesn't know this device, only specialists do. Now substitute in your mind what happened to the ETS page with this scenario: there is nothing to stop a deletion of the page if technical specialists are not watching what is happening on the page for 7 days. Most people don't monitor it after editing their specific pages.

In other words, it is very easy for a single biased individual to delete a page just using the fact that most scientists who edit Wikipedia are too busy to constantly monitor what is happening, especially at the end of the term (April-May). However it involves a 6-steps multi-message exchanges with administration to make the page restored, and that poor honest soul who, not being even an author of the theory, should spend his own time raising awareness about the deletion in the community. I believe this favors a rather psychopathic deletition of opinions that specific editors don't like, and this also disencourage scientists or knowledgeable people to contribute their expertise to this encyclopedia. This case is a good example for public discussion of the flaws of the Wikipedia and I would be grateful if you can point where is an archive of the Talk discussion is stored. Thank you for your detailed response, I think I saw the rules already and Mr. Lem obviously knows that it is easy to kill the page when nobody watching it for a week but it is too bureaucratic and time consuming to get it back. You are just confirming that you know this imbalance too and you are fine with this.KaiStr (talk) 19:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

@KaiStr: The talk page was deleted along with the article. It might be restored during a DRV, but since you seem unwilling to do the exchange of messages with Malcolmxl5 that would need to kick that off, I don't think there's anything further I can suggest. —C.Fred (talk) 02:21, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

In response to conflict of interest

Hello C.Fred,

I have no Conflict of interest as I have no relation to these filmmakers, I do not work for Fat Brothers Films. I am an avid sci-fi fan in the United Arab Emirates, I have been part of many conventions like MEFCC (Middle East Film and comic con), and IGN Middle East numerous times, this is the materials that come out of our country. I am keen to publish articles on other filmmakers in this region. I have not added these photos on my own, they are in the newspapers and comic-con, you can view them with the links provided. I have taken them from newspapers and I have not found any photos outside the media of those films. Please do have a look at the news article sources I have mentioned. Since I have taken these pictures from newspaper articles I was unsure of how to upload them to wikimedia and how to source and link them, which is why I stated them as my own. If you could please guide me on how to post photos taken from newspaper articles it would be greatly appreciated.

Im asking you for guidance, because there is something I am not doing right, cause these are not my photos, they are newspaper photos. So tell me how to state that and publish accordingly. You guidance will be highly appreciated

Thank you Robotictrance (talk) 23:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)Robotictrance

@Robotictrance: If they are newspaper photos, then they belong to the newspaper; they are not free images and may not be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. —C.Fred (talk) 00:29, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Maplewoodd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This is an RJCola sock, could you block them. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 01:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Home Lander: Yep, I just saw the SPI. Obvious sock is obvious and blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 01:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Correcting My Own Profile

Dear Fred, My additions and corrections to my profile are not a conflict of interest, they are providing accurate information about me and my career, which was inaccurate prior to my corrections. The first time I corrected it, you said I was dead. The second time, the profile said I was an active novelist till 2016 and in fact I am still an active novelist, since I am not dead. I am also updating my bibliography to include new work. Elizabeth Ann Scarborough — Preceding unsigned comment added by EAScarborough (talk • contribs) 07:10, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@EAScarborough: If you are writing about yourself, it is a conflict of interest. Further, if you are holding yourself out as the subject, you need to verify your identity with the Volunteer Response Team, to guard against the risk of you being an impostor. —C.Fred (talk) 15:29, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jorjman

I think these two are ducky enough to be blocked even without a CU. Shyamal K Mishra was originally created by the master. Home Lander (talk) 15:15, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Please stop vandalizing my article for Ano Poroia

Hello, I am from Ano Poroia! The article is about 30-40 % my contribution since the beginning. I had requested for translation of the bulgarian article for the village many years ago and someone wrote the exact translation from Bulgarian to English. Then I added more facts that I read in books referring to the local history. Recently I realized that someone has vandalized it by changing Bulgarian to Macedonian, greek to Macedonian or turkish and so on.

I expect you to revert to my version as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geotol (talk • contribs) 02:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

• Geotol, I am this close to blocking you for edit warring and nationalist disruption. Drmies (talk) 02:12, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
• @Geotol: You gave no explanation for your edits, so for all purposes, you're the one who appears like they're vandalizing. Further, it's an article related to the Balkans, where users can be subject to discretionary sanctions for improper edits. Hence why admins can be quick to block for edits there.

Now, had you mentioned this sequence of edits by OrkanOrkan in your edit summary, then it would have been clearer what happened on the page and why you were making these sweeping changes.

@Drmies: Let me know what you think about the diff I linked. —C.Fred (talk) 02:15, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Here you can see that the guy who requested the translation of the original bulgarian article was me. I am not a bulgarian to have any nationalistic view on this. I am greek and aromanian and I can definitely tell you that there were no "Macedonian" slavs in this village. Now why this vandalism was allowed by wikipedia is a matter for discussion... https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B0:%D0%93%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%9F%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geotol (talk • contribs) 02:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@Geotol: Wikipedia is a collaborative project. If you were the editor who requested (or made) the initial translation, it doesn't give you any special standing over any other editor. Or, nobody owns the article they initially created. —C.Fred (talk) 02:35, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

C.Fred, I don't know what to say. That other editor gave explanations of sorts, but they're not exactly clear or convincing. Let me add, Geotol, that it is not a good idea to edit while logged out--C.Fred, I think you know what I'm pointing at in the history. Drmies (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

This article if it remains as it is, it does not make any sense. You had better remove it completely if you are not reverting it to the previous versions. There were never macedonian schools in greece since there was no macedonian state back then. There were people studying in either bulgarian schools funded by Bulgaria, or Greek schools funded by Greece. There were a few Romanian schools later on as well funded by Romania which taught in Greek and the local Aromanian language. Just to give you the extent of vandalism, in 1913 the village was within Greece. I had written that according to the greek statistic ministry there were 2.684 greeks in the village. Now it says macedonian ministry. There was not even a macedonian ministry back then and even if it existed they wouldn't be able to count people within the borders of another country. There was no macedonian exarchate back then as well. And to conclude if I start writing in every english article the toponym of the US places in greek or swedish version wouldn't that be absurd? I accept the term in bulgarian since there were bulgarian people in the village who may try to find information on wikipedia about their former homeland. But the "macedonian version" is ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geotol (talk • contribs) 02:58, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Another thing, it speaks about macedonian language and it has a link to the south slavic language. Then it refers to Macedonians being the main population of the village and there is a link to the greek Macedonians (the indigenous greek population of Macedonia). So is it difficult to see that the article now has become a joke?

And regarding the statement "this is the Balkans"... I don't even live there anymore since I moved to Sweden years ago and I have attained a more internationalistic point of view. Geotol —Preceding undated comment added 03:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

• "This" refers to the article, not to you. I don't know why you'd think this was somehow about your location. Drmies (talk) 03:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

About Gary lineker

At first I was joking and was going to revert the Rest.... But lineker did not score ten goals for England for the golden boot it was 6 in 5 Dh8410 (talk) 19:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@Dh8410: The table later in the article is clear: he has ten career goals in World Cup finals. —C.Fred (talk) 19:21, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

And anyway, Dh8410, you appeared with a new created account just after an IP block targeting the same article?? Sounds Fishy to me. Govvy (talk) 19:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

This edit casts doubt on the sincerity of Dh8410. I wonder if "I was joking" is a euphemism. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

The Jacob Ziegel Medal

I see that my request to have my submission re-considered for publication on the Awards page has been granted. I am not sure what is now required of me to move this process forward. I could update the entry by giving the name and circumstances of a second recipient of the Medal, but do not want to put in the effort if the basic entry is not accepted. Your advice on this, please?

Prof Crawf≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prof Crawf (talk • contribs) 19:25, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

@Prof Crawf: Draft:The Jacob Ziegel Medal is back, so you can work on that page again. What you need to show is where the presentation of the medal has been covered in independent reliable sources. In other words, find news stories about it. —C.Fred (talk) 21:05, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Georgia Tech colors

What do you mean by this? Their colors, as stated in all of their media guides, are Old gold and white. We don't use branding colors. Corky 21:32, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Furthermore, please see this, this, etc. Corky 21:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I apologize, I've changed the Old gold to Tech gold in the module now so it'll automatically display. I contacted their media relations department who did confirm it was an official change. I personally deal with the colors and logos on Wikipedia and have spent many hours trying to update the module and So many times editors like to use the branding name when in fact they are not the official school color names. Hope you understand my POV here. Corky 22:01, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Corkythehornetfan: The missing piece of the puzzle was that the module displays it automatically. It looked like you were just removing the colour information altogether, while your edit summary implied a change from Tech Gold to old gold. —C.Fred (talk) 22:37, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Copyright Violations on Program

There is currently a sock puppet investigation in place between User:Jurijus Pacalovas, User:Angel2014fly and Special:Contributions/2A02:8084:EA2:5B00:7D83:82A0:2D9A:316C from edits on Program but due to content removal, we are unable to display diffs as evidence. Is there anyway to restore them just for the investigation? IWI (chat) 18:52, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@ImprovedWikiImprovment: Admins reviewing the case will be able to see the diffs. —C.Fred (talk) 21:17, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, ok. That's good then. IWI (chat) 21:20, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

About AK47

Hi C.Fred, I appreciate your comment regarding my change on AK-74, but the guy in the picture is on illegal agenda. Calling him a police patrol is not neutral either. It is the same as calling Mexican drug cartel members - armed Mexican forces. If the picture is causing such a debate, why not remove it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vbalsys (talk • contribs) 14:20, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@Vbalsys: It is not our place to comment on the legality of an agency, just who uses it. The DPR refers to that agency as a police force; identifying what the DPR is is outside the scope of the article on the AK-74. As a way of compromise, I've removed all identification entirely. —C.Fred (talk) 14:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: That sounds fair. Thank you. Vbalsys (talk) 14:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

List of Trump administration dismissals and resignations: Scott Pruitt

Hi C.Fred how come you changed my edit? Scott Pruitt is leaveing Monday the 9th. and plus I called epa. and asked him. And plus he is still on epa's website https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/current-epa-leadership Thanks:96.36.68.29 (talk) 14:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

I've already addressed your failure to cite a published source at your talk page. Please keep the thread there. —C.Fred (talk) 14:37, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Dear C. Fred:

   You mentioned that my edit addition to the biography of Louis Faurer represented a "conflict of interest." All I did was to mention the name of the artist's son, Louis Faurer's son Mark, as a supporter of the Bresson Foundation exhibit, along with mention of Louis Faurer's Estate, which also supported the exhibit. None of this benefits me in any way, nor does it benefit Mark Faurer. It is merely clarifying facts that were mentioned in the book published in connection with the exhibit.

