User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q3 2013

Goings on at Ayurveda

Hi Acroterian, I'm wondering if the account you recently blocked [1] is related to another [2]. Perhaps it's coincidental, but both have a fondness for copyright violation, editing the same article nearly simultaneously, with what I'm taking to be an agenda. Thanks for any light you, or a talk page stalker, can shed. 99.149.85.229 (talk) 20:08, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hard to tell - I'll keep an eye on that account. They seem to have similar levels of English proficiency, but that's not very telling, and lots of people have reservations about homeopathic or traditional medical practices and don't understand WP policies on copyrights. I'm going to be on WP somewhat irregularly, so I may not be able to give it full attention. Acroterion (talk) 20:13, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Points taken, though I did find they also crossed paths at a little-edited article here [3]. By the way, your responses here [4] were excellent. 99.149.85.229 (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. Andy's given good advice too. I see what you mean about the convergence of edits. We'll see whether they edit while Poldar is blocked, which would indicate that they are not autoblocked and therefore not using the same IP. It's the middle of the night in India, so nobody's likely to edit from there for a while. Acroterion (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, though the bonus there was his being addressed as respected AndyTheGrump. Kind of deflates the whole curmudgeon thing. 99.149.85.229 (talk) 21:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Dr. Potdar gets considerable credit for being polite, which is more than I can say for most edit warriors. Acroterion (talk) 21:39, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

9/11

(moved from some dim corner of my userspace) Hi i am not quite understanding this ruling on "original research" given that NO article can contain items not linked to original research, twice i have added information to articles pertaining to 9/11. Both of which were simply information that relates to things that a) are provable,not subject of themselves to debate as to veracity and thus not research b) because they are either explanations of something drawing upon alternate linked sources or scientific fact, they are clearly not original research c) a few people i have spoken to who edit articles have assured me that NO 9/11 items may be edited outside of officially endorsed explanations. So if this is the case can that be explained, and if it is not the case, please explain how un provable clearly false information is allowed. I refer to my first edit being related to the claim that debris pushed the walls apart by accumulation and consequently forcing walls open. That i need not truly explain, unless you require it,however suffice to say i simply pointed out that this is a theory and cannot be taken from the site as fact given that correct examination establish that to be highly improbable. The second edit obviously as seen by yourself (possibly the first was too) Was only to highlight the alternative timings given even official versions are not even set in stone. I would be grateful for an explanation on where i went wrong so i don't repeat the error on any other wiki article.

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Emergencycode66 (talk • contribs)

You've been adding your own personal views and analysis to Collapse of the World Trade Center. You can't do that, I can't do that, nobody can. You may only add content that can be referenced to reliable sources and which can be verified - these are fundamental policies. You can't just write your own discussion of the subject. Additionally, a YouTube video is not a reliable source: in fact, YouTube is usually a red flag, and a random video amounts to nothing more than a given person's point of view about AA 77. A bot (not a person) routinely removes YouTube links, because they are almost always copyright violations (Wikipedia policy prohibits such links), or they are original content subject to no editorial review that is worthless as a reference. Most things on the Internet are inadmissible as sources on Wikipedia, particularly on fringe topics, except to the extent that they describe the fringe theory. Wikipedia gives primary weight to peer-reviewed analysis and mainstream media, and lesser, proportional weight to outside viewpoints, and little or no weight to fringe points of view: this is policy, part of WP:NPOV. Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for conspiracy theorists or promoters of fringe theories on any subject: vaccines, AIDS, truthers, birthers, deathers, flat-earthers ... To help you in the future, please remember that your own analysis is not admissible, that you must provide references to reliable sources, and that you must gain consensus for your edits. Acroterion (talk) 02:30, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Help needed

The user 74.213.188.138,identified as a sock-puppet [5], keeps harassing me with his commentary on my personal talk page. Although I delete his comments from my talk page, he just restores them... --walkee^talkee 23:29, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I've blocked them for a week. Obviously, you're entitled to remove the harassment (or anything else) from your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 23:35, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Although you have not been named explicitly at ANI, you are implicitly being accused of assuming bad faith in the batch of idiom AfDs for comments like [6]. Psychotropic sentence (talk) 03:37, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I know about the ANI post and have ignored it, since Ryulong seems mostly to be complaining that things aren't going his way and the ANI post hasn't gone his way either. I had a cordial discussion with him about the issues with the AfDs father up this page, and I assured him (and I now assure you) that I've reviewed each one individually and I think they're pointy and poorly considered nominations. Whether you or Ryulong think that is an assumption of bad faith is not my concern. Acroterion (talk) 11:23, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Paola De Luca Group Creative Intelligence

Hi I'm writing the page for Paola De Luca Group Creative Intelligence based on its marketing materials as part of an iterative development process. Is it possible to allow me to continue writing while I make the page more encyclopedic?

Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFuturistPDLG (talk • contribs) 12:14, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd suggest that you write it in your userspace in User:TheFuturistPDLG/sandbox. You may not copy material into any place in Wikipedia from a copyrighted source (or for that matter any source that is not unambiguously freely licensed or public domain), even if you intend to rewrite it. Please review WP:CORP (you need to show that the organization is notable), WP:YFA and given the initials in your username, WP:COI. Acroterion (talk) 12:25, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Where can I find the material which was deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFuturistPDLG (talk • contribs) 10:24, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

It was deleted, and I can't restore copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Please write without importing copyrighted text. Acroterion (talk) 11:09, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Tier-3

Hi,

The Tier-3 company page I created was deleted.

I'm not sure I agree - several of our competitors; such as Arcsight, Logrhythm have pages on Wikipedia ...

However, if the text was too promotional I have redrafted and reposted the content. What is there now is completely factual. Hope this time it is OK - but let me know.

Piers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Only1weasel (talk • contribs) 13:14, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

It was promotional. However, I deleted it primarily because there was no indication that the company was notable. The present version, while lacking the marketing release character, doesn't indicate notability either. It's also not referenced (referencing to third-party coverage of the firm is essential to establishing notability). Self-sourcing is of limited use, and of no use for notability. Acroterion (talk) 13:30, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

You're deleting information that shouldn't be deleted.

On the Page Waterford, Connecticut you have deleted information that I had just put back up after the page was vandalized by a user called: Polaron. This information is being posted as part of a project in an English class, your deleting will affect the students' grades. Please refrain from farther deletion. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 16pattonm (talk • contribs) 20:18, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Replied on their talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 20:25, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

You just said that a person made "criminal allegations" on somebody, that is not true, that information is on a police case in Waterford, Connecticut, meaning that he was not alleging anything, just explaining that the person was a suspect. Also, Polaron deleted mass amounts of information from the page,and the Wikipedia page explaining the policy on vandalism clearly states: " Vandalism includes the addition, removal, or other modification of the text or other material that is either humorous, nonsensical, a hoax, or that is of an offensive, humiliating, or otherwise degrading nature" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_vandalism). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 16pattonm (talk • contribs) 20:33, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Polaron's removals were not vandalism: extraneous material is removed all the time when it isn't in compliance with sourcing, notability or appropriate emphasis. That's part of the editing process, and the burden is on the editor who adds the material to support it. At no time may any editor make criminal accusations without solid sourcing and in almost all cases, a conviction. If it happens again, people will have their editing privileges removed. Acroterion (talk) 20:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I assure you that all the information being posted on the page by the students is factual and have sources to indicate so, also, when a post doesn't have a source, normally a "Citation Needed" link will pop up before it is removed, that did not occur here. I will talk to the instructor and see when she can contact you, meanwhile, stop posting on my talk page about others' posts not having sources, that is not my responsibility it is theirs.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 16pattonm (talk • contribs)

It's the class's responsibility to edit in accordance with this website's rules. If you have sources that comply with Wikipedia policy, cite them, and I repeat: if any edits are made that make allegations of criminal activity, those editors will be blocked from editing: please pass that along to your instructor. In the meantime, please respect Wikipedia's requirements for sourcing and attribution. Acroterion (talk) 20:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your input (I agreed with you) and I will make sure that the information the students post are sourced and obey the rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 16pattonm (talk • contribs) 21:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and best wishes on the project. Any questions, please ask. I can help with formatting references (it's not as easy as it ought to be) and with opinions on notability, etc. Acroterion (talk) 21:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

What exactly was wrong with the "allegations"? And what should the student do about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 16pattonm (talk • contribs) 22:01, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Read WP:BLP. Wikipedia doesn't permit editors to post defamatory or accusatory material on living persons, broadly construed, unless the material is well-documented, the crime and the perpetrator are notable on a national or global scale, the topic is neutrally written, and the material is completely, appropriately and scrupulously sourced to major third-party media with a reputation for fact-checking. Wikipedia is not a means of shaming people, and it does not report purely local events. Editors who break this rule are blocked from editing and the material is removed from public access. The article on Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev is an example of an acceptable article concerning someone accused of a crime: the subject is notable, the event is notable, the sources are from major publications that do fact-checking, and there were at last count 236 references. 99+% of murders, assaults and crimes do not pass Wikipedia's policy requirements for notability. Unsourced defamatory material is immediately removed and the editors warned. If it's reinserted without references or is poorly referenced, the editor can be blocked. If the references are acceptable, the material can (and often is) removed as undue weight, non-notable or tangential to the subject. See WP:BLP1E. Acroterion (talk) 22:25, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Addendum: the reason for all this is that Wikipedia is the fifth or sixth most viewed website on the planet. There is enormous potential for harm to people. Material that might be #7354 on a Google search under other circumstances will show up as number one or two when placed on Wikipedia. We don't know who editors are, whether their intentions are good, and whether they're posting the truth. The only way we can judge the veracity of content is to demand references to reliable sources that we can verify, and to demand that biographies (which in effect means any material on any living individual) be held to a high standard and edited with great caution. I've seen people try to post libel, or to use a factual event to smear or punish someone under the guise of "the truth must be told." Since Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, such edits are unwelcome. Many victims of crimes do not want their experience to be prominently displayed on a widely-viewed website, closely linked to their name, and Wikipedia is not a means for shaming or branding otherwise unremarkable criminals.. Acroterion (talk) 00:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Richard Basciano

