Open main menu


I don't recall asking you to edit my election templates pageEdit

... so don't do it, ok? I consider it vandalism. You may think you know what you're doing, but you don't actually have a clue, and your renaming commons files without doing due diligence points to a poor understanding of what your role there is. Hint; just because some random drive-by editor slaps a rename request on something doesn't mean you should actually oblige without bothering to check that it's not creating a whole world of problems. Fan N | talk | 09:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

  • @Fanx: Unlike this silly comment you left on my page, I never purposely edited your page. I renamed a file on Commons per a request that met renaming guidelines and the file name was automatically updated globally across on all Wikipedia projects. If you don't like the new name then start a discussion on the talk page on Commons. The old name still works as a redirect so go ahead and revert the automated edit. It makes no difference at all. If you consider file renaming to be vandalism, that's your personal issue to work out, but in the future I would suggest you not waste your time leaving angry messages on the talk pages of Commons Filemovers. A more constructive activity would be fixing your signature that does not properly close the style. МандичкаYO 😜 10:32, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
I haven't left an angry message - you clearly don't know what angry means. The file didn't meet rename guidelines as it was a request from someone that didn't understand the purpose of the file in question, and it resulted in two different files being the same because on ill-advised redirects and renamings. "wasting my time" would be more like spending most of this week dealing with uninformed renamings and over-writes, and file merges that have rendered these files toxic ... yea, that's what I've been "wasting my time" on this week. Days and days of trying to fix screwups that no automatic fix will solve. I have started that discussion already ... but it has been ignored, and I have only got nonsense answers from commons - so, how many conversations should I have? ... bearing in mind that there have been further renamings and over-writes before anything is even answered. BTW ... one of these renamed files that was working fine as a redirect now has a delete notice on it - from the same editor that screwed it up in the first place. ... and my page has your name on it as editor, if it wasn't you then that's a problem with the automatic updating - so, if you're hoping for an apology ... don't hold your breath. Try sorting out automatic updates so they're labelled as such, and we won't have this problem, ok? As for file moving ... can it really be that you don't actually check that it isn't likely to screw something up? Something else for you to take to your next Commons coffee morning then, because from here you just look incompetent.
My understanding now is that if I can conjure up any excuse to rename a file just for the hell of it, I can actually con you into acquiescing? ... so much power, and so little responsibility - I am in awe. Fan N | talk | 10:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

(message from User)Edit

Hi Wikimandia, Thank you for tweaking and making the article Johan Matton better, I did some work on it to previously and it's very polished and updated as of now, 4 days ago someone placed it for speedy deletion and then up to discussion for deletion. I think it's a notable person that has news cover both linked to News Paper and a TV interview, would you be able to read through the article and make a comment in the delete discussion. I would want to avoid the hard work go lost but again you might be of a different opinion. Thank you kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:18, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

(message from Hal Plotkin)Edit

Hi Wikimandia:

My name is Hal Plotkin and I am the subject of an article you recently edited. Thank you for your interest in this article and for your efforts to improve it. However, I noticed that you inserted what I assume are some inadvertent errors, non sequiturs and other problems. In other cases, you have omitted accurate, germane, referenced information. I am reluctant to fix those problems myself because of Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines so I thought I would instead point them out to you -- at least those that are most obvious -- hoping you might be willing to fix the errors you inserted (some of which are substantial and others which merely involve proper use of the English language or what may be typos).

Here, for example, is one major problem:

"In 2003, Plotkin initiated the district's Policy on Public Domain Learning Materials[3] which are now more commonly known as Open Educational Resources."

Problem: you omitted the foundational information that explains that in 2003 I was elected to the non-partisan Foothill-De Anza Community College District Governing Board of Trustees, which oversees two community colleges in Silicon Valley with approx. 45,000 students. As such, the reference above to "the district's Policy" makes no sense and renders your edit on this point incoherent.

Thus, it would be appropriate to restore this text -- which you deleted -- to the article:

Plotkin is a former member and president of the Foothill–De Anza Community College District Board of Trustees and Chair of the District's Committee on Audit and Finance.[2] He is the first graduate of Foothill College to ever serve on its governing board.

The information in the second sentence about being the first graduate of the college to ever serve on its governing board is germane and pertinent; it has a direct bearing on the work I have done and continue to do to increase college affordability in ways not contemplated by previous governing boards.

Here is an English language usage problem:

"He attended college part-time over the next 10 years while working a variety of jobs, including Comprehensive Employment and Training Act worker serving as an aide to then-Santa Clara County Supervisor Rod Diridon, Sr."


This is clunky English. The proper sentence construction would be:

"He attended college part-time over the next 10 years while working in a variety of jobs, including as a Comprehensive Employment and Training Act worker serving as an aide to then-Santa Clara County Supervisor Rod Diridon, Sr."

Here is another English language usage problem:

Your edit:

"Plotkin worked a Silicon Valley-based journalist and commentator whose published and broadcast work often focused on technology, business, public policy, education and science."

Problem: The sentence is not proper English. It is missing the word "as" between "worked" and "a" and it repeats the same word, "work", twice in the same sentence. It should read:

"Plotkin is a longtime (or veteran) Silicon Valley-based journalist and commentator whose published and broadcast work often focused on technology, business, public policy, education and science."

In the section entitled "Professional Career" there are a number of significant problems, as follows:

The first paragraph of this section now duplicates information that appears in the last paragraph of this section. While duplicating some of this information you have also omitted related information, such as the more complete list of representative publications to which I have contributed articles and the list of publications that have cited or mentioned my work. I am a professional writer and commentator -- confusing readers about these points renders the article less accurate and less useful, which is not a goal most Wikipedia editors would embrace, in my experience.

Thus, I suggest you revert to the original accurate list of publications I have written for and revert to the accurate list of publications that have cited my work, as follows:

"Plotkin's publishers include Inc. magazine, Inc. International, International Business magazine, Forbes ASAP, Barron's Online, California magazine, California Business magazine,, Family Business magazine, The Harvard Management Update, The Harvard Management Communications Update, Securities Industry Daily, Ernst & Young's Entrepreneur of the Year magazine, France's Courrier International newspaper, Biotechnology magazine, Biotechnology In Japan Newsservice, The Peninsula Times Tribune,, Arthur Andersen's, and the San Jose Metro, among others.

Publications citing Plotkin's work include Die Welt, Mac Week Japan, Brazil's 80/20, The Taipei Times, The Industry Standard,,,, The National Review, The California Hydrogen Business Council and Nanotechnology News, among others."

In addition, if you are concerned with accuracy, you could also ad LaMonde to the list of publications citing my work, (see:

In this section, you have also omitted this referenced paragraph:

In 2011, an essay Plotkin wrote on astrophysics ten years earlier[36] was republished as a chapter in Gale Cengage Learning's "At Issue" series of textbooks.[37]

This information about my professional background is also pertinent and germane for inclusion in the section about my professional background and I suggest you revert your deletion. Again, I don't think it is customary or proper for Wikipedia editors to delete information about publications produced by the subjects of wikipedia articles, particularly when those article subjects are journalists and writers.

You have also deleted this information below, which explains what the Foothill-De Anza Community College District is, how governing board members are selected (in a non-partisan election) and the location of this community college district (in the heart of Silicon Valley). That information, which is useful for anyone seeking information about my professional background, is contained in this deleted paragraph:

"Plotkin was elected to the FHDA board in November 2003 by the voters in Palo Alto, Mountain View, Cupertino, Sunnyvale, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills and parts of San Jose and Saratoga.[35] During this time, he also served as a member of the Association of Community College Trustees' (ACCT) Committee on Public Policy. In 2007, he was re-elected, without opposition, to another full term on the Foothill–De Anza Board after having been elected earlier that year as board president."

In the interests of accuracy (and coherence)I would suggest your revert your deletion of this information.

In addition, I note that you have taken the liberty to redefine me professionally at the top of the article with the claim that I am a "politician." In truth, I am an American journalist, public servant (or former U.S. government official), and activist. I last ran for partisan (political) public office in the U.S. in 1993 (22 years ago!). In 2003, I was elected to a non-partisan (non-political, the political parties have no role in such elections here in the U.S.) position on a community college board of trustees, which is essentially a school board. If your definition of my profession holds then, to be fair, anyone who has ever served on a non-partisan school board and who has a page on Wikipedia must also be redefined as a "politician." Since that would not be proper I would request in the interests of accuracy that my profession be reverted to "an American journalist, former U.S. government official, and activist." I should also note that my position in the Obama administration was a non-political position, governed by the U.S. federal Hatch Act, which prohibits any partisan political activities.

Again, thank you very much for your interest in me and in this article. I assume no hostile intent on your part and appreciate your efforts to improve the article. I also assume the errors and omissions noted above were made in haste rather than in malice or disregard. I also appreciate the open practices embraced in the Wikipedia community and trust you will regard and act on these requests in that same spirit.

Finally, I should add that the problems noted above may not reflect all the inaccuracies or material omissions created by your edit and that others may also be present. Instead, the list of problems cited above reflects the most obvious inaccuracies and omissions that do the most serious damage to the accuracy of the article.

Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can provide any additional information to assist your review of this matter. Hplotkin (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hal Plotkin

  • @Hplotkin: Hi Hal, thanks for the message. I removed the word politician from your intro - I agree you should not be categorized as such. As far as I know, there are not any Wikipedia guidelines that prevent you from making copyedit corrections to your own article for things like missing words, punctuation, etc. I've made these fixes and have reworked it so things are not redundant. Also, as I'm sure you can appreciate, things that are seen as significant by the subject of an article are not necessarily seen that way by others. For example, whether you are the first or 300th Foothill graduate to serve on the board of De Anza Community College district does not seem significant to me. If you're unhappy with the rest of it, I think that for the sake of transparency the best thing to do is bring it up on the talk page: I don't assume any ownership whatsoever to the article, I simply came across it and, seeing the need, edited it. Have a great day. МандичкаYO 😜 12:09, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Arthur Hay, 15th Earl of KinnoullEdit

Is there any information concerning his party?--The Theosophist (talk) 10:59, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much!--The Theosophist (talk) 20:36, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Category:Burials by pantheonEdit

Category:Burials by pantheon, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. SFB 20:27, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your edit on Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana. Bobbyshabangu talk 16:56, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Authority control/VIAFEdit

Just in case you no longer watch your winter question, see Wikipedia talk:Authority control integration proposal. --P64 (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)


As it's used for an interview, it's probably ok as a source, but we wouldn't use a site that calls itself a travel guide as a source for history. Dougweller (talk) 12:13, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

@Dougweller: I'm not sure why you're leaving me this message - this was used as a source long before I got to the article. I could tell it's an amateurish site but since it was in his own words I left it. МандичкаYO 😜 18:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Oops, I misread, sorry. Dougweller (talk) 18:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
@Dougweller: no problem, thanks for the message. Have a great weekend. МандичкаYO 😜 19:33, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Royal Caledonian BallEdit

Thank you for creating Royal Caledonian Ball. I had actually started a draft at User:Zigzig20s/Royal Caledonian Ball. I will have to delete my draft, but perhaps we could use some of my weblinks to add more in-line referenced info to your article.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

@Zigzig20s: Thank you so much! Please don't delete your draft yet - it will really improve the article! Right now it's just barely not a stub. If you want you can just copy your information in, since you've already written it, and you should get credit for that. Since it happens soon, maybe it could get it featured somehow. МандичкаYO 😜 21:33, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I added a bit, but frankly I think it would be easier if you took what you wanted from my draft. Perhaps there could be two separate sections for fashion and the reels.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: I want everything from your draft :-) If you want to put it in, that would be great. I don't think I'm allowed to copy it and add it like it's my own, and it doesn't need to be rewritten. Definitely a separate section for fashion and reels! I can go in and edit it to move things around and add more. Thank you so much. МандичкаYO 😜 23:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I added more. You could use the Tatler links to add a paragraph about the recent attendees; lots of wikilinks to articles about aristocrats no doubt. I don't have time to do it (partly why my draft was on the backburner for so long). Do you need any more content from my draft? I think I've moved more or less everything.Zigzig20s (talk) 23:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Awesome! Can you add this? "By 1849, it had become a fundraiser for Scottish charities helping vulnerable schoolchildren, the homeless, and cancer patients." and "Traditionally, the Duke and Duchess of Atholl are the first couple to start the dance, followed by his private army, the Atholl Highlanders." That's great info. Thanks so much! МандичкаYO 😜 23:36, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Done.Zigzig20s (talk) 23:52, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: Thank you so much!!!!!!!! :-) МандичкаYO 😜 23:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Sure. Let me know how it goes.Zigzig20s (talk) 00:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: Of course!!! :-) МандичкаYO 😜 00:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Btw, I've just created a redirect for the Quorn Hunt Ball and added some info to the main article about it. If you are able to find sufficient information about the ball itself, it might be good to create its own page. Let me know if you want to do this. Btw, it is easier if you reply on my talkpage each time. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)


awesome nobility
Thank you, Мандичка, veteran editor with a cute infobox, for quality articles such as George Hay, 1st Earl of Kinnoull, Moreby Hall and Chasing the Scream, for adding substantially as to Cathleen Mann, for gnomish work on article talk, redirects, categories, filling references and taking care of copyright, - (you knew anyway that) you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1193 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Three years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Msg from Unicorn46Edit

Hello Wikimandia: Thank you very much for your offer to help make the article on the Jewish-Palestinian Living Room Dialogue Group more acceptable. I really appreciate it. I am a relatively new editor and though I have read the rules about editing, I still have much to learn and could definitely benefit from your experience. As you can see on the talk page, Sandstein has asked that those of us who have already edited the article back off for now and I want to respect that; so any edits that you can offer will be valuable. I have printed out the page as it now stands and I will watch the page to see the changes that you make so that I can better understand what I should have done as opposed to what I did when editing the page. Unicorn46 (talk) 04:59, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Unicorn46 - No problem! I'll work on it in the next day or so, and give you a general summary of what changes I've made and why. Fortunately it looks like it is not in danger of being deleted; there are enough people who have pointed out that it more than meets the requirements. МандичкаYO 😜 18:41, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wikimandia: I do so appreciate this. I would like to learn how to be a good editor as I value the contribution that Wikipedia makes on the educational front. I am also endlessly impressed by the fact that people from all over the world, most of whom have never met each other and probably never will, generously volunteer their time for a greater purpose. I am also hopeful that you are right about the page not being deleted as there are many good resources associated with the page that can be helpful to other people working on using dialogue to resolve conflict. I will watch for your edits and am more than grateful for your offer to take the extra step of providing a general summary of the changes you will make and an explanation of why you have made them. That will be very helpful for my learning. Unicorn46 (talk) 19:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wikimandia: I noticed that some editing has been done on the Jewish-Palestinian Living Room Dialogue page and that some citations were needed so I added citations 14, 15, and 16. If those are not appropriate, please let me know. For the citations related to the Foundation for Global Community and the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center, you have to page down a ways on both pages to get to the actual mention of the Dialogue Group. Should I have noted that in the citation, or just assume that people will find it on their own? Thank you Unicorn46 (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Unicorn46 Hey there! I'm so sorry, I've just done some stuff with the infobox. I'll attack it tomorrow :-) МандичкаYO 😜 00:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wikimandia: Absolutely no worries. I just very much appreciate your willingness to wade in and help.Unicorn46 (talk) 06:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


Hi, can you check the interwiki translation title links are correct here? Any help to start them too as part of the project would be much appreciated!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: - I made a couple small changes :-) I didn't know about this project... what an awesome idea! I'll try to start helping as soon as I can. МандичкаYO 😜 00:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, if you could start a few articles/check the translations this would be great. Each month or two we should have 10 articles for a Bulgarian topic. Long term you're welcome to list missing articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki/Bulgarian. Churches and Theatre of Sofia in Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki/Bulgarian/Buildings for instance, Bulgarian history articles in Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki/Bulgarian/History etc. I know other wikis are often unsourced and not great, but they're a good starting point for transferring content if external reliable sources can be found to support the transfer, ransacking categories on other wikipedias is the best way to find missing content of course. If you could try to get others at the Bulgarian project involved with this in a coordination between groups this would be great. I have been meaning to create some stubs on Bulgarian films and actors sometime, I believe I was the one who created the lists by decade originally.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:35, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, can you expand The Bishop of Lovech? First Bulgarian play, worth it! At the Foot of Vitosha also, both might make DYK ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

List of persons and things mentioned in the Epic of Gilgamesh ‎Edit

That's so nice and delicate an edit to make, for you to swoop down and add those 2 dots!but... how did you find the discussion? I'm wondering so. Whalestate (talk) 08:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!Edit

  Keep calm and carry on товарищка. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 19:00, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@Sturmgewehr88: awwww ...спасибо большое!!!! :-) МандичкаYO 😜 19:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

@Wikimandia: Конечно :) ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 19:36, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Grigoriy DobryginEdit

Harrias talk 12:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for the comment on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Paul_H._Lemmen. My plan is exactly what you suggested, to make an article devoted to the topic. My draft is here and you are welcome to contribute or suggest before it goes live.Legitimus (talk) 10:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

  • @Legitimus: Awesome! Article looks great and well-sourced. I'm glad you included the motivation section because they have a unique motivation that differs from other imposters (ie people who lie about credentials) and this aspect has been covered in RS too МандичкаYO 😜 10:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Post death pagesEdit

  • I am asking that you revisit tech CEO Rachel Jacobs. As you suggested might occur, there has been some post-death coverage. For example, an article [1] in today's Forbes that pairs her death with the recent death of tech CEO Michael Goldberg, a page written in response to his death. Jacobs page has improved since you saw it, ApprenNet is now blue-linked and while ApprenNet is not exactly SurveyMonkey, I think there is enough to justify an article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
E.M.Gregory - done, I agree. Happy to change my position to keep. Thanks for doing all this work! МандичкаYO 😜 13:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


Heyo! Just to be clear, I like your signature. Though, I feel the inclusion of that smiley in every comment you make somewhat odd. There is nothing wrong with it and it does not affect your argument, but it may not serve the seriousness of your words. The idea of "😜" appearing after everything you say, despite of that being only in your sign, feels a bit immature. I only wanted to leave a little note on what I felt. Like I said, I like the sign and I am ok with it :) Cheers, — Yash! (Y) 01:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Yash! Thanks for your comment. FYI, I really don't consider anything I say to be particularly serious, in the big picture of things. Wikipedia is not real life and people should not treat it as such. WP would be a much more pleasant place if people stopped to remember that, don't you agree? 😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜😜 МандичкаYO 😜 01:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Haha I couldn't agree more! The Internet is not Serious Business :D — Yash! (Y) 01:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Ahah you get it!!!! Internet is NOT serious business :-D МандичкаYO 😜 01:47, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Re: Muhamed Filipović AfD NominationEdit

Greetings. I initially called for delete on the article because the claims put forth weren't backed at all by references. I don't need specialist knowledge, or even mild interest, in a subject to recommend 'delete' in such circumstances. When one good source was cited, I duly removed the delete recommendation, leaving the criticism. The people calling for 'keeps' seem partisan, often a problem on articles concerning The Balkans. So, I'll leave it to others to recommend "Keep." I don't like partisanship--actively and passively discourage it. I saw nothing in the pages you cited that discourage people from making recommendations at AfD if they lack expertise and/or interest in articles, nor anything obliging recommenders to search out references. Try straightforward English when communicating @ Wikipedia, please. You may be OK, but a cursory analysis of your comment to me, 'keep' comment for the article, and the recent writings on your talk page convince me you're not "100% awesome." Since I'm far from 100% awesome, I have some expertise in the matter. Tapered (talk) 05:01, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Murtada Sharif 'AskariEdit

Would you copy edit Murtada Sharif 'Askari too? I nominated the article for DYK, but it needs to copy edit. Thanks. Munifi3nt (talk) 13:40, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Munifi3nt, yes, I can copy edit. Do you have a photo? They want to have a photo for all DYK articles. МандичкаYO 😜 13:45, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I do not have a photo but I think there is no problem. I nominated another DYK before and they did not want to have a photo. Munifi3nt (talk) 13:55, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, it seems there is a mistake. Murtada Sharif 'Askari needs to copyedit. Munifi3nt (talk) 14:16, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, I will copy edit now. Also I put some photos on Borunsi - it will be good for Abd-al-Hussai Borunsi to have an article. МандичкаYO 😜 14:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Munifi3nt, I am still finishing the copyediting - who is Mirza Khalili Kumriyi? A scholar or religious leader? I tried to make sure the spelling was right but cannot find it. Also, can you please translate the titles for Khamsun wa mi’ a sahabi mukhtaliq, Al-Tawassul bi al-Nabi(s) wa al-Tabarruk bi Atharihi and Abdullah Ibn Saba' wa Asatir Ukhra ? Мандичка

