User talk:Dennis Bratland/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 25

Talk:Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Since you are a major contributor to articles related to the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, we'd value your comments about the current discussion on adding new sections on "The Collection" and "Library and Archives". Please contribute to the discussion. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:08, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Verification of degree at UCBerkeley

Dennis, In case you'd like to do a bit of online research, I paid for a National Student Clearinghouse degree verification, which the Registrar at U.C. Berkeley told us today is sometimes used for Wikipedia purposes. Would you like to check the degree that way? I can give you the info you need (order ID and email address used). Please advise. Ttrider87 (talk) 22:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Ttrider87Ttrider87 (talk) 22:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Go ahead and post the information at the article talk page. It's not something I'm interested in pursuing. As I explained, I don't think having this level of detail in the article is a high priority. Have you seen the condition of articles like Soichiro Honda? Do you know no Harley-Davidson KR article exists at all? See how few blue links there are at List of Motorcycle Hall of Fame inductees? Kawasaki Z1 is a mess. The list goes on and on. The Steven L. Thompson article does a good enough job of telling people who have never heard of you who you are, and doesn't libel any one, so I'd rather research other topics. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:47, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Libraries

Greetings! I am a student at the University of Puget Sound, and our library (the Collins Memorial Library) is considering hosting a Wikipedia Loves Libraries event! The only problem is, we're not really sure where to start. I have been busy doing some research (on Wikipedia) about the events other libraries have held across that nation, and I managed to stumble across your username when it had the word "Seattle" near it. I was hoping perhaps you could share some suggestions on the "dos" and "do nots" of Wikipedia meetups. I'm not a Wikipedian myself, so any information would be helpful. Also, if you know anyone in the area (Tacoma, Seattle, etc) who might be interested in the event, their coordination would be appreciated. Thank you! MattinaMorgan (talk) 22:56, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

GERMAN SHEPHERD

I entered information on dog breeds such as the German Shepherd which was obviously correct (you do not need to be a veterinarian) , as you can judge by yourself viewing the video I had posted. My purpose in posting those videos was to alert prospective owner of the MAJOR health issues that afflict the breed in question, so that they might do more research before purchasing their puppies. without such warning, once owner realize that they have purchased an unhealthy dog, they may abandon the dog or otherwise dispose of it. Misinformation is causing untold suffering among dogs. Your actions you are only perpetuating it. If you own a german shepherd, you will soon come to realize that this was not "disruptive editing", but simply the objective truth. As we say in Italy "time is a gentleman" (it always brings out the truth) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altes2009 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 27 September 2013‎

Well then, no reason to persist and get yourself blocked from editing when Gentleman Time will bring the truth all the same. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

CAT BODY TEMPERATURE

Hi Dennis! Thanks for the form letter, cousin.

Since you have completely ignored what I asked you to do, I've wasted more of my time to post the original text before I corrected it:

The normal body temperature of a cat is between 38 and 39 °C (101 and 102.2 °F).[8] A cat is considered febrile (hyperthermic) if it has a temperature of 39.5 °C (103 °F) or greater, or hypothermic if less than 37.5 °C (100 °F). For comparison, humans have a normal temperature of approximately 36.8 °C (98.6 °F). "

This is the original article before I fixed the conversion for Fahrenheit. It is cited in SOURCE 9 for the article.

I couldn't care less about code or autoconversions or where you take a cat or a human's temperature. But I know from my visits to the hospital that human body temperature is in a range and that the original figures memorized by school children were before this was realized. BTW the average of this range is *not* 37C, but nevertheless, the numbers provided are cited in this article75.118.68.149 (talk) 22:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for ignoring my two articles here. I've found a new source with a more accurate temperature, and will affect changes from it. Thanks for the threat. 75.118.68.149 (talk) 22:11, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

You're insisting on comparing a cat's rectal temperature with a human oral temperature? Rather than cat core temperature with human core temperature? All because you're obsessed with making a point about misconceptions over human temperature that has nothing whatsoever to do with cats? And everybody but you is a pedant? Really?

You should seek consensus at Talk:Cat anatomy. Further edit warring and personal attacks could result in being blocked from editing. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:15, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Link to piaggiogroup.com

I saw that you deleted the link to piaggiogroup. I think we should keep it, because Piaggio is a group, and Piaggio SpA is the parent company, whose website is piaggiogroup.com; piaggio.com is just the product- site, one of the group's brands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by F.orsano (talk • contribs) 09:01, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I thought I was doing, but I had the sites backwards. Thanks for pointing it out. I've fixed it now. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Nonsense

"Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Lane splitting, you may be blocked from editing. Dennis Bratland (talk) 06:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)"

Where do you get this stuff ? It is not "original research" to say that in the United States, unless something is prohibited by statute, then it is LEGAL. This is a basic premise of the American legal system. California is part of the United States, ergo, in California as well as the rest of the US, if there is no statute prohibiting lane splitting, then IT IS LEGAL.

