User talk:Flat Out/Archives/2014/March

A reply

Thank you for your comment. I try to always sign my edits using the four tildes and my editor name. If I haven't I will be more careful in the future. Once again, thank you. Alambre (talk) 04:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Alambre

This week's article for improvement (week 10, 2014)

Because it is so vast, there are a large number of different cultures involved in Prehistoric Asia Hello, Flat Out. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Prehistoric Asia Previous selections: Human skeleton • Reconnaissance satellite Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 03:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC) •

POV? I'll give you POV!

Seriously, someone who claims that Tony Abbott is the Antichrist should not criticize someone else who likewise applies a bit of humour to a serious subject. China's excellent achievements in wind power (FIVE TIMES the previous world's largest). I guess you have a few options: (1) Remove your "antichrist" sticker and treat Tony Abbott seriously, (2) stop playing around in areas where you unable to demonstrate competence or experience, or (3) provide notable sources demonstrating that Tony Abbott is indeed the antichrist.--203.206.186.165 (talk) 00:58, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

You seem to be laboring under a misapprehension regarding the differences between a user page where personal touches and humour are allowed, and a wikipedia article where POV and humour are not permitted. Lists do not require commentary, but if you are going to add some at least use a source. Lastly, if you have an issue don't sign out to make it. Flat Out let's discuss it 01:04, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

You seem to be labouring under a misapprehension that I intentionally logged out to make a comment. I made that post by following a link on my iPad, and I did not notice that I was not logged in. For you to attribute intent is particularly disappointing, and simply more evidence of your bias. When I added the Gansu Wind Farm entry I provided THREE sources. Lastly, the humor I expressed was NOT within the text of a wikipedia article, it was only in the edit summary. Back off.--Graham Proud (talk) 01:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I have never edited Gansu Wind Farm so I have no idea what you are talking about. Please refrain from accusations of bad faith. The edit I did make was to delete commentary in the lead section of a List article. Usually the lead just describes what the list is and that's all. If you believe the edit I made was wrong then revert it and move on.Flat Out let's discuss it 02:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Peter Ludlow and WP:BLP

Under the circumstances, it seems to me very ironic, but I feel I have to warn you about breaches of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons that you have made, and that I intend to revert, in connection with Peter Ludlow. That policy says: "A person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty and convicted by a court of law. For people who are relatively unknown, editors must give serious consideration to not including material in any article suggesting that the person has committed, or is accused of committing, a crime unless a conviction is secured." (My emphasis.) Please note that it is not sufficient that someone has made allegations in a lawsuit, and quite rightly so, since in most countries anyone can start a law suit and allege anything they like, with or without good evidence. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks JamesBWatson and I understand as this is where I started out with my first revert on this BLP. I have to admit to being worn down by the I.Ps alleging a whitewash that I too focused on achieving consensus and ended up making the mistake. Since the IPs haven't bothered entering into discussion I'm done with this particular aspect of the article. Perhaps changing the protection to having all edits reviewed would be a good option for moving forward. Cheers Flat Out let's discuss it 00:40, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I've removed the full protection, and set "pending changes". For the moment I have set it to run for three months, but that could be reviewed. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:07, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Since I removed the protection, virtually all of the editing has been BLP violations by new or unregistered editors, followed by reversions of those BLP violations. While pending changes prevents un-logged-in readers from seeing the problematic content, it does not prevent that content from being published to anyone who bothers to create an account, nor does it prevent editors from having to waste time reverting the unacceptable edits. I have therefore semi-protected the article. I will avoid fully protecting it again if at all possible, as locking out all editors except administrators is contrary to the whole spirit of Wikipedia. I did that before purely as a temporary measure in the hope it would encourage editors to join discussion, but, as you know, that did not happen, and I see no useful purpose that would be served by fully protecting it again. At present there are two single-purpose accounts that seem to exist specifically to post the unacceptable content to that article. So far, neither of them is autoconfirmed, so semi-protection will prevent them from editing the article. If and when any autoconfirmed accounts start violating the BLP policy on the article, I will be willing to block the them, provided they have first been given adequate explanation of why their edits are unacceptable, and given a chance to stop. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks JamesBWatson. There was one reviewer who accepted a BLP violation and I have written to them asking them, to exercise caution. Flat Out let's discuss it 22:43, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014

• Traffic report: Brinksmen on the brink

• Discussion report: Four paragraph lead, indefinitely blocked IPs, editor reviews broken?