YO 😜 15:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :)
Mirza Khalili Kumriyi is a scholar. He was the teacher of Allhama Askari.
Khamsun wa mi’ a sahabi mukhtaliq: 150 so-called companions (150 persons who did not exist but many believe they were the companions of Islamic Prophet)
Al-Tawassul bi al-Nabi(s) wa al-Tabarruk bi Atharihi: recourse to the Prophet and consecration to his relic
Abdullah Ibn Saba' wa Asatir Ukhra: Abdullah ibn Saba and other historical legends. (Abdullah ibn Saba is a name of person) Munifi3nt (talk) 15:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Close on AFD GoodWin's LawEdit

I reverted your close, first, it's way too soon to close it. Please allow a sysop to close it out as a NAC can only be used when there are no "Delete " votes. KoshVorlon Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti 21:32, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

  • KoshVorlon: There are no delete votes and three speedy keeps; additionally, article subject clearly meets notability. If you revert it again I am reporting you. Quit wasting people's time. МандичкаYO 😜 21:36, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Lean to read, my AFD IS a delete vote, therefore you can't NAC the damn thing. KoshVorlon Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti 21:40, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Non-admin_closure#AfD, it states “experienced non-admins in good standing may consider closing a discussion on that page which is beyond doubt a clear keep.”
  1. Wikipedia:Snowball clause states, as one criteria, “the resulting decision is unanimous”. It is not the case that one’s opening an [[WP:AFD], as you put it, counts as a Delete (non-unanimous Keep) because, if that were so, there could never be a “Snow keep” on an AFD.
  2. Additionally, the article had already been through two prior AFDs, both closed as “Snow keep”s. So, not only was your AFD ill-formed (it was a 3rd attempt, and needs to be corrected to reflect that), common sense suggests it had no chance at being closed as Delete (the essence of a Snow Keep).
  3. Finally, it strains credulity when you assert, twice: [2] & [3], that your AFD was unrelated to your dispute with User:Timothyjosephwood.
I think you need to take a short break and chill. JoeSperrazza (talk)

Sadly I have no newsletterEdit

But I did wait five hours to see your youtube link that I can't view at work. Worth. I would give you one of those "I gave you a random thing on your talk page" things, but I don't believe in those. Also I don't know how to do those and saying I don't believe in them is a convenient excuse not to do it. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 05:03, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Timothyjosephwood, same here - no idea. And yet I feel I'm quite comfortable with my level of knowledge of barnstars. If that chunk of info were to creep into my head, it might push out something else, like how to deal with shark attacks. МандичкаYO 😜 08:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

1 Park LaneEdit

FYI, I changed my !vote regarding the deletion discussion per new information from Witkoff representatives stating that no plans have been developed at this time. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:48, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

File:X tour ed sheeran.jpg listed for deletionEdit

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:X tour ed sheeran.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 11:27, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Alexander OshunloyeEdit

I moved the original and incorrect page Alexander Oshunloye (Entrepreneur) to the current title. At some stage it reappeared at the original and I moved it again. Apologies, any move to a double redirect was completely unintended, don't know how I did it Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:48, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Jimfbleak, the strange thing is that the entire history of the article is gone. There's nothing there before you moving it. Not that it makes a huge difference, but since this is a current AfD, we lost evidence of the article subject repeatedly removing the AfD template. МандичкаYO 😜 12:56, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Some of the history was lost through a deletion, I've re-deleted and restored, the full history is now there, sorry about the confusion, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:15, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Sourced another article started by an SPAEdit

Writing to request that you revisit Jean Griswold, an AFD that you !Voted on early - it was a terrible piece of SPA promotion (not of self, of an elderly, former employer. SPA has withdrawn gracefully) It caught my fancy and I sourced it, deleted hype. See what you think.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

E.M.Gregory I'll take a look! МандичкаYO 😜 06:33, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Fifth Street Asset ManagementEdit

Hello Wikimandia. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Fifth Street Asset Management, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article is at AFD. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 03:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I Am CaitEdit

Thank you for creating this article. I added it to Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride 2015/Results, which tracks new and improved LGBT-related articles during the month of June as part of the annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign. If you create or improve other LGBT-related articles this month, please feel free to add them to this list as well. Thanks again! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Another Believer, you're welcome! Can't wait till it airs. МандичкаYO 😜 06:33, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Cardiac arrest/cause of deathEdit

Hi Wikimandia -

I just thought I would drop you a message regarding Aarthi Agarwal. Cardiac and respiratory arrest are widely considered "terminal events" rather than causes of death, even though published lay sources often get this wrong. While it's not a WP guideline, the CDC makes the distinction more clear here (the first paragraph inside the box). In other words, all people die because their heart and lungs cease to function, rendering that essentially meaningless as a descriptor around the time of death. Sometimes we end up saying cardiac arrest in an article because there's no sourced description of what actually happened.

I feel like the Times of India reference was explicit in stating that "the death was caused by a heart complication caused by the surgery." I compare this to someone who dies in a car accident. We could truthfully say they died of cardiac arrest, or that they died of a ruptured aorta, but both of those things have lots of mechanisms, so "car accident" makes the most sense. The same way, I think that "complications from surgery" is the most clear, but I didn't want to revert without discussion.

Thanks! EricEnfermero (Talk) 23:53, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

@EricEnfermero: Thanks for the note. Considering she just died today, it's premature to assume it was caused by surgery 10 days ago (even if it was likely related). Things are not always what they seem. For all we know the surgery went fine, but her ex husband injected her with nicotine to kill her. Additionally, cardiac arrest is a sufficient cause of death for encyclopedic purposes; see Joan Rivers and many others. We just don't know yet what the underlying complication was that induced it. (See death cause for Michael Jackson.) МандичкаYO 😜 00:26, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
I respect your concern for accuracy here. I just think of this with the reverse point of view. We had a descriptive cause of death that was reliably sourced, but we took it out based on our assumption that the timing of events didn't make sense. I don't think we have adequate reason to question the source, especially based on our own opinions. My job experience that tells me it's not an implausible scenario, but that experience is irrelevant because of what the reliable sources say. We may want to move this to the article talk page. In my head, I was thinking that this would be a quicker discussion. EricEnfermero (Talk) 00:37, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
The Michael Jackson cause of death isn't totally bad, even if it uses cardiac arrest. :) I like the description in the body of Joan Rivers, but the infobox doesn't provide any info that would distinguish her death from any other person who has ever died. EricEnfermero (Talk) 00:42, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Personally I think it's self-explanatory. The COD does not need to go down to the cellular level - therefore it's sufficient and accurate to list basic COD (ie pulmonary embolism; asphyxiation by hanging; plane crash; etc.) МандичкаYO 😜 00:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
We're on the same page in a lot of ways. I would just consider cardiac arrest to be the unnecessary level. Cardiac arrest can be assumed and the underlying (non-cellular-level) cause can be used if sourced - like complications from surgery or any of your suggestions if applicable. EricEnfermero (Talk) 01:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
And after they do an autopsy it will be possible to be more specific. МандичкаYO 😜 01:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Re: WP:BLP/NEdit

Please don't change your comments after other editors have replied to them. See WP:REDACT, which is part of our Talk page guidelines. Thank you. — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 18:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

  • @MShabazz: Please don't write silly things on my wall. Obviously, I didn't change my comment in any meaningful way; I only added to my original argument. You're allowed to edit your own comment; nothing was changed that affected the context in which someone replied. As you can see at WP:REDACT, it refers to editing your own comments to to correct false information or remove (or redact) personal attacks and warns against the possibility that Removing or substantially altering a comment after someone else has replied may deprive the reply of its original context; I fail to see how this applies to these edits or could cause an issue regarding all two replies - yours claiming speedy doesn't apply and the other one that appears to support that this article needs to take a one-way trip to Delete Street. МандичкаYO 😜 19:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


I think that a new sock of the banned user:Saqraat / MrX is back. He is editing from the username "Malik Mubashir Awan". Khestwol (talk) 19:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Khestwol, Yes, I mentioned that in the latest AfD. How do you reactivate a closed sock investigation? МандичкаYO 😜 20:19, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
I guess we have to just ask an admin. DMacks is the admin who just today indefinitely blocked another sock Shehzad Uddin (talk · contribs) that belongs to Saqraat. I have notified the admin on his talk page of this new sock too. Khestwol (talk) 20:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Ah, Great minds think... I have just reported him at WP:AIV. Perhaps you can add a note there about the suspected SOCK account as well. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 21:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
I created a new sockpuppet investigation - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Najaf ali bhayo. Hopefully they can do more to block his IP. Obviously he thinks it's his mission in life to to convince the world of his ethnic theories, so he's not going to just give up. МандичкаYO 😜 22:38, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for that Мандичка. Hopefully the disruption by him will be stopped by that. Khestwol (talk) 09:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015Edit

I see that you have been previously warned and should be aware of the existence of WP:NPA. This is a blatant personal attack, therefore I blocked your account for 24h. May I please also remind you that this is English Wikipedia, and you are expected to write in English.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:29, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Totally worth it :-D МандичкаYO 😜 01:52, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Miss grand japan logo.pngEdit


Thanks for uploading File:Miss grand japan logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 23:37, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!Edit

  For Mandichka for being a good contributor. Khestwol (talk) 10:46, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

IKEA PencilEdit

Hi Wikimandia. I have reverted your strikethrough of my !vote, as i think you misunderstood what i had done. The nominator had changed their position, but not signed it, so i indicated that fact; my belief is still that the article clearly meets our criteria for existing and as such should not be deleted. Thanks, Cheers, LindsayHello 20:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Ooops, I thought that was your comment. So sorry. Thanks for the note! МандичкаYO 😜 20:24, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
No harm, no foul; i figured it was a simple mistake! Easily fixable ~ this wonderful wikimagic. Cheers, LindsayHello 20:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

AFD closuresEdit

Please do NOT close AFD's that you yourself have already voted in. It is inappropriate per WP:CLOSEAFD, which says that whoever closes the discussion must be an uninvolved user. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Seriously SNUGGUMS? Administrative hopeful, huh? LOL. Good luck. МандичкаYO 😜 00:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
No need to be rude; I was simply pointing out that closures from involved users in discussions is inappropriate. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
To be fair I myself close AFDs I've voted in If the outcomes extremely obvious (Yeah you're not really supposed too but I see no point in letting an AFD drag on just for the pure hell of it) and I think this is one of those AFDs where the outcome was indeed blatantly obvious, Anywho thanks Wikimandia for closing :). –Davey2010Talk 00:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
You were not "simply pointing it out" - you reverted the admin's redirect and re-opened the AfD!!! All for WP:POINT. As Davey2010 said, people do this occasionally when there is no controversy, and it's simple housekeeping and being helpful. It doesn't matter who closes the AfD in these cases. When people see this kind of "hall monitoring" going on for articles as ridiculous as Bunny with a pancake on its head, it makes them less interested in this place. МандичкаYO 😜 00:52, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Warning for WP:NOTTHEREEdit

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Female foeticide in India. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Well, see you at ANI too. --92slim (talk) 04:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Pro-life POVEdit

I did add sources, but not to the article; rather the discussion. Just because you push a pro-life POV doesn't mean that the sources I provided are wrong. In relation to "unsources claims", I don't even know what you are talking about. As I said, get a clue and stop being so unnerving. --92slim (talk) 07:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

LOL calling someone "pro-life" when they specifically stated they are anything but. Good call.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:37, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
So what, actions speak louder than words, troll. --92slim (talk) 07:41, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Says the POV-pusher attacking relevant articles and helpful users, awesome.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:43, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't really intend to edit this topic anymore, it's full of pro-lifers (and talk page stalkers). Have fun. --92slim (talk) 07:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
You didn't add sources to the article or to the discussion. The "source" you supplied was added to the ANI, after that had already started! Perhaps you should take your own advice and seek a clue. It seems that everyone who doesn't agree with you is a "pro-lifer" - interesting. Can you promise you won't edit this topic anymore? Like in writing? Please add that to the ANI if you'd like to be helpful. That would rock! МандичкаYO 😜 07:55, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
No one's giving her those 20 years in jail back to that Indian woman from Indiana, so who cares anymore. Enjoy your lulz, Wikibandia. --92slim (talk) 07:58, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh man, and if we'd just let the article on Indian feticide be deleted, she would have been set free!! Cause all of these things are totally related! Aaargh why didn't you tell me 92slim? I would have changed my position to "SUPERDELETE!" A vote to delete Female foeticide in India is a vote for freedom for all Indian women in Indiana!!!!!11!!oneeonee@!! МандичкаYO 😜 08:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh seriously, you're definitely a challenging one. As I said, it's a legal matter. --92slim (talk) 08:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
No, it's a Wikipedia article. МандичкаYO 😜 08:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
There is already another article for that specific legal term (feticide) and I already said they could be merged: Female infanticide in India. Anyway, this obviously doesn't matter to you so whatever. --92slim (talk) 08:50, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Why would they be merged? They're separate notable topics. Should we also merge feticide and infanticide too then? No, it doesn't "matter" to me on here. That's what being neutral is about. МандичкаYO 😜 09:00, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Feticide and infanticide belong to different legal systems (US and UK respectively) so no, they shouldn't be merged. Maybe learn about abortion law worldwide (specifically UK and US law) a bit before commiting hearsay. Should feticide and abortion be merged? No, then either drop your stupid ANI case or be a helpful person and at least apologize for wasting my time with such childish nonsense. --92slim (talk) 09:08, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
What are you talking about? They do not belong to "different legal systems." LOL!!! Maybe learn about, I don't know, what facts are. Considering nobody but you thinks you've been wronged in any way, and it's pretty obvious that you've been completely owned, why would you possibly expect an apology from me? You created all this drama yourself and apparently can't let it go, by starting this discussion after you'd withdrawn the AfD and continuing to make it worse. You were warned over and over and you didn't listen. МандичкаYO 😜 09:28, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
You're unbelievable. Good luck in life, prolifer. --92slim (talk) 09:32, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Deletion reviewEdit

Renominating an article for deletion a mere 12 days after the previous review was closed is disruptive and contrary to deletion policy which requires a reasonable amount of time to pass before renomination. The original nomination lasted over three weeks and was re-listed twice. The correct procedure if you believe the review was incorrectly closed is Wikipedia:Deletion review where you can properly explain your concerns. You should now withdraw the second nomination. --RexxS (talk) 10:45, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

  • @RexxS: You still seem to not understand the difference between when an AfD is closed as kept and when it is closed as no consensus. This AfD was not closed as kept. Deletion policy very clearly states that this refers to AfDs closed as kept ("After a deletion debate concludes and the page is kept, users should allow a reasonable amount of time to pass before nominating the same page for deletion again.") There is no period of time in which I need to wait, nor is there any reason to do a deletion review (unless I wanted to argue that it shouldn't have been closed as no consensus, but should have been deleted). I'm not withdrawing the nomination so kindly stop pestering me to do so when it is perfectly in my right to nominate this article for AfD. МандичкаYO 😜 11:52, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --RexxS (talk) 12:20, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:SameeEdit

One Vandal namely User:Samee nominated article namely Rehmat Aziz for deletion. After consensus the decision was strong keep. Now the Vandal Samee removed all content from article Rehmat Aziz, deleted all references, all photos, all sources, all external links for his personal enmity with the renowned personality Rehmat Aziz. It is pertinent to mention here that he is the confirmed vandal in urdu wikipedia and the administrator of urdu wikipedia revoked his admin rights due to his vandalism in Urdu Wikipedia and his username has been banned. He is a confirmed sock puppet of User:Farhad Uddin, User:Deepak Chitrali and User:Najaf ali bhayo and they have moved article Rehmat Aziz Chitrali to Rehmat Aziz without any reason. The three users are the same person. User:Samee has been blocked for his vandalism by the administrator of Urdu wiki. Please blockUser:Samee and remove his adminship access and block him for abuse of admin access. I don't think he is qualified for admin or any access in Wikipedia. Please revert all his edits done by the vandalUser:Samee and restore all article to their original position--Abdulqayyumfsc (talk) 13:29, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Hello. Thank you for the note. I have undone the changes as I did not think it was appropriate. However, I don't know if Samee is a sock puppet of those, as his English is much better. Also, he is not an administrator as far as I can tell. МандичкаYO 😜 13:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Abdulqayyumfsc: Think twice before you speak lest you hurt feelings of others. You should be careful and are responsible for allegations made without evidence. Firstly, anyone can nominate an article for AfD (with valid rationale) and that does not make any user a VANDAL provided the integrity of the Wikipedia is not compromised. As far as Rehmat Aziz Chitrali is concerned, the consensus was not STRONG KEEP but only keep. It was opined in the discussion that the article had promotional issue and required NPOV edits. The article was already tagged with maintenance templates and per WP:BOLD, my recent edits to the article does not make me vandal. I have never been an administrator on any Wiki. This is English Wikipedia and here we have consensus instead of democracy and bureaucracy as in the very Wikipedia you're referring to and sugar coating won't influence opinions. You're alleging me a CONFIRMED SOCK PUPPET, have you any proof? A confirmed sock puppet should have an investigation page and I believe that user should be indefinitely blocked. Am I so? Be familiar with Meatpuppetry and I suspect it to be the case of meatpuppetry.3
Instead of accusing others I would suggest you to be bold and revert the edits or start a discussion on article's talkpage instead of spamming.1,2, and here I'll be taking you to ANI.
  • @Wikimandia: I have grave reservations over your edit summary. How did my edits to the article constitute vandalism? If the whole of the article does not conform to the standards, deleting it won't be vandalism. I edited that article per WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and subsequently WP:BOLD. Some of the references I deleted just cited main domain of a site and others deceptively cited.  sami  talk 03:19, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Samee: You deleted almost the entire article! Except for the infobox, you cut the article down to two sentences. It is one thing to delete the promotional info, but you even removed the section about his education. Since you had already nominated it for deletion and it was kept, this is retaliatory editing IMO and if not vandalism, is certainly disruptive. This is not acceptable. Also I don't understand the edit summary that "Removed wordpress reference and another reference that is the main domain (can't be used as reference)". Wordpress is not a blacklisted site, but if it's self-published it's preferable to just put "better source needed" instead of removing the information. I don't understand why Pakistan Television Corporation can't be used as a reference either. МандичкаYO 😜 03:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
There is no problem in citing Pakistan Television Corporation but does citing the main domain make sense? What if I make a claim and cite only the main domain that does not back the claim. While wordpress is not blacklisted, the wordpress reference used in the article was not acceptable and reliable. My edits were not retaliatory in any sense. Because you're just assuming it a retaliation and not bothering to check references, all my edits to maintain the integrity of the Wikipedia would only appear vandalism and disruptive. The very wordpress reference you're favoring refers to the comment made by Mr. Rehmat Aziz and who knows this blog is not self-published but one thing that is confirmed is that the comment made by Rehmat Aziz is self-published. The education section was not cited with references for years and one reference that was cited was the website of Allama Iqbal Open University that did not back his claims. In fact, my edits to the article were in accordance with the policies.  sami  talk 04:06, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
I disagree - what do you think the "better source needed" and "citation needed" tags are used for? You're not supposed to remove giant swatches of non-controversial text. I would suggest you do not edit this article anymore. МандичкаYO 😜 04:27, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Have I edited the article after your edits? I suggest rather REQUEST you to assume good faith. This is a BLP and major portion of the article was not properly referenced and constituted original research and it was not an obligation on me to necessarily add citation needed or better source templates only.  sami  talk 04:40, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
@Samee: I assume good faith when it is warranted. Based on the AfD, it appears you have an agenda with this particular person. Neutral people looked at the coverage and decided it met GNG, but you continued to argue otherwise, including saying things like, "If the subject is really notable, they should not have spammed multiple Wikipedias just to have autobiographies and biographies." This is not how notability works. You also argued, about the coverage of him related to the keyboard, that "As far as keyboard is concerned, there is nothing new in developing a keyboard layout." We don't argue that an article subject didn't deserve the coverage they received. МандичкаYO 😜 05:23, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
You're driving to another direction. This discussion is not about the notability of the person. AfDing once did not mean I have personal agenda; applying your rationale this AfD would translate the same. You're quoting out of the context to weigh your arguments. You say neutral people argued Keep but it should also be remembered that some also argued in deletion or were uncertain and there was no unanimous consensus. Deletion of the article would neither benefit me nor retention would harm me. Should all claims were backed by reliable sources, I would have no objection. You're getting biased in the assumption of good faith.  sami  talk 05:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Renominating an article for deletion that was closed as no consensus (especially when it was not even my original AfD) is not the equivalent of your deleting all but two sentence of an article after your nomination to delete that article failed! It doesn't matter that it was not unanimously kept; consensus is what matters, not unanimous anything. That you're still arguing about the AfD outcome (who cares if it wasn't unanimous? Where is that a requirement), your comments in the AfD, and your apparent personal issue with the article creator show me you were not editing in good faith when you deleted everything except two sentences. We both know it. МандичкаYO 😜 06:16, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
You're twisting the discussion. It was you who quoted out of context AfD comments and ignited the notability debate arguing neutral people agreed to keep. I have already written at ANI that I respect the outcome and it depends on the consensus and was not my desire. When I said it was not unanimous outcome, it was in response to your above comment when you quoted out of context comments and insisted as if all neutral people agreed to keep. I am restating and STRESSING that I have no personal issues either with the subject or the creator/author of the article. I have never been in arguments with them. It is only you and the one with 27-edits, who has levelled allegations against me, think so. The article was not my original nomination and it was previously nominated at AfD twice and last time there was no consensus and then I renominated it. My nomination did not fail but in fact helped to gain consensus. Instead of collaboration, you're distorting the discussion just to bring arguments in your favour. This discussion is not about the notability of the subject but to defend myself against impolite and uncivil allegations. Thus engaging in discussion with you is in vain.  sami  talk 07:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
OK, as you wish. I already apologized if I hurt your feelings by referring to your edits as vandalism. However, I stand by my statement that they were disruptive and not in good faith. In the future, please think twice before you delete 90 percent of an article, especially one you want permanently deleted, and use your critical thinking skills to consider alternative ways the article could be improved. МандичкаYO 😜 07:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of You've Got TimeEdit

  Hello! Your submission of You've Got Time at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ~ RobTalk 06:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

If i'm being difficultEdit

If I'm being difficult, it is only because someone's job is always to be strict and difficult if we are to be a quality encyclopedia. It is not personal nor do I have bias against Burma or non-English cultures. My only concern is notability and verifiability. There's so many terrible-quality articles on Wikipedia; it is hard to be the one saying "this needs to go". I am glad there is activity on gyi and sayadawGyi, because it will result in YES/NO faster and if YES, it will mean work is done to the articles by editors.

