Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:30, 21 October 2014

If you feel that I have reverted an edit or issued a warning in error, please let me know. I am human, and I do make mistakes. Please don't interpret an error on my part as a personal attack on you. It's not, I promise. I ask you to simply bring it to my attention; I am always open to civil discussion. Thank you. NeilN

Archives

Archive 1: Aug 2005 - Oct 2007 Archive 2: Nov 2007 - Jan 2008 Archive 3: Feb 2008 - Mar 2008 Archive 4: Apr 2008 - Jun 2008 Archive 5: Jun 2008 - Oct 2009 Archive 6: Nov 2009 - Dec 2009 Archive 7: Jan 2010 - Mar 2010 Archive 8: Apr 2010 - Mar 2011 Archive 9: Apr 2011 - Apr 2012 Archive 10: May 2012 - June 2012 Archive 11: Jul 2012 - Jan 2013 Archive 12: May 2013 - Jul 2013 Archive 13: Aug 2013 - Sep 2013 Archive 14: Oct 2013 Archive 15: Nov 2013 - Dec 2013 Archive 16: Jan 2014 - Feb 2014 Archive 17: Mar 2014 - May 2014 Archive 18: Jun 2014 - Jul 2014 Archive 19: Aug 2014

24 December 2024
News and notes: Responsibilities and liabilities as a "Very Large Online Platform" Op-ed: Beeblebrox on Wikipediocracy, the Committee, and everything Opinion: Graham87 on being the first-ever administrator recall subject In the media: Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting? Recent research: "Misplaced Pages editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality Humour: Backlash over Santa Claus' Misplaced Pages article intensifies Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols Traffic report: Was a long and dark December
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Hong Kong (page)

Hello NeilN, this is Pageswriter. Thank you for pointing out the problem of recentism in my edit. Despite my political views, I aimed to remain as neutral as possible by avoiding opinionated facts and by including views from opposing sides.

Do you think a timeline is a good idea? My intention of adding this was to provide convenience for readers who might have to navigate their way through a long section of 'History'.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pageswriter (talk • contribs) 01:37 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Pageswriter. A timeline may be better suited to History of Hong Kong. However, recentism aside, your 2014 text definitely did not read as neutral (e.g., your repeated use of communist and your use of scare quotes) and was unsourced. --NeilN 01:51, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Laverne Cox

I shouldn't have to get consensus on my life. When a transgender person is referred to by our birth name it misgenders us and encourages people who hate trans people to misgender. Having this information on Misplaced Pages encourages hate and affects the quality of my life as a trans person. Can you take it down please? I beg you.

Also Chelsea Manning transitioned publicly and her pre transition name was public knowledge before she transitioned. This is something I have never shared with anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavernecox3000 (talk • contribs)

Replied here. --NeilN 02:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Lord Laitinen

I thank you for your advice. You were one of the few people who were respectful in disagreeing with my opinion. I meant nothing negative by the statement you emphasized; it simply meant that if there were consequences for making threats of suicide, then it would dissuade many people from doing so in the future. Again, thank you for being respectful in this situation. Lord Laitinen (talk) 02:23, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Lord Laitinen unfortunately it seems that you have a misguided understanding of a suicidal person's behaviour. If a person threatens suicide and they get help, there's a chance that they might not kill themselves. Blocking someone for threatening suicide serves to decrease the chance of getting help for being suicidal, which then increases the chance of that person dying. The only consequence for threatening suicide should be getting that person help, not trying to dissuade them from speaking out. --Ca2james (talk) 19:10, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Odisha Edit

Neil, this is in reference to your deletion of my adding of pics on the Odisha page. I am reverting back the addition of pics as Odisha has richer cultural history than other states. In architecture, while other Indian states in the north with Nagara style architecture suffered massive iconoclasm, Odisha did not. That is the reason Bhubaneswar, Puri and Konark exhibit remarkably rich examples of architecture representing Odisha's unbroken history. The pics are not at all out of context, as they concern only and only Odisha. They just make the article richer and more beautiful. I have not deleted anything. I do not change the factual lines in any article. I just add more visuals to the cultural and historical sections of some articles. There is no wikipedia rule for deleting that. I ALWAYS make sure, the pics do not exceed the text, which is the rule. In this case however, I will delete one or two pics.