  In excising these additions, you have also removed ANY mention of the Greenberg Gallery and the artist's son, which were in the original Wikipedia entry. Those items have been part of the bio for almost a year.

Sincerely,

David Gedalecia Fisher Professor of History College of Wooster Wooster, Ohio

P.S. I contributed information for the entry in Wikipedia on the Chinese philosopher Wu Cheng. In it, I made reference to several studies I wrote on him which frame the information provided in the entry. Does it represent a "conflict of interest" that I provided material with which I have a scholarly relationship? I think that Wikipedia needs to "fine tune" the definitions on "conflict of interest," lest it deprive its readers of useful, and sometimes vital, information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.140.24.212 (talk) 21:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

As I noted, the conflict of interest is based on your edit summary, where you said "The additions were made according to the suggestions of Louis Faurer's son, Mark." Any editor who is editing at the direction of a subject, or relative of a subject, has a conflict of interest.

As for Wu Cheng, it is probably not a conflict of interest, but citing your own work can get you near the slippery slope of original research. —C.Fred (talk) 21:27, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Original research: there are published books listed, and the essay was the product of a 450-page doctoral thesis submitted to Harvard University, as well as being based on those books. I'm not clear on why that entry would be on a "slippery slope." That thesis is also the only study of this individual in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.140.24.212 (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

The tricky issue is that it's your thesis. —C.Fred (talk) 22:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

The Faurer bio: Mark Faurer did not "direct" me to do anything. I asked for "suggestions," and he provided them. These can be footnoted to the exhibit volume if this would clear things up. Please inform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.140.24.212 (talk) 22:08, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

The fact that you solicited suggestions still means you were editing with input from him. Please review WP:Secondary sources for more guidance on what is acceptable for independent sourcing. —C.Fred (talk) 22:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Tricky issue: the guideline says that original research should be based on published sources, so are published books I wrote excluded? Furthermore, the thesis was published by the University of Michigan. Are you saying that if I contribute material to an entry that is from my own published research, as in a book, it violates Wikipedia guidelines?

Faurer bio: Okay, I asked for suggestions. What I gleaned is corroborated in the published exhibit volume. Can what I gleaned from the volume be included? It's published material.

Scholarship: There are countless instances of the author of a book referring to his earlier works on the subject. Encyclopedia Britannica has many examples where the author of an entry refers to his own works on the subject. Furthermore, my mentor in graduate school, Francis Cleaves, the premier Mongolist in the U.S., not only referred to prior works he had done in his articles; he also cited oral communications with his colleagues in the field for points of interpretation and factual verification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.140.24.212 (talk) 22:53, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

138.75.24.113

Hello, I am one of Chinese Wikipedia administrators. About Tsai Ing-wen, you may feel weird for edit of IP 138.75.24.113. He is User:Zhenggnehz‘s puppetries[3][4] and his vandalism[5] in Chinese Wikipedia has been reported by China Media[6].——Outlookxp (talk) 23:25, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

C.Fred The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		message is basic..great job in wikipedia.....timeline of salem....

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.46.45.22 (talk) 16:11, 14 May 2018‎ (UTC)

Noonlight Edits

Hi C.Fred - I appreciate you keeping Wikipedia honest, but I have a few questions about your edits on the Noonlight page. I didn't realize the information was considered "spam" or "promotional", so if you wouldn't mind informing me on how to update my page's information without doing so I would greatly appreciate it. I'm not sure if it's the certain words I used or the articles I attached, so please let me know the reasoning so I can update it correctly. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenbhambri (talk • contribs) 20:19, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@Laurenbhambri: The issue was with the tone of the text: it felt like it came from a brochure for the app, not a neutral encyclopedia article. Consider this text: "If you think there's danger or are feeling unsafe, you can press the button". First, we shouldn't use first- or second-person in articles; they should generally be written in third person. Better encyclopedic prose for this example would be "The app provides a button that the user can press if they feel unsafe." For an even more blatant example of promotional tone, there's "Noonlight illuminates insights and rich data from your connected apps and devices during an emergency, helping first responders get to you faster and more prepared than ever before." Better text would be "Noonlight provides added information to first responders from the app and connected devices."

With that removal, I highlighted a further concern. It doesn't look from a Google search that the text was copied from Noonlight's website, but if it had been, we could not use it on Wikipedia. Editors may not violate the copyrights of other websites; we cannot use text copied wholesale from another website.

One other note: you referred to the article as "my page". Editors do not own articles; articles are a collaborate effort with multiple editors contributing. The guiding force in page content is Wikipedia's set of guidelines and policies, not the preferences of the editor who creates the article (or worse, an editor with a relationship to the subject). —C.Fred (talk) 21:21, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Thank you, very helpful! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenbhambri (talk • contribs) 21:27, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Richard Ong's page edits

Hi C.Fred, I'm confused on why you would delete two whole paragraphs from Richard Ong 's page under the 'Goldman Sachs' sub-header when there were citations linked in the page itself. It seems pretty crucial to the page, and I'm puzzled on why that would disappear. Additionally, do you know why those linked articles have been removed? I don't know why. Oh, and no need to TalkBack- I'll jusst check this page instead. ThePuggernaut (talk) 03:42, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean with deleting paragraphs: I restored material, particularly references, to the page. —C.Fred (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh my god. I'm so sorry- I misread the edit history and mistook you for a whole different user. My deepest apologies that I accused you of anything. ThePuggernaut (talk) 23:07, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

No worries. If Wikipedia had a dollar for every time a user had done that, they wouldn't have to post the fundraising drive ads. :) —C.Fred (talk) 01:25, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Conrad Borg Manche

Hi - I have created the stub article as I need to link the photo received to an article. Will be uploading a proper article next weekend. Please remove the delete tag for now and give me some time thanks.Maltalinks (talk) 14:29, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Maltalinks: You have a week. If you can't come up with a single source about Manche within a week, then he needs neither an article nor a picture of him on Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 14:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

I added a valid source and deleted the tag. Home Lander (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you C.Fred, Home Lander will be finishing up and uploading the article next weekend. Maltalinks (talk) 14:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Just to clarify, you, Maltalinks, will need to finish up and load the article, not me. Home Lander (talk) 14:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Of course Maltalinks (talk) 14:50, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Whereas anybody can ship the image over to Wikimedia Commons and rename it in the process. —C.Fred (talk) 15:01, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

2600:1700:50D0:ECC0:8527:DC9D:BF0A:60FA

I noticed that you warned the user "2600:1700:50D0:ECC0:8527:DC9D:BF0A:60FA" to stop vandalizing, it still appears that he or she is still doing so. I am still "new" to Wikipedia so I do not know how to report this user or warn this user again. Would it be possible to for you to warn this user again?

Here's the link to your warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:1700:50D0:ECC0:8527:DC9D:BF0A:60FA

Here's the link to his/her edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=2600%3A1700%3A50D0%3AECC0%3A8527%3ADC9D%3ABF0A%3A60FA&namespace=&tagfilter=&start=&end=

Thanks OkayKenji (talk) 00:28, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

  Update: I think I figured out how to warn users, found the template to do so. OkayKenji (talk) 00:51, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Mark Wnek

Hi, you added a notability tag to Mark Wnek page. I have attempted to fix the page by adding some of the numerous sources out there to establish notability, as there were none at all earlier. Is there enough there now to establish notability? Thank you. Frakkler (talk) 19:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC))

Heber Ackland

Hi C.Fred, can you confirm your the editor who proposed the page Heber Ackland (created in 2004 and not by me) for deletion? Thanks Heberackland (talk) 19:55, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@Heberackland: I have not edited that page at all: no deletion requests, no deletion, no move to Draft:Heber Ackland. —C.Fred (talk) 20:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Talking Back

C.Fred, how do I respond to comments that you have left for me? Dgaines2000 (talk) 23:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I've left instructions at your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 00:28, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Assumptions Are Bad

C.Fred -- Kindly do not make assumptions that I am being recruited by a subject. I am not.

Thank you. Dgaines2000 (talk) 23:22, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

The reply to this thread is at your talk page, where the original message was left. —C.Fred (talk) 00:28, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:REFUND request

Hello! I'm going directly to an Admin for this, rather than going through WP:REFUND, because I only seek to have a deleted article moved into my Userspace as a draft, primarily for research purposes. The deleted article in question is List of Figure It Out episodes – the AfD discussion was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Figure It Out episodes. I would like it moved into User:IJBall/sandbox4. The discussion for which I would like to see what shape this article was in when it was deleted is Talk:Double Dare (Nickelodeon game show)#Propose separate list of episodes page or season pages – basically the question is whether "season" or "list of episode" articles are ever appropriate for TV game shows. (Note that once I get this into my Sandbox, I may just request it's deletion again, or I may try to salvage it to see if can be gotten up to snuff for article status...).

Finally, I would have made this request to the original deleting Admin Lankiveil, but they have passed. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:09, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Bumping topic – if you would rather I go through WP:REFUND, please just let me know. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:55, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I'd rather this go through WP:REFUND. —C.Fred (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Blagojceog

Hello, C.Fred. User:Blagojceog continues to edit war after your last warning, and he/she started a redundant article (which will soon be deleted) that he/she is also insisting on cramming into the Ariana Grande article, despite its obvious redundancy. He/she has totally refused to engage on Talk pages. Isn't it time for a block? -- 17:08, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ssilvers: I'll take a look. —C.Fred (talk) 17:13, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Not enough yet today, IMO. —C.Fred (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for looking. IMO, this person has not made a single constructive edit, and it is unpleasant to have to continue removing their edits from this BLP, which gets a lot of fancruft/hatercruft already. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Ross Mathews, User:FlightTime

Hello. I am not harrassing User:FlightTime. it had a problem with my edits. I posted to it and it deleted my comments. So i went ahead and edited Ross Matthews only for User:FlightTime to again revert/undo my edits. Now it is all over reporting me. I tried to dialogue with flightime and it ignored me. Please look at my attempts to dialogue with flightime and what I added to ross matthews and you will see. Thank You. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 01:56, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

flighttime again reverted saying "blp vio" when there arent any. my info is sourced.I am restoring my edit. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 04:13, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I was being bold as Jimbo Wales says to be. I did source my edits. I dont see how I violated blp because my info is sourced.

I tried to dialogue with flighttime

[dialogue attempt 1]...[dialogue attempt 2]... [dialogue attempt 3]...

[dialogue attempt 4]...[dialogue attempt 5] repeatedly and it just deleted my posts , reverted me, threatened me, then went to you and ponyo and fred to block me and lock the page. Thank you. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 13:34, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Verification fail on Ross Mathews

I have removed the names of Ross Mathews' parents from his article because of a verification failure. I checked the Instagram post in question, but could not find the names of his parents anywhere in it.