I also know it takes time to find cites. But putting bad cites is like the worst thing; I'm assuming good faith, that there was a miscommunication or that you have passive knowledge of Burmese that makes a sentence appear clear but to an outsider is not apparently supportive of what you are citing at all. But I'm not going to stop calling out bad cites. It's not because I'm committed to deleting gyi, it's because they are bad cites. I may have voted delete but I abide by consensus and respect other editors. I just want that to be crystal clear, because I think as nom I am automatically suspect of bias. I'm just trying to make Wikipedia better. Ogress smash! 08:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@Ogress: thanks for the note! I've tried to clean the cites up as much as possible (you'll see I rearranged the first sentence). Unfortunately I don't speak the language so I'm very limited; I've done what I can. (I think this word is also spelled "kyi" based on how Google transliterates it, but I can't say for sure.) I appreciate your vigilance but I do advise caution to avoid WP:SYSTEMICBIAS. Not all subjects have online resources that allow us easy Googling to verify notability. This is not the FIFA World Cup; we're talking about one of the most oppressed people in the world; there is very limited information available online as the Internet was illegal for many years in Myanmar. People do not visit there freely. Having free resources detailing with the specifics of language and culture is just not going to be easily available. The systemic bias against these people is so great Wikipedia refuses to even title their country correctly as Myanmar (as they have requested and as all major sources have done), but insists on sticking with colonial name of "Burma." So patience is really appreciated here to give them a shot. Based on other comments you've made (ie about the ANI on skyerise) I know you to be a sensitive soul so I appreciate you dropping me a note. Together we'll make it better! :-) МандичкаYO 😜 09:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
N.B. "Myanmar" is an imposition by Ne Win; it should be Bamah or Bamar, like Bamar people. In fact, "Myanmar" is pronounced "buh-mah", just like Bamah/Bamar. It's just another method of control imposed by Ne Win as the historical sound [mj] is pronounced simply as [b] in Burmese. (Burmese, like French, has a lot of silent letters and "odd" letter combinations due to historical change.) There's actually other dialects where the sound changes are different, like the Mamar people (I can't remember how to spell it), who retained the m and the Rakhine, who retained the r (r > Burmese y). That's why Burmese borrowings from Pali look so unrecognisable, like Thingyan is spelled saṁkrānti. We'll see if Burma keeps spelling its name like Myanmar over time... I suspect not. Ogress smash! 11:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

Just wanted to say thank you for this comment you made. This individual has, lets just say, been a bit of a pill.... So I appreciate having a little support. Hoping you are well! --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@Zackmann08:, you're welcome. It's really odd/amusing to me how illogical some of these claims are by the crew obsessed with keeping every police department/fire department/shoe department that exists. It's like they are emotionally attached to them... МандичкаYO 😜 18:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Yea seriously. I mean if the page has context, is cited and well organized then fine. But usually they are just copy and pasted. -_- I particularly love that user tho... (Special:Contributions/Zlassiter). 21 edits total. 6th edit ever was warning me for disruptive editing, 11th edit was an WP:ANI against me. Gotta love it! Though I suspect he's probably a sockpuppet but oh well. --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:09, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration, an Editor, a Politician, etc.Edit

I do not currently work in Arbitration. RGloucester is subject to American politics discretionary sanctions if he is disruptive about American politics, including about the primary title of an article about a politician. I generally do not think that WP:ANI is effective at dealing with divisive or polarizing editors, and that arbitration is sometimes the only way to deal with them. However, if the community at ANI wants to impose sanctions on him, they can do that (and I may express an opinion just as another editor). His remarks at Village Pump were over the top. Making over-the-top remarks is not in itself a blockable offense. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

(I removed your 4x signatures as I found it distracting). Over-the-top is not the complaint: being rude/uncivil, engaging in WP:Battleground behavior and being a bully in order to get his way is the complaint. МандичкаYO 😜 21:52, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

2015 Ramadan attacks -> Bloody Friday (2015)Edit

I understand why you have moved the page as part of your improvements to the article but doing so has some unintended consequences. It mightbe worth moving it back until the AfD closes. 17:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

RichardOSmith Yeah I weighed that, but it seemed like AfD is going toward keep at this point. The urgent problem to me is that 1) Ramadan is really not NPOV and 2) since Ramadan is a month long, every single violent attack in a Muslim country is being added to this page, which is really problematic. There were like 20 new events added on today. Such a broad title invites people to keep adding them (and not understanding why they shouldn't), and then it dilutes the improvement of the page and people will want to delete it again. It needs to be focused on where the coverage is (the stuff that happened around Friday, even if we have another name, or where the coverage grows). By the way I really do respect waiting for the AfD to close - someone took the template off the page earlier and I put it back.[4] МандичкаYO 😜 17:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 2 JulyEdit

  Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Keri (talk) 15:57, 3 July 2015 (UTC)\

RGloucester ANIEdit

Why are you commenting in the archive? Nobody's gonna notice. Alakzi (talk) 03:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alakzi: Aren't the ones in the archive still open? I thought they just put them into archive when the current page is too long, but they're still active until they get put in the resolved template. МандичкаYO 😜 03:46, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Nope, all reports in the archives are considered inactive. There's hundreds of them without a coversheet. Alakzi (talk) 03:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
@Alakzi: OK I made a new one. I can't believe they just ignore all of those and let them go to archive. Some are really disruptive people. МандичкаYO 😜 04:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  The Civility Barnstar
For taking a stand on issues of civility even when others respond with apathy GregKaye 16:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much GregKaye! МандичкаYO 😜 19:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for You've Got TimeEdit

Do try and pass this thank you on. Thanks. Victuallers (talk) 00:11, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


I totally agree on competence issue. User in question in afds resorts to long winded policy and excuse deflection. In another AfD, he refused multiple times to actually list example of sources. LibStar (talk) 05:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I know, I've seen him do that over and over in his defense of keeping every small town police department. He claims "Google search results" as evidence of meeting GNG. He one time even argued "I don't have time to go list the actual sources" but has time to leave paragraphs of nonsensical text. He also claims that organizations are buildings and therefore cannot be deleted as non-notable organizations as they actually buildngs (?). Truly a special snowflake. МандичкаYO 😜 05:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
he is one of the worst in terms of WP:BLUDGEON, continually using long winded convoluted responses in an attempt to basically shout down anyone questioning him. LibStar (talk) 02:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
more examples of competence, he said that "police departments are ineligible for deletion." LibStar (talk) 12:29, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding FireflyEdit

I've never seen Firefly.

I would highly recommend taking some time to watch all 14 episodes of Firefly. I'm not a libertarian, nor a huge fan of that particular political philosophy, but the show does a fantastic job illustrating this idea. The characters work well together, and the writing and editing are second to none. Viriditas (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

message from Mr PosenEdit


Forgive my ignorance of how Wikipedia functions. I appreciate what you are doing and hope to resolve the Abraham Greenthal issue as soon as possible. Please note that his name was spelled with only one "l" at the end. A double "l" in German is not possible. "Thal" means valley. Originally, the name would have been "Grünthal."Mr. Posen (talk) 12:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Given your interest in Russia, the following article that I wrote might be of interest to you: “Using Max Vasmer’s Russisches geographisches Namenbuch to Find Locations in the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union,” Gen Dobry!, Volume XVI, No. 1, 31 January 2015, pp. 2-6. The article was reprinted with emendations in Rodziny: Journal of the Polish Genealogical Society of America, Vol. 38, No. 2, Chicago, Illinois, Spring 2015, pp. 9-13. [CS49.P64] Mr. Posen (talk) 12:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wikimandia,

I just wondered if you have had a chance to read my book and what ideas you have on correcting the Wikipedia article. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Thanks.Mr. Posen (talk) 12:17, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Yesterday I posted a reference to my book on the Abe Greenthal wikipedia article. This morning I found it removed and posted the following on postdlf's talk page: Please explain why you removed the reference to Stop Thief! The True Story of Abraham Greenthal, King of the Pickpockets in 19th Century New York City, as Revealed from Contemporary Sources, ©2015 by Edward David Luft, Washington, DC, 166 pp. and at the Library of Congress, HV6651.L84 2015, which I posted yesterday. Most, if not all of the corrections made to the page came from my book. Mr. Posen (talk) 11:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC) I do not have much hope that postdlf will see reason. May I please ask that you suggest how I should proceed. Please note that there are still major errors in the Abe Greenthal article, but I will let those pass if the reference to my book is placed there. Thank you for your help.Mr. Posen (talk) 11:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


Maybe you can help search for any good sources? I searched and found nothing so any good sources are probably in Ukrainian. SwisterTwister talk 22:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I think it should be speedy deleted as non-notable.... Those sources don't mention him at all and there's no indication of importance anyway. I did find a reference (on Facebook) to him being an architecht for a church in Morocco but it's not significant. МандичкаYO 😜 23:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


I searched for sources and the best I found was this at Books, and the Ukraine article looks very similar (no sources). Can you find any good sources? If not, I may have to take it to AfD. SwisterTwister talk 06:19, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I linked it to the Ukrainian article. It seems like it meets the minimum notability. It's been around for awhile, they have a lot of signed artists and they also run a festival.[5] МандичкаYO 😜 06:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

My RfAEdit

Pavlov's RfA reward

Thank for !voting at my recent RfA. You voted Support so you get a whopping three cookies, fresh from the oven!
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:57, 16 July 2015 (UTC).


Maybe you can shed some light here and see if the Russian Wiki sources are any good. My searches found nothing until this search along with some Books links (but I'm not sure if, say for example, that 2014 book was influenced by this article as the page cuts shortly after). It's concerning this has existed since February 2006 with basically no improvement and, in any case, I may take it to AfD for better consensus. Cheers! SwisterTwister talk 21:52, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@SwisterTwister: Not a hoax - I added solid sources :-) Thank you so much for alerting me!! МандичкаYO 😜 22:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

premature nominationEdit

I wasn't even close to done with the article. Not even close. I just started the first of major edits. I was even going to put this source and many others on there along with a whole bundle of other information. If there isn't a guideline against to what you have done regarding AFDs. There should be. Jhenderson 777 01:24, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jhenderson777: Of course there's no rule against it because it doesn't make a difference. I could create an article about my couch and then claim it shoudn't be deleted because I wasn't finished with it yet. I obviously searched for the subject and there is nothing there to show any notability. The Pop Matters article is a mere mention and not enough to meet WP:GNG. Something is either notable or it's not, and the current state of the article is not important. МандичкаYO 😜 01:33, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Your couch isn't a major recurring fictional location that has already had results in Google in websites. Not a fair example. Have you checked everything? You probably looked at Google Search. That isn't a good way to find the sources. Lots of time I have been a deletionist but your method of desiring to delete something that I just started was a bit unfair. Is this not notable to you? Probably so. But that didn't matter because you were eyeing me creating this article and AFD'd just because you wanted to. Look at all those reliable sources that the Daily Bugle article doesn't have. I bet you won't find "reliable sources" looking the way you were doing finding sources on The Daily Bugle. But I bet you still heard of it thanks to the movies and tv series of Spider-Man. I know that might have sounded against the other things exist essay but I am just using example of relevant related articles that debunks your logic on how you determined something isn't notable in your own mind. Jhenderson 777 01:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
TL;DR. Subject not notable. МандичкаYO 😜 01:58, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
How did you determine that. Lazy googling. If you really want to be fair about saying Spider-Man related isn't notable. Check out this and this. That would be nicer instead of noticing instead of deciding that you are going to delete somebodies work that isn't finished because something is not notable in your opinion. Jhenderson 777 02:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midtown High SchoolEdit

49 minutes from creation to deletion nomination is a bit quick, and from sources being brought forward, the topic may indeed meet the WP:GNG... and I need to clarify that while substantial coverage in sources is nice to have, "substantial" is not a mandate... what is required is that sources discuss "the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it need not be the main topic of the source material. IE: While substantial can be SIGCOV, SIGCOV does not have to be substantisl. Related terms yes, but they do not mean the same thing for Wikipedia. How about we simply accede to Jhenderson777's reasonable request that it be returned to him? Schmidt, Michael Q. 07:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by "returned to him" but I didn't nominate it for speedy deletion, so I'm not sure what the drama is all about. He has at least a week if not more to find sources and improve the article. For a topic as widely covered online as the Marvel Universe is, I don't think finding sources for anything related to it should be particularly hard, do you? Not like it's an article about an 18th-century indigineous artist or something. I think he is not familiar with AfD and thus his bizarre accusation that he was somehow being stalked (or followed, whatever he claims) and his insistence that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.... МандичкаYO 😜 07:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry I was not explicitly clear, but I made no mention of a "speedy" and by "returned to him" I meant his request at AFD that it could have been userfied back to him in a user draftspace. And yes, an AFD runs seven days, and sometimes that is enough time for some, but it can also place a loudly ticking clock upon someone who may have a real-world life and job away from Wikipedia. His "insistance" that other similar articles exist was explained... in that similar fictional elements have been found notable and he believes this can be so shown as well. I ask that you might be please patience with someone who truly believes his article can meet notability criteria, and who is unfortunately sensitive that his work was sent to WP:AFD 49 minutes after being in mainspace and while is was being worked on. I will advise him ti in the future begin his works away from mainspace and not put them into mainspace until notability is obvious. If it gets deleted and if he asks, as an admin I will restore it and userfy-without-a-redirect for work at User:Jhenderson777/workspace/Midtown High School. As Wikipedia is a work in progress and admittedly imperfect, all "drama" and misunderstandings could have been avoided had you treated his early piece as if it were a draft at WP:Articles for creation and by a simple move out of mainspace until a better article versions is ready... something I would gladly do since he is now very aware of your concerns. Thanks. Schmidt, Michael Q. 09:25, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
The reason I brought up speedy is because it is not like this article is in any danger of being immediately deleted, is it? Deletion discussion would take a least a week, so I don't understand his drama. It is very clear he has been around quite awhile (16,000+ edits) and has had pages he created deleted, so I don't see why he is getting so angry. Sorry I didn't see his request - go ahead and userfy it - again, he should understand that once he publishes an article in mainspace, it is no longer "his work," whether it's been 1 min or 1 year. You should also recommended he submit it for approval so this does not happen again, as he does not seeem to understand GNG as none of the sources I saw discussed the subject directly or in detail at all. МандичкаYO 😜 09:52, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
My drama is that I didn't want to necessarily spend time discussing an article's notability. Definitely when it wasn't complete. I was on the verge of major edits. But then before I can even expand and add more sources. Your AFD swooped in and changed anything. No chance for other editors to review or kick in at the slightest. It was like a ****block to what I what I was doing. Also I wasn't angry. Just frustrated. It didn't help that outside the cyber universe that I was having some pain at the time either. I could have maybe be snappy on improving the article in some other times but unfortunately not at THAT PARTICULAR time. Also I am very aware that it wasn't my work. But you didn't even let it be a chance to be anybody's work either. I am very aware of WP:OSE. I am also aware that it's a essay. Not a guideline. It should be taken with a grain of salt and is there to pick off any bad bad reasons to vote "Keep". If that was the only argument I used, then my excuses were meaningless. But it wasn't. I actually brought them up to ask a fair questions. Those articles are relevant to the article I made. Comparatively reliable sources are not even on the other articles. This article (that isn't my work) was just created. It was picked on because it was recently created compared to the others. That doesn't seem fair IMO.
Only two things I created was ever deleted. I also favored delete on them after it was AFD'd because I grown as a editor. They were articles that were just splitted anyways.
Also I don't believe you stalked me. Stop saying that! I corrected myself. I believe you saw my work on the recent changes special page and just decided that it wasn't notable for an article way too prematurely. Also I didn't even mean "stalking" as a bad thing. So no assuming bad faith anymore. Jhenderson 777 13:28, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Helpful hint: If you don't want to "spend time discussing an article's notability. Definitely when it wasn't complete" then don't publish incomplete articles. You've been around long enough that you should know what userspace is and that this is the place to create articles there that won't be subject to scrutiny by other editors, especially when new page patrollers are waiting to do exactly that. There is also the very helpful {{uc}} template to put at the top of your article. МандичкаYO 😜 22:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

─────────────────────────Your helpful tip is noted (Even though I knew and done these in the pasts). Although your "should have know better" style I am going to brush off. There is nothing wrong with what I did. There is nothing wrong with what you did. We are both the fault of eating the fruit and we got what was coming to us. No point in pointing fingers on who did the most wrong (Obvious metaphor is obvious). Jhenderson 777 23:32, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

1) I have no hurt feelings. 2) I didn't start this discussion on my page, inviting this unnecessary drama over something as silly as an AfD (again, not a speedy delete where the article was in any danger of immediately disappearing). I was done discussing it at the AfD. When I see an article that I feel completely fails GNG, I'm going to nominate it for deletion, as instructed in the new page guideline. One of the outcomes of AfD is userfy. There is no nomination for userfy and considering the reaction the AfD got ("I'm so furious!" "Other stuff exists!" etc), I highly doubt me dropping a note suggesting userification would have been met with agreement. But I'm happy to see this discussion end, so please stop leaving messages on my wall about it :-) Thank you. МандичкаYO 😜 00:37, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Recent warning at talk pageEdit

Hello, I simply wanted to notify you that I think you meant to add this warning to User talk:Rockteem Bhattacharjee, not Rockteem bhattacharjee. The user's abilities are now removed regardless but I wanted to let you know. Cheers! SwisterTwister talk 05:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh duh! You're right. Thanks! МандичкаYO 😜 05:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

i love you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sailor of Panama (talkcontribs) 04:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC-5)


Sorry - didn't mean to delete you there - trying to shut down this pain of a sock! - SchroCat (talk) 09:55, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

That's OK. Looks like I'm the only one he likes! LOL. I'm honored. МандичкаYO 😜 09:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)


For the barnstar. LibStar (talk) 10:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I love you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humba Jumba (talkcontribs) 11:11, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for all the love, Humba Jumba! We need more love on Wikipedia. LOL. МандичкаYO 😜 11:21, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

AFD policy: When to go to AFD and when notEdit

Hello. I'd hoped "let's agree to disagree" would end it but if you're going to accuse me of policy violations, let's hash it out, as I certainly have read Wikipedia's policies and am somewhat insulted you think that I'm lazy & ignorant rather than having a different opinion than you. Going to try to separate this from the particular AFD and talk about AFD policy in general.