I do not know from where in the world you are. I highly respect your vigilance. I hope you will help me in making wikipedia richer and more visually appealing. Thank You.

I agree we should not sandwich entire articles of images. I always add images to one or two sections. I also will not want to make an entire article full of images.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by PankajSaksena (talk • contribs) 16:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

@PankajSaksena: Every single editor on here can probably make the case that the article on my home of "x" needs more pictures because "y". Twelve pictures in one section is not happening. The sandwiching of an entire section is not happening. --NeilN 17:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Our guidelines are at Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Images. Dougweller (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

@Neil. Okay, I will un-sandwich the images and delete a few more, though now they are not 12 as you said. Is there a stipulated amount of images to be included in one section? If you could tell, I will be careful in future.

Moreover, you called one revert as edit war. It is my first and only one, as you just deleted the entire stuff, and even when I reverted, I deleted a few images, complying with your suggestions. I will comply more and do the above needful. I am also an editor, as you are, so calling one revert an edit war with multiple editors is not happening either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PankajSaksena (talk • contribs) 17:11, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

@PankajSaksena: Initial addition, revert, revert. Twelve images. The amount of images is obviously tied to the length of a section. A one paragraph section shouldn't have five images. Longer sections can have more images, but not so many that they have to appear on both sides. --NeilN 17:19, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Islamic Encyclopedia

@NeilN

About Author:

Syed Iqbal Zaheer, a mechanical engineer by training and profession, is today a well-known researcher and writer on Islam, its culture and civilization. Quite apart from the Tafsir Ishraq al-Ma'ani, the fourteen-volume commentary on the Qur'an, he is also the author of numerous books and booklets on Islam.

Recently, he headed, in his capacity as the Chief Editor, the ambitious 'An Educational Encyclopedia of Islam' project which is a two-volume, 1300 multi- colour page, compendium of knowledge on Islam, its civilization and heritage. The Young Muslim Digest, one of the most authentic periodicals on Islam in English has been edited by him since the last three decades.

Books Published by Syed Iqbal Zaheer

http://www.youngmuslimdigest.com/iqra-publications/

Online version of the recent book "An Educational Encyclopedia of Islam"

http://islamicencyclopedia.org/public/index/topics

The website of Islamic Encyclopedia is actually an online version of the book “An Educational Encyclopedia of Islam”

http://www.edupediaislam.com/ This is an official website where you can find the complete information concerning the book “An Educational Encyclopedia of Islam” and the author “Mr. Syed Iqbal Zaheer”

Further you can also find the mentions of Mr. Syed Iqbal Zaheer in “About Us” page of Islamic Encyclopedia website;

http://islamicencyclopedia.org/public/index/aboutUs

Moreover, here I’m mentioning some of the authenticated profiles of Mr. Syed Iqbal Zaheer for your consideration. Syed Iqbal Zaheer’s author profile on amazon; http://www.amazon.com/Syed-Iqbal-Zaheer/e/B00MXXXZU4

Syed Iqbal Zaheer’s author profile on Good Reads; http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/3515937.Syed_Iqbal_Zaheer

You may also find the work of Mr. Syed Iqbal Zaheer on Misplaced Pages; https://en.wikipedia.org/Tafsir_Ishraq_Al-Ma'ani

You may also find him and about his publication on news;

http://www.milligazette.com/news/2441-educational-encyclopedia-of-islam

Here some books are mentioned written by Mr. Syed Iqbal Zaheer

An Educational Encyclopedia of Islam on Amazon; http://www.amazon.in/An-Educational-Encyclopedia-Islam-Volumes/dp/6039000449/ref=aag_m_pw_dp?ie=UTF8&m=A23ZXOCER9ZMRI

• Book: I Want to Repent, But…, Published 2006 by International Islamic Publishing House (IIPH)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16154055-i-want-to-repent-but

• Book: An Educational Encyclopedia of Islam, Published 2010 by Iqra Welfare Trust

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13557128-an-educational-encyclopedia-of-islam

• Book: Fake Pearls, Published 2002 by al-Attique Publishers, Inc.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13557275-fake-pearls

• Book: A Short History of Israel, Published 1993 by Abul-Qasim Publishing House

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13557282-a-short-history-of-israel