• News and notes: Wikipedia Library finding success in matching contributors with sources

• Featured content: Full speed ahead for the WikiCup

• WikiProject report: Article Rescue Squadron

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:49, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Μαστιγα

Hello Flat Out, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Μαστιγα, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: " This does not include poor writing, vandalism and hoaxes (G3), material not in English, badly translated material, etc. See CSD G1.". You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 08:47, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Shirt58, the translated text is a jumble of terms and unrelated definitions and therefore I believe it meets CSD G1. Flat Out let's discuss it 08:53, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Undone Edit

I added an edit which is a link for huffman code from my gist account. If it is a type of advertisement then I am really sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minhaskamal (talk • contribs) 05:05, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

George Pell

Do you mind if I get back to you tomorrow on this? I think that there was some dispute between the two sides to the litigation, one side (Pell) claiming exoneration, the other claiming what I think the lawyer in question called "vindication". The Herald's religion correspondent made some comment or other that was less than fully supportive of Pell's view, then the Herald later (possibly years later) disowned him. I'll have to check. PiCo (talk) 09:46, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem, Flat Out let's discuss it 09:48, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

My word, you do attract a lot of comments on your talk page!

I've had a look at that article again, and as a result I've amended it so that it quite closely tracks the SMH article of 15 October 2002.

The material you want to include has me puzzled. It's from this article of 13 March 2013. It's apologising for an article published on 11 March 2013 - not for the article on 15 October 2002. I don't have the 2013 article, but it seems it relates to the 2002 affair - yet it doesn't specifically mention the Herald's article. Instead it says that the Age in 2002 published an article that called Southwell's report "a just result", that the Herlad agrees, and that it said in an article on 14 June 2010 that the report cleared the Cardinal. The 2002 story doesn't say it didn't - it says it fell short of complete exoneration, which is a different matter. My guess is that the Herald has been threatened with legal action and so has published this "clarification", but I do note that it doesn't actually disown the 2002 article. It might be interesting to contact Kelly Bourke and ask. PiCo (talk) 05:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

New page/new editor patrolling does result in a lot of talk page action! Yes I agree its a retraction based on legal action, and also agree the status of the 2002 article is unclear. You know what you are doing so I will leave it in your capable hands :) Flat Out let's discuss it 06:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't mind having you checking on me :). Well, I've tried to find the 11 March 2013 article, and I can't - maybe it's been withdrawn. What I have found is that it was written by Barney Zwartz, and seems to have said quite blatantly that "the judge never cleared Pell". No wonder Pell was annoyed. Anyway,that seems to be the subject of the apology published on 30 March 3013, not the article of 2002. [http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=14792 Interesting piece here at On Line Opinion. PiCo (talk) 06:24, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Leading practice discovery ‎

I left a few more comments on this article,'s talk page. If Leading practice discovery‎ survives PROD in its current state please let me know if it goes to AfD. I won't consider it canvassing. Too bad we don't have a speedy for incomprehensible Business Speak. Meters (talk) 00:51, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Photo of Prmeier Denis Napthine

Thank you for your message and please understand that I am not trying to operate outside the rules of Wikipedia – our office needs your assistance to have the photo of the Premier replaced, as obviously the exiting one is very old. And I am not trying to edit the article in any way, I am just providing a current image of the Premier which I believe is in Wikipedia’s interest as well. Up on the initial rejection of the photo, I sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org from my official government email account confirming the photo was released under the CC-BY-SA licence with the permission of the copyright holder, which is the Office of the Premier. That email was sent on 28 February and I haven't been given a response yet. In 2011, I was able to successfully replace the old photo of then Premier Ted Baillieu and conflict of interest was never an issue. The office of the Premier is very keen and ready to provide any info and document to comply with your requirements and please let me know what I can do to achieve that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.12.194.65 (talk) 02:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