In the great purge of various perceived "fluff" from 2007-2009 or so - mostly fictional character stuff, some merited, some not - there were a variety of cleanup solutions proposed. Sometimes people just plain redirected without comment an article. Sometimes people *tried* to redirect an article but there was opposition. And many times everything in these spin-off articles was uncontroversially true, but the question was more if such intense coverage was merited, e.g. detailed plot summaries (before an explicit policy was invented to make this a deletion reason). Now, nobody contests that the flat redirect option could happen if everyone agreed, and it was even fine for the occasional bold editor to do so outright. However, for more borderline cases or if another editor reverted the redirect, it was usually taken to AFD. Additionally, an AFD result of "redirect" has a much stronger force behind it if someone wants to remake the article, with it arguably requiring going to DRV rather than just boldly remaking. (Not that this has always stopped people from recreating AFD'd articles, but I disgress.)

My point is this: it is always possible to go to AFD for such a redirect, and sometimes it is required, e.g. if another editor in good standing disputes this on the talk page (as happened to me 4 years ago). It is in no way against policy. It isn't need to go to AFD for "cleanup", yes, but when the cleanup is "redirect the article" and there's a dispute, AFD is the fastest way to resolve the dispute. There's little functional difference between deletion and redirection; redirection is de facto deletion, so it seems like splitting hairs to claim there is one. That's my take on the overall rules, and furthermore it's a good idea, because AFD can give a comparatively final result on a contentious issue.

Going back to this specific AFD rather than AFD policy in general, I dunno. Should I not have given specific examples of problems? I thought bringing the article to AFD would have made it crystal clear, but my "cleanup" I'd perform is redirecting the article to tax resistance, not fixing the specific issues I identified, which were meant as examples only. I have 0 confidence that the revolts I'm not closely familiar with are merited when almost every revolt I am closely familiar with is misleading or wrong. Now if you disagree with me and think the article is great, fine. If you think that I shouldn't have taken it to AFD in the first place, and furthermore am somehow breaking the rules of Wikipedia, I vehemently disagree. As far as I'm concerned, it's people who delete contentious material quietly and without raising it to a larger audience who are breaking the spirit of Wikipedia. SnowFire (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@SnowFire: I'm not sure why you feel so insulted. I certainly didn't mean to insult you, and I'm sorry if you felt that way. The guidelines are right there, however. The simple matter is it's a notable topic that has too many examples and needs to be improved. There is just no valid reason to delete it. It looks like it's already been closed as nobody else agreed it was a candidate for deletion. МандичкаYO 😜 21:36, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm happy to bury the hatchet, and I have no problem with people disagreeing with me and voting keep.
Re "I'm not sure why you feel so insulted": The reason why you got this rather upset screed was that you seemed to be arguing that bringing the article up for deletion itself was a violation of Wikipedia policies. That I wasn't merely wrong about the article, but that I was violating Wikipedia policy. And that if I'd read WP:BEFORE I'd understand this, and this is obviously just simple cleanup, etc. I was trying to explain to you that, IMHO, I was not asking for simple cleanup but rather deletion; and that far from ignoring WP:BEFORE, I'd followed it scrupulously by waiting for 4 years hoping for the article to improve before trying to delete it, and that the lack of fixing the "it's all wrong" problem for such a long time did in fact qualify as a reason for deletion. It was extremely infuriating to attempt to a deletion in the nicest, slowest way possible, and be accused of breaking the rules! Yes, nobody agreed with me. That's fine. But if we set up a standard where AFD nominations that "fail" are inherently wrong, that's a horrible standard to have. Articles can go to AFD and be kept, even snowball kept, and that's healthy & fine. Now, if that's not what you meant, sorry about the misunderstanding, of course; however it's very strongly the implication I got, as you didn't engage me very much over the article's problems and more acted as if I didn't understand AFD. SnowFire (talk) 22:12, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to emphasize that you personally had violated any policy. I simply stated, over and over, that this article did not meet the criteria set for AfD, by the policy that seems fairly clear. You kept arguing otherwise. AfD was quickly closed almost in a Snow Keep, by a non-admin nonetheless, who took a look and saw the article did not meet the criteria for deletion. That you "followed it scrupulously by waiting for 4 years hoping for the article to improve" seems like a colossal waste of time. I'm not sure why you put forth so much effort into an article you flatly refuse to edit. It appears the only edit you've ever made to the article was to nominate it for deletion, despite your vigilant watch. Wikipedia relies on Wikipedians acting together as a community and each contributing something. The project is not improved by someone complaining to other people that they need to go fix something. It's called WP:SOFIXIT. There's even a template (Template:Sofixit) that basically says, "thanks for complaining, how about you fix it yourself?" МандичкаYO 😜 23:22, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for I Am JazzEdit

Materialscientist (talk) 01:51, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015Edit

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to History of anatomy in the 19th century 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:
  • (Andreas vesalius (1514-64), a Belgian and a professor of medicine at the University of Padua, was

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:28, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Thomas John Barnardo 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:
  • September 1905) was am Irish [[philanthropist]] and founder and director of homes for poor children]. From the foundation of the first [[Barnardo's]] home in 1867 to the date of Barnardo's death,

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:23, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

About Chapel of the Boim familyEdit

  Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Chapel of the Boim family a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Alakzi (talk) 20:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@Alakzi, Ymblanter, and Danrok: This is strange, I did not do a cut-and-paste move. I just moved it normally. Chapel of the Boim family should have stayed as a redirect. I don't know why I'm getting these alerts. МандичкаYO 😜 20:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
You moved it and then replaced the redirect with an exact copy of the original article, so that for a month we had two identical articles in the main space. Now I deleted one of them. I have no opinion which name is preferable.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: That must be some kind of bug because I did not do that. I moved the article and it automatically created a redirect. It doesn't make sense that I would move the article, copy the entire content, GO BACK to the redirect and paste the content over the redirect.... I can't see the deleted article history, but I'm wondering, I see the day after I moved it I got a Disambiguation Bot message about something I linked before I made the move - I used the bot to fix it. Could that have somehow also changed the old article as well? Thanks for your time. МандичкаYO 😜 21:07, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
I do not think anybody suggests you have done this on purpose, it must have been accidental. I can not check the deleted history without deleting the redirect first (which I am not willing to do), but I am pretty sure the deleted article had four edits: you creating a redirect, you restoring the full version, I believe, next day, someone AfD ing it, and the speedy nomination.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:55, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm thinking it must be a bug. I can't see any circumstances when this could happen by accident. I will ask the Disambig bot creator about it. МандичкаYO 😜 08:46, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Your July 2015 accusations of a Hillary Clinton focus by another user/editorEdit

On 2015-07-29 "User:Wikimandia" wrote to "User:Professor JR" ---

It seems like you are particularly focused on Hillary Clinton. Outside of the hugely problematic "controversies" article, (which the editor who approved has admitted should not have been approved) you added peacock tags on different articles when none were necessary such as this one [6] and this one [7] (anything positive was sourced and there is a neutral tone, discussing any criticisms). This kind of editing is seen as a bit disruptive and has led you to be labeled a WP:SPA (single-purpose account). It looks like you have made some very valuable contributions in many other areas but you have some personal bias regarding Hillary Clinton. I would kindly suggestion you should consider voluntarily not editing that topic. Also FYI, it is good if you list your previous account name - have you done this? It is confusing to see you claim you have been around since 2006 yet this account only has activity from May 2015 on. Happy editing. Thank you. МандичкаYO 😜 18:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Wikimandia: @JoeSperrazza: Accusations of my being a WP:SPA (single-purpose account) and the contention by "User:Wikimandia" of some particularized or single purpose focus in Wikipedia on my part, are clearly unwarranted. And, I'm afraid that I do resent them as a personal affront. If you were to go to the trouble and effort of taking a quick look at my past contributions (numbering more than 1,300) beyond just the past few days, that should reassure you that I can hardly be validly labeled as an SPA, nor as a user with some narrow focus. Also, I assure you that I do not, in fact, have any particular bias one way or the other regarding Hillary Clinton, and even if I were to have, always attempt to abide by objective POV standards when editing Wikipedia entries. By the same token, I cannot, however, be held accountable in any way for any controversies Clinton and her husband may have evoked or stirred up about themselves. If those issues cumulatively tend to cast Clinton in a bad light in your or others' opinion, that is hardly the result of anything I have or have not done. I do, however, believe that Wikipedia users and researchers are entitled to know about such issues and all sides of the opinions about the issues, which have been widely written about and discussed recently in very reputable publications (such as The New York Times and The Washington Post). It is doing Wikipedia users a disservice, and runs counter to Wikipedia policies, to just have some aspects of such matters patently deleted, or otherwise hidden from view in some knee-jerk fashion by those who do, in fact, seem to harbour a likely POV bias in support of Clinton's current political ambitions, as well as apparently much more free time on their hands than I. --- Professor JR (talk) 10:40, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

I think we got a compliment!Edit

I was checking back on our combined efforts on the Ji'an accident page. It was an orphan, so I fixed that - then I saw Chinese WP had added a page. They basically translate our page, and use same references with a few added. They also copied your map and coordinates with a slight difference. We must have done a good impartial job to be so honored!--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 22:43, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Wow, that is a compliment! I'm glad we saved it from being deleted! Thanks :-) МандичкаYO 😜 22:51, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Immigrate and emigrate (Who Do You Think You Are? (UK TV series))Edit

Hi, I did attempt to find an answer by searching the internet about when to use "immigrate" and when to use "emigrate", and seemed to get that you "immigate to" a place and "emigrate from" another, but also that, from the point of view of those left behind, they would say "so-and-so emigrated to...". You pointed me in the direction of WP:MOS. Could you give me a hint as to which MOS section(s) I should be looking at? Thanks. –anemoneprojectors– 21:40, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Look up "Commonly misused words" or consult any dictionary. Emigrate from is correct. Emigrate to is never correct, ever. МандичкаYO 😜 21:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)


This article needs considerable improvement and may need to be AfD'd, my searches found this, this, this and this and the Bulgarian article looks the same. Maybe you can look through it? SwisterTwister talk 04:48, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi SwisterTwister, thanks for this. I cleaned this up a bit. It actually had been used as a source already for a few stories, so was definitely not an orphan, etc. It's frequently quoted and has really good journalistic content - as claimed, its stories are just reprinted wholly in major newspapers and BTA, and its founder has appeared on panel shows etc. Unfortunately, finding sources discussing IT in depth are lacking so this is still problematic. I'm not surprised though because it's been around so long (in internet time). It first would have been featured around 2004 and 2005, and that was very early in the dawn of the Bulgarian Internet, because fewer people were going online for news like now. Sites have long since been redesigned and content chucked. I'm fairly confident that coverage does exist, so it's not a high-priority AfD situation. МандичкаYO 😜 13:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Pavel AlandskyEdit

Maybe you can further translate this article from Russian & Ukrainian including the sources? My own searches found no additional sources so any sourcing is going to be exclusively Russian & Ukrainian. SwisterTwister talk 20:12, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Done! Too bad his tombstone was destroyed - I was hoping to find it in the Commons directory for that cemetery. МандичкаYO 😜 02:37, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Ahmadiyya JabrayilovEdit

I saw this one tagged as a possible hoax and meant to ping you earlier, this would appear factual and the non-English wikis (specifically Russian) have more so maybe you can have a look. SwisterTwister talk 00:09, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

@SwisterTwister: thanks - definitely not a hoax. Not sure why the tagger didn't research it as it doesn't have any signs of being a hoax, especially as you said, the many other wikis that have been around awhile. His name was not transliterated correctly into English and the French just called him "Ahmed Michel" (not Akmed Michele as article had) - he's another interesting subject so I'm happy to fix it up and I'm going to write his French WP article. Merci! МандичкаYO 😜 03:18, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
The French article existed previously and was deleted as a hoax; the Russian one is currently AfDed.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:07, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
I can't see his French article, so it's very possible it was using his Russian or Azeri name. That Russian AfD puts every English AfD I've ever seen to shame - they all but dug him up and DNA tested him. [8] @SwisterTwister:, you have got to check this out. They contacted the French government (scanned the letter, on letterhead!) and even went to this man's museum in his hometown, photographing everything in site. It's been going on since June and is a thing of beauty. If this was on the English Wikipedia, it would be the first time an AfD was tagged as a "Good Article." I don't know why it hasn't been closed as keep. As Ymblanter can attest, people are just asking "what more do you want?" МандичкаYO 😜 15:32, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject TelevisionEdit

There's an issue at WikiProject Television that I would like your input at. ElectricBurst(Electron firings)(Zaps) 17:50, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for alerting me. Note I rearranged this, as I think they're supposed to be laid out.... МандичкаYO 😜 18:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Dušan BezuhaEdit

How good is your Serbian? SwisterTwister talk 14:52, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

  • @SwisterTwister: hah almost the same as BG so I got the jist but did a quick search for this guy and this is copyvio from ... I'm on my phone so can you please take care of it? Nevermind, got home and tagged for speedy. Thanks! МандичкаYO 😜 23:12, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
How about Nikolay Nikolayevich Durnovo? The Russian wiki has the most with some at Ukrainian and Romanian. SwisterTwister talk 15:16, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Can I include an empty section with instructions on what can listed within that section?Edit

See Talk:List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zindagi_TV#What_is_wrong_with_adding_an_empty_header_for_upcoming_programs_with_instructions_in_html.3F. I added an empty section with instructions within the edit html about what can be listed within a section. But "TheRedPenOfDoom" deleted the entire section with instructions. I have left it there so that anyone who wants to edit the section can see the criteria about what can be listed within the section. See his edits here..

Am I violating any rule that prevents me from adding an empty header with instructions? Your reply would be gratefully appreciated. Manoflogan (talk) 00:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Why would you add an empty header with instructions? Seems like a bad look for the article and also what's the point? It only takes two nanoseconds to add a new header. МандичкаYO 😜 17:37, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
The idea was to lay the guidelines for what constitutes a valid future entry? Many wikipedia editors may not bear that in mind when adding new entries. In those events, the entries are often deleted by other experienced wikipedia editors on the grounds of violation of some rule that new editors may not know of. This is result of heated discussions (if I can use that term) with "TheRedPenOfDoom" on what constitutes future content. I don't think that listing sourced future content is promotion, while he does. Manoflogan (talk) 02:06, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
@Manoflogan: You shouldn't add empty sections, because it looks bad, but if you want, you can add in commented out instructions using the <!-- and --> tags. МандичкаYO 😜 02:11, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I have done that. Is that not the right way? Manoflogan (talk) 02:15, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
No, because you created a blank section. Include the header in the commented out section and you should be fine. I don't know why you put "<!-- Add all upcoming entries between the two comments -->" though, this seems like an unnecessary instruction. МандичкаYO 😜 03:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Stupid question from a newbie editor on what constitutes valid sourceEdit

I know that primary sources are preferred, but I wanted to ask you about using social media as one of the source of contents? If any of them acceptable?

  • Post from a verified social media account (Twitter/Facebook/Instagram etc.)
  • YouTube video from a verified channel

What if one or both of them are third party entities? Any clarification would be appreciated. Manoflogan (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you can use primary sources for many things. Check out WP:PRIMARY. PS I'm happy to help you out. Everyone was a newbie editor once! МандичкаYO 😜 02:15, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Nikolay Nikolayevich DurnovoEdit

I mentioned this above and you haven't responded so I assumed you never saw it. SwisterTwister talk 04:27, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I didn't see it. I improved it to basic stub status, will try to expand it soon, I'm going to tackle the Azerbaijani guy first since certain people are motivated to delete it. МандичкаYO 😜 07:43, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Copyright imageEdit

Hi, you have uploaded this image of Shuza Khanzada, I just want to know some info if you are willing to provide. You took that image from newspaper Express Tribune, so it is allowed to use such images?? How you produced metadata of the image? Did you scan it? Do you had print version of newspaper? I think this image don't exists on commons. How to upload such copyright images without getting deleted? Because I want to upload some. I should know this. Thank you. --Human3015Send WikiLove  17:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Human3015: It is not possible to upload "Fair Use" images on Commons, but you can upload them to an individual Wikipedia (such as the English Wikipedia). When someone has died, it is possible to use images where the copyright might be unknown. Obviously, the Express Tribune does not own the copyright on this photo as it appears to be a personal photo. Please see Wikipedia:Image use policy for more information. МандичкаYO 😜 20:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Milan AsadurovEdit

My searches found nothing good and there is not an existing Bulgarian article. Maybe you can help? SwisterTwister talk 02:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

He actually does have a BG article, it's just not linked at Wikidata. I'll fix it later tonight, thanks. МандичкаYO 😜 03:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I found another article of concern, Valentyn Volodymyrovych Bugrym. It has swinged back and forth between additions and removals and I added one of the best links from the past but any further good sources are going to be Russian & Ukrainian. Thanks again! SwisterTwister talk 05:45, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
I thought about speedy tagging Rodger Azadganian but I often think having comments is good especially to bar it from future creation. Feel free to vote though. BTW, I see you have an active Russian Wiki account, would you be willing to start Lester Dragstedt? I significantly improved it here and it'd be nice to have an article there. Cheers! SwisterTwister talk 17:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Sure, I'll do French first. Great improvements! МандичкаYO 😜 19:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Manor of PoltimoreEdit

I have reverted your 13 March 2015‎ addition of "infobox building": article is not about a building or manor house but about an estate or manor. A common source of confusion.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 16:14, 19 August 2015 (UTC))


Are you Russian? I could use some help as I am working on a new article, the "Russian scare" in Australia and I would like some help, I think I'm am supposed to put the Russian name for it in the first line. I don't trust Google translate. Can you tell me how you would say that? Here is the article: User:Alec Station/Russian scare Alec Station (talk) 07:55, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

You would say "Русские страхи" but you don't actually need it in this article, since it would have been only discussed at the time in English. But Russian historians probably wrote about it. Do you want me to find sources? It sounds like a very interesting article! МандичкаYO 😜 08:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

2015 Attock bombing and Shuja KhanzadaEdit

I know there were casualties in the bombing, but is merger possible? The bombing occurred at the late politician's home. --George Ho (talk) 23:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)


If you're female, why are you Мандичка?   Sca (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case openedEdit

You may opt-out of future notification regarding this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 8, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Dimitrie SerafimEdit

I must admit, this painter is just about the last one I would have expected to attract immediate attention! WQUlrich (talk) 00:13, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

@WQUlrich: I saw it in the new pages section and was curious :-) МандичкаYO 😜 00:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)


Well that was interesting... Sorry for getting you involved in that circus. Also, didn't realize that I had recruited you to my cause? What was it that I said that convinced you? Was it "Turn to you"? Or perhaps calling you "my friend"? -__- FACEPALM. Hope you are having a good Wednesday. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing)

I know, so lame. Like two people can't both agree that something looks good. And did you take a look at that guy's block log? I've also never seen someone put a message that administrators are not allowed to leave a message on their talk page - LOL!!! МандичкаYO 😜 17:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
HAHA! I didn't notice either of those... WOWWWW. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing)
By the way @Zackmann08: I checked your contribs, thanks for the great work you do on fire stuff. I'm trying to get more into focused editing on certain projects rather than random stuff and AfD. МандичкаYO 😜 17:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. :-) It has been a fun little project (except for the current nightmare). If you are looking for a project I'd love to have you join the work on California Wildfires. Lots of work still to do. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing)
I wish I had time! I do so many articles that involve translation that they take up too much of my time. But ping me if you're really stuck. МандичкаYO 😜 18:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

──────────── What project/articles are your passion? Also are you from Cali as well? Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing)

  • Yep I'm from California! My main interests are international stuff like Russia, the Caucasus, France, etc, plus historic events, pop culture etc. The last few days (since the train attack in France) I've been working on counter-terrorism articles - you can see my contribs. МандичкаYO 😜 18:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Bulgarian Soft Drink AssociationEdit

You think this is independently notable? My searches found nothing outstandingly good here, here, here and here. SwisterTwister talk 05:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Hmmm surprisingly yes. It seems to be a prominent group that is cited often when it comes to beverages, especially in the larger viewpoint of recycling containers etc. I will see if I can get some sources. МандичкаYO 😜 05:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

2015 attack in Thalys train car has been nominated for Did You KnowEdit

Request your feedback on the points that I have madeEdit

Talk:List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zindagi_TV#Regarding_notability_and_removing_future_programming. This is related to these edits by "TheRedPenOfDoom" Manoflogan (talk) 01:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

(Edit:) I hope that I was civil in this section Talk:List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zindagi_TV#Regarding_notability_and_removing_future_programming. I don't want to get into edit wars or flame wars, but "TRPOD" keeps deleting the entries because he thinks that the references are not reliable, even though they have proven to be correct and are by third party and primary sources. What would you advise? Every reference is attributable upon challenge. Manoflogan (talk) 20:14, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

If he continues to remove this, he should be given a warning to stop his disruptive editing, then if he continues, he should be taken to WP:ANI. МандичкаYO 😜 09:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your advice. I have explained my position on the talk page User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom#List_of_Programs_Broadcast_by_Zindagi providing sources in accordance to WP:BURDEN. He has continued to revert my changes here He removed the references in cited revision edit and then removed the entries in because according to him they are UNSOURCED (emphasis mine)
I have also informed him on his talk page User_talk:TheRedPenOfDoom#List_of_Programs_Broadcast_by_Zindagi. Is there anything else that I should have done?Manoflogan (talk) 00:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Request feedback about validity of sourceEdit

I want to use the following URL as a source about a program being broadcast on Zindagi. This is the correct information and be corroborated by and This conforms to the guidelines listed by WP:SOCIALMEDIA. Would you consider this a valid source? I think that it does. Television post publishes blog posts about the television, movies and other media but the company also offers detailed research information for a fee. "TRPOD" feels that the source is in this case is some one's personal blog, so it should not be considered. But I think the site represents a valid source because the information is verifiable and attributable. Once again, the source is See

Your advice on whether this site represents a reliable source would be gratefully appreciated. I would like to request feedback about the following commits if possible. I believe that the information does not violate the guidelines of WP:SOCIALMEDIA and WP:PRIMARY and therefore can be used as references to determine that a series indeed premiered on a particular date.