I just started a new page on Richard Basciano. Nobody has yet commented on it in any way. I post it here to get your thoughts. I was hoping other, smarter people would add flesh to the bones. The gentleman is an internet ghost. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 14:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

The Philly Inquirer had a lot on Basciano yesterday in their articles on the collapse. He's getting on in years, so that may account for the Internet drought. I'll see what I can find. Acroterion (talk) 15:03, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

dawn forces and britney

um, hello. i just wanted to add these two catagories in megaman x. can i? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Princessbritneyaroma (talk • contribs) 21:32, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Do not add hoax materials.--Mr Fink (talk) 21:51, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi there

It appears that people who have twinkle like me have been looking at recent pages for vandalism. Looks like if I keep up with anti-vandalism. I might earn rollback! DDreth 03:00, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

You're learning quickly and doing well. Please remember that there are a myriad of rules (like the one about editors blanking warnings), and that it's very easy to fall into a shoot-em-up attitude toward vandalism. Sometimes things that look like vandalism aren't. Remember that the wiki won't blow up if you don't catch something, and try not to taunt vandals. Boring escalating templates are best, otherwise you may end up feeding a troll. Remember to take time out to work on content: it's vital to understand how the place really works. Happy editing! Acroterion (talk) 03:15, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

we've made new friends

Looks like we have made some new friends in Connecticut. At least one of the kids on that article seems to get it, so I don't mind a little pranking. Gtwfan52 (talk) 18:53, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd rather give them a break. Teacher assigns Wikipedia editing project, kids have no idea what's appropriate or how extensively the project is monitored, cruftiness gets poured into article, everybody gets mad, and so on. School's out shortly, and as long as no BLP issues arise (some already have), I don't mind a little acting out. Acroterion (talk) 19:08, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Acidtron!

What did you mean by umm disruptions ?

Don't be obtuse: stop messing around with [[Tabby cat][]. (However, I might start going by Acidtron from now on, good name). Acroterion (talk) 01:38, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Messing around? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.32.105.21 (talk) 01:40, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Roland Baines worked VERY hard to get where he is today. It's sad that a human has to go and act like he doesn't exist. Not right! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.32.105.21 (talk) 01:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Talk:Elisabeth Sladen

Hi. Just wanted to say thanks for getting rid of that awful comment by 92.3.240.27. Have a good week! Liam 22:11, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome: I've blocked the IP for a week, but they've come back after two previous blocks, so I doubt this is the end of it. Acroterion (talk) 21:14, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Tania Fiolleau

Hi Acroterion,

I just created the Tania Fiolleau article. I noticed that you had deleted an article that previously occupied that title back in 2010, leaving an edit summary stating that the article was an "unreferenced controversial BLP." I believe that the new article I have created is much better-sourced than the previous one, but I thought that I would notify you of my creation of the article so you could review it yourself.

Neelix (talk) 04:25, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Your version is eminently suitable: the version I deleted wholly unsourced, read like a promotional release, and was probably a copyright violation. Cheers, Acroterion (talk) 11:10, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Griggs]], [[S|thumb|Novarupta lava dome]]nowy Mountain (Alaska Peninsula, Alaska)|Snowy Mountain]], [[Mount Denison]], [[Mount Kukak]], [[Devils Desk]], [[Mount Kaguyak]], [[Mount Douglas (Alaska)|

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Revert

Thanks a lot You made a constructive edit to my talk by reverting dumb vandalism, but I actually prefer to keep it. Thanks, though! —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:13, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Works on the RNZAF, World War I in the Baltic, and British battleship construction Op-ed: Anchors Aweigh for the Majestic Titans

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:51, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

New Message

Hey Acroterion

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:09, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

RE: Iain Duncan Smith Page

I wasn't "vandalizing" the page, rather, I was contributing, he has (in Scotland) became know for his nickname. A simple google shearch would tell you that. Don't call me a vandal you wiki-bureaucrat. For someone who has an Anti-Vandalism reward, you're remarkably cavalier with the concept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanBerry98 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Sell it somewhere else: no "ratbag" in biographies. Acroterion (talk) 00:09, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/mar/27/ian-duncan-smith-branded-ratbag http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/27/iain-duncan-smith-ratbag_n_2964720.html Theres even been a short film and a song. What biographies has is there about IDS?

The sources you provide clearly indicate that "ratbag" is an epithet, not a name. Wikipedia isn't a platform for name-calling. Pleae read WP:BLP for more on Wikipedia policies concerning living people, including people you don't like. Acroterion (talk) 02:07, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, can't we put-in that his epithet is "ratbag"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanBerry98 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

No. Acroterion (talk) 02:30, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

No? Just No? No reason? I think it's you who's the bias one... — Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanBerry98 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

You did read my second reply, didn't you? Abuse is abuse, even if the target's a politician. Acroterion (talk) 02:34, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Bad RFPP call

Re: Conor Maynard

Sorry. I thought because it was BLP and 3 different single-purpose users, 1 day was justified. Please help me understand. I'm new. :) Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:58, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like I misclicked while my %$@#! browser was slowly loading - I had no idea I'd reverted something. Jeez. Not anything to do with you, my fault. Legoktm was corect to revert my mistake. Acroterion (talk) 23:14, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Phew. Thanks. I was panicking. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Don't panic! In my case, my first official administrative action as an administrator six years ago was to accidentally block myself. You won't blow up the wiki, and we all make mistakes. Acroterion (talk) 23:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Came to your page for other reasons, but reading your post above was hilarious-sounds like something straight out of my playbook. Not sure I want to know how you contrived to do that. Hushpuckena (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I blame my browser, my Internet connection, my mouse, my dog, anything but me (and of course Anna). It's possible for the code to load before ti displays, and I was going click click click in irritation and hit a place on the screen where "rollback" would appear on the latest diff at RFPP. It happens sometimes. As for the self-block, I was fooling around with the "block" function (for admins the interface displays "Typicaluser (talk|contribs|block)" )and not knowing the sequence of confirmations, I blocked myself. I of course unblocked myself, learning how to unblock in the process, but it looks dumb and is enshrined in my block log [7] with my rather disingenuous rationale. Acroterion (talk) 23:08, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Braulio Castillo (businessman)

I come gain seeking adult supervision. I created a page on Braulio Castillo (businessman), the gentleman who was grilled by that congressman the other day. My article is true, it is careful say only what is in the public record, it is my best shot at a fair article. That being said, no other editor has worked on it. I suspect the fellow is notable, but the lack of traffic hints elsewise. Take a look and tell me what you think. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 08:52, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any obvious problems, and I'd suspect that the lack of other editors is just because you've reported what's available to report. It got 119 views yesterday, and I assume you didn't need 119 edits to get it written. Acroterion (talk) 14:52, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I see it has been deleted, which if fine. But it has been deleted with no discussion, which seems odd. Can you advise me?Paul, in Saudi (talk) 02:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Non-constructive reversions

On my page in March, you posted regarding the actions of Tom991, who took umbrage to some edits I made at Wilbraham, Massachusetts, reverting them in some instances without constructive reason, whilst launching personal attacks. On at least two occasions since, this user has posted at my talk page, then deleted the message. He has, moreover, deleted some of the edits I have made, simply for the sake of doing so. In the edit summary of his last episode, this user made a comment to the effect that he delighted in 'making (me) mad'.

I've no intention of getting involved in anything resembling a flame war, but see no reason to tolerate this behaviour, either. I would be most appreciative of any attention you could give to this matter. Thanks in advance. Hushpuckena (talk) 23:04, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I left him a rather neutrally-worded note [8]: we'll see what the response is. I'll keep an eye out. Acroterion (talk) 23:17, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Once more, thanks! Here's hoping things work out for the best. Hushpuckena (talk) 16:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Where

Where can I request a protection for this page? Thia sick Portgual editor wants to teach me the reality of my country. Rauzaruku (talk) 02:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to block both of you if you don't stop edit-warring and throwing around insults. The kinder thing to do would be to protect the article, but that won't be necessary if you both stop. I'm in no position to judge whether your position is correct on the idiom, but it would be nice if somebody would find a source. Acroterion (talk) 02:12, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Here: http://veja.abril.com.br/blog/sobre-palavras/consultorio/americano-norte-americano-ou-estadunidense/ . His brazilian source analyzes the issue impartially. Here, says: "estadunidense - that is the third option of Brazilians and is containing higher doses of anti-Americanism". He also says: "In the end, suffice the pedantic of the word "estadunidense" to alienate me against it" Rauzaruku (talk) 02:16, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

The source supports your argument that it is a pejorative term (I wouldn't call it "racist" since you're referring to a nation), but I'd suggest a discussion on the article talkpage - the other user has posted there using more temperate language. Acroterion (talk) 02:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I think you're being way too kind with them, especially Cristiano. With all of those excessively foul insults, my watchlist now probably needs a good wash with soap. Thank you for quickly dealing with the problem. Best regards. [;)]--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 03:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Probably, but Christiano has apologized, and they ended up talking about it, sort of. I'd rather have some sort of mediated discussion than a round of blocks for a slanging match. Rauzaruku's insistence that on characterizing it as a horrible insult is probably unnecessary, and I don't think this article is the place to present every nuance of the perennial problem "what is an American?" in Spanish and Portuguese for non-US citizens of the Americas. Acroterion (talk) 11:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I remember a similar discussion taking place in Americans (or American, or both). It has no end.

I found Rau's point interesting. In Spanish, the term estadounidense is actually the correct (respectful) way of referring to an American. Slang includes "Gringo" and "Americano" (and both may be insults depending on the tone and context of the word).