203.12.194.65 I have already answered this, until you have a response to your email you cant use the image. Believe it or not, the article does not exist to promote Denis Napthine and paid editors are frowned upon here. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:15, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi

hi?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeeJay TrueCopy (talk • contribs) 01:59, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi PeeJay TrueCopy, can I help you with something? Flat Out let's discuss it 02:12, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes. I am trying to publish a personal article but wiki always included it to contest of deletion. how can i avoid that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeeJay TrueCopy (talk • contribs) 05:11, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Photo of the Premier of Victoria Dr Denis Napthine

Hi there, my edit on the Premier's page has been rejected twice and I am just asking what I could provide you with to comply with your requirements. The only change we (the Office of the Premier) want to make is replace his old photo with the recently taken and official one. I sent an email a couple of weeks ago from my official government email account to say the uploaded photo was taken by the Office of the Premier we can confirm that the photo is released under the CC-BY-SA licence with the permission of the copyright holder. But we have not received a response. Could you please assist us in getting the photo changed and we are absolutely ready to provide any info to verify that we are the copyright holder of the photo. Thank you, Befekir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bef 2011 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bef 2011, the issue I have is that the Office claims copyright. Until someone reviews your email there isn't anything I can do. The other issue that you should be aware of is that you have a clear conflict of interest as a paid employee of the Premier's office. Flat Out let's discuss it 23:28, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

You were right in deleting avvas rama rao page

Yes brother. You were absolutely right. I seem to have violated some rules. I have read through those rules and thanks for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanandamuri (talk • contribs) 07:22, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

• News and notes: Wikimedians celebrate International Women's Day, Women's History Month

• Traffic report: War and awards

• Featured content: Ukraine burns

• WikiProject report: Russian WikiProject Entomology

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:45, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Gene Pierson wiki page

Hello Flat Out, Thank you for your message. Is it possible for me to include the additional information on Gene in a more neutral tone? Thanks! Jodie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.16.45.76 (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi 174.16.45.76 and thanks for your message. You can edit the article but please do not make claims to the first paragraph that are not supported with references in the body of the article, or edits to the body of the article that aren't referenced. Flat Out let's discuss it 23:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Flat Out, That last email that you reiterated pertained to something I added months ago to the main body, and I addressed everything mentioned in that email - the references, the neutral tone, etc. I only edited the introduction this time. Everything in the introduction refers to information that is covered more fully in the body of the article, which is referenced. It is also neutral. I'll try again. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jodiebrownlee (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Flat Out, I have put in a neutral encyclopedic sounding introduction. Gene felt there were some important parts of his career missing. This is covered and referenced in more detail in the body of the text. A few months ago I read the pillars and everything else there is to read about writing for wikipedia, and it took me all a good while to get through it, but I do understand it. As a researcher, I appreciate wikipedia and the work people like you do to keep it reliable. If there is anything you believe is not complying could you let me know precisely what that is so that I can address it rather than giving me blanket criticisms. It would be more helpful to me. Thank you! Jodie — Preceding unsigned comment added by [User:Jodiebrownlee|Jodiebrownlee]] (talk •contribs) 14:47, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Jodiebrownlee, A few things. (1) "helping to establish the careers of AC/DC, INXS, Air Supply" is not neutral, it isn't true and it isn't supported with references in the body of the article. (2) You have a clear conflict of interest and should exercise appropriate caution. (3) We don't take directions on editing from the subjects of articles. The article is not a Gene Pierson promotional piece. Flat Out let's discuss it 22:27, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the email. I do not know Gene Pierson personally, but through a mutual acquaintance know that he felt his intro was not so good. I tried to improve it. I have taken the Peter Lik reference out. It's not a key part of his career or life so best to leave it out of the intro. Thanks. Jodie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jodiebrownlee (talk • contribs) 02:22, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

He doesn't get to decide how the article is written. Please read WP:3RR Flat Out let's discuss it 04:12, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I slightly altered the first sentence. It didn't read so well before. I hope you accept this small change. Thanks. Jodie

Actually you deleted a whole paragraph without reason or consensus. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:13, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Flat Out, I have followed the wiki guidelines for these edits and cannot understand why you have reverted them. You keep telling me there is something wrong with the edit, I address it and yet still you revert it. This time you said "Don't remove or add content without a valid reason" and yet I gave a valid reason for each tiny change I made. Please check. You also said that the additions and deletions do mot appear to be constructive. I corrected punctuation (you had three inverted comma's around each name!), added information from the body to create a more accurate introduction. The introduction is very sparse compared to other wikipedia pages. I also included references.

three inverted commas are there for formnatting. Flat Out let's discuss it 01:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

What can possibly be wrong with the tiny edits I made today? I believe you are being obstructive and will take this further. I am sorry it has come to this.