Find me a statute that prohibits it and I will shut up. But since the California Highway Patrol and the California DMV BOTH say that lane-splitting is legal, then Mr Hoy's claim that it is a "grey area" is nonsense.

And now I will go back and DELETE that untruthful crap once again.

If you want a war then fine, you can have one but you are in the wrong. The California DMV and CHP aren NOT "personal analysis". If they say lane-splitting is distinctly legal, then we can assume that the State of California is correct while Mr Hoy is full of bovine excrement.

You are in the wrong. Very very wrong.

210.22.142.82 (talk) 06:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

There are at least four laws in California that could be used to cite anyone lane splitting. The same laws are what are used to prohibit lane splitting in most states. David Hough explains this in detail. Pat Hahan goes over it as well in his book. Your opinion that there needs to be a law against it is contradicted by numerous sources. This has been discussed repeatedly in the past. It has also been agreed that Wikipedia is not a drivers manual. If you want to know how to ride your bike, you must read your local drivers manual. The lane splitting article is about the broader social aspects of lane splitting. The legal section is about the convoluted legal issues in many jurisdictions over the subject. It explains why so many people are confused. It does not give legal advice.

I think it would help if you tried to understand Wikipedia better. The encyclopedia is a collection of information based on verifiable sources. Pat Hahn is one such source, and one of only a few that directly address the subject, so the article reflects what our sources say. Not the opinions of us editors. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 06:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

But NONE of them are for lane-splitting. There are none, xero, nada, zip zilch NO laws in California against lane-splitting. The fact that a chippy can cite you for unsafe speed, reckless driving, whatever does NOT have anything to do with lane-splitting. It means you are guilty of breaking some OTHER law, but they cannot give you a ticket for lane-splitting becasue it IS NOT ILLEGAL.

And it doesn't matter what Pat honey has to say, his claim that this is a "grey area" is patently WRONG. If you want to take his word over that of the DMV and CHP, then you are less than analytically astute.

THEREFORE, ergo, whatever, this section DOES NOT BELONG in that article because what it says IS A LIE. Driving unsafely != lane-splitting, can you figure that out ?

Unless you think wikipedia should be full of lies because someone you approve of says so ? Sun rotates around the earth, eh ? The Church tried that several times. I thought wikipedia was supposed to be about fact ?

I am now going back to get rid of that section because IT IS A LIE. Lane-splitting IS NOT A GREY AREA in California, according to the State of California.

The State of California is a higher authority on their own laws than Patty Hahn, sorry. 210.22.142.82 (talk) 07:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

There are only one or two states with laws against lane splitting. Most states have exactly the same laws on the books as California. If your argument were correct, then lane splitting would be legal in all 20 or 30 states with no laws against lane splitting. So your assertion that lane splitting is legal because there is no law against it is disproved. There are many US States with no law against it, but only one state where it is tolerated. It is a classic legal gray area. The difference is entirely in customary practice, nuance and legal interpretation.

But what's much more important is that no matter how much you shout "ITS A LIE" in all caps, your opinions are not what Wikipedia is made of. Wikipedia is made of information from reliable sources. I suggest you post your rationale at Talk:Lane splitting and see if you can get consensus from other editors. But keep in mind that you must calm down. Shouting is unnecessary. Attacking other editors will get you blocked from editing. I think it would help you to read Staying cool when the editing gets hot. Discuss the issue cooly and you might just get your way. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• <ref name="Eckermann">Eckermann, Erik (2001). [[http://books.google.com/books?id=yLZeQwqNmdgC&pg=PA14#v=onepage&q&f=false World History of the

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Please check your email

Hello, Dennis Bratland. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Pine^✉ 06:06, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Hooliganism book quote

The book quote you restored on the workpage seems to be from The Road East, a work of fiction. Obviously, you took it out again but I thought you should know. Brianhe (talk) 05:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I know. The quote was entirely opinion, so on some level it doesn't matter if the book is fiction. It expresses attitudes that exist. But non-fiction would be far better. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:49, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

FN Four timeline

I see you are starting on a table of changes on the FN Four. Agree that this is a great idea. I have started a translation of the Dutch Wikipedia article's timeline here: User:Brianhe/sandbox#FN_Four. Although the precise sources are unclear in that article, this might help. — Brianhe (talk) 22:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: Comment Deletion