Regarding Cristiano, I would have probably gone with a one-day block to keep a record of his behavior in the log. This is not the first time he steps over the etiquette line. But, everyone has a method, and I think you made a right choice as well. Best.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 14:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Please ignore MarshalN20. He was recently topic banned from editing all articles related to the history of Latin America because of me. Obviously he doesn't have "Portuguese language" on his watchlist. He is following my edits and once I asked the two users to stop and talk MarshalN20 found out about the conflict. Seeing what he wrote to you it seems that he was hoping to see Cristiano blocked. --Lecen (talk) 12:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I give up. Rauzaruku's latest message was enough for me. He's aggressive and clearly engaged in somekind of political warfare. All this in Portuguese language? I wonder what he'll do in articles related to politics. --Lecen (talk) 12:30, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I've left a warning on his talkpage about his aggressive tone. I will be tied up much of the day and may not be able to watch and intervene in a timely manner. Acroterion (talk) 12:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Block request

See User:Jasmeetkaur1765's edits — time for {{uw-spamblock}}? Nyttend backup (talk) 18:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, blocked. Ignoring a clear prior warning is enough for me. Acroterion (talk) 18:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Meanwhile, see here for my response regarding the Maryland Inventory of Historical Properties; I realised that it was time for a talk page archive. Nyttend (talk) 21:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

bad timing

Saturday evening I was bored and stumbled upon an old story that needed an article...Blackwater fire of 1937. It's not a happy story I thought, but should be documented since it is a significant event...anyway, my timing was terrible for the next day we have the disaster in Arizona...such an ugly coincidence that I decided to write an article about a forest fire that happened 76 years ago (almost) that killed 15 people and the next day we have one that kills even more. It doesn't sit well right now but I wanted ot get it done and I'm not going to take it to DYK at this time, though that was my original intent. Having been involved in fighting forest fires I'm just not feeling so well right now...but if you want to take a lookie and see how the article is (since I'm finished unless I get a few more images)...kind of feeling a little sick to my stomach.--MONGO 00:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Your timing is uncanny. Still, it's good to have a memorial to the 15 who died in 1937, and the events of yesterday will have people looking for other similar disasters: again,. it's best that those who died be remembered to the present day. It should be added to List of the deadliest firefighter disasters in the United States. Acroterion (talk) 01:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for putting the article up at DYK..looks like it got a fair number of hits.--MONGO 13:51, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Estadunidense

What you should realize is that these two users are Brazilian leftists, trying to defend the spread this word via Wikipedia. Wiki-PT have a large influx of communists, socialists and left-lists using your structure for spreading ideological ideas (articles of politics at Wiki-PT are a disgrace, totally advocate a political vision and always attack the other), and of course, they come here as well. Any Brazilian acquainted in politics (few people) know that the word "Estadunidense" is used only for fanatics anti-US or ignorant who do not know the political meaning of this word, and just talk because they read somewhere. You will not find this word in any common and serious Brazilian media, only radical blogs and a few media organizations that have strong links with the left. Rauzaruku (talk) 21:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Leftists are not disqualified from contributing to Wikipedia, nor are rightists, but we are all required to edit neutrally and to remain civil. As always, it is up to any editor to support their assertion with sources: so far, you've provided a source that indicates that the term is one preferred by the left, but have not supported your assertion that it is a gross insult. You'll need to achieve a consensus on the article's talkpage, and must remember that perhaps Portuguese language isn't an appropriate subject for a digression into shades of meanings on terms for American citizens: in fact, I'm a little mystified about why it's even discussed in the article. Acroterion (talk) 21:42, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Just going to tell you something very serious: who speaks "Estadunidense", as a rule, want to see the U.S. atomized, covered in blood, all Americans dead, like Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. I'm really defending your country and your people. Rauzaruku (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Kinjockity Ranch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Viga

Rufus Riddlesbarger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Army Air Corps

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Blackwater fire of 1937

Harrias ^talk 08:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

ANI: Rauzaruku

I opened a threat at the ANI regarding Rauzaruku. Since I mentioned your name, feel free to comment if you like. The link is here. --Lecen (talk) 19:15, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Samarkaand

He Acroterion, could you have a look at user:Samerkaand in relation to user:Jageshwar (SPI seems to be on summer holidays....) Thnx, L.tak (talk) 07:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Help please

Hey there, one of the nmore cool things about having a hobby is that yu can use that knowledge on Wikipedia, SO, I read THIS article on the cello...I have played for just over 25 years and there are some errors etc that I can address in of course, an encyclopedic fashion. BUT I will need to take some pics of some of the things I have with my cello and wondered, if you could offer ANY advice...I have OF COURSE provided some citations needed tags, and certainly will challenge the veracity of some assertions, Dark Rosin, uhhh no being one of them. As this is outside of my normal scope as it were, I will follow to the letter any advice you do offerCoal town guy (talk) 23:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker): If you are going to be providing pictures, you can easily upload them via the Upload Wizard. I can walk you through the steps if you like. Citations aren't necessary for photos. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Photos I am OK with, BUT I appreciate the offer. My questions were looking at the article and looking at what people actually do when playing a cello, sadly, in the specific example given, the 2 do not meet and I would be delighted to correct thatCoal town guy (talk) 00:15, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm nearly the last person who can offer advice concerning the cello. I note that much of the early content was written by Flcelloguy (talk · contribs), who hasn't edited in six years. BassHistory (talk · contribs) has added more recent (if "recent" is 2008 or so) material, and is still around. The article appears to have just gradually grown by about 5k a year, which means that there could be a lot of junk that nobody's refuted or weeded out. A reference, preferably several, are required, of course. As always, reconciling what you know about playing the cello and what WP wants for references (particularly nowadays, with inline references and such) is the problem. Acroterion (talk) 00:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Understood and that is precisely why I would ask a person who has NOT played. Our world here requires sources, not "popular wisdom". THANK GOD. Example, Dark Rosin vs Light Rosin....Have you ever had to cut a pine tree and noted that dreaded orange goop on the trunk and had your hands gummed together by it, well as yoyu probably know, thats rosin. Here is a cool thing, if you gather that goop, let it dry and harden in the sun, it can then be applied to a bow by rubbing the bow hair back and forth against it. The rosin comes off as a fine white powder and now the hairs on the bow will grip the strings better so you can now play. If the roisin is dark, or light it does not matter, it came from a pine tree. I mean, what do those people who used "regular" rosin for the last half millenia know anyway???Coal town guy (talk) 00:49, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello, thanks for this edit, particularly the last sentence – you put it far more diplomatically than I could have. Graham87 05:58, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome - the huge amount of work you've done to reconstitute the early history of Wikipedia and to give credit to the editors who began work on the encyclopedia's core has been mostly unacknowledged. A poor choice of article title doesn't give editors the right to dictate terms for rearranging article histories to make them first in line to fill a parameter for a toolserver list, and runs contrary to the WP ethos of the community over the individual. We all like to get credit for our work, and good work should be acknowledged and praised, but it doesn't mean that editors are entitled to run to ANI and claim they're being abused when it doesn't work out to their liking. Acroterion (talk) 13:16, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Haloperidol

FYI, I have filed a sock puppet report on the disruptive editor at Talk:Haloperidol. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gift of ELOOHIM. Deli nk (talk) 16:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I was forming much the same conclusion, and IPv6 users are in some ways easier to deal with than people on IPv4. Acroterion (talk) 17:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Request for Page Protection

Would it be possible if I could get you to page protect my page from an anonymous vandal with a changing IP? It seems that a banned user, THC Loadee, is out to get revenge on me and other users because he was banned indefinitely in an edit war. [9] [10] [11] Thank you for your time.--Mr Fink (talk) 17:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we wouldn't normally semi-protect any user's talkpage for more than a few hours at a time, particularly someone who's doing a lot anti-vandal work and who needs to be reachable by new accounts and IPs, and you've not had a lot of trouble. I've watchlisted yours and Gilliam's talkpages and will keep an eye out: I realize that it's more annoying to be harassed in this way for non-admins than for admins, who can just block 'em and go on, so I'll try to stay on top of it when I'm available. Acroterion (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.--Mr Fink (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion???? maybe

Hey there take a look here. The article discusses how to play a cello. Last I checked, Wikipedia is NOT a how to guide, AND THAT article is a slippery slope. A person does not need to have a knowledge of how to play the cello to see, that article could be very very very long, in fact, it could possibly be impossible to finish. EVERY technique, EVERY sound, EVERY approach??? I could not do it, nor could folks who have played longer than I have been alive......In short, IMO, I do not think it should be an article. What say you?Coal town guy (talk) 20:18, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I can't say it bothers me, though a better title might be Cello technique, and the companion playing the violin should be Violin technique. WP:NOTHOWTO is intended to forestall people putting in user guides, technical guides, travelogues, recipes and the like. I think there's room for a discussion of instrumental techniques, necessarily written in summary style, and I'm certain the article would survive a deletion discussion. Acroterion (talk) 20:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I think the idea of changing the article name to Cello technique is a dam good one. WHERE would I go to start the lets rename this article agreed upon etc etc OR should I do a REDIRECT? (I like this alot). I am way cool with that BUT consider this, after 25+ years of playing, I would bet beer money that there are techniques, I will not know or really even know the name of them. They can be freakishly specialized so, IF and I do mean IF we actually want to list the techniques, it would be a monumental undertaking. UNLESS as you have well stated, a summary guide as it were could be used. I think that would be great and I will try to do so. Under the proviso that an exhaustive list would be nearly impossible...of course.Coal town guy (talk) 22:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I've boldly moved both articles. I'm sure there are other similar articles on instruments, but I'll stick with these two. Acroterion (talk) 13:27, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

FANDAMTASTIC! Of note, I met my teacher after a mere 20 years of not seeing her. I was petrified she had died as I was tuning a cello one day, a DAM NICE ONE, in fact, and it was hers, and the person who handed it to me claimed to be the owner. I was "concerned" because the only way these things change hands is usually death. She is indeed alive and kicking, it was her son doing a quick favor for momCoal town guy (talk) 13:31, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