Manoflogan (talk) 08:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Ref ابتسام_تسكتEdit

Hey just an FYI, I saw where you reverted my PROD change and substituted a "needs translation" template on this article because this person is notable, just needs translation. Fair enough, however it still needs a linked source somewhere in the article to meet the WP:BLP rules, otherwise it becomes subject to PROD, which is why I had tagged it as such in the first place, not for notability reasons. I re-tagged it as PROD but left the translation marker too. RegistryKey(RegEdit) 11:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!Edit

  7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos Torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos Torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 20:56, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Rough FireEdit

Any interest in helping me expand the Rough Fire? It's poised to become one of the top 10 fires in State history. Also, girl your talk page is HUGE! You know you can setup an auto-archiver... :-p I just finally got around to it myself. Pretty simple to do if you want any tips. Happy Thursday! --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:48, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


What you are looking for is Wikipedia:Deletion_review. Specifically criteria 3: "if significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page". I doubt that would survive however as the bio was fairly extensive and due to his interesting web footprint, ripe for lots of BLP violations - I will admit I have not paid attention to this person in the meantime so there might be significant new info that would pass however. None of the other criteria apply as it was a well-attended AFD with a clear consensus and closed appropriately in line with process. Take attention to what DRV is not, specifically points 1 and 5: "because of a disagreement with the deletion discussion's outcome that does not involve the closer's judgment" and "to repeat arguments already made in the deletion discussion". Regards, Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:52, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

I am not challenging the original deletion determination as consensus nor am I requesting to recreate the deleted page. This is a new article that should go through the AfD process. "Deletion Review (DRV) is a forum designed primarily to appeal disputed speedy deletions and disputed decisions made as a result of deletion discussions" I am NOT disputing the original deletion discussion. МандичкаYO 😜 11:01, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Unless there is substantially new information that argument wont fly. That the same information is presented differently does not make it a new article. Its the same article re-created. Unless the new article has 'new information' that now makes him notable its not a new article and the same arguments made previously at AFD apply. I dont see anything substantially different than the previous article contained. Hence DRV. Regards. Only in death does duty end (talk) 11:27, 18 September 2015 (UTC)


2015 Thalys train attackEdit

Have a bone to pick with you, but I think we can come out of this on good terms and be good collaborators on 2015 Thalys train attack and elsewhere, so let's just get this out of the way. Regarding your edit summary on 2015 Thalys train attack, please remain civil and assume good faith. (Maybe that's not a policy that applies to summaries, but I wish it did.) Let's unpack the summary at 2015 Thalys train attack, and look at your point about "chronological" order wrt controversies, and your point about language.

(controversy should be chronological; info needs to be clear WHY it is a "controversy" and thus should be in article dropped to note; presumption of innocence is NOT OR as it is in the source. If you cannot read French please use Google Translate.)

First: credit where credit is due: I did not notice that the presumption of innocence was sourced in one of the three references, as they were all stuck on the end. Previously, one of the refs I had added was closer to its referent, but given they were all clumped at the end, I didn't read through all of them so didn't see it, so WP:OR does not apply here, I was mistaken. You were right to point out that one of the references did support it. However, with the refs remaining at the end, it's still not clear to the reader which one.

Where we differ on the i>Tele issue, is that I take issue with including the sentence about handcuffed suspects in-line in the article. There is no controversy about what French law is, and it hasn't changed recently due to this event, so it's not newsworthy, it's merely explanatory. The only "news" that this paragraph is reporting on, is the warning to i>Tele. The bit about French law about handcuff pics wouldn't be mentioned in a French news report, because it's obvious. It's just something that Anglo-Saxon readers wouldn't know, and so mentioning it somewhere gives the reader a little extra help. It's kind of like a "translator's note" that you might see in a footnote in a translated work, or an "Editor's note" to help out with something a bit obscure due to difference in time period, culture, or whatever. That was my motivation for moving it into a "Note". Now, I don't feel strongly enough about this to edit-war about it (and that's not the right approach anyway) but putting something inline about it in an article about a train attack just seems O/T to me.

Now, as to "controversy should be chronological", sure, the different controversies should be addressed in the order they occurred (an alternative would be by importance if there were a lot of them, but there aren't). However, that doesn't mean the explanation within a sentence or within a few sentences has to be chronological, and good style often demands it the opposite. For example: if you ever read a description of some cause-effect relation, like in a story about dinosaurs we might read: "The dinosaurs died out due to changing climate conditions on the Earth"--that is in backwards chronological order--first the climate changed, and then the dinosaurs died out. The reason it's done that way, is because the story is about dinosaurs--that's the TOPIC, so it goes first. Explanation follows, can be the same sentence, or other sentences. (If the topic of the article were the changing climate of the Earth and its repercussions, then the bit about the dinosaurs would come second, because it's not the topic.) So I think you see where I'm going with this: the topic of the paragraph about i>Tele is the parquet scolding them for publishing the photo, so that goes first. If explanation why is necessary, it goes second (whether in footnote, or in-line, we'll leave aside for now).

Second: your comment about my language ability: If you cannot read French please use Google Translate. That was snarky and uncalled for. Now you're going to have to sit through some snark comin' back atcha from my side, and then we can forget it and continue on as best buddies (I hope). I can read French just fine, thank you. And it's curious to read a remark like that directed at me, <snark alert!> coming from someone whose edit summaries on French Wikipedia are always in English (when there is one). </snark>

Okay, now we're even. So: if we agree that the topic of the paragraph is the parquet scolding i>Tele network for publishing a prohibited photo, can we also agree to place the topic at the head of that paragraph? That leaves the only disagreement remaining, about whether to follow that with a "because" clause or second sentence inline about French law (like you seem to prefer) or whether to just add an "Editor's Note" type reference as I prefer it. My feeling is that it doesn't really belong there, and perfectly fits the "translator's note" or "Editor's note" type of addition that goes at the bottom of the page as a footnote in a printed book, but I won't go to the ramparts about it, if you're absolutely opposed, for some reason.

I think you do good editing with a view to improving the article. I'm sure we can work out these very minor issues. Let's figure out how best to improve the article, and hopefully others, in the future. Feel free to call on me anytime you want to collaborate on a topic where most or many of the sources are in French. Et bonne continuation! Cdt, Mathglot (talk) 09:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Fings Ain't Wot They Used T'BeEdit

hi my friend. would you know meaning of fings in "Fings Ain't Wot They Used T'Be"? thanks Alborzagros (talk) 07:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you lady. best wishes. I respectably donate this Iranian dish for you. I HOPE you will eat it in Iran. Alborzagros (talk) 07:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Murder of Shuja KhanzadaEdit

You are one of major contributors to Shuja Khanzada and 2015 Attock bombing. Can you help me improve the nomination and the articles? --George Ho (talk) 15:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Somebody Removed pics, poetry & referencesEdit

Sir, somebody removed pics, awards, poetry and references by reverting your last edit in article Rehmat Aziz Chitrali please check your last edit here [9] and check the current edit. Like User:Samee some users are deleting the pics, awards, poetry and external links in this article. Please check and and restore the article in its original position with Pics, poetry, references and external links -- Thanks Abdulqayyumfsc (talk) 13:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

LCCN, not LOCC --and also template {LCAuth}Edit

Hi. Early this year, it appears to me from a spot check of two pages, you worked on the DuPont family or on Delaware, including the addition of Library of Congress Authorities identifiers to template {{Authority control}}. But the parameter name is LCCN and you used LOCC. example Bayard 2015-01-21 example Ridgely 2015-01-20 There are several others among 39 "unknown template property" reported by Kasparbot [10].

For some of these people an ordinary External link to Library of Congress Authorities will be valuable. For one, the target provides a link to browse the online catalog for Library of Congress records of the person's works, which the target of 'LCCN' in template Authority control does not provide. Template {LCAuth} provides that automatically, using the same identifier, such as "n79105973" at Thomas L. Tedrow#External links. Other parameter values "Thomas L. Tedrow" is the primary form of his name at LC Authorities and "14" is the number of catalog records for his works. The fourth parameter, empty in this case, is "ue" in order to spell "catalogue" rather than "catalog".

You may wish to use this external links template for some of your people. --P64 (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Rudolf Abel ArticleEdit

Could you explain your edit on the talkpage of Rudolf Abel. In future could you explain any edits prior to editing the article on the talkpage. Adamdaley (talk) 23:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!Edit

  With this ever dramatic world and winter coming, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day!  This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 05:25, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for 2015 Thalys train attackEdit

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Shuja KhanzadaEdit

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for 2015 Attock bombingEdit

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Wales Green PartyEdit

There is a discussion at Talk:Green Party of England and Wales#Should Wales Green Party become a standalone article? to establish if Wales Green Party (which currently redirects to a section inside Green Party of England and Wales) is notable enough to be restored as a standalone article. As you either took part in the AfD, or are a significant contributor to either Wales Green Party or Green Party of England and Wales, you are being contacted to see if you have input to the discussion. SilkTork ✔Tea time 16:05, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for your comments on the Neelix thing. I have things I wish to say there too, but frankly I'm a bit of a chicken. :) I don't understand the form and certainly don't know the protocol. I am curious if they have or will consult with WMF Legal on this. I'm the only paid employee of a nonprofit that has an unpaid staff of about 60, with some having a supervisory role over others. If one of my senior volunteers had been doing something for years that reduced a protected group to a bucket of parts, I would swiftly and quietly remove him with as little fanfare as possible, then go hide under my desk for the next six months, fearing the arrival of the process servers. Not only does all this feet dragging make us as a group look incredibly stupid, I fear it leaves the foundation wide open to a lawsuit. John from Idegon (talk) 08:23, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration case acceptedEdit

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Neelix. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Neelix/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 17, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Neelix/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias (T)(C) 20:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


Hello Wikimandia. I don't want to prolong the AN/I thread so I thought to leave you a few personal comments.

1. Thank you very much for helping clean up Wikipedia.

2. Editors all have defects. Apparently Neelix is excessively prolix, and has an odd sense of humor, and allows his passion for certain topics to overwhelm his better editorial judgement. Let's be kind and just assume good faith, without assuming competency. I trust ArbCom to investigate and take appropriate action in this matter.

3. When several accounts act together, particularly if they have been recruited or coordinated off-wiki, WP:MEAT applies. I hate this name, meat puppets, but nobody has yet invented a better term. When meat puppetry is suspected we have to ask a couple questions. First, are the accounts working in collusion? If so, we can treat them as if they were one editor, even when there are multiple editors involved. So, we look at the combined contributions of the accounts. Second, does the combined contribution history show serious disruption or obnoxiousness (e.g. personal attacks or harassment)? If both answers are affirmative then all the accounts can be sanctioned as if they were one. That's policy, and that's how I looked at the situation. I admit that I should have been more skeptical about Cirt's complaints, and looked deeper into Neelix's editing. Had I known then what I know now, I would have given the editors more slack because they were engaging a serious problem, even if they were doing so in a problematic way.

4. At this point I am not sure what to do to improve the situation, but am open to suggestions.

5. If you have any concerns, feel free to visit my talk page.

Thank you again for your good work. Jehochman Talk 15:59, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I think you need to put this on the ANI. It's nothing to do with me - I just discovered it. There is another admin who did the same. This is evidence of a much larger problem as it exposes how certain editors and of course admins are blindly trusted. In No. 3, you list all the things that should be considered/investigated in case of WP:MEAT, but I fail to see how you did any of those things, and this is what needs to be explained on ANI. As for Neelix - he's shown himself to be extremely incompetent if not outright dishonest and manipulative, and every day more things are uncovered. Please see the information already provided here and the wikipediocracy article on his exploiting WP as a tool for advocacy and evangelism. МандичкаYO 😜 17:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

friendly adviceEdit

I do not want to make an issue of it, but "liarrhea" could be taken as a personal attack. But it nonetheless is a clever word coinage. DGG ( talk ) 05:36, 12 November 2015 (UTC) .

Arbitration statementEdit

The Arbitration Committee has asked that evidence presentations be kept to around 500 words and 50 diffs. Your presentation is 1238 words. Please edit your section to focus on the most relevant evidence. If you wish to submit over-length evidence, you must first obtain the agreement of the arbitrators by posting a request on the /Evidence talk page.

For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias (T)(C) 21:49, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Item form Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentsEdit

Hi Wikimandia, I had a chance to read your response on the admin noticeboard, though I respect everyone's input, I have to say that your response does not address user Faustian's remarks, and my request was made to address that issue, not to get additional feedback on the RfC, where only user Darouet made the suggestion to start over. While the majority of editors cast their vote for Option 3, agreeing that the disputed section contained undue weight and coat-racking. If you are still available, please address the issue of comments which contain negative ethnic overtones. Thank you. --E-960 (talk) 22:37, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

  • @E-960: Whenever you bring an issue to ANI, there is a chance it will "boomerang" back to you as other editors and admins look at the whole situation and your own actions. We don't just look at one side. I don't see any negative ethnic comments, as being Polish or non-Polish are not negative things. So if he states, all the ethnic Poles feel one way and all the non-Poles feel another way, that would be more of a statement of fact rather than something offensive. (This is what I assume you're talking about negative ethnic comments.) МандичкаYO 😜 22:50, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
I don't mean to dissuss this issue at length, but the vote results are pretty clear, when you read user comments vast majority agree that the article contains POV and Coat-racking, now a legitimate discussion is taking place as to how the issue should be fixed:
  • Option 3: As suggested by users SMcCandlish and Ivanevian. I think that the proposed "third way" approach is fair and worth pursuing. --E-960 (talk) 07:05, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 2: Keep as is no changes. Faustian (talk) 15:03, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 3: Certainly keep lead and body material that describes pogroms, but add more information that also describes the causes of anti-Semitic and anti-Ukrainian violence, as we discussed in the Talk Pages above. -Darouet (talk) 18:47, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 2: Keep as is no changes. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 01:22, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 3: There is clearly a WP:UNDUE / WP:COATRACK problem here, but it is not as significant as the nom suggests. I do agree that this material can be compressed by about 50%, but a summary of it should not be removed from the lead. As noted below about Enc. Judaica, Haller's Army is notorious for this; i.e., it's one of the things that establishes WP:Notability. It's not WP's job to do a WP:SYNTH analysis of our own on how significant the alleged pogromming was in relation to the Blue Army's role in the war. Just follow the sources. That said, don't dwell and dwell on one aspect from cherry-picked sources.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  06:11, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 3: I wouldn't go as far as option 1, but the emphasis on anti-Jewish violence by the BA completely distorts this article, so a re-edit of some kind is definitely needed. Ivanevian (talk) 22:33, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 1/3 I second Ivanevian; the article currently has an undue focus on this issue. I'd suggest shortening the lead a bit (what are "numerous segments"?), and trying to be more concise in the body. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 1: Re-edit the sections as recommended. Reason: It is too one-sided, hence POV now. Zezen (talk) 00:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

--E-960 (talk) 22:59, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


Why did he chose to argue with you instead of me? You are senior editor and he would have easily won arguments against me. User:Future Perfect at Sunrise did helped little. --The Avengers (talk) 01:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

@The Avengers: I don't know - probably because I was neutral and he could not accuse me of being dishonest. It is easy to say "The person accusing me is suspicious," but when other people actually believe the accuser, that's trouble for sure.... I can't believe he had so many accounts! Crazy. МандичкаYO 😜 01:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
That could be! He expected Administrators would ignore my accusations. He was worried if Administrators would listen to Wikimandia. That's why he tried to prove your points wrong, which was futile.
Hello, Wikimandia. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
--The Avengers (talk) 03:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks again The Avengers (talk) 02:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.Edit

Thank you for your recent help and comment on the ANI case about the Danbury, Connecticut article. I am sure the article will be improved as a result of the call for sourcing, and some cruft will indeed be weeded out, but it won't be wholesale axed as it had been. I really appreciate that the guidelines of Wikipedia can result in good resolutions to disputes like this one. Thanks for your kindness and your time. SageRad (talk) 20:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)


Please read and understand the information in the policy (not guideline) linked above. In particular, that at WP:COMMONNAME#Foreign names and anglicization, which says:

Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese, or Russian names, must be transliterated. Established systematic transliterations, such as Hanyu Pinyin, are preferred. However, if there is a common English-language form of the name, then use it, even if it is unsystematic (as with Tchaikovsky and Chiang Kai-shek).

The common English-language name for the city is "Kiev", If you dispute that, please show evidence on the article's talk page to back up your view. In the meantime, please do not edit war, I am following policy here. BMK (talk) 23:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Please see the RfC I've opened here. BMK (talk) 00:12, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
@Beyond My Ken: Kyiv IS English as it is found in English dictionaries! Київ is Ukrainian just like Киев is Russian. It is not true that Kiev is the common name when Kyiv is widely used. Please educate yourself about this concept. МандичкаYO 😜 01:10, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Please read the above. The question is not whether it is "English" or not, the question is whether it is the common name in English. It is not. BMK (talk) 02:06, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Language disputesEdit

Hi, I saw you were involved in a dispute regarding the spelling of Kiev. It's best to ignore or severely limit your participation in common name disputes because the community generally blocks everyone who is involved and lets the Goddess sort 'em out. So to avoid topic bans and blocks try to steer clear of these things. Alternatively, you can make use of structured DR methods to achieve similar outcomes. I'm just leaving you this message because I don't want to see you sanctioned. Viriditas (talk) 03:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

You've been accused of being part of a tag-team on ANIEdit

Here: [11].Faustian (talk) 21:29, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Can you help?Edit


Please see Draft:Alex Gilbert. It has been through on going discussions for months for it to not get into the main space. Look [Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alex_Gilbert_(2nd_nomination)] (Nothing to do with a Cinematographer by the way and many sources that are on the page now were not there during this discussion), [Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_August_24] and [Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_October_29]. I have gone through and updated and have also details what each source shows. Please take a look below and do give me any advice! I will just keep on working on the article in the meantime until I find a good time to put it through one last undeletion review. Thanks! By the way.. This article was reviewed and put into the mainspace but then deleted as it had to go through an undeletion review. --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 10:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

@DmitryPopovRU: OK, I will try to help this week. МандичкаYO 😜 10:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank You! :) --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 18:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I have yet again updated the sources for this article. Please I would like to know your opinion. Thanks User:Wikimandia --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 07:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@DmitryPopovRU: Oi I'm so sorry, I forgot!! I promise to help soon. S novim godom!!!! МандичкаYO 😜 08:18, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry User:Wikimandia, but can you please let me know when you will have a look? Thanks --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 09:23, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Long list of references- Updated - 1 January 2016

New Sources that were found since the last Deletion Review.