Thank you for your cordial notice on my talk page. I'm not sure what I wrote on the other user's page. Likely something regrettable. I am a Naturalized Filipino with a Filipino family. There are a few people here making fake Filipino pages that go against many wiki rules. I can't seem to figure out how to fix these pages permanently. The reality is, the Philippines has not contributed as much to the industrialized world as Western nations have. It is still a developing nation! However, that is OK. No one is required to compete with Europe and America. Also, what one has, they may be lacking somewhere else, that the other has instead. I think it's important to acknowledge real Filipino accomplishments, contributions, and qualities. Making fake articles to bolster one's pride accomplishes little in the long run. Then again, I simply do not have the time at present to figure out all the wiki rules to file all the petitions, etc. Editing the page does nothing. I've petitioned a speedy deletion, but was denied. There are quite a handful of pages that need serious revamping or total deletion. Though I do not know how t do so... Anyhow, thanks again. Cheers. -Tom Presidentbalut (talk) 00:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I would try editing Wikipedia articles on subject that you are interested in, but are not so personally important to you, like your own country. Pick something else in history or art or technology or media, and work on those articles for a few months. It will help you understand Wikipedia better and allow you to work through problems less passionately and more objectively. Then maybe later on come back to the Filipino pages after you've gained some experience and perspective. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:11, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Living persons?

Alice Masterson and Buster Roberts, to the best of my knowledge, are no longer living. Ricky was a Sheriff in Tuolumne county last that I knew. You on the other hand are not bothering to verify what I am stating from PERSONAL Knowledge. I live in Modesto California, I grew up in Modesto California, and I grew up on the West Side of Modesto near Gallo's Vineyards. You did not. I am very near marking your edits to my edits as Vandalism.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Foolishfish (talk • contribs) 11:24, 31 October 2013‎

I have marked your edits as vandalism three times already and if you don't stop you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is not your soapbox for posting your personal experiences and observations. Everything on Wikipedia, particularly any facts about living persons, must cite a verifiable source. There is no way to verify who you are or what you did or didn't experience. Please stop. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:56, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Do trials bikes have seats?

I am responding to your standard-form message on my talk page. The caption that I wrote, ("A trials bike with no seat") was self-evident and self-explanatory, and needs no citation. By contrast, the previous caption, to which you have twice reverted, ("Trials bikes have no seats") is not only incorrect, as I explained before ("Older trials bikes have a conventional seat, some have just a vestigial seat, and some, as pictured, have no seat."), but it is also a statement made without any citation or reference. In my view you were mistaken to readopt the faulty caption. Arrivisto (talk) 15:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

And I suppose a caption with a picture of a Honda Civic must mention that cars were once started with a hand crank? These historical details belong on Motorcycle trials, not a general article about what distinguishes a trials bike from other types.

Regardless, I'm no longer going to waste time trying to talk you into sticking with what the sources day. Please stop adding unsourced content and opinions. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I have no wish to waste any of your time, so I am delighted to hear you no longer propose to talk to me. In return, I hope also you are going to abandon your insufferable patronising, sarcasm and invective, and your knee-jerk reversions & deletions. I have not once "added opinions". In this instance I have responded to your standard-form comment on my talk page. On the wikipage, you made a statement "trials bikes have no seats" which is both wrong and unsourced. Instead of hectoring, kindly accept that I, like almost all other editors, make contributions that are both intelligent and made in good faith. To quote from my own page: "I'm not complacent and am still keen to improve, and I do my best to avoid "editor skirmishes". I'm disappointed that some wiki-editors seem to take themselves too seriously, but I hope I shall avoid falling into that trap; and I reckon that good faith and good humour are the way to avoid any spats." QED. Arrivisto (talk)

Categories

Why are you removing the German inventions category from lots of articles? --IIIraute (talk) 18:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

See WP:EVASION. It's in my edit summary. And there are no sources that say the bicycle is a German invention. Dandy horse is already in that category.Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about reverting this edit. It was listed in my watchlist as a revert; you actually were making a new edit, not reverting. I agree with removing the Scottish category; I was preparing a stack of books on bicycle history that show consensus among bicycle historians that there is no agreement on who invented the bicycle. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:33, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I understand the issue regarding WP:EVASION, however for some articles the "German inventions" category (i.e. for Vacuum pump) seems to make sense. The same goes for the Taximeter article - the content looks alright - I am no expert, but it is kind of sad to lose all this (rather valuable?) info. Maybe it does clash with a policy, but if it does benefit the article❔ --IIIraute (talk) 19:56, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I would say there are enough non-disruptive editors around to ensure Taximeter and Vacuum pump and so on are factually correct. I don't consider it a good use of my time review every one of his edits for its merits, although others are free do do so if they wish. This content should be carefully reviewed for plagiarism or copyright violation. Do not assume good faith with this dude. It's really sad: Europefan has a lot to contribute. I and several others repeatedly asked him to cease socking, cease the constant personal attacks, and respect the collaborative process. He flatly refuses. He thinks he can do as he pleases by hopping IPs. So every week he comes back, gets reverted and blocked again. Nobody so far has offered a better strategy for dealing with him.