That bold move suits me right down to the ground. I've fixed Template:Violin to reflect the change. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 14:54, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

THIS is excellent. NOW, editing can begin, I will speak to the specifics on the article talk page. Thanks again to everyoneCoal town guy (talk) 14:59, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

McDowell County WV history

Hey there. I used a close paraphrasing tag on the McDowell County WV page...It is a clost paraphrasing form the WV poli sci page. I know this because I did a verbatim review, saw the re wording saw virtually NO refs. I can fix ity with another source I own, BUT it will take time.........Is there a time limit I need to be aware of here when tha tage is used??? Also, I do not own it, but I would love to fix it. If another person does so, thats cool, BUT I wanted to make you aware of what the issue is. And YES, I did indeed do a verbatim review. I have also brought up the issue on the article talk pageCoal town guy (talk) 16:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

There's no time limit - the sooner the better, but I don't see why it won't wait until you've got the reference in hand. If it's really bad, I'd suggest a quick rewrite with an edit summary and/or talkpage note explaining the issue, and that you'll follow up when you have access to the reference. Acroterion (talk) 20:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Cello pic question

Hey, I found this parts of the cello image on commons. It is however in German. I can translate easily. Do you know if I am allowed to do so/modify the part tags as it is a GNU image?????Coal town guy (talk) 20:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

You shouldn't alter the existing file, but you're certainly able to (and encouraged to) download and edit the file and upload to a new filename with your English derivative work. Acroterion (talk) 20:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Finished cello parts! Followed your adviceCoal town guy (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Image discussion at article 17 Mile Drive

A discussion is underway about images on an article you have contributed to. Please help find a consensus for the article stub at: Talk:17-Mile Drive#17 Mile Drive info box and section images replacement.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Warning and reverting changes

Why have I been given a warning, just because I asked NeilN a question? I wasn't rude, insulting or even sarcastic, I just asked a simple question and you have removed it AND given me a warning. I am truly upset, I thought Wikipedia used to have decent people who removed the real vandalism, not a simple query.Beedum (talk) 17:57, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

User Acroterion wasn't warning you about asking a question, he reverted and warned you about not editing User NeilN's comments.--Mr Fink (talk) 18:11, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

And no question was asked [12]. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:34, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually, there was, but not one I'd take seriously. Acroterion (talk) 18:35, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I didn't scroll all the way down. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

King Mafia Entertainment Deletion

Good morning. I saw that my page was deleted and would like to know why. Tyrone Warren Jr. and King Mafia Entertainment are both gaining popular momentum on the Houston Underground Rap scene. I myself am not affiliated with that organization but wanted to do a biography and introduction into this up and coming star. Is it possible to remove the deletion? Please advise, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.215.90.194 (talk) 14:38, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Please review WP:MUSICIAN, which explains the notability guidelines. There was no indication that the group met those guidelines. As long as they're "underground" and "gaining momentum" they're not going to meet the notability threshold: they need popularity on a national scale and need press in major media to satisfy the requirements for notability, references and verifiability. You might also read WP:UPANDCOMING: when we see that phrase it almost always means that the subject isn't notable. Acroterion (talk) 15:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Newton

Hi, no it was not a mistake, I noticed information that was repeating itself about Newton and safety that was repetetive and contradicts articles I read. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigfarz (talk • contribs) 20:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, just say so in the edit summary so other editors can see what you're doing. Acroterion (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Is this worth doing?

Take a look at my Sandbox. Is a list of all PDRK merchant ships worth doing? At the moment, I am sniffing around that live-map thing. Any thought on how to be more systematic? Another issue would be how to cite the map thingee website. Obviously, my link is red, here is the small table I have so far:

North Korean merchant ships

Name	Type	Length	Last observed
Chong Chon Gang	Bulk Cargo	155M	July 2013
Dai Hong Dan	Bulk Cargo	122M	2008
Kang Nam 1	General Cargo	86M	2012
Ra Nam 3	Cargo	81M	July 2013
Mangyongbong-92	Ferry	162M	July 2013
Mi Yang 8	Cargo	85M	July 2013

Paul, in Saudi (talk) 15:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I think it can be done. I don't know much about the map cites, but most of the ships are bluelinked and sourced, so I think there's value. I'd keep assembling it in your userspace and see how it goes. Acroterion (talk) 15:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I am still working on it, but check out North Korean Merchant Ships. I wanted to put the unfinished product up so the ship people can add columns to it before I get too far. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 05:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Adam Cavanagh

Hello, i was wanting to create a page under the title "Adam Cavanagh" however is see it has been you have recently deleted it. How do i recreate this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awwramans (talk • contribs) 01:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

If it's the same Adam Cavanagh who was born in 1993 and went to Marian Catholic College, no. If it's a completely different, provably notable Adam Cavanagh, you can use the sandbox in your userspace to write an article. Acroterion (talk) 01:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK

Just letting you know that I nominated an article which you started at DYK - Template:Did you know nominations/Languages of the Roman Empire. SL93 (talk) 04:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

You mean User:Cynwolfe, don't you? Acroterion (talk) 04:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Ugh. Sorry. I meant Template:Did you know nominations/The Wreckage (Ocean Park, Washington). SL93 (talk) 04:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes, that one. Thanks for nominating, I thought it was a good candidate for DYK too, but got sidetracked by Real Life and haven't had a chance to do a QPQ review or write a hook. Thanks for nominating it! Acroterion (talk) 04:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. I thought that it was an interesting topic. SL93 (talk) 04:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

About deleted page Jsky

Hi Acroterion. I was about to decline the speedy, pointing to coverage in the British press that appeared to at least indicate some significance for the person himself at the same time as you deleted the article. Me being just a baby admin and all, would you think it appropriate if I invited Jskychat to request userfication of the article? --Shirt58 (talk) 14:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

As far as I could see they didn't meet WP:MUSICIAN, and while they'd gotten some press, it was of the hometown variety, not enough for the GNG. I have no objection to restoration and perhaps a PROD, or since it appears to be autobiographical in nature, it could be userfied to Jskychat's talkpage with the usual advice about COI, and point him to the notability guidelines and ask him to provide evidence that he meets the threshold. Acroterion (talk) 14:47, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

The Wreckage (Ocean Park, Washington)

I just noticed The Wreckage (Ocean Park, Washington) at DYK. Interesting that three days after I noticed an erroneous link here, that this article was created. Chris857 (talk) 00:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

A nice coincidence. I ended up making The Wreckage into a disambig. I was looking for redlinks and the name caught my eye, so I wrote the article. Acroterion (talk) 01:05, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Australia's frontier wars Interview: What Wikimedia chapters can offer military history editors

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:26, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Saif Muddassir

Do you think we should salt Saif Muddassir temporarily to prevent recreation? Thanks. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 17:51, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I usually salt on the third re-creation, but given the age of the creator and their persistence, I might do that now. Acroterion (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Salted. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Trelora speedy deletion

I would like to contest your deletion of my contribution for the company, Trelora, "This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia." My article was qualified and featured many references that were in line with this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(summary). This company has grown tremendously in Colorado over the past year. They have been featured on most of the major news channels and in the local newspapers and journals. Those articles were referenced in my wiki. This company is important and significant because it is an entirely new real estate model and is addressing issues with the current industry.

Msgdsgn (talk) 19:00, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Is it important and significant on a national or global level, or just in Denver? Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia, and subjects are expected to have more than local significance. All of the sources you provided were in local Denver media. You should look for references outside the Denver area, and please remember that Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion. Please see WP:NOTE for more on notability. Acroterion (talk) 19:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of page

Hello, you deleted the articles Sultan-ul-Faqr , Sultan-ul-Faqr (First) Hazrat Fatima Razi Allahu Ta'ala Anha , Sultan-ul-Faqr (Second) Hazrat Khawaja Imam Hassan Basri Razi Allahu Ta'ala Anhu and Sultan-ul-Faqr (Third) Ghaus-ul-Azam Hazrat Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jillani Razi Allah Anhu . I have added the source of the matter in the article and the OTRS # please guide me what am I doing wrong. How it can be said that i am advertising some thing ? I was also not given any opportunity to rectify my mistake, if any. It is therefore requested to restore the articles , guide me of my mistake and allow me to edit accordingly. --Rizwantdf (talk) 20:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)Rizwan

As I told you on your talkpage, Wikipedia isn't a platform for religious (or any other) promotion, nor for expressions of faith or devotion. You posted large, entirely unsourced articles that are better suited for a devotional website than for Wikipedia. Please do not post inappropriate articles. Acroterion (talk) 20:43, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Sir but i could not understand how my articles were promotional these are just some biographies and of those who are well known. I have seen similar articles like Sultan Bahu which are very much of same nature, i believe. But those are not tagged or deleted. Sir please guide me i am confused. -- I created 3 articles in few hours .. is also the reason for deletion ? well i first prepared them in word and then copied from there. -- Do u mean to say that these are deleted because of being large ? -- and sir what is meant by 'unsourced' when i gave website reference below the article.

and one request that can my articles be restored so that i can amend them according to your guidance?--Rizwantdf (talk) 20:55, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Rizwan

In contrast to Sultan Bahu, your articles were exaltations of religious figures, not encyclopedia articles. They appear to be expressions of faith rather than dispassionate discussions of their lives and status, sourced to reliable and verifiable sources. If you wish, I will place the deleted text into your userspace for you to work on and reference. They are not suitable for use as articles as they stand: they are devotional essays, not neutral discussions of factual material. Acroterion (talk) 21:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Acroterion: your last update cleared my concepts to much extent. I ll surely try to come up with more informative sort of articles than rather than essays. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rizwantdf (talk • contribs) 23:20, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Creation of pages

In the above section, the editor there mentioned several pages, three deleted by you, the one labeled "Second" deleted by another admin. Now, I see Sultan-ul-Faqr (Fourth) Hazrat Shaikh Abdul Razzaq Jillani Rehmat-ul-Allah Alayh created, though created by a different editor. I tagged it for CSD, but if both editors are the same person then what do I do next? Help?