Please sign your posts. I have explained multiple times what is wrong with your edits and you are ignoring the feedback that I and other users have given you. For example, you added In the 1980's he recorded and released 122 albums on his World Indigenous record label. In the mid 2000's Gene formed Lifestyle Music which achieved 2 top 20 ARIA albums. to the lead of the article but there is no reference to this anywhere in the body of the article. The lead is only there to summarise the key referenced points of the rest of the article. The tone is promotional - see WP:SOAP.Flat Out let's discuss it 01:50, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to take the matter further but beware of the boomerang. Flat Out let's discuss it 01:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Flat Out, Please can you confirm that you are receiving my messages. Jodiebrownlee — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jodiebrownlee (talk • contribs) 01:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I have received your messages, but it would help if you didn't keep creating a new section every time you posted. There is no time limit on responding to posts. Flat Out let's discuss it 01:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Draft

I don't think its live — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiOriginal-9 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

The draft isn't live but you had linked to the sandbox from a category that you created. Flat Out let's discuss it 00:59, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Victims

Why is Ted Bundy full of victims, just wonderingWikiOriginal-9 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:24, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiOriginal-9 that was my mistake, as the victims aren't living. Please don't include the names of victims of other crimes if they are likely to still be alive. Thanks Flat Out let's discuss it 01:42, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

www.WeRecoverData.com

Hi. I was the one who created the article. I was hired by the president of the company to put their name on Wikipedia. The content that I copy-pasted from www.werecoverdata.com is the same content I used on Wikipedia. am I still subject to copyright issues if the case is this? Deeissoulless (talk) 05:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Deeissoulless we discourage paid editing, but you have a clear conflict of interest and need to take care to ensure your edits are neutral and unbiased. You can't copy the company's website because it is copyrighted - see WP:COPYVIO. Lastly, Wikipedia articles should never be copy-pasted but written in the editors own words and supported with independent, reliable and verifiable sources. Flat Out let's discuss it 05:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Can you help me? What should I tell the president? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deeissoulless (talk • contribs) 06:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Deeissoulless, tell them that the company isn't notable enough to have a wikipedia entry because it doesn't meet WP:CORP and that it is WP:TOOSOON. Flat Out let's discuss it 07:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Want to restore the entire contact of Boyar(Caste)

the article has been tampered and its entire content has been deleted by someone. The actual content is available previously which was deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganesharunkumar (talk • contribs) 10:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Ganesharunkumar , I removed your addition because it was not supported with any sources.Flat Out let's discuss it 10:31, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Leading practice discovery‎

The expired PROD tag on Leading practice discovery‎ has been removed again by the article creator. I have to admit that I'm not really sure if he's allowed. I agree with you that the concerns have not been addressed. Meters (talk) 02:02, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Meters, I have replaced the maintenance tags as the issues listed have not been resolved and have refereed the prop del templates issue to Materialscientist who is an excellent admin. If the articles aren't deleted I will nominate for deletion. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:08, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. I have great respect for MaterialScientist. I've been watrching thsi article with amazement. The author just didn't seem to be interested in listening. Meters (talk) 02:29, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Meters, I have taken this article and the other one created by the same editor to AfD. In both cases the proposed deletion exceeded 7 days but templates were removed. Flat Out let's discuss it 00:08, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll make my comments. My guess is that the one I have been watching is an attempt to introduce an article on terminology that is not in widespread use. There'sa very suspicious coincidence in names between one source's co-author, the wiki article's author, and one of the names associated with the only online uses I've found. Meters (talk) 00:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Greeting