I'm not a fan of the use of invention categories for any technology that is of uncertain, disputed, or multiple-country origin. At a minimum, I'd like to see citations from mainstream historians who say unequivocally, "X is a German invention". In any event, there should be consensus on the article's talk page. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:11, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Europefan

Hello. Thank you for caring about Wikipedia. But, as the investigation will show it, I do not have any link with Europefan. Sfitztrw (talk) 19:17, 3 November 2013 (UTC).

"Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon in Vancouver, WA

	WIKI LOVES LIBRARIES 2013! You are invited to attend the upcoming "Wiki Loves Libraries" edit-athon. The event will be held from 2:30–4:30pm on Sunday, November 17, 2013 at the Vancouver Community Library (901 C Street) in Vancouver, Washington. The edit-athon will focus on creating and expanding articles related to Vancouver and Clark County. Details and signup here!

You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active member of WikiProjectOregon or WikiProject Washington. This message was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:15, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Copy Edit

What was wrong with my copy edit? :)

-Duxwing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duxwing (talk • contribs) 01:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

You deleted the fact that for more than 50% of the human population, the most common type of motor vehicle is a motorcycle, not a car. There's two graphs that illustrate the point. In the US, Europe and Japan, the vista is filled with cars, plus a few motorcycles. In China, India, Indonesia, and a number of other countries, which together make up a majority, motorcycles are everywhere with cars in the minority. The fact that the world is split into these two contrasting populations is the point the demographics section, and the reason why it's explained in the article lead.

It's grossly oversimplified to delete all that and just say, 'motorcycles are inexpensive'. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:44, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Oh... Well... heh. :o

-Duxwing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duxwing (talk • contribs) 06:25, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

RE: A belated welcome!

Thank you very much your friendly welcome. Abraço. Lourencoalmada (talk) 17:01, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Lane splitting". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 07:19, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Lane_splitting

Since you have reverted lane splitting while also restoring some dead links that others have attempted to fix, I am reporting the case to dispute resolution noticeboard.--Jusjih (talk) 07:20, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Difference between revisions - Sachs motorcycles.

Hiya,

As I can't access the website you have replaced my external links with, I found it appropriate to re-edit this mistake. I have tried visiting the external link you have provided on 3 different addresses. No success. As it mentions in the Official site point I am allowed to do this. So are they not the official websites what I put down? You also removed my edit of the ZZ 125. This is as much of a bike as the ZX 125. Visit the websites I mentioned and you will see for yourself: UK website German website

I mean no argument, just factual correctness. AJPotter96 (talk) 23:19, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. This is why you should always write an Edit summary. Nobody knows why you're doing something if you leave the edit summary blank.

Sachs-bikes.cc was up yesterday; it looks like it's down today. Hopefully they can get it back up again. It is the official international site, and it contains more or less the same content as the German site, but translated into English Per WP:ELOFFICIAL, we don't want a long list of official web sites, we prefer one, and we prefer English. If http://www.sachs-bikes.cc/ stays down, we'll have to revert to the German site. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:33, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me! AJPotter96 (talk) 23:39, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Video removal

You removed a video from the Harley-Davidson article with the rationale that "50% of video is putting on gloves and helmet. 15% is sitting there staring at H-D logo. part with bike is more sun glare and pavement than bike. video with good view of actual bike might be nice." I wanted to point out that the video was added to the section of the article that deals with "brand culture," and its content specifically illustrates content from that section, including the demographic of Harley riders and the extensive licensing of the logo through gear, signage, etc. The section of the article where the video was added is not about the visual aspects of the motorcycle itself. Would you consider reverting your edit? --Jgmikulay (talk) 00:40, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but sitting there for 10 seconds staring at a big H-D sign doesn't convey any information about Harley brand culture. Neither does a long, long, long shot of a guy putting on some gloves and a helmet. In the parts where you finally get to see the bike being ridden, you can't see the bike. What's the point? It's like an art school project, not something encyclopedic that conveys information in a documentary, encyclopedic fashion.