As for the names of his siblings, nephews, cousins, etc.: unless any of them are notable or significant enough to warrant more than a passing mention, they really don't need added to the article. —C.Fred (talk) 12:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

In the desert sun article is his mother's name. Having family names is part of biography. So many articles on here mention relatives. For Ross specifically he always talks about Eric and Kai Kai (and friend Taya) on his tv show as his support system. He wrote extensively about his family in his book and talked about them while promoting the book.

Lastly, did you see how i tried to work with flighTime. What went wrong. Did it just not like my edits ? 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 13:30, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

You didn't cite the Desert Sun article for his parents' names; you cited Instagram.

This is why it's probably a good idea for you to suggest your edits on the talk page and get input from other editors on how to best present material and how to properly cite it.

Likewise, you need to take a more collaborative approach to working with FlightTime. They are an experienced editor and trusted by the community, as evidenced by the fact that they are an OTRS volunteer. That also means FlightTime is very familiar with Wikipedia policy, including policy for the biographies of living people. So, if an experienced editor who is trusted with OTRS tools is removing material because of BLP concerns, and an unregistered editor with a demonstrated lack of familiarity with Wikipedia norms and policies is restoring it, most editors and administrators are going to go with the views of the experienced editor. Which takes me right back to what I said in the last paragraph: you really need to be discussing these prospective edits at Talk:Ross Mathews and working to build consensus for the changes. Then, other editors can make sure the material complies with guidelines and is properly backed up by reliable sources before it goes into the article. For more information there, please read the essay on the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle. —C.Fred (talk) 15:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

(Speaking of behavioural norms: please spell FlightTime's username properly, and please use a pronoun other than it to refer to this user. Since FlightTime has not publicly declared their pronouns of choice, I would ask that, while discussing this user on my talk page, you either use their name, abbreviate their name to FT, or use the singular they (as I'm doing)—I'd even let it slide if you used he forms of the pronouns since English doesn't have a gender-neutral pronoun for people. However, a quick check of Internet resources said to avoid it when referring to people.[7] Repeatedly misspelling FlightTime's name and your choice of pronoun could be interpreted as a tone of hostility on your part toward this editor.) —C.Fred (talk) 16:02, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Note that WP:BLPNAME is particularly relevant here.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:13, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Please look again. I had desertsun and instagram and parade. I use it because all this nonbinary cisgender means no matter what I may mis identify someone adn that would be a problem. Any mispellings of flighttime were just mispellings not me insulting. And you saying " an unregistered editor with a demonstrated lack of familiarity with Wikipedia norms and policies" is not nice. You sound uppity.

You say i should suggesst my edits on talk page, but what about being bold. When flighttime reverted saying blpvio I did add sources but I feel flighttime didnt bother to look, just kep reverting. Please look above and see I did post my sources first to flighttime and flightime just delted and said I was harrassing. Just as you have advised me to use article talk page, I think you should remind fligttime to look and engage. I many times tried and my posts were just deleted as harrassment. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 18:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

What about being bold? You've tried bold; you were reverted; now it's the time for discussion. That's exactly the WP:BRD model. —C.Fred (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

And here's the sentence in question, with its citations, from your last edit:

He is the son of Gaye Louise and William Ross Matthews(deceased).

References

The only source supporting that sentence is Instagram. —C.Fred (talk) 18:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

ponyo, i dont understand how WP:BLPNAME is relevant here. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 18:12, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

The entire second paragraph applies. At this point I don't think you're reading or comprehending any of the policies that are being pointed out to you by various editors and administrators.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

The 2nd paragraph is about privacy. Ross has shared this information, i didnt seek it out. He talks about gaye, eric, kai. He tweets about them. They are in his book. He brings them on red carpets. And as to your ad hominen attack, you hae a problem. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 18:51, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Then the article should mention that. "He has a nephew named Kai" leaves little explanation for why he is significant in the article. "He has a nephew named Kai, who has accompanied him on the red carpet at several events" does explain. —C.Fred (talk) 19:06, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Okay. That makes sense. I was writing it in the sense of just listing his family memebers. For example, this is on Madonna (entertainer)'s page : She has two elder brothers, Anthony and Martin, and three younger siblings, Paula, Christopher, and Melanie.[7] . No explanation given so that is why I thought it okay to list Ross' relatives. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 19:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Lourdes is now reverting. The edits you made have been reverted and Lourdes says I am to be blocked. Hmmm, acting independently or on behalf of Flighttime? I dont know. You interceded and made edits. That version too is reverted. You guided me and I did find sources that were supportive of the information in the sentence. I am going throught episodes of "hello ross" to add specific episodic sources. But factual sourced information (himbeing from Mt Vernon, Wash; his partner Salvator who he has been with for 10 years; mother Gaye) all reverted. Why? What is the agenda? Thank You. 2601:155:8300:1659:F551:3B17:414B:8B8F (talk) 12:35, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

A reminder about blanking your talk page

If you blank a warning left on your talk page, the Wikipedia community will assume you have read and acknowledged the warning message. Bear that in mind, particularly since there have been final warnings for personal attacks and adding unsourced information, as well as a warning about the three-revert rule, placed here. —C.Fred (talk) 19:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC) (copied here from User talk:2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40)

How do I give Ponyo a warning for the personal attack? It is amazing to be I am being held to rules but not ponyo, not flighttime. Thank you. 2601:155:8300:1659:4536:B605:9536:DB40 (talk) 19:11, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

You went nuclear and reported Ponyo to ANI. Your report was immediately dismissed by another admin as not a personal attack. So, there is no adjudged violation of the rules by Ponyo.

(Also, since this is in reply to a message left on your talk page, I'd prefer if the thread were kept on your talk page.) —C.Fred (talk) 19:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

To add, it was far from a personal attack. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Rickinbaltimore: How was it far from a persona attack? I FELT personally attack. For another to say " you cant read nad lack comprehension" is an attack. Cfred pointed out to me ( respectfully, kindly) that the sources I use must be supportive of the information. So when Ponyo said read this and the link was to multiple paragraphs instead of a specifc paragraph, I did not see what it/ponyo was pointing out. Ponyo then replied the insult.

Cfred: How do I see the ANI. How am I nuclear but ponyo is allowed to be rude and post insults? Is that a benefit of being a registered editor? 2601:155:8300:1659:F551:3B17:414B:8B8F (talk) 12:27, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

You didn't engage with Ponyo at all, either a message to say that you felt attacked/that the comment was untoward, or even a templated warning like {{uw-npa1}}. Instead, you went straight to the noticeboard, which is a last-resort option. Hence the idiomatic term of choosing the "nuclear option".

Let's also look at what Ponyo said: "The entire second paragraph [of WP:BLPNAME] applies. At this point I don't think you're reading or comprehending any of the policies that are being pointed out to you by various editors and administrators."[8] In context, Ponyo is saying that your actions are not in keeping with WP:BLPNAME; he posited either that you haven't read the policy or read it but don't understand it. (There's also the third possibility, that you read it and willfully disregarded it, that he didn't list out.) I have to agree that it was not a personal attack. If he said, "You can't read," that would be different—but he didn't say that. What he said was your actions indicate that you haven't read the policy. —C.Fred (talk) 15:28, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

User Wikiyabo

Hello. See this discussion on my talk page from mid-June. I strongly suspect that Wikiyabo is either Kemi Omololu-Olunloyo or someone very close to her, I also suspect that it's a reincarnation of a blocked user (see page history of article). Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:56, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

File:Death on a Galician Shore cover.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

The bot has run, I'm happy with the results, and I've deleted the old version. —C.Fred (talk) 23:43, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

edit conflict at Spencer Proffer

Oops sorry. Looks like we were trying to remove the same thing!..I accidentally removed the larger section first. That section certainly reads like a copyvio too, but I havent found where from yet. I have been trying to clean the article up, but its one big promotional mess, and when you start looking at the referencess, most are useless, because they are all from the websites of production companies and musicians he has worked with so can hardly count as independent sources. Anyway. I left another message on the IPs page, although it probably wont do much good. Curdle (talk) 16:38, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Praneethahy

FYI, this is Nsmutte. Pretty much anyone showing up out of nowhere to attack Bonadea will be him (IPs will geotrace to India). Home Lander (talk) 18:34, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

@Home Lander: I knew it was somebody I'd seen around before. It was obvious and not worth the effort to figure out who. —C.Fred (talk) 18:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

A goat for you!

cfred

WiKPEiDAWiz (talk) 19:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

IP disruption at GG

See here: [9]. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 17:47, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Steve Irwin and that comma

I'm definitely not going to edit war over it, but that article has a "Use Australian English" tag on it, and in Australian English we generally don't use a comma before the "and" before the final item of a list. But no big issue. HiLo48 (talk) 23:41, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@HiLo48: Feel free to strip all the Oxford commas out of the article, if it's that critical an issue with Australian English. —C.Fred (talk) 03:36, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Please tell me why you cancelled my edit

I added an external link to the "Health effects of tobacco" page. I don't have an account, maybe I should create one. My IP is 70.41.185.47

Please let me know, thanks.

As a general rule, a website that is hosted on Wordpress is going to fall well short of WP:EL criteria. I don't see any compelling evidence that this site aids in understanding of the subject of the article. It appears more to be an advocacy cite lamenting the site creator's difficulties with FIOA acts. —C.Fred (talk) 14:46, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Well, there's already a "Radioactive carcinogens" section on the "Health effects of tobacco" page. And the link I tried to add, goes to a site that has extensive information on that topic, along with lamenting FOIA problems. And lamenting FOIA problems is just a small part; most of it is about radioactivity in tobacco and the corruption in the agencies. So I think it's relevant. If you still don't think it is, please tell my why. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.41.185.47 (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2018‎ (UTC)

Sorry, but the link you added appears to be far more of an advocacy site than an informational site. Plus, there's no evidence of any editorial review or that the site creator is an expert on the subject. —C.Fred (talk) 15:49, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

It's both an advocacy site, and an informational site. I wish you would read the NCI section of the site, because it, more than the other sections, really lays out the quantitative aspects of radioactivity in tobacco (by both the site creator, and the NCI). And you're right, there's no PhD involved, but Wikipedia is not exclusive to PhD's, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.41.185.47 (talk • contribs)

<tps>Advocacy sites aren't acceptable as external links except in specific situations. Please see WP:ELNO, and please do not insert such links, they can be considered spam. Acroterion (talk) 16:42, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

The scientific aspect of the site is supported by a link to tobacco radioactivity on Google Scholar, which presents dozens of peer reviewed papers on this topic. If you're going to block the site in question, then you should also remove the "Tobacco Free awareness action - How many people smoke in cars" external link on the "Health effects of tobacco" page. I think you should accept external links that are a mixture of informational and advocacy, just like the two sites mentioned in this post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.41.185.47 (talk • contribs)

And that's why we don't accept such external links - they metastasize and turn articles into battlegrounds for advocacy. The link you cite, while of limited value, is about an academic study and isn't advocacy. Acroterion (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

However you want to spin it, the Truth has a way of coming out, battleground or not. And SilencedOrganic.com is all about Truth. If that's too much for you to handle, and you worry about controversy on Wikipedia, then I think you need to accept that battles do exist, and the Truth shall prevail. I think you are too concerned with policies and political correctness to even see the point. No hate intended - instead, appropriate frustration.