Note: The Draft Draft:Alex Gilbert had a Un Deletion Review discussion that closed on the 6th of November 2015. The new sources below were not there. See Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_October_29

  • [12] Retrieved 22 December 2015 - Source is from Channel One Russia. Alex appeared on Russia’s biggest TV Talk show ‘Let them Talk’. This source talks about his journey and also his I’m Adopted Organisation. See [13] (YouTube link to the show) and look at 47:27
  • [14] and [15] Retrieved 22 December 2015 - Also from Channel One Russia
  • [16] Retrieved 22 December 2015 - From - A reliable news source from Russia about his work and projects.
  • [17] Retrieved 24 December 2015 - From Progorod76 - A reliable news source from Russia.
  • [18] Retrieved 22 December 2015 - Another new source.
  • [19] Retrieved 22 November 2015. ‘’Whirlwind trip feels like it didn't happen’’ The Northern Advocate - Source talks about his recent trip to Russia for his TV Appearance on ‘Let them Talk’
  • [20] Retrieved 1 December 2015. ‘’To Russia with love: The Kiwi-Russian taking his homeland by storm’’ - TVNZ - Alex is featured on another TVNZ ‘’Sunday’’ Story about his recent trip to Russia. He is expected to appear on this huge TV Channel in Russia this year.
  • [21] 16 November 2015. ‘’Alex Gilbert - I crossed the ocean, to see my biological parents” - . This is another big article website. It also talks about his recent trip to Russia.

References that cover his 'I'm Adopted' Organisation Please note: Yes these were in the old DRV.

  • [22] Анатомия дня TV Show NTV Russia Retrieved 29 October 2015. Source covers his Non-Profit Organisation 'I'm Adopted' and talks about him helping others.
  • [23] Retrieved 22 August 2015. Whangarei boy who traced Russian roots helps fellow Kiwi adoptees find bloodlines (TVNZ) - This source also talks about 'I'm Adopted'
  • [24] Retrieved August 7, 2015. Russian adoptee shares stories The Northern Advocate - This source is only about his 'I'm Adopted' page and mentions A former Russian adoptee raised in Whangarei is helping other adopted people share their stories. This is not a BLP1E am I correct?
  • [25] Retrieved 4 November 2015. Adoption project enthrals Russians The Northern Advocate - This article talks about what impact his page has had with the Russian Media. I have also added these news outlet links to the article. This is due to his 'I'm Adopted' page.
  • [26] Retrieved 29 October 2015. In social networks, a new unusual community. Children of Russia, adopted by foreigners looking for their biological parents Translated from Russian. NTV Russia - This source is from a huge Russian Media outlet about his I'm Adopted Organisation. Read the article or watch the video.

Other References

  • [27] Retrieved February 26, 2015. From Russia with love The Northern Advocate - This article is about his Book 'My Russian Side' that he published in 2014. It reads Now 22, Alex, has written a book about his journey.
  • [28] Retrieved 23 February 2015. TVNZ - This is his actual Full Length NZ TV Documentary Story which aired in NZ and yes at the time was an issue where BLP1E was talked about in the previous deletions. New Sources have since been found and updated. ALOT MORE
  • [29] Retrieved July 2, 2014. The New Zealand Herald - This article covers a meet up Alex Gilbert had with another New Zealander he found through his TV Documentary.
  • [30] Retrieved 16 November 2015. Change One Life Russia - This article is an excellent interview with Alex Gilbert about his own story and journey.
  • [31] Retrieved 5 June 2015. - TV3 NZ - This TV Show features Alex who talks to other adoptees who are going through the same journey as he went through.

References in Russian Language If you can't understand them then don't comment. People have been ignoring these. These are put up as a support to the article. It shows you how much coverage it had.

  • [32] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - This article talks about his experience and journey.
  • [33] Retrieved 21 October 2015 New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk, threw him in the hospital . echo76 - New Russian article talking also about his life and journey to Russia.
  • [34] Retrieved 21 October 2015. New Zealander found in Rybinsk own mother - - This article notes if translated Now the young man helps the other people who find themselves in a similar situation, to find their loved ones.
  • [35] Retrieved 21 October 2015. The guy from New Zealand found in the Yaroslavl region his own mother
  • [36] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - This article talks about his journey and experience also
  • [37] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk
  • [38] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - This source is from Vesti News. One of the largest TV News outlets in Russia - Russia-24
  • [39] Retrieved 22 October 2015. - This is another alternative news source
  • [40] Retrieved 1 November 2015 - Another news source in Russia
  • [41] Retrieved 22 October 2015. - A news source from Rybinsk City, Russia
  • [42] Retrieved 16 November 2015. - - A reliable source talking to Alex directly about his experience and journey.
  • [43] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - Another Russian News Source


Long list of references- Updated - 1 December 2015

New Sources that were found since the last Deletion Review Note: The draft Draft:Alex Gilbert had the deletion review before these and closed on the 6th of November 2015. See Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_October_29

  • [44] Retrieved 22 November 2015. ‘’Whirlwind trip feels like it didn't happen’’ The Northern Advocate - Source talks about his recent trip to Russia for his TV Appearance on ‘Let them Talk’
  • [45] Retrieved 1 December 2015. ‘’To Russia with love: The Kiwi-Russian taking his homeland by storm’’ - TVNZ - Alex is featured on another TVNZ ‘’Sunday’’ Story about his recent trip to Russia. He is expected to appear on this huge TV Channel in Russia this year.
  • [46] 16 November 2015. ‘’Alex Gilbert - I crossed the ocean, to see my biological parents” - . This is another big article website. It also talks about his recent trip to Russia.

References that cover his 'I'm Adopted' Organisation

  • [47] Анатомия дня TV Show NTV Russia Retrieved 29 October 2015. Source covers his Non-Profit Organisation 'I'm Adopted' and talks about him helping others.
  • [48] Retrieved 22 August 2015. Whangarei boy who traced Russian roots helps fellow Kiwi adoptees find bloodlines (TVNZ) - This source also talks about 'I'm Adopted'
  • [49] Retrieved August 7, 2015. Russian adoptee shares stories The Northern Advocate - This source is only about his 'I'm Adopted' page and mentions A former Russian adoptee raised in Whangarei is helping other adopted people share their stories. This is not a BLP1E am I correct?
  • [50] Retrieved 4 November 2015. Adoption project enthrals Russians The Northern Advocate - This article talks about what impact his page has had with the Russian Media. I have also added these news outlet links to the article. This is due to his 'I'm Adopted' page.
  • [51] Retrieved 29 October 2015. In social networks, a new unusual community. Children of Russia, adopted by foreigners looking for their biological parents Translated from Russian. NTV Russia - This source is from a huge Russian Media outlet about his I'm Adopted Organisation. Read the article or watch the video.

Other References

  • [52] Retrieved February 26, 2015. From Russia with love The Northern Advocate - This article is about his Book 'My Russian Side' that he published in 2014. It reads Now 22, Alex, has written a book about his journey.
  • [53] Retrieved 23 February 2015. TVNZ - This is his actual Full Length NZ TV Documentary Story which aired in NZ and yes at the time was an issue where BLP1E was talked about in the previous deletions. New Sources have since been found and updated. ALOT MORE
  • [54] Retrieved July 2, 2014. The New Zealand Herald - This article covers a meet up Alex Gilbert had with another New Zealander he found through his TV Documentary.
  • [55] Retrieved 16 November 2015. Change One Life Russia - This article is an excellent interview with Alex Gilbert about his own story and journey.
  • [56] Retrieved 5 June 2015. - TV3 NZ - This TV Show features Alex who talks to other adoptees who are going through the same journey as he went through.

References in Russian Language If you can't understand them then don't comment. People have been ignoring these. These are put up as a support to the article. It shows you how much coverage it had.

  • [57] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - This article talks about his experience and journey.
  • [58] Retrieved 21 October 2015 New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk, threw him in the hospital . echo76 - New Russian article talking also about his life and journey to Russia.
  • [59] Retrieved 21 October 2015. New Zealander found in Rybinsk own mother - - This article notes if translated Now the young man helps the other people who find themselves in a similar situation, to find their loved ones.
  • [60] Retrieved 21 October 2015. The guy from New Zealand found in the Yaroslavl region his own mother
  • [61] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - This article talks about his journey and experience also
  • [62] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - New Zealander Alex Gilbert found his mother in the Rybinsk
  • [63] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - This source is from Vesti News. One of the largest TV News outlets in Russia - Russia-24
  • [64] Retrieved 22 October 2015. - This is another alternative news source
  • [65] Retrieved 1 November 2015 - Another news source in Russia
  • [66] Retrieved 22 October 2015. - A news source from Rybinsk City, Russia
  • [67] Retrieved 16 November 2015. - - A reliable source talking to Alex directly about his experience and journey.
  • [68] Retrieved 21 October 2015. - Another Russian News Source

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Barnstar of Good Humor
I've just noticed your comment [69] & I can't stop laughing  , I honestly hadn't even realized the pink shirt otherwise I would've said something to him/her sooner  ,

Thank you for brightening up my rather crappy day!
Keep up the great humour :), –Davey2010Talk 17:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

You might be interestedEdit

Hello Mandichka :-),

Regarding this, you might also possibly be interested in this. If yes, feel free to leave a comment on it. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 06:20, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

An apologyEdit

I wanted to say im sorry about the incident the two of us had in the past. I noticed your name, and remembered. I don't know, I guess I was just off that day. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:43, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Knowledgekid87 Hah I don't even remember! I'm not going to look it up to be reminded. All is forgiven! If I was being a smartass (most likely) then I also apologize. МандичкаYO 😜 15:54, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


This is one example. If we are going to be "cleaner", for lack of a better term, then this is one of the expressions we need to clean up. The reference is pretty much the same as the infamous c-word: reducing women to, or explaining their behavior from, basic biology. DD2K didn't have much relevant criticism to offer ("bullshit" is not a rebuttal), and that you were not offended doesn't mean the term doesn't have a loaded history steeped in Victorian sexism. But there's something else I need to take issue with--"Being hysterical is most certainly not specific to women", which means you do seem to think that Sagaciousphil was being hysterical. I thought she was just being very angry, possibly unreasonably so, but still--"angry" will do just fine, and it doesn't carry all these de- and connotations. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Hysteria, until the 19th century, was thought to be a female disorder. We all live in the 21st century, and most people are not familiar with medical associations last common in the Victorian Era. I advocate common sense in trying to create a more equal community. I know you mean well, but to suggest using the words hysteria, hysterics or hysterical is offensive to women is itself offensive. МандичкаYO 😜 17:20, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Wikimandia, I am well aware of the word's history; context matters. An angry woman being called hysterical, that's at least iffy. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 17:24, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • HighInBC, "Phil went to further hysterics about her being a female and content creator"--the term is pretty clearly used in the context of a woman editor being angry. We can mansplain it away all we like, but there is no need for that language. Note that the whole thing got started of the interpretation of a particular phrase used by another editor, or the misinterpretation. That's all. Note I'm not blocking or templating anyone, but I'm not prepared to have this just laughed off without an explanation or rebuttal to these three quick (throwaway) remarks. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Being that I'm a female, I don't mansplain anything. There is nothing offensive to women about the term hysterics unless it's someone purposely associating women with hysterics. We do not need to be this politically correct; to do so is completely demeaning. Again, common sense please. Nobody in their right mind associates hysterics with being a female. "Phil went to further hysterics about her being a female and content creator" quite accurately explains her lame fit (which is not a slam on disabled epileptics). 99% of people think SagaciousPhil is a guy name Phillip anyway so I don't know why she's even bringing up her gender, unless she somehow thinks that (like being a content creator) it gives her a get out of jail free card. МандичкаYO 😜 17:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
"Her" makes it quite clear that the comment was addressed at a woman, so that person was not one of the 99%. Drmies (talk) 18:02, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
And I'm saying it doesn't matter, since my comment was in regards to SagaciousPhil supposedly being mistreated as a female. МандичкаYO 😜 18:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

As much as I like etymology I am convinced the word was referring to behaviour and not gender. By your logic the context suggests it was a reference to content creators as much as women, I think the context was highly emotional behaviour a much more common modern definition. Modern definitions of the word are all gender neutral. I don't think there was any attempt to use the comment in a gender based fashion, nor do I see any value in interpreting it that way. It means "a wildly emotional and exaggerated reaction". HighInBC 17:47, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

  • High, there is no way "hysteric" refers to "content creator", come on now. The sexist part is the supposed emotional instability of women, "wildly emotional and exaggerated" because their womb makes them so. Historically, that is. I'm not one to sign up for the GGTF agenda, I think, and I think y'all are bypassing the point that I'm not claiming anyone is a sexist, just that the word has serious implications. You don't have to jump to the extreme and lay a PC agenda on me, sheesh! Drmies (talk) 18:02, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Nobody is supposing emotional instability of women. You are supposing that the supposing of emotional instability in women is happening. In my life I have heard the word used in a gender neutral fashion and the dictionary agrees with my experience. You exactly claimed that the comment was sexist: [70]. This whole conversation reminds me of the latest season of South Park. HighInBC 19:10, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
    • "The sexist part is the supposed emotional instability of women, "wildly emotional and exaggerated" because their womb makes them so. Historically, that is." I'm sorry but I'm going to ask you to please take this bullshit off my page and discuss it elsewhere (and don't ping me to contribute). The only person being offensive is you Drmies. Unfuckingbelievable. МандичкаYO 😜 18:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

@Drmies: - Well,I most definitely didn't know about the usage that you've shown here. And my comment was not directed at Phil's gender in the least. But I do apologize if anyone took it that way or it was offensive to anyone. And I will remove the word from my vocabulary from now on, or at least attempt to do so. Dave Dial (talk) 18:54, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Dave, I really appreciate that. Please note again that I didn't think Phil's comments were appropriate, or that you were a sexist. Getting older and having two daughters (who go to schools where certain activities are stupidly gendered) has probably made me a bit more sensitive. Thanks again. Oh, wait, I'm not supposed to comment here. Drmies (talk) 18:56, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes Drmies, I told you not to comment here and yet you did, and left a sarcastic note at that. Shows how respectful you truly are of women. Maybe now you can find a black editor and start an argument on their talk page telling them what they're supposed to be offended by, while rehashing archaic arguments about the racial inferiority of the negroid race, such as that their smaller skull size shows them to be less intelligent than caucasians. Historically, that is. Be sure to keep posting when they tell to get the fuck off their page. I'm glad I have procrastinated on voting at Arbcom - you are no longer getting my support. МандичкаYO 😜 19:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Looking at this, I cant believe a debate spun off from the usage of a word. Of all the things to argue about I have learned from the internet that word usage arguments aren't worth it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Oh good. Maybe Drmies can now continue his "cleanup" and insist that Brits don't use the intensifier bloody in conversation with any editor who is Jewish, and then go argue on a Jewish editor's talk page and demand they find the word "bloody" offensive because everybody knows the Jews are associated with accusations of murdering Christian children and using their blood in rituals. Historically, that is. МандичкаYO 😜 10:45, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
      • I feel it is a lose lose argument as both people are right when it comes to said word. The argument usually goes like this: 1. Someone calls out a word you use for being offensive, 2. You say no this is why I am right and you are wrong, 3. The other person says no I have a dictionary here that says im right and you are wrong, 4. You say but I have a history book back in ... the word was okay and... In a nutshell, the heart of the problem should be a respect talk not one that goes im offended that you are offended. Anytime you see someone calling you out for a word you may use that appears sexist shrug it off for the time being, and address the respect issue later. "I understand that you think the word I used was sexist but in my culture (or ect...) (insert reason here) I meant no disrespect towards you." I wish things worked like that more often is all. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
        • What I really have a problem with is a man telling me, as a woman, I need to be offended by something because it's offensive to women. I will decide what I am offended by and I'm not going to "clean" my vocabulary of common words like "hysterical" because of archaic meanings from the Victorian era. OP needs to examine his obsessive need to be right and get the last word, which caused him to violate policy by continuing to comment on my talk page and mock me when I very clearly told him to go away. He supposedly wants Wikipedia to be a more welcoming place to women, but he goes out of his way to offend me, the only women in this thread. (If you can't tell, I particularly don't like aggressive arguments rehashing old offensive stereotypes that nobody in their right mind ever thinks about.) This entire conversation (uninvited by the way) is the one and only time I have ever felt offended and targeted as a female on Wikipedia. МандичкаYO 😜 07:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!Edit

  A nice calming cup of tea for next time you burst into hysterics ;) Safehaven86 (talk) 23:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Hassan Rebell's IP PRODSEdit

Hi again. I don't think I'll have time to do them all, so might you have time to help review Hassan Rebell's IP PRODS and make sure Kurdish bio articles for notable people that do have references available aren't BLP deleted after the 7-day period? I've done a few this morning myself but off-wiki life beckons. I'll resume later, soon as I have time. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:39, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Nahla RoweEdit

What the actual heck? Have you heard of anything like this before? It seems like so much effort to sell one obscure fake album of pirated songs on iTunes. Thinking now someone needs to tell iTunes they've been had... Blythwood (talk) 13:45, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

  • No, it's totally nuts. I emailed iTunes already. My attempts to get it salted by admin Vanjagenije fell on deaf ears. They're obviously going to keep trying. МандичкаYO 😜 13:49, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Yes, I saw that they already tried and failed under a different name. My fear is if this is being run by some bunch of scammers who will move on to creating more hoax articles. I'm pretty worried - I've read an article about content farms in the Philippines being hired to churn out dodgy content for promotional purposes and I can easily see Wikipedia getting swamped with more articles like this. That's particularly why I called in a sockpuppet check - it's so plausible I can easily imagine there being more articles on here like it that didn't get spotted. Blythwood (talk) 14:07, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
      • I think it's a pretty good scam. It's free to create all those accounts, pay $9.99 for a domain name and you can easily get fake followers on Twitter with all the followback accounts. I bet you this is the tip of the iceberg and more will be found. Thanks for opening the SPI. МандичкаYO 😜 14:13, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I've now been alerted to a Buzzfeed article about what seems to be the same crew active this summer. The good news is that SPI has concluded and everything's been deleted. Best of all, we can now see that sockpuppet Logicequalslogical participated in deletion discussions on non-notable musicians - and often voted delete! Sounds like they were trying to pick up experience at sounding convincing. Damn these guys are good. Blythwood (talk) 01:36, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Holy shit.... same crew for sure, same photo of beautiful girl. Crazy. I'm emailing the reporter to say they're back at it. МандичкаYO 😜 01:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry ChristmasEdit

Merry Christmas!!
Hello, I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!  