Thanks! kikichugirl ^inquire 21:47, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I've blocked the new account as an obvious sockpuppet of Rizwantdf. I wouldn't call the latest article exactly promotional, but it's not appropriate. I don't have time to deal with it right now, but I'll try to keep an eye on it and another admin will probably have a look. Acroterion (talk) 22:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, You Recently Deleted a Page on Breve Woodson I Created. She is a Real Person. Search Her Under Twitter: @RealBreve. She Even Has Her Website its on Her Twitter Bio. XFlawlessBrianx (talk) 23:51, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't doubt her reality, but there was no credible assertion that she meets Wikiepdia's notability guidelines. Acroterion (talk) 00:42, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Spotted Horse Wyoming

Good news, I have just purched a Spotted Horse, Wyoming postmark...it will look waaaay cool on the page. No worries it is decades before the 70's.Coal town guy (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Cool; I'd agree that any pre-USPS postmark would be in the public domain as a U.S. government agency's work. Acroterion (talk) 15:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

AND I might get a Red Dragon WV postmark, which is now called Blue Pennant, West Virginia. I did indeed confirm, that pre 1973, is public domain as far as any stamp in the image of a postmark. The postmark, by itself, is ok. I was most happy when the Ed, Kentucky postmark came, two letter town names are NOT commonCoal town guy (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

GOOD NEWS, I finally acquired my Spotted Horse Postmark, which I think looks very cool. I need to dig around and find a postal ref for their post office however, and of course the naming origin was after a Native American named Spotted Horse, which I also still need to find a ref for. I m awaiting my next Wyoming postmark, from another place which I will start a section on as it will need some helpCoal town guy (talk) 13:52, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Smart

This was a good call, I hope I didn't disrupt you in any way reverting those edits on your talk page! Prabash.Akmeemana 16:02, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, as I was going to be away for a little while I saw no point in making work for folks like you who've been kind enough to keep an eye on this talkpage. The disruptive user has, of course, moved on to pester others. They'll get tired eventually. Acroterion (talk) 16:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Hate speech coming, HELP

Hey, need your tact here Neo con police chief and rants againts gays. Does it belong in Wikipedia or on a location page?? My thoughts were libel, NOT cool. I deleted the section as it came across as a violent POV, good or bad, its hardly encyclopedicCoal town guy (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I personally think it's undue weight, but I have seen coverage of the guy in the national media, and the quote's accurate. I'd bring it up at WP:BLPN for opinions. Acroterion (talk) 19:00, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I wisely uninvolved myself. I am going to be non e motive, and I think its better for me as an editor and for myself in general. Iam cool with the truth. I am not cool with an accurate quote, for no reason other than to let people know that there is a place a PA that does not like gay people. I do not need an encyclopedia to let me know that.I very much respect any view, and I will continue to contribute. I am also very grateful for your feedbackCoal town guy (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

User: 97.86.226.87

Hello Acroterion, Could I please refer you to the above users latest "contribution" to Talk: 7 World Trade Center. It does seem that your warning has had no effect and the abuse is continuing. Good talking with you again. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 09:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I saw the soapboxing, and wasn't going to feed/block that particular troll unless it becomes disruptive. Tom Harrison has quietly removed the post, which is probably the best course for now. They seem to be a conspiracy theorist of the most credulous sort, which is the easiest kind to deal with. Acroterion (talk) 12:48, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help/advice. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/The Wreckage (Ocean Park, Washington)

It's strange that the reviewer used this review as a QPQ for his nomination. He never did a full review, or even approved one of the new hooks. SL93 (talk) 04:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Once one undertakes to review, follow-up is obligatory in my view. I put a considerable amount of time into reviewing New Brighton Tower, copyediting and helping the relatively new editor who wrote it, and enjoyed it - I had no idea that the structure had ever existed. Acroterion (talk) 12:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Complaint

Firstly Please remove the defamatory labels on the wikipedia articles related to the Bosnian Pyramids, namely, the 'See also' categories, and the search result label of 'hoax' in google search results.

"Hoax!?"

..As the definitive information about whether or not this is genuine is not actually available, then having these labels, not only reveals the restricted and small minded attitudes of you and your fellow contributors to this issue, but also does wikipedia a diservice as an open objective source of information about the real world. Information that is challenging current paradigms won't be snidely suppressed by this materialist worldview much longer. The grounds of your forum itself are beginning to rumble..

If my argument here isn't appropriately responded to, then i will continue to delete this flaw until i am forceably removed, which then will affirm the oppressive worldview that folk like you are scrabbling to maintain as the 'norm' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickneachtain (talk • contribs) 16:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no control over Google. The title was briefly moved to a title that included "hoax" and has since been moved to the present title; the Google cache will eventually reflect the current title. As for the "see also" topics that you removed, there is no support among professional archaeologists for the view that the hills are man-made objects. Wikipedia is obligated to reflect those views. Please do not continue to edit-war, as you have threatened: it will result in the removal of your editing privileges. Acroterion (talk) 16:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Censorship

Why not refute the facts instead of censorship? I believe you sir are the violator of NPOV, and worse, by abusing editor privileges you continue to undermine the goals of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.129.35 (talk) 03:49, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

You're the one who keeps inserting adjectives into articles to reflect your views on groups of people and individuals. Acroterion (talk) 03:51, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe we have a legitimate dispute, however I am not engaging in censorship. Please refute my contributions through reasoned arguments or at the very least present a case for why you feel your behavior, which can be easily construed as abuse of editor privileges, is appropriate. The terror tactics which editors such as yourself use with little restraint undermine Wikipedia and transforms it into a medium only for the editors, most of whom have neither the credentials nor moral authority to moderate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.129.35 (talk) 03:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

This isn't a debate: keep your opinions out of articles, or your editing privileges will be removed to prevent further disruption. And please stop attacking other editors.. Acroterion (talk) 04:02, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

As I expected. The self-righteous editor smug in the moral authority declares "this is not a debate". There is no defense or recourse for the lowly anonymous contributor who must tolerate censorship. Ironically speaking out against censorship apparently is justification for removal of editing privileges. Since I am new to Wikipedia could you instruct me on how to file a complaint for abuse of administrator privileges with the goal of seeking your dismissal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.129.35 (talk) 04:09, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:ANI is available, but it's not very welcoming for editors who seek to use Wikipedia as a soapbox for their views on politicians and religious groups. And please use the signature function: the bot has already left a message to show you how to do it. Acroterion (talk) 04:12, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I see you have already been cited for prior abuses, but I will take you at your word that this administrator elitism is pervasive. To be honest this episode has given me a lot of insight into the social structure of Wikipedia. Apparently administrators such as yourself stare at a screen looking to censor anything but the most innocuous contributions from anonymous editors. The NPOV fact that Tom Delay was found guilty of money laundering is suppressed by a very conservative editor who by his own admission supports the very controversial Confederate States of America (I am African America, and find the Battle Flag of the CSA to be very offensive), and a response from me on his Talk page (the proper forum to discuss such issues) results in the threat of a ban from another conservative editor with a history of prior abuses. If ANI is not the place to resolve our dispute maybe I should reach out to the ACLU. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.129.35 (talk) 04:34, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Glad we could clear things up. For future reference, editors who add content are expected to be able to justify its addition: the onus is on the editor making the change. For instance, you must justify why it's vital to describe DeLay as "disgraced" in an article on the Hainan incident. Also, you do realize that a substantial proportion of born-again Christians are non-white? While I personally think it's a poor idea to keep a confederate flag on one's talkpage, you're not entitled to harass that editor. You may also wish to read WP:FREESPEECH: Wikipedia isn't a forum for free speech, it's an encyclopedia. Acroterion (talk) 04:41, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Raven

I disabled VE for the article. It's generally the best thing to do when you find one that is getting mutilated that way.—Kww(talk) 22:28, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I didn't know we could disable VE! Acroterion (talk) 22:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm trying to get the word out.—Kww(talk) 22:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

IPs

Hi. You have recently blocked for one month the edit warring IP 67.84.69.128 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), but it is back now as 146.127.253.13 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). 146.127.253.14 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 146.127.253.12 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 146.127.253.44 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) appear to be the same person. Could you please have a look at their contribs and see if it is possible to block this range for a longer period? Thanks. Grandmaster 22:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I've blocked the range 146.127.253.0/26 for a month. Let me know if they pop up elsewhere. Acroterion (talk) 00:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Grandmaster 07:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Kinjockity Ranch

The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Rufus Riddlesbarger

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Anawalt, and Jenkinjones West Virginia

Hey, just a FYI, the Anawalt Elementary school disappeared via the dozer this past week. Its just over a mile from the stores at Jenkinjones, West Virginia.....The building was in far superior condition to the stores at Jenkinjones......Coal town guy (talk) 15:06, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

ArchitectsIndex.com

Dear Acroterion,

I am writing to inform you that the ArchitectsIndex.com is very similar to websites such as the RIBA and ARB. It is a register of UK Architects and therefore relevant to people looking up Architects. I do not see this as spam as it has relevant content and relevance to the term Architect within the UK.