Wikipedia is an encylcopedia. It is not for righting great wrongs are explaining the "truth" of a current issue. —C.Fred (talk) 18:34, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

If the most respected encyclopedia, and source for truth, on the internet (besides WikiLeaks.org), can't accept a mere external link to a website that presents truthful, substantiated information, through peer-reviewed papers and the Freedom of Information Act, then this is a very dark hour in history.

<outdent>Wikipedia isn't a vehicle for revelation of The Truth, nor is it a linkfarm for advocacy, good, bad or indifferent. We've made that sufficiently clear by now. Acroterion (talk) 19:56, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

So Wikipedia is gray, according to you, and those like you. I have no more interest in it, if it were run by you. But I know the true spirit of the internet and Wikipedia is truth.

No, we have an essay on verifiability, not truth also. You should read that too. —C.Fred (talk) 01:40, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

OK. Would you have a problem if I start citing peer reviewed scientific papers? And not putting them as external links, but as citations in the body of the page? I might be willing to accept that compromise.

Actually, I'd like to put link(s) to one or a couple-few peer-reviewed papers in the External links section. Is that OK? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.41.185.47 (talk) 17:48, 5 August 2018‎ (UTC)

It depends. If they're in compliance with the rules for either reliable sources or external links, whichever one applies, then yes. I'd suggest proposing the edit on the article's talk page or providing the suggested changes/links here so they can be vetted. —C.Fred (talk) 01:35, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the links to the rules. I admit, I haven't read them yet. I have a question, before I do: I don't understand how some references are cited near the bottom of an article page, and they only list a URL, a title, and the date retrieved. Would it be OK if I made a reference in the "Radioactive carcinogens" section of the "Health effects of smoking" article, and cited my website, in that manner? I really do think my website brings new, at the very least, data to light. For instance, in the NCI section of my site, the NCI provides quantitative figures and information. Now I'm no PhD, but I think my voice brings new perspective too, even partially quantitatively. Let me know please. Thanks. 70.41.185.47 (talk) 16:23, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

No. Please review WP:No original research. And thank you for clarifying your conflict with the website: you should really not be adding it to Wikipedia at all. You've had independent editors look at it, and they've said it's inappropriate, so don't add the site. —C.Fred (talk) 21:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

OK, I will not post a link to my site, any time soon, if not ever (specifically, so there's no confusion, SilencedOrganic.com). However, I have a suggestion/edit for the "Radioactive carcinogens" section of the "Health effects of smoking" article. May I post it here, for your approval? I don't want to offend you by posting it, and then you taking it down in frustration with me. Thanks again! 70.41.185.47 (talk) 03:08, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Sure, you can make the suggestion here, and I'll review it. —C.Fred (talk) 04:42, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks! I think it should be in the "Radioactive carcinogens" section. Feel free to revise what I have here. You see, I tested a few samples of different cigarette tobaccos with my own Geiger counter. I know you don't like my website it seems, but if you want to look at it, not for inclusion in Wikipedia, but just for yourself, I invite you to - pretty much all of this stuff is on there. The USDA Organic tobacco is far less radioactive. And just so you know, I am a retired, independent researcher, and have no connection to any tobacco company. In addition to what's below, I know of a peer-reviewed paper that talks about how Big Tobacco experimented with "acid washing" in order to remove the Polonium from the leaves, but they decided against it because it impacted the flavor too much. Here's the beginning of my edit...

USDA Organic tobacco is an alternative to radioactive fertilizers. The fertilizers used for this certification cannot contain any radioactive substance. Tobacco grown this way only gets radioactivity by pulling Radon from the soil. Quality Certification Services certifies some organic tobacco made by Natural American Spirit. Not all of NAS cigarettes are USDA Organic. 70.41.185.47 (talk) 08:36, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

References

No, those are self-published sources and not permissible. —C.Fred (talk) 16:52, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

OK so how do we get awareness that there are USDA Organic, less-radioactive cigarettes? Surely this should be in the article! 70.41.185.47 (talk) 18:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

On the one hand, we don't. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it is not to build awareness of new products.

That said, for them to warrant inclusion, they would need to have gotten coverage in independent reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 19:11, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

OK. Well, since the war on tobacco is so myopic, I don't think there really are any sources out there that talk about radioactivity in tobacco, along with Natural American Spirit's 5 USDA Organic, and less-radioactive, offerings, which live up to your standards, what a shame. The only reference I know of is my own website (SilencedOrganic.com), and you've already pretty much blacklisted it for Wikipedia's inclusion. So I guess, this exchange, for Wikipedia's concerns, dies here, and that is unfortunate. At least you were respectful, mostly. 70.41.185.47 (talk) 18:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

This talks about radioactivity and American Spirit. Is this a reliable source? http://www.acsa2000.net/HealthAlert/radioactive_tobacco.html Thanks 70.41.185.47 (talk) 18:08, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm inclined to say no, for two reasons. First, as a computer science organization, health is outside their field of specialty, so it calls into question their reliability. Second, because they are seeking donations related to the topic, they are an advocacy group and not independent. —C.Fred (talk) 01:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Fred, be, just a little more flexible. If you do your own research, you'll see the importance of what I'm saying. Rules are important, but I think you're sticking to them too much. For example, a judge is meant to interpret the law, not just only act on precedent and bureaucratic micromanagement. Do you not agree this information, and the importance of it, should be everywhere? Maybe you need to review my website again to see how many lives can be saved: SilencedOrganic.com. And FYI, there are tens of thousands of websites, included in Wikipedia, that ask for money. And why do you question the intelligence of a computer group, to use their knowledge on tobacco - look this stuff up yourself! scholar.google.com my friend!

"Maybe you need to review my website..." Thank you for confirming that you are not interested so much in building an encyclopedia based on neutral point of view as on advocating a particular position on an issue that you have a vested interest in. —C.Fred (talk) 18:55, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I love to plug my website. But, I make no money on it, so "vested interest" I don't think applies. And you should review it. The world is not "neutral." So a high-abstraction, universal collection of information should not be "neutral." It should be Truthful. 70.41.185.47 (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

The most respected, and most easily accessed collection of information in The World, should be about The World, and not neutral, because The World is not neutral. There is Right and Wrong, True and False. Be on the right side, and let Wikipedia be too. 70.41.185.47 (talk) 22:41, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=polonium+tobacco 70.41.185.47 (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Picture

Don't delete the pictures because those pictures shows their best roles, their best acting abilities and legalized stills from their respective roles, mate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minority Report 20 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@Minority Report 20: "Legalized stills"? You have provided no evidence that those images have been released by the movie studio for unrestricted use. —C.Fred (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Daani94

Can you please block this user for repeatedly making unsupported changes? This user continues to ignore warnings on them, and after I reverted their most recent instance of it here, it seems like an indefinite block for WP:IDHT is now warranted per a warning Ad Orientem left. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:06, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: I was waiting for them to do something like that. Blocked indefinitely. —C.Fred (talk) 03:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Much appreciated; the user's disruption really needed to end! Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: Or, they've got to engage with editors to ask to be unblocked—and thus get some guidance on the rules—before they can edit further. —C.Fred (talk) 03:23, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Unsure of the problem

Hi, I am still not sure what I did wrong. The edit was removed by Rosalina2427 but then she told me to feel free to add it back. I have tried twice now, the last time with her permission but I keep getting messages that something is not right. I would greatly appreciate your help in figuring this out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GBOvfl (talk • contribs) 03:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@GBOvfl: The problem is that we cannot use that image on Wikipedia. It is a non-free image that was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons after it was found on the internet. That's why I've tagged it for speedy deletion from Commons and removed it from the article here. —C.Fred (talk) 03:41, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred:Thank you, after I left the message here I saw the the problem on commons. I am new and appreciate the feedback, I am currently trying to figure out what is accepted under a creative common license. I will try to have that solved before making everyone take time to fix my mistakes. Again, thank you for the feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GBOvfl (talk • contribs) 04:16, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

new

Fred,

I don't think censorship is good, so I hope you think the same way. I did not edit war. T*U did. Please review carefully my comments on the article's talk page. Noramiao (talk) 14:31, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Fred, You are from the States and you appear to be reasonable. I updated the prices of electricity for each country, I did numbered them, so each time you rank the country by their price they would appear more synchronized and pleasant and standardized and easily to be interpreted.

I don't see anything wrong. Its possible that you do at first, although there won't be any reason for that. But if you study carefully what I did, you would not be just impressed, but way beyond.

At the beginning of the article its written that the prices are listed in USD. Therefore I reflected on that in the table.

The code is more simplified, more accurate, more pleasant.

Anything else is a major leagueleague nonsense. Noramiao (talk) 19:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

@Noramiao: Wikipedia pillars trump style. The issue is that the updated prices couldn't be verified against a reliable source. That's why Velella reverted the article, to go back to a version based on reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 15:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

This is not correct. I'm shocked by the ignorance of Velella. She is offending people that worked really hard and that I used their source of information. Just because she is not capable of verifing that, that doesn't mean others didn't verify it. Fred, you are reasonable person. You are from the States as I am, explain to both Aussie and Velella that they have a wrong approach which is full of ignorance, arrogance and stupidity. I never called them stupid, I said something else, just to clarify before someone implies something here.

Fred,

Please take the time to look at the version the way I did it. The prices are and should be in US Dollars, not in cents, but Dollars and also not in Euro cents like Spanish prices were.

Fred, I expect you to support me against the ignorance of Aussie ans Velella. These people are not in the States and they DO NOT think properly as us.

I'm in shock you smell witch hunting and paranoia instead of admitting others, not just Allylyric, agree with me. Noramiao (talk) 16:13, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Noramiao: Why should a table of electricity prices in Europe be denominated in USD? If you really think the change is needed, you need to discuss that at the article's talk page—and after your bold change is reverted, you don't try to force through a change until there is a new consensus. —C.Fred (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Fred,

At the beginning of the article it's stated that the prices are listed in US Dollars. Also US Dollars are a world trade currency and it's widely adopted that all, absolutely all prices are listed in US Dollars, not just here but in many other financial sources. The only prices in Euro cents were listed for Spain, why not for the rest of the European countries?

Why ignorant Velella didn't spend time to update the European countries with Euro prices either Euro or eurocents?

Why she is ignorant to mess will my time for what I did. I'm telling you these people are not form the States and they are not capable of thinking like US.