   –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 16:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Post-nominal lettersEdit

Hi there, Wikimandia. I'm not quite sure what your edit summary on Template:Post-nominals/GBR ("DCL is used in official citations in Gazette etc, not needed for biographies") means. In what contexts could DCL be used in an article? Graham (talk) 03:27, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

  • @Graham11: Hi, sorry for the confusion, I didn't have enough room in the edit summary to explain. By official citations I mean the Honours lists we have that are taken from the official London Gazette archives. The policy is to list them with their full name and as they were styled at the time (eg, even if a someone later become a CBE or a KBE, we put their name and post-nominals as they were listed in that citation). I'm tackling the very tedious task of doing the missing articles for New Year, Birthday Honours etc. They use a lot of academic and membership post-nominals that we don't normally include in someone's biography. I just did 1938 New Year Honours - DCL was used in the very first citation. They're really time-consuming because of all the formatting and so the post-nom template helps a lot. :-) МандичкаYO 😜 13:47, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year!Edit

  Happy New Year!
Best wishes for a wonderful 2016!---- WV 00:23, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

White Student UnionsEdit

Hi there, I am confused and need a bit of help. I'm having SJWs attack the White Student Unions page and they are claiming there is no such thing as administrators of moderators who can help rebuild a page after large chunks are deleted or when someone keeps deleting content with perfectly good sources. And they say there is no such thing as the neutrality review board, are they just trolling me? Is there any way you can look at the talk page again and help close up some of the argument on whether or not we can talk about the WSUs as existing. They don't understand that there was a page which just talked about he appearance of the WSU pages on facebook but that administratively they decided to merge the pages and treat them as if they do exist so there aren't multiple page about WSUs., now the conversation on whether WSU's is open again but under a different title even though you closed it up.Shannonfraser (talk) 18:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@Shannonfraser:: No worries :-) Wikipedia has administrators who can do things like ban users and delete pages and things like that. I'm not an admin - there's a long process to become one. There aren't any moderators, but just regular users. Experienced users often do maintenance type things like "closing out" discussions on talk pages, which is what I did. I was worried you had started too many conversations and we needed to have one centralized conversation going. Does that make sense? You'll get the hang of it! МандичкаYO 😜 18:33, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the help, I appreciate it and also for the explanation. I'm afraid I don't know how to deal with people constantly deleting large tracts of text and or putting their text over it. I reverted something and got dinged for edit warring but it doesn't seem right that people can just remove and delete and then hold the other people hostage and never let them put anything back in and report them when they do. Is this supposed to work this way? If I put anything back in I'm an edit warrer but if they do its ok, im so confused.Shannonfraser (talk) 18:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
@Shannonfraser: No problem - we were all new here once. Yes, that's how it works - anybody can edit the text, but within rules (it has to be reliable sourced, etc). If you go back and forth and keep reverting something it's called edit warring. When a disagreement happens, you have to take it to the talk page and ask what is going on, and other people will weigh in and give their input and eventually people compromise or reach a consensus on what it should say. You picked a fairly controversial topic for your first Wikipedia article so unfortunately you're going to feel a lot of frustration at first and feel like people are sniping at you. But you're really brave for doing it and once again ask if you need any help! The article looks like it will definitely stay (the deletion conversation is showing so far people in favor of it being kept). Eventually you'll get the hang of it! It's very addictive LOL МандичкаYO 😜 18:47, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
@Мандичка: Thanks, I am surprised though that so long as something is properly sourced that people can just remove it and if there is no one else contributing or weighing in on it that thats it, they get their way. It seems wrong. Seems like SJW dream, a trolling utopia.Shannonfraser (talk) 19:27, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


Any chance you can take a look at this user's talk page, last edit after my 3RR warning, and advise them? I really don't have time to sort this out. Doug Weller talk 19:43, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Hey, I explained above about how things work. She was so new to WP she did not understand that what you write can be edited and deleted by other people. I explained it to her after her last comment on the talk page, so hopefully she gets it now. МандичкаYO 😜 19:50, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Oops, missed that. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 20:32, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

1936 New Year HonoursEdit


This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 1936 New Year Honours, and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Obergefell v. HodgesEdit

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Obergefell v. Hodges you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria.   This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Display name 99 -- Display name 99 (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Obergefell v. HodgesEdit

Hello. I have placed the article that you nominated for GA consideration, Obergefell v. Hodges, under review. I have left notes for you on the review page that I would like for you to examine. Thank you. Display name 99 (talk) 01:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Obergefell v. HodgesEdit

The article Obergefell v. Hodges you nominated as a good article has failed  ; see Talk:Obergefell v. Hodges for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Display name 99 -- Display name 99 (talk) 22:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

The CaliforniasEdit

A hoax article, The Californias has been voted for speedy deletion a few times over the last nine years. The last time was in July, here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Las Californias Province. Note that the content was pasted into a new article, then the old was redirected to the new one to avoid deletion. A time before that, content was copied into a new article and the articles were merged to avoid deletion (see the present article's Talk pages). I am requesting that the original decision to delete be permamently carried out and that the User:WCCasey be prevented from carrying on the hoax any longer. The article is one of the longest running hoaxes on Wikipedia. Thank you. Wyeson 07:15, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I have added the article to the deletion log, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Californias. Also, please note that the creator of the hoax, User:WCCasey has been following me around for years and reverting whatever I do. From the reverts, some of his other user names and ISPs are apparent in the History; can the stalking be stopped? Thank you. Wyeson 08:46, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Felix ReadyEdit

Hi - Thanks for your edit to Felix Ready. Do you have a source for his date and place of death? Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 00:17, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

@Dormskirk:, hi, sorry, it was in his Times obit. I forgot to add it as a source. I added it just now, plus a couple other details. МандичкаYO 😜 00:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

1919 Birthday HonoursEdit

Hello! I drafted the 1919 Birthday Honours the other night but it seems as though you've already started it. I'll stop working on it now, but if you need to copy anything from then feel free :-) Comes Dunelmensis (talk) 17:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

@Comes Dunelmensis: Thanks, I've actually been working on the missing Honours Lists for awhile. I've done a massive text extraction and formatting from the Gazette for the missing years and have been formatting, formatting, formatting. This one is particularly awful because it's so huge and all the honours were announced by campaign and not necessarily by the award. Thanks for the offer of help, but I mainly need help searching for bios to link to and finding typos and stray periods, so not very fun! :-) МандичкаYO 😜 18:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

A page you started (1927 Birthday Honours) has been reviewed!Edit

Thanks for creating 1927 Birthday Honours, Wikimandia!

Wikipedia editor T.seppelt just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you very much for this new page!

To reply, leave a comment on T.seppelt's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Birthday HonoursEdit

  The Hard Worker's Barnstar
No more redlinks for birthday honours. That was a serious amount of work, and you did a good chunk of it. Well done! Schwede66 04:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
@Schwede66: Thank you so much! 1919 just about killed me :-) Not done yet - a few more redlinks in New Years and then onto dissolution honours. Some of the lists are also incomplete - for example, New Zealand only, or are missing awards, plus in the early days, the new peers and knights were not published in the Gazette with the rest but can be found in the Times. My goal is to get them as complete as possible. МандичкаYO 😜 13:06, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
  The Working Woman's Barnstar
And now, the last New Year Honours redlink has been removed by you, too. I've done a few of those lists before myself, but they were nothing in comparison to the remaining WWI issues that you have tackled (and yes, there's a bit still to do on the 1919 list, but the article is now in existence). Thank you! Schwede66 08:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
@Schwede66: Thank you so much! Yes, the WWI lists are just nuts. I think 1917 has more than 17,000 names... and still more to add to 1919. But it's worth the effort for the war honours. I really appreciate your support and help! МандичкаYO 😜 10:12, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Help with Jarret Myer?Edit

Hi there! I'm reaching out to see if you might have some time to look over my revised draft for the Jarret Myer article? You had mentioned in the RfC that the article needed to be depuffed, which I tried to do.Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 23:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Eugene KasperskyEdit

Hi Wikimandia. You participated on this page previously and I thought you may be interested here David King, Ethical Wiki (CorporateM) (Talk) 20:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


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

- LouisAragon (talk) 01:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Obergefell v. HodgesEdit

The article Obergefell v. Hodges you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold  . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Obergefell v. Hodges for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 18:41, 30 March 2016 (UTC)


Hi and I expanded and referenced this article. Can you take a look? Thank you: Amaro Rodríguez Felipe.-- (talk) 17:31, 7 May 2016 (UTC)


Hello Wikimandia,

Given that you are acquianted with this sockmaster + new sock (Damianmx), would you mind giving your opinion [Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Satt 2 here on the SPI case page] whenever you have time? Bests and thanks - LouisAragon (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Nvm, he's CU confirmed since some days already. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

WWI directoryEdit

Hi there. Apologies for the impersonal nature of this post. I am sending this short note to a number of people who were involved (some still are) with World War I topics, letting them know about a WWI projects directory that I've started (in my userspace for now). Would you be able to look and see if there is anything you might be able to add or advice on what is most useful? If you want any follow ups, please put your name on the talk page. Many thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 22:21, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


I'm back!!! After a bit of a Hiatus I'm back at the grind. Are you still around? --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:25, 6 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi, I've been reading quite a few of your New Years Honours Lists and just decided to take a look at your userpage for no other reason but curiosity, for completely unrelated matters, could I kindly suggest that you archive this talk page and start a new one instead? I will understand if you choose to keep it as it is for reasons but archiving it will make it so much easier for other editors to visit your talk page without the loading and endless scrolling to find a particular message or post a new one. Cheers. Zyc1174 (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)


Dear Wikimandia, You recently added to the article on Bashiqa an infobox and some factual information about the town's having been taken by Peshmerga forces. I recently added sourced information about the stoning of Du'a Khalil Aswad to the same article. Your work and mine has been removed by IP user The History shows that another IP user,, removed differently phrased information about the stoning from an earlier version on 10 March 2012, as did on 26 March 2014 and on 27 April 2016. The information about the stoning of Du'a Khalil Aswad in those three earlier versions was not sourced, and its removal could be justified on that basis. But together, the four deletions do look as though they may be ideologically driven, and I wonder whether, to forestall edit-warring, semi-protection might be appropriate. I think you have much more experience on Wikipedia than I do, and perhaps you have a wise view on what (if anything) should be done. Thanks --Frans Fowler (talk) 20:52, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Update: User NYCRuss has restored your contribution and mine. I hope it sticks --Frans Fowler (talk) 21:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your diligent work on Battle of Mosul (2016). Current event articles are especially difficult to keep up with, but you still manage both quality and quantity when it comes to accurate information. Thank you! (I had a report on this. Your article saved me from failing!) UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 11:42, 3 November 2016 (UTC)


Good work, but please control your deeper sentiments. Favonian (talk) 19:58, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@Favonian: LOL sorry about that, I have the "Some Rich Asshole" extension for Chrome that automatically changes his name. So when I did the preview, it screwed it up and saved it like that, and screwed up all the refs too. You can see I immediately fixed it. МандичкаYO 😜 20:03, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


Welcome back to the WP:AFD process. ;-) --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:50, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Karl-Theodor zu GuttenbergEdit

Hello, I'm contacting the editors who responded to an earlier RfC about the article Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg. The issue in that RfC was about how long the section "Plagiarism scandal and resignation" should be. Following the RfC, I've written a summary of about the length suggested. There's a working draft on the talk page. I would greatly appreciate your comments on it. -Thucydides411 (talk) 15:59, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Lrednuas SenorocEdit

Since I saw your comments on previous SPI case of banned and IP-jumping sockmaster, I thought that you may interest current issues regarding the same passionate vandal. See: [71]. Bests. Cathexis1349 (talk) 21:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Unpresidented listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Unpresidented. Since you had some involvement with the Unpresidented redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

2017 New Year HonoursEdit

Hi Wikimandia. Well done with the Honours article. I was trying to decide whether or not WP:MoSCAPS trumped the Royal prerogative/London Gazette house style or not, particularly for the associated entries at the individual person's article. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

  • @Martinevans123: Thanks - do you mean the excessive use of caps for things like "for services to Rowing"? I think they should not be capitalized, personally. I'll take a pass at fixing them. МандичкаYO 😜 14:04, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's just what I meant. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:29, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
More pedantic whingeing: why is the construction ". For services to theatre." (a grammatically incomplete sentence) preferable to ", for services to theatre." - which is at least grammatically correct? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
It doesn't really matter but it's a list, so complete sentences aren't necessary. In some of the honours lists the format is "— For services to..." (see 2016 Birthday Honours). There is a lot of inconsistency across all these lists and it's my goal in 2017 to get them as similar as possible. МандичкаYO 😜 15:37, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks. That's very good news. I wish you luck! Martinevans123 (talk) 15:46, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
The problem is that in removing the capitals you managed to remove the capitals from countless names of towns, cities, other geographical areas, and other proper nouns. I see that you tried to correct a few of them yourself, and I have tried to correct many more (but probably missed many of them), but I would strongly recommend that in future you don't try to impose the MoS in that sort of way. We can legitimately accept the MoS non-compliance as the award citations can be treated as quotations. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, but capitalization is easily fixed. It's preferable to have them consistent. I don't know why The Gazette is capitalizing them in such a way. МандичкаYO 😜 18:51, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
If it is easily fixed, I wish that you had done so. This batch that I tried to sort out was just in the BEMs. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Feel free to look at the history of this article and the formatting that was needed. I did need to sleep at some point. I was and am perfectly happy to make corrections. МандичкаYO 😜 19:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
So what does the Wikipedia MoS actually say in this regard? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
What would be more relevant would be WP:MOS, not The Chicago Manual of Style to which you linked. I would regard the award citations as being effectively quotations in this context, and thus MOS:PMC would apply. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:30, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
We follow the MoS and don't capitalize these things and for good reason. ("For voluntary services with People with Cancer" makes it seem like "People with Cancer" is an actual charity or foundation.) We do style them as they are listed when it comes to full names and post-nominals. МандичкаYO 😜 19:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to certainly "MoS stalwarts", I find it increasingly difficult to distinguish between those two publications. But thanks for the link. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)


Hello, I am having a similar debate on Talk:2017_Chicago_torture_incident#Names_of_suspects where, despite clearly showing the Wikipedia policy specifically allows the naming of suspects in high profile cases, I can not get through to a couple editors. If you could please, bring your knowledge of the subject to the talk section and help either correct me, or bring consensus to the dispute, thanks.  {MordeKyle  20:56, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

February 2017 at Women in RedEdit

February 2017

Black Women & Women Anthropologists online editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 08:37, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Oxford English Dictionary requires quotes?Edit

I noticed you put double quotes around "Oxford English Dictionary" in the Argument Clinic article. Why? - Denimadept (talk) 16:31, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Mean Dreams and Kevin DurandEdit

FYI re this edit, have you seen the film? The CBC article seems credible; it sounds like Durand worked on the shoot for at least one day but his scenes were cut. Mathew5000 (talk) 00:48, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

  • @Mathew5000: I haven't seen the film - I saw the tag saying it was dubious and tried to find a ref to correct that. He was listed in a lot of refs saying he was in it but if you know the scene has been deleted, maybe add that to the production info. It's probably available on the DVD. МандичкаYO 😜 06:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
    • If he is in the film, it's a brief uncredited cameo. I haven't found any refs specifically saying whether or not he is in the final cut of the film, but it's telling that reviews do not mention his name at all ([72] [73] [74] [75]). In light of this, shouldn't we omit his name from the "Cast" section of the article per WP:FILMCAST? The fact that he was originally cast in the film and shot at least one scene for it could be mentioned in the "Production" section but I'd say it too should be omitted from the article as unimportant. (I'm not planning to re-watch the film or obtain the DVD.) Mathew5000 (talk) 21:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
      • @Mathew5000: Honestly I don't really have strong feelings about it. For sure he shouldn't be listed in cast, but given the number of articles that had his addition to the film in their headlines, and the CBC feature on him filming a scene (I think there was another article about it too), I would say he should be listed in the production as having filmed a scene that was deleted. МандичкаYO 😜 00:09, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Henry BeasleyEdit

Thanks for your additions to the article. Can I ask the source from which the information comes? It's not that I disbelieve it, but it would be good to be able to add a reference to the article. JH (talk page) 08:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jhall1: Sorry, I thought I put it. It's from The Times. I'll add it. МандичкаYO 😜 08:44, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Grenfell Tower fire -- great workEdit

hey there, wanted to stop by and thank you for all the work you're putting into the Grenfell Tower fire article. with the ads and whatnot, you can barely find what you're looking for on CNN's website these days. reading the page you've been editing makes it as clear as can be what's going on... and so well-sourced and well-written for the amount of time since the fire started. you've contributed substantially to the article (at least as far as i can see) and i wanna thank you. keep up the good work. Saginaw-hitchhiker (talk) 15:12, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

  • @Saginaw-hitchhiker: Thank you so much! That's exactly why I work on breaking news events when I can—I think they are a great resource and people (including journalists) can come to WP precisely for the Five Ws. I really appreciate the note! МандичкаYO 😜 03:35, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Grenfell Tower fireEdit

 On 14 June 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Grenfell Tower fire, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Mjroots (talk) 12:56, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Your David Hodge (Glasgow) unsourced claimsEdit

You restored your recent unsourced claims to David Hodge (Glasgow) with the comment "I'll add the source later.", and you have added further material still without providing the source. Note that Wikipedia:Verifiability is a core wikipedia policy, and it says "All material in Wikipedia mainspace ... must be verifiable. ... Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed." If you have a good source, now is the time to mention it! Batternut (talk) 06:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Devon heraldryEdit

You have been inserting many of your own images into this article, which is fine if you think they are improvements, however the image files they replaced usually describe the blazons, with sources, and other details, which is quite useful for these arms which are often quite obscure. It might be helpful if you copied the file descriptions too if you intend to replace any more. Thanks.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 23:46, 2 July 2017 (UTC))

Frederick Heath (footballer)Edit

Hello. I noticed you added a year of death to the above, but didn't add a source for the info. I'd looked him up myself on the freely available BMD records, but although there's only one death registered in England for someone of that name, I couldn't be sure that was enough. Many birth dates/places of early footballers are incorrect, either taken from newspaper reports or guesswork from BMD records. As to the latter, there's no birth registered for a Frederick S Heath in Smethwick in 1865, despite it's being sourced to a secondary RS (or if there is, I can't find it). So basically I was wondering if you have a better source than BMD records – in which case please could you add it to the article – or if not, what made you sure that that death record applied to the footballer? Thanks, Struway2 (talk) 09:33, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017Edit

  Please do not add or change content, as you did at Leonel Conde, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. GiantSnowman 17:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

  • @GiantSnowman: This information was already available in the bio there in the external links. So now I've added a reference duplicating the external link which looks stupid. Seriously. This is what the CN tag is for, precisely. This is non-controversial, non-dubious information about a non-BLP. There is no point in being so petty by reverting something so trivial as a missing birthdate and that a Uruguayan guy is from the capital of Uruguay. You really have nothing better to do as an admin? МандичкаYO 😜 18:13, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Prose TagEdit

Hello, should be aware that, a few years ago, several Wikipedia editors tagged the Martha Cohen listing as being excessively "promotional," based upon its previous prose format, and in order to mollify them, the listing was changed to expunge any aspect of promotional connotations. At that time, the Wikipedia editors involved in the discussion approved the elaborate reworking of Cohen's listing and seems it would be best to avoid revisiting the entire argument, by keeping the listing as neutral as possible. As you may know, there are quite a number of Wikipedia listings that are not in prose format, and nobody seems to object. Thank you.

CanadianBiographies11111 (talk) 02:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Joan Trumpauer Mulholland.jpgEdit

Thanks for uploading File:Joan Trumpauer Mulholland.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Fred SpellerEdit

Hello. Very many thanks for your additions to Mr Speller. I was aware of the incident in Cookham, but not of his institutionalisation and death so soon afterwards (although it was pretty clear that the 1940 death date had to be wrong, as he didn't appear on the 1911 Census or the 1939 Register under either spelling of the surname) nor of his employment by Birmingham FC. The South Bucks Standard must have been added to the BNA after the Wikipedia partnership with them came to an end. One thing: please could you clarify which source it is that verifies his exact date of death? thanks, Struway2 (talk) 08:54, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

  • @Struway2:: You're very welcome. He is registered in the Q3 1909 death registry, but his exact date is in the Lunacy Patients Admission Registers, 1846-1912 database available on Ancestry. There is a column for the date for intake and also one for discharge/death, and his is ticked off as death - screenshot here. It's sad we don't know what happened. I don't know how they came up with the 1940 date of death either - a curious journalist could probably uncover his death certificate and find out more. It sounds more like a brain tumor or traumatic brain injury than any mental illness. МандичкаYO 😜 09:31, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for your effortsEdit

  The Original Barnstar
For contributions to the article on the Cornish Language. Awarded by Cdjp1 on 6 August 2017.


Was there a reason you changed multiple people's comments from Rebranded White Nationalism to "Rebranded White Nationalist"? RickinBaltimore (talk) 00:57, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Oh crap!! I didn't actually change it - I have a Chrome extension that changes "Alt-Right" to "Rebranded White Nationalism" in articles, for a joke. I didn't realize it changed automatically changed text in text fields too when typing. I didn't mean to do that at all. I'll get rid of the extension. So sorry. МандичкаYO 😜 01:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Thaks I was afraid you were compromised for a moment! RickinBaltimore (talk) 01:11, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject InvestmentEdit

Not exactly sure if this would interest you but you never know:

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!