Hi. Greetings from the University of Michigan. It's probably plain I'm a newbie. I try to spend an hour per day learning how Wiki works. It is quite a valuable tool for getting complex information organized and integrated with other fields of study. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael A Anthony PE (talk • contribs) 10:34, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Michael A Anthony PE . Wikipedia articles are summaries of what reliable sources have to say on a subject. The articles you have created are like essays and do not meet wikipedia standards. Please read Wikipedia:Your_first_article and let me know if you need a hand. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi FlatOut, I have a bazillion references -- I am just having trouble keying them in so that's why I'm just listing them. I have a few minutes this morning and will try again. I will get to each concern 1 x 1. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael A Anthony PE (talk • contribs) 09:06, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi FlatOut. I'm going nuts trying to find the instructions for making external links. I have plenty of them, but I'm struggling to get them in there, in-line. Any clue will be gratefully received. Thank!s — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael A Anthony PE (talk • contribs) 19:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Michael A Anthony PE Please read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners before you add any further references to your articles. Flat Out let's discuss it 22:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi FlatOut. I noodled around a bit with the CITE tool -- the video was helpful -- and I think I have the hang of it. Thanks! Gotta crash. More in the morning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael A Anthony PE (talk • contribs) 00:30, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Flat Out. I think I've figured out how to get the in-line references going. Pretty easy, actually. I did notice that some text that showed references and footnotes accumulated over the past few days seems to have gone missing. I might have done this in error, or maybe it was done by others. I am doing my level best to respond to the issues raised in the development of this page. Thanks for your guidance. (And now I am going to try the proper sign off) -- Mike Michael A Anthony PE (talk) 12:54, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Michael A Anthony PE (talk) 12:54, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi FlatOut. I have been adding/subtracting to this a little bit here and there to answer some of the issues but maybe not fast enough. The notification seemed to indicate that i simply delete the proposed deletion notice so I did. Hope i did this correctly. I'll be bringing in other experts around the world to help me with this. Thanks for your guidance. Mike Michael A Anthony PE (talk) 11:27, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Michael A Anthony PE , the proposed deletion notices have been in place for the required time now and the articles will be deleted by admin. The articles are on terms that are not supported by substantial independent sources and the references used did not support the content of the article. Flat Out let's discuss it 22:17, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I think I can get the trade media folks to add more to what I've started on education facilities industry. Michael A Anthony PE (talk) 01:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Can I recommend you do some reading on how to create articles? I left you some links - but the place I recommend you try Wikipedia:Afc so that your future efforts aren't wasted. The problem with your current articles are; No inline citations so that what you are saying can be verified, a lot of jargon, and an unclear link between the title (subject) and the information contained in the article. Flat Out let's discuss it 01:38, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Flat Out. I guess I now know what a maintenance template is -- and that I read the instructions incorrectly about how to respond to the header material that is seeking new edits. I won't be doing that again. There are a bazillion things written about this topic, much of it academic, that best of it appears in transcripts of speeches by industry leaders. I've got to get them out of Powerpoints and into this encylopedia! Michael A Anthony PE (talk) 09:43, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Michael A Anthony PE you cant reference information that another editor is unable to verify. Flat Out let's discuss it 09:54, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi. So the 'notability' issue seems to be on the back burner for the moment. I will read over the copyright rules ASAP. There's just a crazy amount of stuff out there on this subject that I only have limited time with. As soon as I get it to a certain point I'll be bringing in patent attorneys and standards experts from around the world to contribute to it. Thanks for your patience. // Mike Michael A Anthony PE (talk) 10:16, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Michael A Anthony PE sorry I don't know what you are referring to. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Heads-up

G'day, this edit might interest you - check the signature. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 15:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

The user that impersonated Flat Out has just been indefinitely blocked for persistent vandalism. And I guessed he didn't intentionally impersonate Flat Out - he probably just copied and pasted the warning Flat Out issued without deleting the signature. BigCat82 (talk) 17:34, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

That's what I thought initially, but as far as I could tell none of Flat Out's edits match the time stamp. Anyway, hopefully that will be the last we see of him. YSSYguy (talk) 00:28, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks BigCat82 and YSSYguy. This same editor has mutliple I.P socks and has done this before. Thanks for letting me know. Flat Out let's discuss it 00:35, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