I'll be severely disappointed from " the project" as you call it, if you allow these people to goof around with other people's work.

I have no association with Allylyric, but it's beyond obvious what critical thinking means. I hope you looked what I wrote on Allylyric's talk page. Noramiao (talk) 16:27, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Noramiao: The article does not say that. The global comparison table is in US dollars; the Eurostat tables are in Euros. —C.Fred (talk) 16:31, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Fred,

You are WRONG, AGAIN. Look at the price comparison paragraph at the end of the last sentence. The table comparison should not be in US cents, but in US Dollars as I did it. Although other currencies like the Japanese Yen, the Euro and so on are in the category of the international currencies, they are not widely adopted as the US Dollars and here I'm not talking about trade I mean as a measurement.

Please go to the latest version of the article the way I did it and you would see a SIMPLIFIED and an aesthetic CODE.

All others are plain in lame. Beyond lame. Noramiao (talk) 17:21, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Noramiao: How does the article benefit if the prose is in cents and the table is in dollars? That's inviting some order-of-magnitude errors. —C.Fred (talk) 17:26, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Also, please start intending your replies. It's hard to follow the thread when you don't. —C.Fred (talk) 17:26, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

What Sort of Source Is Needed?

Hello, I made some edits to the entry for Bill Mauk, link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Mauk however, you removed some of the information I put in: (cur | prev) 23:36, 18 January 2018‎ C.Fred (talk | contribs)‎ . . (2,603 bytes) (-55)‎ . . (can't find source for middle name or dob; can find first name and middle initial in several places) (undo | thank) I have been Bill's assistant for 5 years now, the information I entered comes from personal knowledge, but I would be happy to try to provide you with whatever you need as source material. I added Bill's full name - William Lloyd Mauk, and I added some information about his being an attorney responsible for the exoneration of Donald Paradis, for which I provided a source . I am a new user as far as editing, and communicating with anyone in the wiki community go, so please forgive my ignorance, and inability. But, I am quite interested in learning. Thank you. V.Jensen (talk) 21:40, 30 August 2018 (UTC)V.Jensen

References

@V.Jensen: One big problem is that personal knowledge is not a reliable source. Wikipedia prefers information that has been published, so that other editors and readers can readily verify it. Given the choice, we also prefer an independent source like a newspaper story or journal article over a self-published source like the subject's website or press release.

Further, because you are employed by Mauk, you have a conflict of interest. While this doesn't prohibit you from editing his article, you do need to be very careful to make sure your edits maintain neutral point of view and are properly sourced. —C.Fred (talk) 21:47, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred thank you, I will no longer be employed by Mr. Mauk very soon, and I am not paid to make such edits or updates, however I do understand the point you're making. Verifiable sources which are independent are desired. I will look into that and try again. I appreciate your guidance and thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.129.134.98 (talk) 22:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Dundee Crown High School

About the removal of Chaz Ortiz as a Notable Alumni: I have found a few sources mentioning him going to Dundee Crown. As I do not know enough to add them as citations and what not, let me just show you the web sites. http://www.espn.com/highschool/rise/news/story?id=4159164 https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150618/sports/150618877/ http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-08-07/news/0908050420_1_playstation-pro-dew-tour-free-flow-tour

Please add him back as before, with references as what-not. Thank you!2601:240:4400:747E:FC57:A09:1324:9BAD (talk) 05:41, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Boise State—Idaho rivalry

Well, the rivalry hasn't "ceased to exist" as you pointed out using my comments when I made the original edit. It's definitely not a FBS rivalry anymore due to Idaho's move to FCS. Unless something has changed with how rivalries are listed, especially in the FBS section, there aren't any FCS teams listed there. That's my two cents on the matter.

112.173.55.133 (talk) 23:42, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

"Dotard" entry

A few months ago, I included an entry to this word in the List of disability-related terms with negative connotations list, and I have included a source to back this up. Maybe we can redirect this entry to the linked article? Just an idea. It's just that nobody's taken me up on this idea, is all. Johnnysama (talk) 04:20, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry?

I assume you're offline at the moment and so haven't seen recent edits at you've looked at List of countries and dependencies by population. Since your last edit at User talk:Noramiao I've opened a report at WP:AN3 as a result of Noramiao's edit warring and a new account has appeared. Allylyric has, as of now, made 4 edits, 2 of which have been to revert to Noramiao's version, which looks incredibly suspicious for a new editor. I believe the third edit, to Electricity pricing, looks to be diversionary. The fourth, to Allylyric's talk page , looks written in Noramiao's style. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:49, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

@AussieLegend: I just got online; I was catching up on this morning's activities and had just jumped back in. List of countries and dependencies by population is protected, and I believe your suspicions about Allylyric are correct. —C.Fred (talk) 16:52, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

For a new editor, Allylyric seems unusually familiar with Wikipedia terminology, for example being aware that CheckUser exists and even abbreviating it to "CU". Perhaps we're looking at two socks here? --AussieLegend (✉) 17:08, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

@AussieLegend: I definitely smell socks here, whether Noramiao is the master or a puppet. —C.Fred (talk) 17:31, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Electricity pricing is not a diversion - just have a glance at the recent history!  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   17:48, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

@Velella: I meant that Allylyric's reversion of your edit was a diversion to hide the sockpuppetry but I see now that it was actually a reversion to Noramiao's last edit. I didn't realise he had been disrupting that article too. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:21, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Interestingly, I opened Wikipedia today to find that I had 31 notifications. This was the range of edits to my talk page - No new content, just multiple unnecessary edits, and he's done a similar thing at User talk:Thegoodguy3221.[10] I'm sure I've seen this type of thing elsewhere. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:39, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Curiously Thegoodguy3221 will find 66 messages - all for silly one-letter changes to a message from Noramiao. This can only be done just to childishly annoy. Methinks this editor is not here to improve this encyclopaedia.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   16:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@AussieLegend and Velella: Noramiao kept up at User talk:Thegoodguy3221 today, after I warned them specifically about it. They'll be leaving every talk page but their own alone for the next 31 hours... —C.Fred (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Wow !!! You people are witch hunters. Shame on you for what you are doing. Shame. You should be embarrassed of yourselves if you have any dignity and decency.

What a shame !!! You seriously think an adult would do such thing? I'm talking about for what I'm unfairly accused of and for what you are doing. This is not a question, so don't bother answering.

Shame on you !!! Noramiao (talk) 19:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Regarding IP users making legal threat on Talk:Subway Challenge

Hi C.Fred. Regarding your removal of this legal threat on Talk:Subway Challenge, from the IP user 194.176.105.133 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), I think it's the same person who made legal threats in the past. These IPs from the same range also made threats two years ago:

• 194.176.105.132 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), November 2, 2016
• 194.176.105.139 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), February 17, 2016
• 194.176.105.142 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), August 30, 2016

This looks like a long term abuser from a relatively narrow IP range. Should they be rangeblocked? epicgenius (talk) 21:41, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: If it's fleeting messages here and there, I don't think the cost of a block at a site like that is worth the benefit. —C.Fred (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

And see 2A02:C7D:7877:5100:8003:B4B:372D:39C6 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —C.Fred (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) I was trying to point that edit out. Seems like the page should be protected instead. epicgenius (talk) 21:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

SaberCats Logo Edit

Hey, I'm a representative of the Houston SaberCats, The current logo on the page is incorrect, and doesn't reflect our branding. I uploaded a new (correct) logo, but you undid the change. Can I ask why? -Denny, 9/5/18 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thynecoffee (talk • contribs) 21:56, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

@Thynecoffee: The logo was tagged as your own work. Unless you are the artist and have the rights to give the image away for other people to use, free of charge, the license is invalid. —C.Fred (talk) 23:33, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

St Paul's Church, Auckland

Hi C.Fred. Just thought you should know about Wikipedia:Help desk#ST PAULS SYMONDS STREET AUCKLAND NEW ZEALAND. I was going to advise the IP about using article talk pages to discuss things such as this, but since there seems to be a WP:APPARENTCOI as well as a possible of this moving into WP:NLT territory, I thought I'd query you first since you reverted the IP and re-added the content. FWIW, I think there might also be a COI issue with E James Bowman since it seems like quite a lot of the promotional sounding content was added this edit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Yes, I just saw that and commented on it. Thanks for pointing out the possible COI issue, too. —C.Fred (talk) 00:31, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:35, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Based upon what E James Bowman posted on the article’s talk page, I would say it’s very likely that he has a COI. He also seems to mention the disputed content you removed as being point of contention between the church and the daughter if a former vicar. Perhaps this is the same person as the IP editor. — Marchjuly (talk) 03:45, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Creation of Victor Mochere

I am proposing for the creation of the page "Victor Mochere".— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2C0F:FE38:2020:C0E9:F9BD:3003:17E8:5526 (talk) 10:14, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

With no indication of why he's notable, there's nothing I can do to help this proceed. —C.Fred (talk) 12:08, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

He is a Kenyan YouTuber, Author, a notable blogger and social media personality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2C0F:FE38:2020:C0E9:F9BD:3003:17E8:5526 (talk) 2C0F:FE38:2020:C0E9:F9BD:3003:17E8:5526

Then either start Draft:Victor Mochere yourself, or post at WP:Articles for creation. However, make sure he passes WP:Notability and/or WP:BIO. —C.Fred (talk) 12:16, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I have done that under Draft:Victor Mochere — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2C0F:FE38:2200:1FE2:C12D:1C70:A82:6AC6 (talk) 13:39, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Your warning

Hi C.Fred. I saw your warning. Ugh. Will you please just look at the recent edit history of Edgar Snyder regarding the divorce content. Softlavender has repeatedly restored contentious, unsourced content to the BLP regarding the divorce. It's very simple, Softlavender keeps changing the content to say that Snyder and his wife are divorced (and that it happened in 2014). The problem: the attached sources do not say that! They simply talk about how the divorce just started. Please look at my edits on this, and hers. You'll see why I'm so frustated. It's a black and white issue. She wants to add unsourced content to a BLP based solely on her assumption, not on the sources. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 (talk) 15:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I just found the policy regarding exemptions for edit warring (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring#Exemptions). Number 7 says "Removing contentious material that is libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced according to our biographies of living persons (BLP) policy." Also, why did you issue a warning to me and not the other editor? 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:3059:8016:5847:3E43 (talk) 15:33, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Pentagon (South Korean band)

Hi C.Fred, would it be a good idea to temporarily semi-protect Pentagon (South Korean band)? A lot of editing is going on right now, mainly by fans. I raised a request on Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Pentagon_(South_Korean_band) for that. I believe that Random86's edit might be correct.