Could you review and let me know why you have taken it upon yourself to remove it based upon advertising or spam.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Justin Brain — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArchitectsIndex (talk • contribs) 12:28, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, it's a commercial link that does not provide appropriate encyclopedic content that extends or enhances Wikipedia content, and is certainly not comparable to the RIBA. Please see WP:ELNO, and please stop promoting your website: you have a conflict of interest, and your username is in violation of Wikipedia policy. See WP:COI. Acroterion (talk) 12:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Creationism

What does the term hatted mean? I figured since there was a disagreement, it wouldn't hurt just to remove the talk page. It doesn't seem beneficial to leave it on the forum since it didn't receive it desired affect and lead to debates. Better to just remove the whole thing. Thank you. 98.224.39.88 (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

"Hatting" just means it was collapsed into the brown box that's presently visible - in other words the discussion is closed by consensus. Sorry for the wiki-jargon. Generally, one doesn't remove talkpage discussions in which (as in this case) there was a sincere discussion concerning the article content. We generally remove postings that are off-topic or amount to soapboxing, which wasn't the case here, so it's OK as is. Acroterion (talk) 20:11, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

HELP

Theedits here Allegheny County PA have caused all of the Unincorporated communities and footnotes to not display in the template of the county itself. I cant see why not, could you look and see why? OR could you show me how to fix it?? I have also alerted Nyytend, as this appears to be around the time period of Toney the tiger adding a collapse functionCoal town guy (talk) 13:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

It appears to have been this edit [13] that broke it, but I don't see why it did that. Acroterion (talk) 13:49, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I saved to an earlier version by Nyttend, whoever came in after did so and has not done alot afterwards. I was (gasp) bold. Otherwise, the template was cxrippled and many articles and footnotes were not displayedCoal town guy (talk) 13:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For adding the HABS links to MD & DE NRHP listings Thanks! Pubdog (talk) 00:05, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll keep going as my attention span and time permit. Keep up the good work on VA. Acroterion (talk) 00:13, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

SaveMLAK

Hah, I think they were working on this at wikimania? ;-) http://new.livestream.com/socreclive/wikimania

--Kim Bruning (talk) 01:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Maybe, and a good cause, but no sign that it's notable yet. Maybe we can get more than a journal reference for it?. Acroterion (talk) 01:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

strict interpretation of CSD:A7 does not require notability.

That said "Speedy deletion is intended to reduce the time spent on deletion discussions for pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion."

Given what you now know; 3 guesses how long an AFD on this would last? (It'd be a WP:SNOW keep from everyone in that room who actually has wifi ;-))

--Kim Bruning (talk) 02:06, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

(ec) ... journal references tend to be fairly solidly notable, if you ask me, but hey, people are still working on the article eh? A bit of Common sense never went awry. :-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 02:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

At least it provided an opportunity to discuss the assertion of notability concept. We probably don't need to digress into the mechanics of AfD, snow keeps, !votes or any other practical demonstrations of that kind in that particular symposium. The version I saw had no cites at all, an unfortunate bit of timing. Acroterion (talk) 02:17, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Definitely a bit of a brown paper bag moment, yes :-P . As a pro-tip, at the very least deal with oldest CSDs first. CSDing an article a few minutes after creation is not a good idea. It really hurts the wiki. --Kim Bruning (talk) 02:21, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

All true, it rarely hurts to let them age a while and see what develops. Acroterion (talk) 02:25, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

It may not survive AfD, but I do want to talk with the SaveMLAK guy and see what news references he's collected. Stu ^(aeiou) 02:47, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Which would be insane. Tackle him at coffeebreak? :-P --Kim Bruning (talk) 02:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

@Stu: Agreed, journal references are reliable, but don't necessarily indicate notability as well as mentions in more general media. I was looking for general-media references myself, but I suspect they'd be in Japanese? The top ghit is in Japanese. Sorry to have rained on the demonstration, it's a lot like live TV: anything can happen, and probably will. Acroterion (talk) 02:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

@Kim: I would think there ought to be some Japanese media references, and if the saveMLAK guy's there at hand, who better? We get into the English-is-a-preferred source thing, but I've never liked that as itfeeds systemic bias. Acroterion (talk) 02:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Ha, so the SaveMLAK dude is at the press conference right now. :-P So RS in the making O:-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 03:00, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Calvary Mountain View Church

You deleted a entry I made. I am trying to get Calvary Mountain View Church into Wikipedia. Please let me know how we can get this page created.

Here is our website: http://www.calvarymv.com

Sam Gonzales — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.169.89.141 (talk) 06:57, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There was no indication that the church was notable by Wikipedia guidelines,which makes it subject to speedy deletion. To establish notability, one must provide references to show that the organization has received significant non-trivial notice in major independent media, preferably of a lasting nature and from publications outside the local community. Your website isn't evidence of notability - every church has a website, but very few are notable. Wikipedia isn't a directory of organizations or businesses. Acroterion (talk) 13:28, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

What would you do? Wyoming

Hey there, In my hobby, I have just purchased a postmark from Hells Half Acre Wyoming (EARLY DATE no worries). Yes, its in Natrona County BUT, the current article on it is about the range see here It turns out, Hells Half Acre was a local, with a post office, that was open at randon 2 to 4 year intervals, which tells me, OH GOODY, it was remote. AFTER I receive my postmark, I wanted to know how to start the article? WHY? Because as we have the range article, should I edit that(which would need your help by the way to move it) OR should I go ahead and populate the Natrona County Template with an unincoporated community named Hells Half Acre? GNIS has the data. As usual, I will follow your advice to the letter as I do not wish to up set the apple cart of someone elses effortCoal town guy (talk) 14:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd create Hells Half Acre, Wyoming, following the format for towns. In my work on remote western places, I see a lot of intermittent post offices. If the town/post office was close to the natural feature, then it could be mentioned in the town's article. Acroterion (talk) 20:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I will follow that to the letter, many thanks!Coal town guy (talk) 01:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Hells Half Acre, Wyoming is a reality my friend!Coal town guy (talk) 23:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sneha Srivastava

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

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

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Singularity42 (talk) 13:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about the above. I completely missed that it was a move from user space - otherwise I would have moved it back. Thanks for catching that (which also explains why you were given the above template from Twinkle). 13:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

It took me a couple of minute to figure out too. Sneha is apparently very young, and had way too much information on their userpage, so we should be patient. Acroterion (talk) 13:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Bronx Times

regarding The Bronx Times

What else you wnat me to remove? There's virtually nothing left?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milosheff (talk • contribs) 14:33, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It doesn't matter how little there is so long as what is there is notable and verifiably so. We may not ever use Wikipedia to puff up and plump up the things we write about. Please look at other articles and note the very flat nature of the writing and the total lack of marketing speak. Fiddle Faddle 14:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

take a look: The Bronx Times — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milosheff (talk • contribs) 14:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Acroterion, i wonder if you would pop over and give some additional input on MS's talk page. I'm not necessarily explaining this as well as I ought today. Fiddle Faddle 15:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I left a long discussion on their talkpage. This appears to be a case of someone who initially mistook the purpose and editing environment of Wikipedia, and who is gradually adjusting. A little encouragement and generall patience may resolve things: I'm having trouble finding good third-party sources though, and there appears to be a dispute (or at least a degree of confusion) over the name with another publication. Acroterion (talk) 17:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you. I've dome my best to help, but I'm not firing on all cylinders today. I have a feeling that TBT is not yet sufficiently notable. I hope I'm wrong, not only because I like articles, but because Murdoch owns the other one!

One thing also struck me as a by-product of the discussion. If you look at the edit hostry of the editor's talk page, it looks as if the Visual Editor might be acting weirldly, It states it has edited sections but the edits are placed in the section above. I don;t use the thing so can;t judge. Fiddle Faddle 17:13, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

they actually got it wrong - our name is 3 words "The Bronx Times" and has nothing to do with the inferior printed and therefore irrelevant to real-time events papers called Bronx Times and Bronx Times Reporter. I publish news since 2005 and nobody has written about my edition other than those jokers who did not even get our name right... regardless, none of that does us any justice. You can see archive.org and see snapshots of our site Bronx.com since throughout the years..., which reflect the obvious thruth that we exist for many years now and have published thousands of articles... Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milosheff (talk • contribs) 17:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

pray tell, did anyone back-up Giordano Bruno when he stated the Earth revolved around the Sun? Please see Archive.org and type Bronx.com in the Wayback Machine, which will establish that Bronx.com exists in its current form and shape for many years now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milosheff (talk • contribs) 17:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't doubt you, it's apparent from my checks for sourcing, the website's been around as you say. We do still need explicit references that don't require searches or research to back up the content, though, that's a fundamental policy. See WP:V and WP:RS. From what Timtrent says, you may be having some trouble with Wikipedia's bug-ridden Virtual Editor WYSIWYG (sort of ) editing interface experiment. You might want to try the plain text editor, which, though a challenge in itself, usually won't scramble content. I've left some more comments on your talkpage about independent sources, which are the heart of the issue for Wikipedia. We do want to help you, if it's at all possible, and I appreciate that you've been willing to take advice and to work with us. Acroterion (talk) 17:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

please see websiteoutlook.com and type their website bxtimes.com, see how many views they get a day... then type bronx.com and see how many times I am viewed a day... More than them... If they are notable at a count lesser than mine, why should The Bronx Times not be noteable as well?

Bronx.com to The Bronx Times is like Boston.com is to the Boston Globe. we took the local media by storm and beat them and proved to be more relevant and more read than they are. The numbers I refer to confirm that.

I do not know what else to say or do to be recognised as a "noteable" media on your pages, especially, given that an inferior media outlet enjoys a spot with you...

My readership makes me more noteable than Bronx Times and Bronx Times Reporter, and if A > B and B > C, then A > C, where B is them, A is my paper and C is your minimum requirement for "notability".

Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milosheff (talk • contribs) 18:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

So, show us, using published sources. If you "took the local media by storm", surely somebody noticed that and wrote about it? Wikipedia is a tertiary source: it uses published secondary sources to verify content and notability. Your comparison is original research using primary sources, which is discouraged. You can't use A>B and B>C comparisons, you need to reference somebody else who thought it was important enough to write about. Wikipedia doesn't publish original research, it relies on scholarly published sources and major independent media. You have to use published sources. Since your content is published in the web, see WP:WEB for a detailed discussion of notability for Internet content. If you can show notability using the criteria on that page, please do.

• Read WP:WEB, as well as WP:NOTE, WP:V and WP:RS. They explain in considerable detail what Wikipedia's policies, purpose and content have to do with your article. Those are the policies that I'm interpreting for you: they are the source of everything that's been said.