No thanks needed. Inspired by you I have been a RC patroller for a while and have made over 700 edits in less than two months, of course still a far cry from your contributions. If you had not intervened the edit warring of the lion/tiger page I would have been blocked as well, as I wasn't aware of most policies here. Being a patroller the most rewarding moment is when a good faith stubborn editor finally realizes how to constructively edit. BigCat82 (talk) 16:08, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Lenskart

Hi, You've made some edits to a page I spend the entire day creating - you deleted almost the entire article except for one line. Are you suggesting that I need to reword the part or that it needs to go altogeher? I have sourced most of what I have written from legitimate articles in national dailies, should I reference it more?? Would appreciate any/all suggestions you can provide since this is my first full fledged article. Sachinj2013 (talk) 17:37, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sachinj2013,thanks for your question. I removed sections of the article that were not encyclopedic or that were promotional in tone. Wikipedia is a summary of what reliable sources have to say about a subject - not a place to describe the company's plans for the future. I am happy to help you improve this article if you would like assistance. Flat Out let's discuss it 23:18, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, most of what I wrote was from reliable sources but I could probably have done a mistake with the language - resulting in it sounding like puffery or promotional in tone. Would appreciate any help that you can provide to me in this regard by editing the stuff that I have written. This is my first article and I plan to develop a series of wikpiedia articles on the fledging startups in India in the near future Sachinj2013 (talk) 06:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Sachinj2013, articles should not be about "fledgling startups" because they are not notable. Articles about companies need to meet the criteria established in WP:CORP. Flat Out let's discuss it 12:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you have also tagged the article for conflict of interest. However, I have no relation with Lenskart. In the past I have contributed to similar articles on Indian startups such as aravind eye hospital or Justdial which should give you an idea that I am just an ordinary contributor. In case you require any further proof I am happy to provide the same. Cheers, Sachinj2013 (talk) 04:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I have removed a lot of stuff and edited lines that sounded promotional earlier to make them more suitable for wikipeida. I would appreciate if you could review the article again and make any further edits you feel are necessary. Sachinj2013 (talk) 11:50, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Sachinj2013 your edits have created a number of errors and duplicate citations in the footnotes because you took out the ref names for no reason and put referencing tags in the wrong place. You also added encyclopedic content, and information that was off topic. Lastly, you reinserted a large amount of content that had no source, or an unreliable source. Please read WP:42 and only add content that is properly supported with independent, reliable and verifiable sources. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:54, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

• Forum: Wikimedia Commons mission: free media for the world or only Wikimedia projects?

• WikiProject report: We have history

• Interview: Nate Ott: the writer behind 71 articles in the largest-ever good topic

• Featured content: Spot the bulldozer

• News and notes: Foundation-supported Wikipedian in residence faces scrutiny

• Traffic report: Into thin air

• Technology report: Wikimedia engineering report

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Unfree material

Don't be an idiot about photographs of electrical equipment. I have that exact meter sitting in front of me right now that i can easy take a photo of and photoshop it to look exactly the same with in 1 minute.

166.216.165.114 if you google search on the image (that particular image), you will see it is copyrighted. If you want to take a photo of a meter and upload it as your own work then go for it, but dont try and pass off copyright violations. Also sign ur talk page posts. Flat Out let's discuss it 09:17, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

About Gretel Ashzinger's article

Hello, I've received a message from you and was hoping you can help me go through certain changes. There was a criteria for deletion for Gretel Ashzinger, but I removed noticed because someone left hoax. Can you please help me by not deleting the page or maybe suggesting Wikipedia to protect the page? Thank you! (Liani2014 (talk) 08:43, 23 March 2014 (UTC))

• Considering that a quick search verified that this was a blatant hoax, I've deleted the newest version of the page and I'm going to block this user as trying to perpetuate a blatant hoax. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

The article was speedied as a haox, Im not sure what happened there? Flat Out let's discuss it 09:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