Cheers, Momo17 (talk) 03:56, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

@Momo17: Probably. I already protected Cube Entertainment; I probably need to get Pentagon and Hyuna as well. —C.Fred (talk) 03:59, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

And done. —C.Fred (talk) 04:07, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast work by the way C.Fred. I'm keeping an eye on these pages in case fans return (already had one on Cube Entertainment talk page). HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:09, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Thanks for your help in this :) Really appreciated! —Momo17 (talk) 04:11, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, continuing on about the Cube thing right now, the Korean version of the Cube Entertainment article is also getting vandalised and has not been protected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cube_Entertainment_discography this page also got hit once, though I did a revert over there already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.77.235.76 (talk) 04:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

What Happened to Zawl and When Did He/She Create an Article For Bregoli, Danielle?

Dear C. Fred.

Do you know anything about that one controversial former Dr. Phil guest named Danielle Bregoli? You know that she became famous for bellowing Cash Me Outside How About That to the audience after she got upset.

Go forward in the day when she turned into a rapper named Bhad Bhabie. Despite her young age she swears quite a lot in her songs.

And when some user nicknamed Zawl he/she decided to create an article for her. It should've been titled Bhad Bhabie and the info about her was supposed to say "Danielle Marie Peskowitz professionally known as Bhad Bhabie (pronounced bad baby) is an American child rapper and social media personality from Boynton Beach, Florida. As Danielle Bregoli, she became famous for the Cash Me Outside Howbow Dah meme after appearing on an episode of Dr. Phil in September 2016", not "Danielle Bregoli professionally known as Bhad Bhabie (pronounced bad baby) is an American rapper and social media personality. She became famous for the catch me outside how about that meme after appearing on an episode of Dr. Phil in September 2016."

Besides rappers or singers with stage names shouldn't be under their real names as the name of the article, e.g. Chalotte Aitchison aka Charli XCX has her stage name as the title of the article not her birth name.

Lastly it would be best if you modify that by the time her 15 mix tape comes out. And I wouldn't consider using teen because she will turn the big 1-8 on Friday, March 26, 2021.

Yours truly,

67.81.163.178 (talk) 00:38, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

To change her name, we'd need a reliable source for the alleged legal name. You haven't provided one. —C.Fred (talk) 00:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Request for deletion

I need to request you that please delete the page User talk:Yisrael Kristal as the reason of criteria CSD G4. That page was recreated after it got deleted. You can see the deletion log of User talk:Yisrael Kristal for confirmation. Thank you. 122.180.231.67 (talk) 09:29, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

CSD G4 does not apply, because there was no deletion discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 14:21, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Even if there is no criteria of G4, there is also the criteria of G3 as there was vandalism history. There is also one more criteria. Both the times, the page was only created for attacking two admin users (JamesBWatson and Widr). So the CSD also applies the criteria of G10. So please delete User talk:Yisrael Kristal as either G3 or G10 or both the criterias. Thank you. 122.180.231.67 (talk) 15:51, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Fred, please see the edits of 171.48.50.140 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) at User talk:JamesBWatson, which duplicate the request and arguments being made by this IP. (The former IP is now blocked, and presumably this one should be for block evasion.) General Ization ^Talk 16:43, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

@General Ization: There is enough similarity in behaviour that I have now blocked 122.180.190.83, the current IP being used by the requester. —C.Fred (talk) 18:12, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

First, IP addresses 122.180.231.67 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 171.48.50.140 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) are not same and there is no block evasion going on. I am also from the same IP 122.180.231.67 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Second, User talk:Yisrael Kristal should be deleted as it was created only to attack JamesBWatson, Widr and more users. I don't want to waste more time on this. It is simply an attack page and should be deleted as G10. So please quickly delete User talk:Yisrael Kristal as the speedy deletion criteria CSD G10 (Attack page). Thank you. 122.180.190.83 (talk) 17:16, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

This is better addressed to the admin who protected the page but did not delete it. —C.Fred (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Yisrael Kristal is an attack page, so should be deleted as G10. The protecting admin protected the page because it was not blank when it was needed to be blank for requesting attack page deletion while an IP requested deletion by {{db-g10}}. I don't want to waste more time on it. Please very quickly delete User talk:Yisrael Kristal as G10 (Attack page) as it was clearly created to attack and troll purposes only. Thank you. 122.180.190.83 (talk) 17:33, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

The template was up for deletion when the page was protected, so the protecting admin did in fact decline the deletion. @Callanecc: What's your take on this? Should the page be deleted? Or should we look into why this IP is so invested in deleting the page? —C.Fred (talk) 17:38, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

As you pinged, the protecting admin (Callanecc) is not around on Wikipedia since 6th September, 2018. Callanecc (the protecting admin) may have left Wikipedia or must have taken a Wiki Break and may not respond to your queries. So please ignore all the protection of the page. User talk:Yisrael Kristal is clearly an attack page and needs to be deleted. So please quickly delete User talk:Yisrael Kristal as the speedy deletion criteria CSD G10. Feel free to do so. 122.180.190.83 (talk) 17:53, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Jonathan Lee Riches

Man accused of filing phony lawsuit against Giffords indicted in Tucson federal court. Since i live in EU, the website is vlocked. Trade (talk) 06:41, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

@Trade: Thank you for the link. I was able to view the source; I've re-added the information to Jonathan Lee Riches along with that citation. —C.Fred (talk) 12:29, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Official Movie Banners not allowed?

Hi C.Fred,

I noticed you flagged for deletion the profile pic I added of the official banner of the film Thugs of Hindostan. Unfortunately it has since been deleted by another user. This was the picture: https://www.yashrajfilms.com/images/default-source/Movies/Thugs-Of-Hindostan/thugs-of-hindostan-desktop.jpg?sfvrsn=2

And this is original page it came from: https://www.yashrajfilms.com/movies/thugs-of-hindostan

I had uploaded it not of my own ownership, but through the Creative Commons uploader and specifically stated that it was NOT mine, but licensed officially by Yash Raj Films. My only question is, why this would not count as following the Creative Commons licensing rules, when official movie posters themselves are? Because movie posters are used under the 'Fair Use' rule and thus there is no problem using them. I would think banners follow the same reasoning. Besides, the company of the film (YRF) often lets their pictures be used, as in this case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jab_Tak_Hai_Jaan_Poster.jpg And YRF uses basically the same Thugs of Hindostan logo on their twitter page, so wouldn't that justify its' usage?

Finally, and perhaps the most compelling argument, YRF has already BEEN RELEASING to the public domain their own posters and motion posters WITH that same logo on them- see this example: https://twitter.com/TOHTheFilm/status/1043072324520607745 So they are effectively releasing that logo for public use now, with those posters. So if that same logo is on the banner, why not let me upload the banner? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Help me understand please.

Rush922 (talk) 07:58, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rush922: The issue is that there is no evidence that the poster was released under a Creative Commons license. There is no evidence that the studio has made the banner free for any subsequent use, including commercial re-use. This has nothing to do with fair use; this has to do with unbridled derivative works.

Now, you are right that movie posters are used in articles under a claim of Fair Use. In that case, the movie poster would need to be uploaded to the English Wikipedia, not Wikimedia Commons; it would need to be tagged that it is under copyright by the studio and an all-rights-reserved license; and it would need to be noted that we are using this image in compliance with Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content. This is relatively easy for established editors to do, but new accounts are restricted from uploading images.

So, you're right that we can use the image, if properly uploaded, under the fair-use rules. However, the image was not properly uploaded. —C.Fred (talk) 13:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Okay, thanks for being understanding and helpful with that explanation. I actually did not realize that there was a difference in uploading between English Wikipedia and Wikipedia Commons. I will try uploading it properly on English Wikipedia in a few moments, and hopefully I can get it correct now. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rush922 (talk • contribs) 13:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rush922: There is a huge difference, especially when it comes to non-free material. Also, no need to upload: I've done at myself to File:Thugs of Hindostan movie banner.jpg. —C.Fred (talk) 13:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: Ah so you did, thanks! Well this has been educational, funny how life's frustrating moments teach you things. (Edit: And I've gone and tagged my re-upload as you requested) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rush922 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Lutheran West

Hey C.fred, I saw that you made several posts to the Lutheran West page in the past few weeks. A User:John from Idegon made a probably well-intentioned edit to the page adding a list of demographics to the page. I made an argument on the talk page as to why I think we should move to take it down. Would you be able to read through my post on the talk page and weigh in? I would like to get some feedback before making any actual edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardo Saunders x6CA (talk • contribs) 09:22, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Richardo Saunders x6CA: It's reasonable for it to be there, but it just looks big because there's so little on the rest of the page. I've edited it into prose, which makes it looks smaller; I've also added student-to-teacher ratio. See also my reply on the article talk. —C.Fred (talk) 13:42, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

GG Copyvio

The image has been deleted. Unless he uploads it again, it's not going back in the article. I'm actually more concerned about the possibility the account is a long-term disruptor and sockmaster at the article with yet another sockpuppet account. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 20:15, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: See right above for a case where I didn't pick up on an editor at Lutheran West being a sockmaster. By all means, keep working that angle if you have a read on it; I'll focus on the editor at hand until I directly observe it (i.e., smell socks). —C.Fred (talk) 20:17, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks.

Hello,

First I'd like to thank you for allowing for my unblocking. I would just like to ask you if you could please reconsider to re-revert this insertion, here, which got somehow caught up in the middle of all this. Please note that this had nothing to do with the reverts which led to my blocking, so I think it is unfair for that user to be caught up in this confusion, and because his addition was in line with what has been said about that article. I'm going to be on a small break to digest all this and will be back soon.--Ppteles (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

This is not me but my volunteers are writing and it is neutral.

Hey C.Fred,

How are you? Thank you for reaching out to me. I would like to inform you that this article has been written by the set of volunteers who are indeed actual contributors to this community. I can rest assure you that any article from my account will never violate the community guidelines. I am highly dedicated to keep Wikipedia free from biased articles. As a conclusion, our articles will always be neutral. I request you and your team NOT TO delete the article. We will soon be updating more citations to the article. In case of any query please feel free to ask. Hope to hear from you back soon!