Acroterion (talk) 19:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I've done a little work in MS's sandbox. There is one useful external reference I've managed to find, but I can;t yet force it to the notable side of the line. All the work on the paper has been to create useful articles, not to gain coverage in other media outlets. It's quite a challenge that an active site that provides news to a well known catchment area has not been picked up as a new item in ots own right. Fiddle Faddle 20:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm surprised myself: most media love to talk about their competition, and I really thought that it would be easyl to find enough references to clinch notability. Even if it's considered as an exercise in self-publishing, it seems like it's a serious venture: it sells ads, and has some reach. Acroterion (talk) 21:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll chip away at the problem over the next few days. It annoys me when something looks as if it really should have an article fails to get over the bar. Fiddle Faddle 21:11, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Inspiration struck. I thought about Alexa. I haven't a clue whether it is an RS or not, but an Alexa ranking at least would indicate something. I found this, which is, unfortunately, not excellent news for bronx.com. I have a site that is higher in the rankings whose traffic according to Google Analytics is circa 2,000 visits per day. However, Bronx.com has a local reach whereas mine has a global one, at least in terms of intended site audience. Then I tried Aboutus.org which is absolutely not RS, but that was no real further help, though it does list many other domains thatBronx.com's owner has interests in or are cohosted in the same ip address/range.

I looked at QueensCourier.com. I have some experience in the creation of news aggregation sites, and this looks very similar, albeit with a different article mix, to bronx.com. They both remind me of a paper.li feed aggregation style piece of output. An example is one of mine, created at almost no effort or investment of time. One that took me a lot of initial effort to set up is http://finance-mentor.com/ but now takes me zero effort (and is an example of a poor site with low traffic, by the way, unlike bronx.com which is a well visited site).

I cant reach any conclusion about bronx.com's notability or otherwise at present. I think we may be at the point of 'not yet notable', and leave it at that. I don't think the site owner is trying to use WP to puff up his wares, I think his work here is genuine. He is working well within our hopes for avoidance of COI now he understand what is needed. I think the notability now depends upon his abolity to market his wares such that RS pic them up and they this earn their place here. I'd be grateful for your thoughts. Fiddle Faddle 07:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I tend to agree, it's a case of "not yet." I think they initially were confused about Wikipedia's editorial standards - I see a lot of social media promotion, and the initial submissions were along the same lines. They're making an effort to work within the rules, and deserve credit for that. Unfortunately, the site needs some coverage in the press before Wikipedia can do much with it. Acroterion (talk) 07:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

The Ambivalent Love Addict

Greetings. You deleted my article and your reason was "copyright infringement." How can I prove to you that I own the copyright because I created the term in 2004. I was ruminating about emotional anorexia and wanted an easy-to-understand term to describe people who are enthusiastic one moment about love and frightened the next. Once I created the term, I documented it by writing articles and letting those articles go out over the internet. I also gave permission for Love Addicts Anonymous to use the term and its accompanying meaning which is written on their website and my website brightertomorrow.net. If you google ambivalent love addict susan Peabody, you will see that most people associat the term with me and my work. I also wrote a great deal about it in my new book. So if you don't want the term and the article I can accept that, but the copyright infringement label does not fit. It only seems fair for the person who created the term to get credit for it. Thank you. susanpeabody@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.241.116 (talk) 23:11, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

It was a direct copy from www.fivesistersranch.com/383, which is clearly noted "Five Sisters Ranch, Inc., Copyright 2013" It can't be used on Wikipedia unless there is permission for use from the copyright holder, and whether you've released it freely or not, that website has it under copyright. Wikipedia is a free-content encyclopedia whose text must be freely redistributable, so copyright infringements (or more precisely, anything that's not obviously freely redistributable) are immediately removed. There are instructions for how to provide permission in the deletion notice on your user talkpage (on your account, not the IP). I will, however, note that the content was a written as a personal reflection and not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. It would be much better to completely rewrite it in a form and tone suitable for an encyclopedia and to reference it to third-party sources, using a more academic style. There is no bar to re-creation of an article that avoids the use of the copied text. Please remember to strictly avoid promotion, and please keep in mind that Wikipedia will require third-party references to establish that the term you've coined is in broad use: notability must be established by reference to other people and media outlets that have used the term and credited you with its origin. See WP:NOTE, WP:RS, WP:V and WP:COI for more advice. and the relevant policies. Acroterion (talk) 23:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Please see in my sandbox and publish if good as The Bronx Times as originally titled. Thnks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milosheff (talk • contribs) 19:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I own the copyright to this article. I allowed it to be published on Five Sisters Ranch to help brand the name. I do not know why you think they own the copyright. The author owns the copyright. I will talk to them about taking down the article if it is standing in my way. If you search The Ambivalent Love Addict Susan Peabody you will find many articles that credit me as the first one to use the term because I created it. It first appeared on the internet when I allowed Love Addicts Anonymous to use it. But their site clearly states I wrote all of their literature. Are you telling me that because my article has been plagiarized I cannot get it posted. I edited the article and took out all references to myself even though I have seen other sites that state the history of a term. See the Wikipedia Love Addiction site. I am cited there as being the author of the term. What do I do next. I am the author of this term and this concept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanpeabody490 (talk • contribs)

If you take the time to read the article you will see that there is no copyright going to Five Sisters Ranch. They asked me to write an article for them. I did. The first line of the article mentions my name as the author. The body of the article states the history of the term which clearly spells out myself as being the author. you are making assumptions which are painful to me. It is as if you don't trust me. Read the 5 Sisters article and you will see they are not the copyright holder I am. When I loaned them the article I made it clear I wanted to keep the copyright and they agreed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanpeabody490 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

It's not a question of trust (in part it is, because we can't easily tell who has the rights they claim to have, but that's to one side), it's that Wikipedia is a free-content encyclopedia, freely redistributable, and if content is copied into it from a site that asserts copyright, Wikipedia can't accept it unless the website(s) that claim the copyright grant permission, either through an email from that domain, or by changing their terms of licensing on the web page. Additionally, we've found that copying material into Wikipedia tends to breach the formal, academic tone that is appropriate for an encyclopedia. It's almost always better to rewrite the content using the source as a reference rather than a literal source of words, to fit Wikipedia's manual of style, and to avoid any appearance of promotion. In this particular case the content was written as a personal reflection or essay and can't be used in that form, whether it's free content or not. Therefore, I suggest that the thing to do next is to write a draft in your account's userspace (User:Susanpeabody490/sandbox) that uses third-party references to establish the term's notability in accordance with Wikipedia requirements. You should rely as much as possible on what other people have said, rather than self-sourcing. Take a look at WP:YFA for more advice, and please review WP:COI for advice on editing with a conflict of interest. I'll be glad to answer any questions. Acroterion (talk) 18:51, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I work at Five Sisters Ranch. They have a blog. I asked them if I could post my article The Ambivalent Love Addict. They agreed. I made it very clear that I would hold the copyright. Someone must have just glanced at the Five Sisters blog because it is very clear that do not own the copyright to the article. On the fist line it says Susan Peabody indicating I am the author. 5 sisters may own the coptyright to the website, but not my blog article. If you want to ask them please send an email to Lori Glass. She is waiting for your call.

I have submitted three different forms of the aticle and you continue to feel uncomfortable that there are no citations because I am the creator of the term as well as the author of the article. If you prefer I can have someone else submit the article and cite me as the creator of the term and author of the artcle. This seems odd, but you are in charge. Would this be better.

DYK for The Wreckage (Ocean Park, Washington)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:18, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

50,000 NRHP sites illustrated

		WikiProject National Register of Historic Places Award
		For helping WP:NRHP to illustrate 50,000 historic sites. Keep up the good work! Smallbones(smalltalk) 14:27, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Mention

You are being talked about here User talk:Jimbo Wales#Every clever man understands this fact. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 00:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

A banned user/troll who shows up every six months or so to promote a Russian site that hosts pirated Beatles songs, or tries to get WP to host such material, claiming that the Beatles have released their work under some form of heritage program! I guess I need to pursue the edit filter again. The website they used to promote has been globally blacklisted. Acroterion (talk) 00:16, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Great, I didnt feel it appropriate to redact another users talk page so glad you, better informed, were able to. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 00:19, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I understand, particularly on Jimbo's page, where folks should be able to speak freely. However, they've trolled Jimmy before, and he ignores them or blanks it. Thanks for letting me know. These episodes usually go on for a couple of weeks at a time, and they tend to target whoever reverts or blocks them. User:Crazy1980 is the original sockmaster, and Russian IPs are diagnostic. I don't know why they think they're fooling anyone. Acroterion (talk) 00:26, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Talk page vandalism I even keep vandalism, so I rolled you back. But I don't want to be unappreciative. Thanks a lot. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:39, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Understood, no problem. I think it's Brucejenner or someone similar. Acroterion (talk) 03:40, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Some edit summaries including the refusal of the restoration of ERT World in some areas.

I don't like the economic crisis continuing in Greece, Bulgaria and most or parts of Spain. Alter Channel, ERT (ET1, NET, Channel 3) and ERT World briefly shut down in Greece and I do not liked the situation that was going on there. In my community, ERT World has not been restored over 2 months that ERT was briefly shut down, the reason that I support the occupation of France as a punishment of the closure of Alter and ERT World (uncertain of other channels close somewhere in Southern Europe). Some of the abandoned houses in the South of France (around the border areas), needs to be ruined and demolished as a punishment for the shutdown of Alter and ERT channels, some contain archival materials and are to be transported west. It was crazy of what was going on in Greece. Everybody supports that ERT World needs to be restored. Some people got furious over the shut down of most-watched channels in Greece, the crisis cannot continue. ERT World in my area has not been restored. My tensions had mounted against Troika and France. I support the occupation of France due to that ERT World has not been restored in my area. Enough is enough, lack of ERT World cannot go on, the worst of the terrible times in Greece, the closure part hit hard and it cannot continue and it cannot get harder and the fury is even felt in parts of the Western Hemisphere, the most annoying to Greece and several outsiders. ERT World did not return in some areas, the reason that I support the occupation of France is due the closure of most-watched channels in Greece and mostly ERT World did not restore in some parts of the world over 2 months after its closure.