But that's just one editor's opinion. Go to Talk:Harley-Davidson and provide your justification for adding the video. Perhaps others will agree. Only one way to find out. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:33, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Wait. I just looked at your user page, and the uploader's contributions, and the video's page. This is a student project. It's nice, but it is uninformative. It doesn't communicate, 1) the magnitude of H-D brand loyalty, or 2) the reasons for the brand loyalty. And again, this discussion belongs at Talk:Harley-Davidson where other interested editors can participate. You should divulge your conflict of interest as well. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:41, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aprilia RSV 1000 R, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liquid cooled (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Sawant citations

Hi Dennis. If you need help finding anything in the references for the Sawant article I may be able to help. There's a lot of video and I know it can be time consuming to review it all. Please do so before deleting any other material you personally find to have a negative connotation as not all people share your paradigm on these issues. There are plenty of circles in which Marixist and Trotskyist are not pejorative terms. I would start with the references called "2012partry" and "relevancespeech". Happy editing. GraniteSand (talk) 17:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Oh, a side note. I was reviewing your profile and you're in Seattle and seem to be a pretty active media contributor. Do you have an appropriately licensed or original picture of Sawant we could use in the article? If so, I'd really appreciate it if you'd contribute it. Cheers. GraniteSand (talk) 18:09, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GraniteSand

Please remember that diffs are required for sockpuppet investigations, even if you provide them privately to a checkuser if they contain sensitive information. Your report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GraniteSand did not appropriately meet that condition, and I honestly should have rejected it from the start. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 20:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

My feeling was that the entire edit history of the two accounts was so small that the diffs of every edit were the evidence. Sorry for not being more specific. I hesitated submitting an SPI case for a few days because I didn't want to start a fishing expedition, but at the same time I was certain GraniteSand was a sock. The most incongruous piece of evidence in front of me was the slightly odd interactions between him and the other account, and I felt opening a formal SPI case was the most fair way of ensuring they'd be given due consideration. The alternative -- say emailing around or IRC chatting with other editors, could have started a rumor mill, casting a cloud over them indefinitely with no chance for exonerating them.--Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:42, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

While I understand the conditions in which you created the SPI, the evidence you listed above, "The most incongruous piece of evidence ...", even just a few links demonstrating that would have been enough for us to start looking in without an issue. It just starts to look like we are doing baseless SPIs when there are no diffs presented as evidence. It's only a note for next time, what's done is done. And what I mean by email, is the evidence was submitted to CU via email, the case is still public. Checkusers as far as I know consider a case closed whenever it gets the grey close at SPI, or if it's completely by email, when they reply. -- DQ on the road (ʞlɐʇ) 23:16, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Suzuki Katana

"Hello, I'm Dennis Bratland. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Suzuki Katana, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:21, 22 November 2013 (UTC)"

Dennis, I have no idea if this is place, or manner, you are suggesting I respond. If it is not, I apologize, there seems to be virtually no real directions for someone who is not familiar with the process.

If this is the appropriate place/format, than I would request some guidance on how the link I posted does not fall within the guidelines, as I've read what should be included, excluded, and which areas various things should be placed, and unfortunately, for my addled brain (too many concussions), don't see how it is in conflict.

The link is to a Users-Group site that contains far more detailed information on the varatinons producted, model differences, etc. than on the Wikipedia page I thought this was detail/drill-down information that Wikipedia would want linked to as opposed to taking up significant space on the actual Wikipedia page itself.

Some guidance on what would be an appropriate way to add detail would be helpful. --Alan Coles (talk) 18:31, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

WP:ELNO, says under criteria #11 and #12:

• Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)
• Open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors. Mirrors or forks of Wikipedia should not be linked.

Also see WP:MC-MOS. Since Wikipedia is not a web directory or search engine, so we don't include links to explore the subject further on the web. We include a few links to unique resources or information from recognized experts, although in most cases even these links would be better if they were moved up into the article as footnotes.

The place to discuss this further if you think the link meets the criteria is to post a note at the bottom of Talk:Suzuki Katana or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorcycling. Consensus can change, but right now there is no support for listing clubs, forums, and user groups. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Sawant NPOV

I'd like to remove the tag on the top of the Kshama Sawant article. What do you see as the POV which is impeding that? GraniteSand (talk) 19:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Give due weight to the local council issues by expanding the section. Or temporarily remove the excess detail about non-Seattle issues. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:55, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate it

Dennis, Thank for the heads up on the KZ1000 edit. I'm new to Wikipedia-- good to get input on how this works.

Again, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apathetic2 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 29 November 2013 (UTC)