Thanks, Kind regards, Akshaysrivastavaofficial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akshaysrivastavaofficial (talk • contribs) 20:34, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Akshaysrivastavaofficial: First, regardless of who helped you draft the edits, you were the person who made the actual edits to User:Akshaysrivastavaofficial/sandbox. The subject of an article is always deemed to have a conflict of interest, regardless of how neutral a tone they use in writing. Second, the draft as it currently stands falls well short of the notability guidelines; no article will be created about you at this time. Finally, if you were to become notable in the future, we would need you to email the Volunteer Response Team to verify your identity, to make sure you're in compliance with the username guidelines. —C.Fred (talk) 20:49, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

to add to this

I challenge you to take a close look at my content and then a close look at what was originally there. I think you will see what I am talking about — Preceding unsigned comment added by OS Believer (talk • contribs) 02:35, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) OS Believer, you need to start a new discussion on the article's talk page here and explain exactly why this content should be deleted, prove that the information on the article is inaccurate (use sources), explain exactly what content you believe does not comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, and explain how you're going to improve it. Reverting the changes to the article as you've been doing constitutes edit warring, and is not allowed on Wikipedia. If you fail to follow these directions, discuss this matter on the article's talk page, and get approval and come to a consensus with others regarding how to handle this, and you instead revert the article again, you unfortunately are going to be blocked for edit warring. Please let me know if you have any questions by messaging me here (or you can also ask C.Fred here), and we'll be happy to answer them. Thank you for understanding and for your cooperation :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:39, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@OS Believer: I took a look at your early edits, when you added unsourced material or original research based on dictionary definitions. I agree with Eperoton's removal of it. —C.Fred (talk) 02:43, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

OS Believer - Also, while we're discussing your edits - you need to stop with the condescending remarks and the hostile messages you've been adding to your edit summaries when editing. That kind of uncivil and disruptive behavior is not okay, and it won't make collaborating with other editors easier for anybody. Thank you :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:51, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

What???? yes I used dictionary definitions of words as did everyone else who contributed to the page! The only difference is that my source provided a complete historical etyomology of the word in question and cited detailed references after every post. How on Gods green earth is that an unreliable source? And I posted unsourced content? What on Earth are you even talking about? I did no such thing. Restore my content immedietely or I will go over your head and get the Wikipedia people involved.

But I only deleted content that was untrue and slanted. Epison deleted all my content. Therefore, I am going to keep deleting...deleting...deleting this article until my content is restored along side everyone elses. Banning me wont do much since I get a new IP address every time I restart my phone anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OS Believer (talk • contribs) 03:00, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

C.Fred - Unfortunately, OS Believer chose not to follow the instructions we gave him and I was forced to give both the account and the IP address a 24 hour seat in the penalty box. Hopefully, the user will follow proper process and listen to directions after the block expires. We'll see... lol ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:13, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Do not revert my changes

Stop reverting my changez.I am writing the sources but you are deleting it. STOP IT!!!! Zoogy691 (talk) 16:40, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Combined to your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Tell Epson and others to do the same

They deleted all of my content claiming my sources are unreliable. But my sources were as good as it gets. One of my sources was actually a link to all the relevant scriptures. I took out a lot of their content due to the fact that it is wildly inaccurate and cannot be verified by historical and biblical eveidence. Not to mention that it is written in a heavily slanted way. This is a subject matter that I know something about so I know when people are doing stuff like this. I want my content restored immediately. It is accurate and can be verified, plus is argued from an even and unslanted position as Wikipedia requires. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OS Believer (talk • contribs) 02:32, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Username change

Hello Fred,

I am NACA OPI and I would like to go ahead and change my username. I do not work for NACA but, because they have helped me in the passed and I follow their activities, they have made me an associate member. I would like to change my username so that I will not have any issues and I would still like to do edits that show who is being investigated.

NACA OPI (talk) 01:37, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@NACA OPI: You must change your username to avoid confusion. WP:CHU has directions for that. However, because you are an associate member of NACA, you still have a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 01:39, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

When I say associate member I mean follower. I am no way an actual member of NACA because I was never a real member. All I was was a victim who reached out to them and they helped me. I wanted to be a part of them but they refused to bring me in as they have strict requirements to be in NACA.

NACA OPI (talk) 01:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@NACA OPI: You have some connection to NACA on a professional level, whether that be member, client, research collaborator, etc. Whatever it's called, it gives rise to a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 01:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

How can I get the information on there? Can I get someone else to do it? NACA OPI (talk) 01:53, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@NACA OPI as I said on your talk page please go to WP:CHU dmartin969 01:58, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@NACA OPI: You have to wait for the information to be independently published. NACA's own publications aren't enough; they aren't a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 02:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

That's ok, I will find someone who does not have a COI and see if they are willing to put this important info up. I think you are taking this COI thing a little too far when it comes to the important information that needs to be put on here.

NACA OPI (talk) 02:04, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@NACA OPI: Thank you for confirming my fear: you do not have a neutral point of view when it comes to the subject. —C.Fred (talk) 02:05, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

User:IZoolabsiZoologic-Emjei

Hi C.Fred. You once tried to help this editor out at User talk:IZoolabsiZoologic-Emjei#Equity Bank Tanzania Limited, so I'm not sure how that one turned out; however, the editor is back again causing disruption at Dhanalakshmi Bank Officers Organization and posting take down notices on user talk pages. Perhaps, you wouldn't mind taking a look at things and advising on how to best proceed. FWIW, this account was dormant for over a year, then re-appeared with the same agenda a few days ago; so, it seems to be that they are more WP:NOTHERE and WP:RGW than anything else. However, since it seems to involve legal claims of some kind, it might be best for someone above my pay grade to try and sort it out. Maybe WP:GOLDLOCK the article until admins or others at the WMF can sort this out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:57, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: At this point, the immediate concerns with this user are WP:NLT and WP:PAID. I've advised them of both. As for the article...frankly, it was so weak that it didn't stand up to CSD A7, so I speedy-deleted it. I made it clear in my message to Emjei that the deletion was only because the article failed our standards and not because the bank requested it. —C.Fred (talk) 11:31, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at this. I requested PP for it, but it was AfD’d instead. That was fine, but would’ve only led to further disruption by the SPA. Now that the article has been deleted, maybe the SPA will move onto something else. — Marchjuly (talk) 11:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

need correct grammar captain marvel/Shazam page

I notice each word wrong, some misspellings. accord to Grammarly said about over 50 incorrect grammar words in this page, an, for example, I notice CaptasPt3"in Marvel Jr. ComicLaw Grammarly did help correct ComicLaw into cosmic law because people don't understand word meaning, you can check out for yourself, I believe Grammarly never wrong. thank. Goldenknight2007 (talk) 12:33, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

@Goldenknight2007: Exactly. Why did you change that text to CaptasPt3"in Marvel Jr. Not only does it make no sense, but it also broke the link. On the whole, your edits broke links, introduced errors to titles (which need to be kept intact), and made the grammar worse. —C.Fred (talk) 14:52, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Vijoo Krishnan

There are definitely significant new information which the original author failed to put in the article and which will make the article wiki worthy. It will be great if the article can be moved to the draft space. Logical1004 (talk) 06:56, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

@Logical1004:  Done It's restored to Draft:Vijoo Krishnan. —C.Fred (talk) 15:01, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

problem cocktail editor

I am pretty sure, based on edit history and patterns, that this is User:Drinkreader. Legal threats cross the line. Where is best to bring this to someone higher-up's attention?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Who is higher up than me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1:C6E1:5EF0:31B4:7A84:5B2C:1F37 (talk) 20:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Behind the Disruptive IP's

Hello, i would like to point out who was the disruptive editor or anonymous editor who constantly editing and removing some parts of article in Wikipedia that was a user named Lyndonbaines, he had ben blocked from editing after numerous disruptive editing and hes target was Filipino-related articles , now he's still doing his business by means of different ip address you better check him out. One of his used ip was 144.178.5.138 and other ip's (Enola gay0 (talk) 12:32, 10 October 2018 (UTC))

Regarding Vengaboys Museum Curator Direct Vengaboys Interview Video Question

Regarding the question under the Vengaboys talk page, The museum curator would be the one behind the camera filming the video and also he would introduce himself as the one and only genuine Vengaboys Museum Curator and he would be the one reading off interview questions to Vengaboys and you would mainly see direct video footage of Vengaboys themselves answering the questions as the curator read them off the paper they were written on in the background, due to a exclusivity agreement between the museum and vengaboys management, the video would be published through the internet archive and the official Vengaboys Museum youtube page similar to how the uncle john not filmed in jamaica video was ONLY published to the museum's official page on youtube too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.68.10 (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2018‎ (UTC)

So let me review. We have an individual who claims, but cannot prove, that he is the curator of a Vengaboys museum reading off interview questions, and then splicing in footage that may or may not be answers to the preceding questions. We also have no independent mentions of this interview. Sorry, this is absolutely unacceptable as a source.

The Vengaboys Museum cannot bootstrap itself to notability or reliability. Only once it has been mentioned in independent reliable sources can we consider the merit of using any of its material. —C.Fred (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

So in other words it would only be acceptable if only mentioned in something as officious and prestigious and mainstream as CNN or MSNBC etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.68.10 (talk)

No. There are other reliable sources than the major media. However, it would need to be more than a local newspaper. —C.Fred (talk) 12:04, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

do you think this would pass the test of reliable sources, the museum is mentioned near the end https://metro.co.uk/2016/05/31/remember-the-vengaboys-this-is-what-they-look-like-now-5915187/

and there's another one - https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/mumbai/other/vengabus-is-coming/articleshow/47167029.cms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.140.68.10 (talk) 21:48, 12 October 2018‎ (UTC)

Metro is suspect because it's produced by the same people who make the non-reliable Daily Mail. —C.Fred (talk) 21:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Based on the Mumbai Times interview, which states the museum "is now an official subsidiary of the band", anything produced by the museum is treated as a self-published source. —C.Fred (talk) 21:54, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

if that is the case then, you might want to have a good look at the official vengaboys page because it is full of SP Sources from their official facebook page etc. 67.140.68.10 (talk) 22:59, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

What do you mean by the "official vengaboys page"? —C.Fred (talk) 01:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

WCW triple crown

Hi, Fred. I deleted the NWA title since there is no source about it. I don't see anything about NWA title being part of the WCW Triple Crown. Also, the Big Show thing is unsourced to, he won the US title, but there is no confirmation about the WWE version counts (also, WCW died 3 years before) RVD is harder to tell, but NWA title and Big Show are OR and fan theories --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@HHH Pedrigree: Yeah, the more I got into the changes, the more I see that. However, we don't add text like "it is unknown if…" to articles; instead, it's better to stay silent on the issue until there is a reliable source to cite. —C.Fred (talk) 16:54, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: The NWA title is OR. Giant and RVD are more dificult. I know the US and ECW titles are a continuation of the WCW and ECW title, but I think is OR. WCW folded down 3 years before, we don't know if he is considered (in the current Grand Slam, WWE counts the WCW US title only if the reign happened in WWE, not WCW). ECW returned as brand, so I think is less OR but I don't knwo. How would you handle it? HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:04, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Unbiased opinion.