• Book: Tafsir Ishraq al-Ma’ani: Being a Quintessence of Qur'anic Commentaries, Published 2008 by Iqra Publications

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8132970-tafsir-ishraq-al-ma-ani

http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=uAzYAAAAMAAJ&q=Syed+Iqbal+Zaheer&dq=Syed+Iqbal+Zaheer&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GFMIVO-QMIv-ygPN4ID4AQ&redir_esc=y

• Book: Islam the Religion You Can No Longer Ignore, Publisher: Iqra Publications (2002)

http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Religion-You-Longer-Ignore/dp/B003NAZQCQ/ref=la_B00MXXXZU4_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1409830354&sr=1-1

http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=42A-0u18HuQC&dq=Syed+Iqbal+Zaheer&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GFMIVO-QMIv-ygPN4ID4AQ&redir_esc=y

• Book: The Short History of Israel, Publisher: Abul-Qasim Publishing House (January 1, 2003)

http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-Israel-Iqbal-Zaheer/dp/B0084NDOYY/ref=la_B00MXXXZU4_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1409830354&sr=1-2

Book: A Voice to Hear, Al-Attique Publishers, Incorporated, 01-Jan-2000

http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=tR9CPQAACAAJ&dq=Syed+Iqbal+Zaheer&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GFMIVO-QMIv-ygPN4ID4AQ&redir_esc=y

I hope these references will be enough to be acceptable as a reliable source.

SheikhJunaidAhmed — Preceding undated comment added 07:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi SheikhJunaidAhmed. Thanks for this. Are there any academic papers that reference his work? --NeilN 12:50, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi NeilN!

In response to your query regarding academic references of Syed Iqbal Zaheer, I personally approached the author and got the response mentioned below:

Paper References:

• http://www.milligazette.com/news/2441-educational-encyclopedia-of-islam - Indian Newspaper
• http://islamdag.info/news/585 - Dagestan's largest and most popular Islamic news site
• http://www.onislam.net/english/news/global/461389-islamic-sciences-encyclopedia-issued.html - OnIslam & News Agencies

About the Author

An engineer by profession (Technical Institute, Bangalore), and then trained in Islamic disciplines by traditional scholars, Syed Iqbal Zaheer, (born in 1944), an Indian now in Saudi Arabia since almost four decades, enjoys equal proficiency in three major languages: Arabic, English and Urdu. Having scraped through a Master's degree in English language (Mysore University), he feels he is the weakest in this language. A polymath, and a prolific writer, he has wide interests and can freely write – journalistically - on advanced scientific topics such as cellular biology, quantum physics, or conundrums faced by the scientists in astrophysics. With reference to religious issues he is probably the first Islamic essayist of such length who stays within the unanimous opinions of the authorities of the past. An interesting feature of his writings – apart from the fact that he writes on subjects not dealt by many - is that, in each of his book he adopts a new style of writing. Although he has produced almost 10,000 pages of writings including translations, the authenticity, especially in his 14-volume Tafsir Ishraq al-Ma`ani, can withstand the test of criticism. In Fiqh he follows the Hanafiyy school, but states the opinions of other three schools wherever necessary. He has been editing the monthly magazine; Young Muslim Digest (issued from Bangalore) since last 35 years in which his editorials and answers to the letters by the readers are followed with interest in several countries. In the "Letters to the Editor" he crisply combines wit, cynicism, humor, criticism, with provocative analysis. The element of surprise is another characteristic of his writings. He runs an Islamic Institute for girls (teenage and above), in a town (Haassan) near Bangalore, whose syllabus is his making (considered distinctive by many scholars), and which lays greater emphasis on the Arabic language, than on stuffing the soft heads with intricacies of `Aqeedah or Fiqh. His weekly Qur'anic Dars and lectures are fairly well attended by the educated class. But, following the fatwa of classical Deoband scholars, he does not allow filming of his talks, does not believe in globe-trotting, and strongly objects to any praise directed at him as he believes that men who deserved praise are in their graves.