• It was a pretty blatant hoax. With the type of things that she was claiming on the Wikipedia entry, IMDb entry, website, and so on, she was about 2 steps away from saying that this person was secretly married to Justin Bieber and received an Emmy for "Best Actress". There were no results for her in a GS and on the IMDb page she was claiming that Ashzinger gave out Grammys at Nickelodeon's Kid Choice Awards. Yeah. Not to mention that the gold/silver/platinum claims were easily disproved as well. Not even a merchant hit. I was going to AfD it at first, but then took a closer look at the claims. She couldn't have made up anything more outlandish if she'd tried saying that during a full moon Ashzinger transformed into a were-pony. I'd perma-blocked her from editing because she re-created it twice in such a short amount of time and her social media creations kind of hinted that she was just going to try to perpetuate the hoax after a shorter block. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:29, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

It's ok, thank you for all of the support you guys been giving me. I just hope that one day God will do the same to you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lianitheonegirl (talk • contribs) 09:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

• Note: Although she wasn't exactly trying to hide it, I've blocked the account accordingly to try to avoid any further addition of hoaxes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:41, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

AfD

Am focusing on these observations: "Unable to find any independent secondary sources on the subject." -- I think Tim Simcoe at Boston University and his co-authors might meet this criteria "An unsourced article written in essay form." -- essay form? will try to weed out matters of rhetorical "tone" Michael A Anthony PE (talk) 22:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Michael A Anthony PE you haven't provided references for any of the content in the articles. The references need to support each statement/paragraph. eg Fire is hot.<ref>http://chemistry.about.com/od/firecombustionchemistry/fl/Why-Is-Fire-Hot.htm</ref> That's the problem. Flat Out let's discuss it 08:47, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Clarification

My apologies for the confusion, but I did not remove the deletion tag on Kyle devine. The article creator, not me, removed it, and I reverted it. My edit summary was unclear on that. Flat Out let's discuss it 08:47, 24 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scarlettail (talk • contribs) 05:46, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Greeting

Hey there, Thank you for the introduction to Wikipedia, I'm new here and am mostly interested in editing Musical Artists, especially Albums. I am confused as to what you were attempting to explain to me when it comes to editing Avril Lavigne's latest album. I understand what is meant by the 'lead' section of the article, but my confusion lies with what you have changed within the article. You changed 'Top 10' to 'Top 20', and ' Top 20' to 'Top 40', respectively. When you write that an album has peaked in the 'top 20' of a certain chart, it means that it had failed to enter the 'Top 10', and yet, the album HAS peaked in the top 10 of at least ten countries, including the US, Canada, Australia, etc. Your edit implies that this isn't the case. The same goes for 'Top 40'. It implies the album had not peaked inside the top 20, and yet, for the countries such as Scotland, Ireland and the UK, it had. These peak positions can be verified by simply looking over the 'Charts and Certifications' part of the page. Apologies for the confusion in all of this, I respect that I am the newcomer in this scenario, but I feel that your edits in the lead section of that article is misleading to readers. Thank you for reading, Architectural Oshawott

This week's article for improvement (week 13, 2014)

The knee of a patient is examined with help of radiography after an injury. Hello, Flat Out. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Injury Previous selections: Assassination of Anwar Sadat • Rare breed (agriculture) Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 01:28, 25 March 2014 (UTC) •

Don't know how to respond to your message on my talk pagePBCAFC (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

ed manion

why are you reverting my input on Ed Manion's wikipedia page. Please go to brucespringsteen.net /band members and you will see that eddie manion is currently a member of Bruce Springsteen's Band and is currently touring with him on his high hopes 2014 tour and his recent worldwide wrecking ball tour. If you live in Melbourne, Australia and are a Bruce Springsteen fan than you know that he and Ed Manion played in your city last month February (2014). please visit eddie Manion's personal website eddiemanion.com for his bio information and please update his wikipedia page to reflect that he is currently a saxophonist with Bruce Springsteen and the E street Band and has been for the last three years. Thanks ---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Connor2278 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Connor2278 , I have reverted your edits (under both names you are using) because you are changing the meaning of the lead without discussion, and removing information from the lead without discussion. I have encouraged you to discuss the issue at the article's talk page but you keep blindly reverting. You have have exceeded WP:3RR despite me warning you at your talk page. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:49, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Yikes