As one of the admin contacts I have from previous interactions, I would love your unbiased opinion on James Jones (cricketer, born 1870) if you care to weigh in? --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:45, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Zackmann08: If there are two contradicting sources, we really need to find other sources to make a clearer case for one date or the other. I've asked for assistance from the cricket WikiProject. —C.Fred (talk) 00:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

much appreciated! I didn't particularly care for the individual's tone or repeated reverts without any attempt to discuss, but oh well. --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 02:17, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Administrator

Hi I’m starting to get interested in being a administrator within the next 8-9 months but in the meantime since your one can you explain to me before I apply for one. Thanks A.R.M. 02:39, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@ARMcgrath: What makes you think you're qualified to be an administrator? What areas of Wikipedia have you been active in? —C.Fred (talk) 02:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: The only things I’m active in is reporting vandals and promoters. I have warned vandals of their editing. I have contributed to several articles with references A.R.M. 02:47, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@ARMcgrath: You'll need a lot broader experience than that. You'll need to be involved in the article deletion processes, like AfD. You should be familiar with image guidelines and understand NFCC. You should either work on getting an article up to good or featured status, and it wouldn't hurt to, if you can find the topics, create some from scratch. —C.Fred (talk) 02:52, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred: I have tried to create several articles. The first one I ever created was struck down my this sock puppet the ones I created either get deleted or redirects (due to “lack” of references) I have promised myself to not do that again I will try and go for AfD and I have struck down a few copyrighted photos. Not much cause I don’t bump into them. Anyways thanks for the advice. A.R.M. 02:59, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

sorry

This was an accident. you beat me to the revert. My apologies again. Jytdog (talk) 01:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

@Jytdog: No worries. And I agree that the first thing the user in question needs to do is to clarify their relationship with the company. Then, once they're willing to abide by the COI policies, we can look into whether there are independent sources to back any of this up, or if it's just statements from the company founder. —C.Fred (talk) 02:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. ack. Jytdog (talk) 02:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Photo

The Paige Williams photo that you keep trying to post may not be used. If a photo is needed, Hachette Books Group can easily and quickly provide one. Discontinue re-posting the photo that was taken without permission and on private property. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paleofacts (talk • contribs) 03:07, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you -

Thank you for your response re: the photo. It was *not* taken in a public setting and therefore may not be used. You may use the author photo found via Scribe Publications and Hachette Book Group, starting immediately. https://scribepublications.com.au/books-authors/authors/williams-paige

Thank you very much and sorry for the trouble. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paleofacts (talk • contribs) 03:10, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Your unqualified rollback of a good edit

@C.Fred:

Hello C.Fred

You have reverted my recent edit to Outback Steakhouse without explanation. My edit was factual, has substantial merit, and is clearly supported by wikilinks. I am obliged to reinstate my edit.

If you care to rollback again please drop by here with your reasons. Always happy to learn. Please be advised also that my edits are invariably initiated by a first hand knowledge, as in this instance.

I have to admit I am surprised, and somewhat perplexed. You have clearly been in this WP editing business for a while, so you should be aware of justifying any rollbacks, especially as you have administratorial aspirations. This reversion does not fall under any exception, and I don't need to remind you of WP:3RR. I know it won't get that far between cooperating editors. Please note also this edit of mine was a precursor to a planned page creation specific to this topic, that will be referenced from right here. Said it before, I don't do barnstars or self accolades. That may have to change.

• Anyway, best regards, Ssaco (talk) 04:33, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Ssaco: It doesn't fall under any exception? I wasn't aware the founder was dead. Not that I think it's a pure BLP violation; however, claims like that do require reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 15:06, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

referenced edits to jill kelley

Fred I saw your comment but confirmed those edits were all well referenced and taken directly from a news sourceAndoveredits (talk) 17:42, 20 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andoveredits (talk • contribs) 17:39, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Andoveredits: Sorry, I'd rather have an established editor who is familiar with Wikipedia practices make that call than a brand-new editor. —C.Fred (talk) 17:43, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate your quick response, and understand that I am new, but all I did was read the article to confirm the facts were well referenced. Andoveredits (talk) 17:47, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Andoveredits: The tone is still unacceptable, though. —C.Fred (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Malicious report by user Wikaviani

The falsified report by Wikaviani (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is grossly fabricated and malevolent. The fact that the reverts he cited conveniently ommit the sources I added is evidence of his manipulative efforts. Wikaviani himself posted his own source my talk page, stating "Some writers believe that Reza Shah was of Turkish origin, but the authenticity of this claim is uncertain." Several reliable sources were cited regarding the Turkish origin of the names, but user Wikaviani has been attempting to fabricate an alternate reality which doesn’t exist. I posted two sources from the renowned Iranica encyclopedia and the entry also contained further internal links to both the names in question, Beyg and Ayromlou, which themselves contain further sources. The fact that Wikaviani is attempting to claim that 'Ayromlou' is not a Turkish name and 'that no evidence was provided' is an outlandish effort to spread misinformation and enforce his biased and fabricated POV. LissanX (talk) 19:22, 20 October 2018 (UTC) LissanX (talk) 19:50, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

References

@LissanX: I'm not convinced the report was in bad faith, although I do question whether there was any edit warring. Since it went to the edit-warring noticeboard, I was looking solely at the conduct in editing, not the nature of the edits or the validity of sources. —C.Fred (talk) 19:52, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@C.Fred and LissanX: I proposed to help him including a quote for the Turkish claim but on the condition that he finds me a reliable cite, instead he added back "Turkish" with no source, before getting reverted by LouisAragon. Also, i never said that Arymlu are not Turkish, i just asked for a quote supporting explicitly that Reza Shah's mother was of Turkish origin, which he failed to provide. Best Regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:02, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Wikaviani: Again, I'm not concerned about the specific content of the edits. Since the report was to the edit-warring noticeboard, I'm focusing on conduct. The more I look, the less I see anything that looks like edit warring or a 3RR violation from LissanX. —C.Fred (talk) 20:23, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Then this means that i missed a point. Are the repeated and unsourced addition of "Turkish" to the article not considered to be edit warring ? Do you mean that only "de jure" reverts are ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:29, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Slow Jam definition

I hate your response. I created the Slow The SlowJam term. I created that for radio in 1984. No one else could be better suited than me to explain what I created. I don’t take kindly to being put down like that. 34 years of using the Slow Jam title qualifies me to be knowledgeable as what a Slow Jam is. Once again, I created the ultimate se of the term. But yet I’m not reliable? I am the actual source and that counts as reliable. By the way your definition sucks.... Slowjamjames (talk) 07:21, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

@Slowjamjames: Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't work that way. One of the core principles is verifiability, which is why we look for sources that are published by reliable, independent publications. Your claim is not verifiable: it has not been published at all, much less by a party independent of the situation. Further, it is precisely because of your (claimed) connection to slow jams that you should not be making edits related to it: you have a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 13:05, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I give up on this Slow Jam battle. How can you maliciously discredit my Slow Jam definition when I am the Original source and implementer of the Slow Jam Radio format with trademark proof? This is ludicrous and my radio audience is baffled at your response to me which was degrading to me with your insuation that I’m not who I am. Your definition is way off base on how Slow Jam was created and it’s broad based genre music that is included in the format. R&B, Jazz, Pop, Rock and even Country has its place based on tempo. It’s a shame that viewers if this disjointed and confusing definition are not privy to what it really is. Hopefully people can go to SlowJam.com to see a real definition. Yes, slowjam.com kind of sells the point of validity. Bye.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:2d10:6380:354f:c583:902a:bfad (talk) 07:58, 26 October 2018‎ (UTC)

It's not malice. It's simply pointing out that your claims do not qualify as verifiable per Wikipedia standards. Nor is it a venue to drive traffic to your website. —C.Fred (talk) 13:23, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Houston SaberCats

Hi C.Fred - I think you may be able to help here as an long-standing editor on sports. Would you mind taking a look at this diff? The issue is the addition of a non-existing parameter 'head coach' within the infobox (replacing 'coach') and the result is the data is not displayed. It's a minor matter but my powers of persuasion weren't helping and a third party might resolve it better. Thank you. -- Ham105 (talk) 20:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

@Ham105: I have changed the infobox and explained the technical reasoning in my edit summary. A quick scan of another club in the league shows they only list the head coach in the infobox. —C.Fred (talk) 20:44, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Maithripala Sirisena

C.Fred, the Maithripala Sirisena page is under pro-Sirisena attack again. A user has been carefully deleting some text linking Maithripala Sirisena to the constitutional crisis and replacing it with irrelevant details (birthplace, importance etc) - also removing mentions of the public disavowal of the 100 days program that got Maithripala elected. Said user appears to have been deleting large snippets of text and adding them back in slightly different form to mask the real changes. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maithripala_Sirisena&diff=868036621&oldid=867879637. Please examine or reduce lock on page so I can police?

@MaithriWiki: Blackknight12 is an experienced editor. While they hold themselves out as Sri Lankan, their edits appear to be neutral and striking a balance between the pro-Sirisena attacks and the overly anti-Sirisena edits. I think the best form for the article is somewhere in the middle, and I feel Blackknight12's edits move us toward that middle ground, not away from it.

Further, reducing the protection is out of the question right now, as it will open the article up to the kinds of edits you're trying to keep out. —C.Fred (talk) 22:05, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Jill Kelley

Is it time to protect this page? This IP showed up making similar promotional edits as the other SPAs [11]. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:22, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: It had been quiet for over a week, but it sure looks like the spam has started back, and with IP hopping. If there's one more incident before the end of the weekend, I'll probably protect. —C.Fred (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay! I'll keep my eye on it. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

cough cough HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:41, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Steps taken. —C.Fred (talk) 00:50, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Honestly surpised by your patience (in a good way) as this has been going on since early October. I'm always glad to avoid COIN. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:57, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

It's the kind of thing where, I give them every chance to do the right thing, so when I do decide to block, it's doubly justified. —C.Fred (talk) 01:10, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Maybe triple justified. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:36, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Is this the third sock puppet I've blocked, or just the second? :) —C.Fred (talk) 21:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

I think second (since you didn't block the IP) but I meant "triple justified" because above you said "it's doubly justified". Anyways, thanks for the quick work didn't even expect you to be online. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Please dont erase

Im editing my page my next alternate account. hello hear--Padmakalki (talk) 17:55, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that Padmakalki is an abusive sock puppet account? —C.Fred (talk) 17:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello

The user is back to behaving weird. Firstly they are resorting to vandalism, then they're straight up lying and look at their indecent language. I'd urge you to block them. MiaSays (talk) 18:07, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@MiaSays: Their conduct is problematic, yes. I wouldn't call their language indecent, but it does fall within the realm of a personal attack. Level 3 warning given. —C.Fred (talk) 18:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into it but please keep a check on the user. They have continuously tried to vandalise pages. MiaSays (talk) 18:11, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Uptown & Lower Queen Anne

New to talk...feel free to guide me.

I noticed you undid all the changes I offered regarding Uptown, Seattle.

The name is moving and I have accurate neighborhood geographic boundaries on recent government docs, etc. The entire Lower Queen Anne post is sadly outdated.

How do we get that updated to be accurate? THANKS!

22:12, 17 November 2018 (UTC) TaraW00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taraw00 (talk • contribs)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, C.Fred. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)