On the other part, I support the city of Flensburg to be a part of Denmark. A referendum for the Flensburg area is needed whatever is the city to stay in Germany or join Denmark. I also support small parts of western England to be a part of Wales.

Figure of finding an earth-like planet, one that is uninhabited and there one land will have some place names named after early Sonic the Hedgehog level names. An abundant number of farms, orchards and groves will be created since only a few places here have new farms and groves to be created, communities like Marble Garden, Emerald Hill, Angel Hill, Mushroom Hill and Green Cove are to be created. Outer space colonization is favorable and is needed, uncertainly more needed. One of the places including "New Greece" has to be created on one of the uninhabited planets, "New Agrinio", "New Kozani", "New Cyrene", "New Agathople/Agathopolis" can be created.

Maybe I will figure a place somewhere on Wikipedia (even in the section at the Creative Commons website) where I can write the ideas and proposals. I do not have the ability to create a website and I know how I can request permission to create one website, some ideas I can create there (not a third party kind, around the semi level).

I think you can help some of the articles to be properly translated into Greek on your free time. Da Desirer 2 (talk) 19:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm chiefly concerned with your edit summaries, which aren't appropriate, as I noted. I don't know of any place in the Wikimedia websites where your idea can be hosted, but it's not hard to set up your own wiki, or to have something on Wikia, which may be what you're thinking of. Sadly, I have no proficiency in Greek, so I can't do much to help the cause there. Acroterion (talk) 19:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

On a similar note sort of...I want Wyoming to become a distinct nation and renamed MONGOland and want to be named as the first Emperor....can you help me?--MONGO 11:32, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

enquiry

hi,

I am user wwwoiopetohk, I am surprised I am blocked, I have no intention to publish copyrights content. When I tried to publish the "Lacquer Thread Sculpture" wiki page, I already tried to rephrase to words of the content I found on other website to avoid copyrights violation. But as first half of "Lacquer Thread Sculpture" is mostly ancient chinese history, it is really difficult to rephrase, and most words are simply translation of the wiki page of -- http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/漆线雕 , which is the chinese version of "Lacquer Thread Sculpture".

As this is my first wiki page, I hope you can give me a second chance, I will be more careful about copyrights violation.

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.203.71.130 (talk) 10:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

While it may be a translation of the Chinese article, it's also a direct copy of www.xiamenguide.com/viewStyle1.jsp?r=12&n=culture&cid=180, which is clearly marked as copyrighted. It's so much of a copy that the punctuation mistakes are the same. I'm willing to unblock your account provided you promise not to copy material into Wikipedia. The Xiamenguide article might be used as a reference, but it can't be used as a text source. You'll need to write an article in your own words on the subject. Cross-wiki translations are generally a problem unless the original article is well-sourced and free of its own copyright problems. Acroterion (talk) 03:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Bronx Times

Hello, may i please ask that the article about The Bronx Times we worked on is also added under this Category: Newspapers published in the Bronx with URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Newspapers_published_in_the_Bronx

Thanks, Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milosheff (talk • contribs) 14:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

All of the papers in that category appear to be, you know, newspapers, emphasis on the "paper." I'm not convinced the category is appropriate here. Acroterion (talk) 03:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Detroit Annie, Undergroung Media Personality concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Detroit Annie, Undergroung Media Personality, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 16:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden Op-ed: Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Something cool about Jenkinjones WV

I recall one of my first edits about Jenkinjones and you and I talking about that. I found something cool and was able to properly update this. I did not know that the actual man, Jenkin B Jones founded the Pocahontas Fuel CompanyCoal town guy (talk) 12:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

many thanks

hi,

I am user wwwoiopeothk. Please unblock my account , I promise not to copy material into Wikipedia.

thanks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.203.71.130 (talk) 11:20, 23 August 2013 (UTC) 

Thank You, But...

Thank you for responding, but i don't think you understand what I'm saying. you can contact the website's creator at therotundanews@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencer Humphrey (talk • contribs) 04:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I understand exactly what you're saying, and if we have to contact the owner of the website to find out about it, it doesn't yet meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I appreciate that you've moderated your tone in communicating with other editors, which was my chief concern: thank you. I also see that you've posted an attack on your userpage. I've deleted it. Any recurrence will be met with a block. Acroterion (talk) 04:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

rudeness

I am sorry that you feel i am being unruly. I am just standing up for what i believe is right. I would not be saying these thongs if i did not 10% believe that what Gogo Dodo did was inappropriate. by the way, how rude to delete my user page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencer Humphrey (talk • contribs) 04:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a collaborative project. It isn't a means of promotion, and Gogo Dodo's actions follow policy, as did my removal of your offensive userpage. Please reconsider your approach to interacting with other editors: you.ve been warned by three administrators. Acroterion (talk) 04:22, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You Don't Get It

you said you understand what i was saying but obviously i must be more simple with you. i am not using wikipedia to promote the website, i am using it as a tool to help others become more familiar with the site, by stating in my article what the website has achieved during its short tenure, as well as its history and roots, all of which meets wikipedia guidelines. So i stand by my claim that he/she was wrong in deleting my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencer Humphrey (talk • contribs) 04:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

yeah

i take your silence as you saying that I'm right, but you're too afraid to admit it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencer Humphrey (talk • contribs) 04:35, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You should have taken my silence as being asleep, otherwise I'd have blocked you myself. Acroterion (talk) 11:31, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia administrators are not permitted to sleep...you are supposed to be available 24/7/365...that's why you get paid the big bucks and have all the benefits buddy!--MONGO 11:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Architects with projects due today who want to make a buck because the wiki-gold is strangely late aren't permitted to sleep, but I found a few minutes for the very polite SH while I uploaded my work back to the server. I am credibly informed that I don't sleep silently. Acroterion (talk) 11:44, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

is

Dare I say Gogo Dodo is a wikihound? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spencer Humphrey (talk • contribs) 04:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

If you have to ask how far you can bend the rules on personal attacks, you shouldn't be editing here, and now you're blocked as a result. Acroterion (talk) 11:30, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Spotted Horse Wyoming

Could you please with sugar on top take a look at Spotted Horse, Wyoming. There is an editor removing a pre 1977 postmark and stamp, saying its a copyright violation. I have provided the US LAW link as well as the Wiki Commons links. They still say, oh, its a copyright violation. It is not. ANY help you could provide would be greatCoal town guy (talk) 21:00, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

The issue is the stamp and not the postmark, and Leahtwosaints may well be right, it's worth asking (nicely) where the determination comes from. Acroterion (talk) 22:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I took another look to be certain. IF the image is of an artwork, or of a living person, or artist, or a reproduction of an artwork from a known artist, I would indeed be violating a copyright. However, in this specifoc instance, no, I am not. I took umbrage, and I will apologize to her personally. I was reacting to another edit where the editor told me, they had no obligation to tell me why.......THAT and another little nugget of joy. It seems that a certain editor, who of course is shocked by others being rude to them, believes that remote houses in the middle of nowhere are "stupid" at least in the context of NRHP...I noted that I was resentful of the comment and walked away. I know these are small places, I am under no illusion, but they are notable.Coal town guy (talk) 22:26, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

User: 12.104.231.125

I was wondering if you can revoke talk page access to this user. 68.119.73.36 (talk) 03:38, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment on edit summary

I have no problem at all with the removal of the tag, but I don't appreciate my edit being labeled as a drive-by tagging. I was very specific and explained in more than one place why I added the tag. --Onorem (talk) 20:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that, no criticism of you was intended: replied on your talkpage at greater length. Acroterion (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fort Fred Steele State Historic Site, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Durant (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) 10:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Master MUZZA

I think that's a press release, so not copyvio although not acceptable either.[14] Dougweller (talk) 14:34, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Thoughts

I asked the author (User:Aude) of the FA on 7 World Trade Center if she knows from the research what the details on floors/stories are for that building [15]...I am hoping she will chime in and figure it out but I know she edits sporadically anymore. Thoughts here, there or at the article discussion page?--MONGO 14:36, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

It will be hard to get a clear answer, as the number of floors in any building depends on who's doing the counting and to what purpose. Some floors may be unoccupied/unoccupiable, being given over the HVAC equipment or elevator equipment, some may be intermediate mezzanines or partial levels, offset levels, or basement levels. Some counts might only include leasable levels, others occupiable levels, others every possible level. I'm working on an existing building right now that has four occupied levels, but for building code purposes it's three stories with a basement. It also has a large mechanical penthouse level, and the elevator rooms are offset four feet above that. It gets much worse with buildings that have sub-basements, receiving docks, intermediate ventilation levels, multiple level HVAC penthouses, and the like, as well as when they leave out a 13th floor or have several lobby levels. Acroterion (talk) 16:14, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Interesting...that makes sense. The building where I work is 15 stories, but level one is two stories high and the structure has a penthouse and basement as well...6 elevators go from 1-15 and 4 go from B to 15.--MONGO 20:31, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rulo Bridge may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• [{Category:Historic American Engineering Record in Nebraska]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:57, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joseph Reynolds House may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• [{Category:Historic American Buildings Survey in Rhode Island]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:34, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Redwood Library and Athenaeum may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• [{Category:Historic American Buildings Survey in Rhode Island]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Charles H. Baldwin House 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:

• House, Bellevue Avenue, Newport, Newport, RI] at the [[Historic American Buildings Survey]] HABS)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:35, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Joseph Smith House may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• [{Category:Historic American Buildings Survey in Rhode Island]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Babcock-Smith House may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• [{Category:Historic American Buildings Survey in Rhode Island]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Edward Dexter House may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• [{Category:Historic American Buildings Survey in Rhode Island]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:03, 2 September 2013 (UTC)