Books authored by Syed Iqbal Zaheer

1. Tafsir Ishraq al-Ma`ani:

In 14 volumes, some 3500 pages. Presents opinions of scholars of first few generations, and majority opinions of the commentators throughout Muslim history, with the provision that such opinions do not contradict a meaning given out by the majority of the Salaf. Anecdotes, Fiqh Points and other features add to the interest. Perhaps this is the first time that such a comprehensive work has appeared in English, with thousands of Prophetic traditions with translations. Published by Iqra Welfare Trust, Bangalore.???

2. Muhammad the Unlettered Prophet Who Changed the World in 23 years

With introduction by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, it is an extremely simple, but comprehensive biography of Prophet Muhammad in 100 pages. Repeatedly reprinted.

3. A Biography of the Prophet in the Light of the Original Sources

Originally in Arabic, by Dr. Mahdi Rizq Allah, translated into Arabic, it is an authenticated work in 2 volumes, with thousands of isnad- related notes and other references in footnotes. Published by Darussalam, Riyadh

4. The Fundamentals of Islamic Creed

What are the fundamental articles of faith, without which a man cannot be a Muslim? Translation of Imam Tahawi’s text and Ibn abi al-`Izz’s commentary (abridged) – 300 pages

5. Islam, the Religion You can no longer Ignore

A very successful short introduction to Islam. 60 pages. Repeatedly reprinted.

6. Fake Pearls

A collection of 250 ahadith taken from 5 different hadith collections that are either fabricated, or very weak, with notes on reasons of such evaluation.

7. Bilal, the Abyssinian Outrunner

Life of Bilal written in a story style, but within the parameters of historical evidences. 100 pages.

8. A Short History of Israel

With introduction by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, it presents the history of the Jews from the Abrahamic times until the end of the last century – 100 pages

9. An Introduction to the Arabic Language through Islamic Texts

In two volumes, 700 pages, and two DVDs containing audio-explanations, dictionaries, and several other interesting features. It teaches the Arabic language with the help of texts taken from Qur’an, Hadith, and other Islamic source books. Being used as text-book in some institutions. Published by Al-Attique Publications, Canada.

10. Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi

A short, but comprehensive biography, but well-appreciated biography of Syed Abul Hasan Ali al-Nadwi in 110 pages.

11. Hadith of the Night Vision

A translation of Ibn Rajab’s Book in Arabic, on one of the dreams of Prophet Muhammad, and its commentary – Pocket-size, 130 pages.

12. The Splitter of the Dawn

A collection of Qur’anic verses that deal with the fundaments of Islam, meant for non-Muslims as an introduction to the Qur’an. Several times reprinted, it is a useful booklet for Da`wah purposes – Pocket-size, 130 pages.

13. I Would like to Repent .. But

Translation into English of a short work by Sheikh Muhammad al-Munajjid.

14: An Educational Encyclopedia of Islam

A comprehensive work in 1300 pages, 2 volumes, covering all aspects of general need and interest. Trustworthy, authentic, with hundreds of graphic works and epigrams, it happens to be the first such work in English at a Muslim's hand. Its maps, though not very artistic, but are the first of their kind. Its third volume awaits publication.

15: Islamic Code of Practice for the Medical Profession

Translation of the Arabic original prepared by the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, Eastern Province, it surpasses in scope and application the Codes of Medical Practices by which doctors take oath in most countries of the world. 40 pages.

16: Looking for God? Get Reasonable

Briefly but convincingly, this little book presents evidences in favor of God's existence, while refuting arguments against it from a rational and logical point of view. It does not shy away from latest atheistic arguments, and does not hide behind superficial homilies. Popularly adopted as primary books for Da`wah purposes. 56 pages.

17: Hadith Rejection, a Critical Review

The work exposes the fallacious nature of the claims laid out by the rejecters of Hadith – both from among the Orientalists, as well as their followers from among the Muslims – and demonstrates skillfully that the doubts raised by both the classes have little scholarly value. 96 pages.

18: Usul al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence)

Few non-scholarly Muslims are aware that the extraction of Law from the Qur'an, the Sunnah and a few other minor sources is based on such solid principles as which cannot be shaken from the positions they occupy. This scholarly book is a short introduction to these principles. 110 pages.