Did you mean "Support" at the Hillbillyholiday ANI, re: revert limits? It sounds as if you support sanctions of at least one week, judging from the section above this. My thinking is that revert limits could follow a week (or more) ban, that the two things aren't mutually exclusive. But I could be wrong. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Tenebrae: No, I meant oppose. I support the one-week block, and either Hillbillyholiday gets with the program and becomes a helpful editor who does not continue removing mass amounts of text from articles, or is indef'd. I don't know why Hillbillyholiday took a break before coming back recently, but it appears he/she is on a crusade that is about making some kind of point. And the abusive comment left on his/her talk page directed at the admin who blocked her for 24-hours was beyond tolerable and shows complete contempt for Wikipedia. МандичкаYO 😜 17:27, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you (more or less)Edit

for your spelling correction of the graph at List of monuments and memorials of the Confederate States of America‎. Whether or not the graph should be included in the article is the subject of much heated debate on the talk page, you might consider reading some of the discussion and offering an opinion. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 23:48, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

  • I actually just renamed the file on Commons and it automatically edited the page for me, but I will take a look at the debate. Thanks. МандичкаYO 😜 23:51, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Hubert ChesshyreEdit

Hi, I see that you have made an edit to the article on Hubert Chesshyre, that this edit was undone, and that you then undid the undoing!

I just thought I would weigh in on this and say that actually your edit *is* wrong. Hubert Chesshyre is *not* a herald and has not been since his retirement. "Herald" is an office granted by HM The Queen by letters patent under the great seal of the realm. Taking up the office is signified by receiving the badge of office from The Queen. The functions of the office can be performed only during tenure of the office. When the holder of that office vacates the office of herald, e.g. through retirement, he ceases to be a herald. It's not like being a bishop or a privy counsellor, where the person typically retains the appointment for life even if he or she has effectively ceased to perform the functions of the office (or like being "a writer" or "a footballer", where you can carry on calling yourself "a writer" even if you no longer write or "a footballer" even if you no longer kick a ball). To say that Hubert Chesshyre is still a herald is like saying the David Cameron is still the prime minister of the United Kingdom. He is not. Hubert Chesshyre may well still be involved in the world of heraldry, e.g. through holding a number of positions such as vice-president of the Institute of Heraldic and Genealogical Studies, fellow of the Heraldry Society, and associate member of the Society of Heraldic Arts, but these positions do not make him a herald. He has retired from all offices within the Royal Household, he has surrendered all badges of office to The Queen, and he cannot perform any of the functions of a herald or king of arms, e.g. membership of the Chapter of the College of Arms, signing and sealing grants of arms, introducing peers to the House of Lords, proclaiming the accession of the monarch, and escorting the monarch at the State Opening of Parliament and on Garter Day. He is now a private citizen, holding no public offices.

If "is a former member of the British Royal Household" does not seem adequate, perhaps a better formulation would be "is a former King of Arms". However, there are a number of problems with this:

(a) It would useful to include a reference to the jurisdiction. However, whereas "British Royal Household" is accurate, "English herald", or even "British herald", are not. The College of Arms has jurisdiction in England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and certain Commonwealth realms. Therefore neither "English" (which excludes Wales, Northern Ireland, etc.) nor "British" (which includes Scotland) are suitable (Scotland is an entirely separate heraldic jurisdiction).

(b) Chesshyre's public offices go beyond being an officer of arms (the general term for kings of arms, heralds, and pursuivants). He was also secretary of the Order of the Garter and hon. genealogist to the Royal Victorian Order. These positions are better characterised as offices within the British Royal Household than as heraldic positions, despite invariably being held by an officer of arms.

Whatever we do, we absolutely cannot claim that he is a currently serving herald. Personally, I would stick with "is a former member of the British Royal Household", simply because it is the most accurate description. The opening paragraph goes on to clarify that he was an officer of arms and explains what this means.--AmericanHeraldist (talk) 02:49, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

  • @AmericanHeraldist: Please learn more about the basics of Wikipedia ledes and how people are described - MOS:BLPLEAD. Some examples: "Barack Obama is an American politician." "Daniel Day-Lewis is an English actor." "Karl Alexander Müller is a Swiss physicist and Nobel laureate." None of those people are actively engaged in that role anymore, but yet, that remains their identity as far as Wikipedia is concerned. If you can think of a better description than herald that sums up his notability, feel free to do so, but a lede which states "So and so is a former member of the British royal household" is insufficient and lacking in key detail required required in ledes, specifically nationality and notable position held. МандичкаYO 😜 03:39, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
    • Hello, and thanks for your reply. I absolutely accept your point that the lede should include Mr Chesshyre's nationality (British) and the main reason for his notability (serving for more than 40 years as an officer of arms). However, I feel that you still do not understand the point I am making when I say that Mr Chesshyre is not a herald. You are, of course, absolutely right that Barack Obama, for example, is an American politician. The correct comparison, however, would be to say "Barack Obama is the President of the United States of America". "Politician" simply means "a person involved in politics"; there is no actual public office called "politician". Similarly with an actor or a physicist, it's more of a general description of somebody's life's work. The same cannot be said of the term "herald". You seem to think that "herald" can be used to mean "a person involved in heraldry". It can't. A herald is a public official appointed by The Queen to perform certain duties attached to that office for the duration of his or her tenure. A more apposite comparison would be with a retired police officer. A police officer possesses certain powers by virtue of the fact that they are a sworn constable. When they retire they no longer possess the powers of a sworn constable, and so it is no longer accurate to describe them as a police officer, even if they remain involved in policing in some other way. A king of arms, in particular, has actual legal powers that can be enforced by the British courts. Therefore you cannot call somebody a herald if he no longer has those actual legal powers. Might I therefore suggest that a good formulation would be: "is a retired British officer of arms." I think "officer of arms" is preferable to "herald" because is covers his whole career, from pursuivant right up to king of arms.--AmericanHeraldist (talk) 14:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

change of Pòrtego da Comunitae on Wiki LigureEdit

Hello Wikimandia, I appreciated what you did recently for our Wiki in Ligurian language. Any small contribution by users from other Wikis is welcomed. However, radical changes like the one you performed on our Pòrtego da Comunitæ cannot be accepted. Feel free to add something in English or French to our Pòrtego, but please no radical change. I will perform a rollback of the Pòrtego page at the end of the day to give you the possibility to decide what entries you want to maintain/add. Salutations, Luensu1959 (talk) 08:22, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

  • @Luensu1959: I apologize, I was not purposely trying to disrupt a change. I was merely updating PNG file globally to the preferred SVG available and mistakenly used the wrong SVG linked to the PNG. You can see my activity on the Ligurian Wiki. I have reversed my changes. Apologies again. МандичкаYO 😜 08:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
    • It's all right now. Actually, I noted that radical changes had been performed by two other persons as well, but all in good faith. So apologies accepted. All the best, Luensu1959 (talk) 21:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Meta/ thingEdit

Hi Wikimandia, hope all is well with you. Over at meta, there is a need for someone who can communicate in Russian to post a notice to the community on about the meta:Requests for comment/Global ban of INeverCry 2 on their admin noticeboard. You were the first active user I found who had Russian knowledge, so I thought I'd check if you'd be willing to do it. All the best, TonyBallioni (talk) 00:15, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar of European MeritEdit

  The Barnstar of European Merit
I, Vami_IV, award the Barnstar of European Merit to Wikimandia for their participation in the European 10,000 Challenge, no matter how minor. Thank you for your work in France, it was very much needed. –Vami_IV✠ 03:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
this WikiAward was given to Wikimandia by Vami_IV✠ on 03:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World ContestEdit

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Your signatureEdit

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

[[User:Wikimandia|<font color="#0066cc">—'''''Мандичка'''''</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Wikimandia|<font color="#6600cc">'''''YO'''''</font>]]</sup> 😜 : МандичкаYO 😜


[[User:Wikimandia|<b style="color: #0066cc;">—''Мандичка''</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:Wikimandia|<b style="color: #6600cc;">''YO''</b>]]</sup> 😜 : МандичкаYO 😜

Anomalocaris (talk) 19:45, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for updating your signature!

User group for Military HistoriansEdit


"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Revert on John GeddertEdit

Hello, I've been notified by an alert that you have reverted my revert, my edit was actually meant to be pointed at, when the history generated all the latest edit was from 98.165.184, typing "Fart", I am sorry for not reverting the correct edit, but I do think that ip gave you unconstructive information.[Edit regarding user].

Nfalceso (talk) 05:33, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Nfalceso: You are way too nice, considering Wikimandia was restoring blatant vandalism while telling you to be responsible in your reverts. Bennv3771 (talk) 05:55, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
@Bennv3771: Thank you. I got scared for a moment (because you don't want to see a revert notice in your alerts) so I immediately sent over a talk page message, but then I started to review and realized it might have been a mistake. Nfalceso (talk) 06:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Statement changed 3 minutes before Bennv3771 but resulted (edit conflict). Nfalceso (talk) 06:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Neutral noticeEdit

You may or may not wish to join a discussion at Talk:Lyndsy Fonseca#Request for comment about a topic on which you have contributed on an identical RfC. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:31, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Seeking a referenceEdit

Hello! I'm working on an overhaul of the Osbert Lancaster article, and I noticed your addition about him in the Pratt's article. It sounds very characteristic Lancaster, and if you have a source for it I'd be very glad to steal it. Tim riley talk 21:26, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • @Tim riley: I didn't actually write anything about Lancaster in that article — I think I just did simple formatting. Unfortunately, that info was added by an IP back in 2014, so you can't follow up with that user. I would be happy to search The Times archive for you though, if you don't have a subscription. МандичкаYO 😜 23:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
My mistake. So sorry! That's a very kind offer, but I have access to the Times archive and needn't impose further on you. All the best. Tim riley talk 08:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Alec LeslieEdit

Hello. I'm a little confused by your edit to the above. The probate record for the Alfred James Leslie who died 1 Feb 1961, freely available online, states his place of residence as Birmingham but his place of death as an address in Plymouth. And the chap who died in Plymouth in Q1 1961 was, according to the death records, aged 64 and not 60. As there's a very clear element of inconsistency, I'm not sure we can go with your combination of vital dates. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:06, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

  • @Struway2: Thanks for the note. Yes, he died in Plymouth, so that should be corrected. However, this is definitely the same person as the pub owner from the 1939 register, since his son was the same in both. His DOB is stated as 1900 in the registry and in the Scotland's People listing, so I think his age in the death notice is a goof. I can check more on Scotland's People and the British Newspaper Archive this weekend though. МандичкаYO 😜 09:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Alexander Cannon (psychiatrist)Edit

Thanks for your edit. The whole question of his disputed date of birth was raised on the article talk page some time ago, and for completeness and future reference it would be good if you could add to that discussion your reasoning for changing the text. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:31, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  • @Ghmyrtle: Off the top of my head, I believe I just added things I found when researching him and removed a few sentences that were dubious. It's pretty clear he had a history of fabricating things and thus things that sourced to him should be avoided. МандичкаYO 😜 16:14, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
He was certainly an interesting character. His gravestone is here - "Dr. Sir...", but no birth date. I think his claim that he was born in 1869 would be worth mentioning, but at the moment I can't find a good source that would justify including it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:46, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Eddie HanlonEdit

Hello again. Was wondering exactly which households you found Mr Hanlon in on the census records. When I researched the article – I had a subscription to findmypast at the time, and was pretty thorough about it – I couldn't find anyone that I could convince myself was the correct Edward Hanlon, and still can't. Or at least not with consistent dating. Perhaps I'm missing something... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:16, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Hi @Struway2: according to birth registration and census data, there was only one Edward Hanlon born in Darlington in the 1880s, in Q6 1886. I trusted that detail about where he was born was true. Darlington is a big enough city that there is no reason his birth would have been registered somewhere else (which frequently happened in villages and smaller towns). In the 1891 England Census, taken in April 1891, he is 4 (about to turn 5). He was listed as the sixth of seven children of John O. Hanlon and Margaret Hanlon (both born in Ireland), living on Howard Street in Darlington, with Edward's birth recorded as in Darlington. His father was 50 and an iron works labourer. The family is also living on Howard Street in Darlington in the 1881 Census, but must have moved around a lot before settling in Darlington around 1879, as their children at this time were born in different cities: Francis in Ireland in 1869/70, Hugh in Benfieldside in 1873/4, Elizabeth in Felling in 1877/8 and then finally Patrick born in Darlington in 1878/9, followed by John born in Darlington in 1880.
The earliest census is almost always the most accurate (there is a big difference between a six month old and a 2 year old), and people start to fudge their ages later for economic reasons (suddenly becoming older) and vanity (women who are actresses/socialites suddenly become 5-10 years younger).
In the 1901 Census, five of the Hanlon children are living together on Vulcan Street, with Elizabeth, 24, listed as the head of the household (even though Patrick, 25, was supposedly older). Edward is suddenly 20 (born 1880/1881) and working as a labourer. He probably should be in school. John is 22, even though he was definitely born at the end of 1880 (he was seven months old in 1881), so his age increase is probably to put a larger age gap between him and Edward to make Edward's fake age believable. The parents are nowhere to be found so must have died as their youngest sister, Catherine, is living with them as well and is 11. The 1901 Census shouldn't have been a ref for his age (I think I meant it to be for birth location) so I've removed it. So anyway I hope this helps. МандичкаYO 😜 11:39, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I've now found them on the 1881 Census, looks like the right family. However, Edward's birth was registered in the Jul-Aug-Sep quarter, which means he could have been born in late September, making him 38 at death as opposed to the 39 you've assumed: do you have the month of birth? Both contradict the age of 40 on his death certificate. As I said above, the problem I have with genealogical data is the inconsistency, which makes it original research when we decide which primary sources to accept and which to reject. Particularly so with a family where mental illness/incapacity was an issue. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:14, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
@Struway2: Unfortunately I don't have the date of birth. But at this time it was common to be off by one year, since for example, they still considered people who were 39 to be in their "40th year." It's common to see people listed as one year older than we would consider them now. At some point in the 1960s or so, they started caring about accuracy and started putting the birthdates on the UK death registry, but for people who died before that, you'd have to order the birth certificate to confirm the birthdate. МандичкаYO 😜 13:46, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Claude GibbEdit

Hi Wkimandia! Thanks for your edits to this page. But can you enlighten this trier as to the reason or protocol for deleting so many of his academic qualifications? Doug butler (talk) 09:38, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @Doug butler: - Hi, academic degrees like xc, MD, MA, PhD etc aren't listed as post-nominals per the WP:MOS. Post-nominals are reserved for rarer honors, like state honors (knighthoods etc) and membership/fellowships to academic institutions (like FRS, FRIBA, etc). I think I only removed DsC and ME - it looks like the other ones aren't yet on the AUS post-nominals template. I will do my best to put them on there but a certain person has WP:OWNERSHIP issues with that template. МандичкаYO 😜 11:35, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks WM. So its a matter of avoiding an alphabet stew. Keep it up. Doug butler (talk) 12:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Norman Lockhart SmithEdit

Hi! I am planning to work on the entry of N L Smith in the Chinese Wikipedia. I find that you have contributed to his entry in the English Wikipedia and you have quoted his obituary published by the Times in 1965. Is it possible if you could provide me with a copy of the obituary by emailing it to

Separately, I know that the Times published a death notice (or obituary) of Sir Geoffry Follows, former Financial Secretary of Hong Kong, on 18 and 19 September 1983. May I solicit your kind assistance to conduct a search as well?

I look forward to your reply. Thanks a lot in advance. --Clithering (talk) 03:35, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

A brownie for you!Edit

  Thank you very much for your prompt assistance! As a token of thanks, I have just uploaded onto Wikipedia Commons the following photo taken by me a couple of days ago showing a foundation stone laid by Mr N L Smith in Hong Kong on 12 April 1933:-

File:N L Smith foundation stone.jpg

With best regards, Clithering (talk) 14:56, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @Clithering: Thank you so much! Happy to look up anything else and put my Times subscription to good use. МандичкаYO 😜 17:37, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Larissa Wolcott AFDEdit

Hi, I just wanted to give you a heads up, there might be issues with the AFD for Larissa Wolcott. It was never posted to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Anime and manga, so no one from the project the article would have fallen under got to review it, or check the published sources. Only reason I found out about this was User:Sandstein removing the links from anime convention articles. I've started a comment thread Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga#Larissa_Wolcott_AFD to see if this needs to be reviewed further. Esw01407 (talk) 23:22, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Mary Cecil HayEdit

Hello, I just wondered why you edited Mary Cecil Hay in July? You omitted to leave a reason.

Sidpickle (talk) 15:23, 13 September 2018 (UTC) Ted

  • @Sidpickle: You're asking why I edited a page? Obviously to add, delete or change something. I have no recollection of the edit but that was my motivation. I will have to look at it later to remember. МандичкаYO 😜 18:46, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Howdy Stranger!Edit

Well hello there Stranger. How goes life? Long time no talk... Any chance you'd be interested in working on a project with me? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Hey! Possibly, depending on how time-consuming. You can leave me details here or email me at МандичкаYO 😜 22:36, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't see your response. So much been going on. Talk soon. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:37, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!Edit

  Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Wikimandia, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,

Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 05:34, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Lee IsraelEdit

Hello Wikimandia,

Please explain your recent edit to Lee Israel, where you changed the name of the star of the biopic. You removed accurate information and replaced it with false information. Why? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:53, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Apparently a sophisticated IP vandal was able to modify the edit history to make you look like the vandal and make themself look like the person who reverted the vandalism. Very bizarre. I apologize. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
The incorrect information has returned. Did you make the most recent edit? Is that your edit summary? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:15, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
What are you talking about? I see this IP editor made the change separate from me, four hours after I edited it, and even left a note explaining. I doubt they are a vandal. And then I undid it. Please show me a screenshot of the history of this page that shows a string of edits by me. МандичкаYO 😜 02:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
I have blocked the IP for vandalism and I apologize for the misunderstanding. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:22, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Why would you block them for vandalism? That's not a good call. That seems a good-faith goof, especially as the article is not about the film and the person was confused, and obviously Melissa McCarthy was later cast in the role. Even this message when you thought I made the change seems to really overreacting, because I can see how someone not paying attention might boldly change it thinking it was a goof. Plus it's an IP so I would not assume the previous edits over time that were clear vandalism were the same person. МандичкаYO 😜 02:27, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
The same IP vandalized Mary J. Blige repeatedly this month, and I think that is recent enough for a block. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:33, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Then the they should have been blocked then. This isn't vandalism. If they said it was Justin Bieber in the role, yeah, but not Melissa McCarthy. Since it's an IP you don't know it's the same person. I still don't know why you thought it was me and want to know more about this person spoofing my details to make it look like I did it - that's far more serious of an issue. МандичкаYO 😜 02:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Request for Help: Speakers of the House of CommonsEdit

Dear Wikimandia

Recently I have attempted to create an article listing the heraldic achievements of speakers of the British House of Commons, based on similar articles about the armorials of various heads of state and government. The draft has twice been turned down by administrators. As a significant contributor to articles relating to heraldry, your assistance would be most valuable.


Robin S. Taylor (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

  • Hi @Robin S. Taylor:, I'd be happy to help you using my Burke's subscriptions. Is the problem only the sources, or do you think it's being declined because the topic itself doesn't meet notability? I have only seen heads of states gets armorials. Do you know of any other armorials for politicians? МандичкаYO 😜 22:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your cooperation. See the talk page. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 23:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Sex Education (TV series)Edit

You reverted my reversion of your erroneous edit. Whilst the original was due improvement (being a simple quotation), your edit contained inaccuracies, as my reversion summary stated. In particular:

  • Otis is a socially awkward teenager; I haven't found any references to say he is awkward in any other sense. You omitted the word "socially".
  • He does not "have a sex therapist for a mother", as you wrote. She is his natural mother, and is a sex therapist by profession.
  • "Cool kid" is not really encyclopaedic language.
  • The enterprise established by Maeve and Otis is a sex education business, not just "help".

If you have disagreements, then please discuss on the article's talk page before reverting. Best, Bazza (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

  • @Bazza 7: LOL having A sex therapist for a mother MEANS it's his mother. Sorry if English is a foreign language to you. If you don't like the phrasing then fucking improve it. Leaving an entire quote for a summary is not ideal for a show and lazy as hell. You obviously have time on your hands. Don't write on my page again. МандичкаYO 😜 22:23, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Vale Royal AbbeyEdit

I hope you're well, Wikimandia! I saw your name at the lead improvement page, and wondered if you'd be able to look at this for me? The thing is, do you think it's too short? I suspect so (hence my coming here)—it's within the letter of WP:LEADLENGTH but perhaps not the spirit. What do you think?

If you've got too much on your plate already, no problem at all, and any other help gratefully received! Take care, ——SerialNumber54129 14:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Wikimandia".