Holy schnikes. I know you were figuring that these were sockpuppets and the rabbit hole was a little deeper than expected but damn... That's a lot of socks! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For being keen eyed enough to catch four drawer loads of socks! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on this one, you got me just enough to get an SPI in. Every time I went to report a sock, another appeared but I had no idea so many would be uncovered! I have reviewed all the socks' contributions and there are quite a few redirects that might need attention. Thanks again. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:01, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• I started to clean up the redirects, but I'm unsure if I should since I'm slightly involved. I'll do a few of them, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:35, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
• I got the ones that were tagged. I figure if anyone wants, I'll re-create them (as long as they're not an obvious sock or anything) in their userspace or something. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

OK Thanks, they'll get sorted out over time. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:46, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

@Flat Out: Meant to thank you earlier for your diligence. There's at least one AfD that's related to this highly energetic sockmaster. - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

@LuckyLouie, thanks, I think in the end about 10 articles were deleted under WP:EVADE. Flat Out let's discuss it 22:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I need to add a company information in Wikipedia. How can I do that?

I need to add a company information in Wikipedia. How can I do that? My sister has a company named NewYork60.com. When I searched it in Wikipedia, I found no results. Can you please help me in this regard? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anikaiub (talk • contribs) 10:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Anikaiub, Wikipedia does not exist so you can advertise your sister's business. To have an article, a company must meet the WP:CORP guideline. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Gaussmeter merger

Flat Out, I have reversed your merger of Gaussmeter because it was not done properly. It probably should be merged, but the procedure in help:merging should be followed. Instead of waiting a week for a consensus to develop, you did the merger a mere four hours after changing the proposed direction of merger; and there was not a clear consensus. Also, when the merger is done, it should be documented as in help:merging. RockMagnetist (talk) 16:05, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Never mind. I see now that you are right - almost all of the article was written by users who are now banned. RockMagnetist (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi RockMagnetist, yes I removed the merge template because the article was deleted. Flat Out let's discuss it 22:51, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

• Comment: A foolish request

• Traffic report: Down to a simmer

• Recent research: Wikipedians' "encyclopedic identity" dominates even in Kosovo debates

• News and notes: Commons Picture of the Year—winners announced

• Featured content: Winter hath a beauty that is all his own

• Op-ed: Why we're updating the default typography for Wikipedia

• Technology report: Why will Wikipedia look like the Signpost?

• WikiProject report: From the peak

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:19, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Verifying information vs. verifying notability

You are removing valid references from the Wisconsin Badgers site for facts about subjects such as Josh Gasser and Sam Dekker. The school athletic site is perfectly fine to verify facts - it is not in the least unreliable for this purpose. The school site would not be sufficient to verify notability, but is a perfectly valid source of information about these subjects. The source is reliable, it just isn't independent. Rikster2 (talk) 05:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Leaving source

I was under the impression that I did in fact leave a source to a website where i got information about wiretap orders? It was under references and everything? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LukeWylie2 (talk • contribs) 11:20, 30 March 2014 (UTC) LukeWylie2 you made 7 edits to Pen trap and put a link in under External links, but no sources. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Davispur

1)I want ask that why you edit my page Davispur . If you find any information wrong , please let me know. 2) I'm a new user, please help me.

Shahid72462 I removed edits that did not have any references, and section headings that were unnecessary.Flat Out let's discuss it 11:29, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Tell me now.

Please bro, don't edit it now. If you need anything to add plz let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahid72462 (talk • contribs) 07:37, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Short articles about churches

Hello, Flat Out. I notice that you nominated Evangelical-Reformed Church of the Canton Basel-Stadt for AfD and also nominated Evangelical-Reformed Church of the Canton of Lucerne for speedy deletion. I also noticed that User:Calvingabor (Special:Contributions/Calvingabor) has created a large number of relatively short articles about churches. You two may want to discuss the whole list. Cnilep (talk) 08:04, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks User:Calvingabor, I notice your comment at AfD. I wanted to see if one would be speedy deleted before i nominated the others, which I will do now. Thanks for your help. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Some of these are national churches. As a very rough guide, national organizations are usually considered notable, and provincial organizations usually not. Neither part of this applies in every case, of course, but national organizations where there is no doubt about existence and some degree of likely reconition are not A7 candiudates, and must go to AfD. If any have been accidentally speedied I will restore them when I can get back to my admin account. If you want to then take them to afd, that's a course open to you.DGG (at NYPL) -- reply here 20:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)