Books available at:

1. Dar Abul-Qasim

P.O. Box 6156 Jeddah, 21442 store: (+966-2) 671-4793 (10 am-1 pm / 5-11 pm, Saturday-Thursday) mobile: 050-433-1535 (calls to this line from 8 am-4 pm please, Saturday-Wednesday) abulqasimbooks@hotmail.com www.saheehinternational.com

2. Dar al-Hadyan

Al-Ma`dhar Iskan Building no. 19, Office no. 04 Ground Floor Riyadh 11444 Tel./Fax: 463 1685 mrattique@gmail.com

4. Al-Attique Publications

11-Progres Ave. Unit #7 Scarborough ON M1P 4s7, Canada, Tel.: 416-335-1179, 416-615-1222 al-attique@al-attique.com

5. East West Educational Tools

c/o, Inst. of Higher Learning, Next to Hasanat College, Darus Surur Building, Basement, 43, Dickenson Road, Bangalore 560 042 Tel. 080 / 41133 504 9845 694 683, 9845 301 422, 9902 527 012. mzaki05@yahoo.com shareefhusain06@yahoo.com

6. Young Muslim Digest, No. 332

1st Floor, Darussalam Bldg., Queen’s Road, Bangalore, 560 052, India, Tel. 2228 9305, 9886 858 400 mzaki05@yahoo.com shareefhusain06@yahoo.com

7. Amazon

www.amazon.com

I hope this would be adequate!

Well, I also want to make an author page of Syed Iqbal Zaheer on Misplaced Pages, what do you think, will it be good enough to pass moderators review? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SheikhJunaidAhmed (talk • contribs) 11:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

About notability of an individual

The person I am writing about is senior journalist and has worked on many prominent projects with PM of India, Narendra Modi and CM of Gujarat Anandiben Patel. Can you guide me on what should I cite to justify the notability of an individual? How can I cite offline articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prafuldaga (talk • contribs) 13:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Prafuldaga. The relevant guideline is WP:BIO. Please also see WP:NOTINHERITED. Working with or writing about famous people does not confer notability. Basically, a person needs to coverage on themselves from independent sources to be considered notable. Please see Help:Referencing_for_beginners#References_not_online for the answer to your cite question. --NeilN 13:38, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I have added few links as citations for the article I am trying to create in the sandbox at https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Prafuldaga/sandbox. How can I get it peer-reviewed before I submit it as article for main review? Prafuldaga (talk) 07:26, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

@Prafuldaga: You can add the code {{subst:submit}} at the top of the sandbox page. I had a look and in my opinion, the article as it currently stands has little hope of surviving a deletion review. There are no sources provided that have significant coverage of the subject. --NeilN 14:41, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Buddhism

You claimed the edit/ section I created in Talk was disruptive editting and inappropriate discussion. I have looked up both these topics and do not agree with your views. There is nothing in my editting that can be attributed to it being disruptive editting or inappropriate discussion under Wiki policies. You are misusing the terms to remove my edits for reasons unknown. I guess it may be that you hold buddhist beliefs or that you are sympathetic to buddhist authorities, and unable to handle a challenge based on facts. If that is the case, then there is a conflict of interest for you to edit the topic, and you should not edit it. I seek to reinstate the section that you deleted. 86.180.152.25 (talk) 00:20, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

You are free to report me to WP:ANI if you think my behavior is problematic. Just as I will do if you continue to blatantly misrepresent sources. --NeilN 14:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

NeilN, are your accusations for real? When and where did I blatantly or unblatantly misrepresent sources? 86.180.152.25 (talk) 00:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The BBC source had nothing about cannabis-growing activities. --NeilN 00:36, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

NeilN, surely if you want to edit or admin to an article, you would do well to know something about the subject. Just Google Vietnamese and cannabis and see the thousands of incidents and references that come up. 86.180.152.25 (talk) 00:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

If you want to edit an article, you should read WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:BURDEN. --NeilN 00:15, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. I don't see any problem. 86.180.152.25 (talk) 00:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

In your careful two minute analysis it's obvious you missed, "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing a citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." --NeilN 00:20, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Labia majora

You talk about edit warring and said to talk with the editor about it but you did not talk with me until after the page had been locked. Did you not start the edit war by deleting an edit without talking about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipplewoman (talk • contribs) 22:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

@Nipplewoman: See WP:BRD. You made an edit, you were reverted (by two different editors); now you need to discuss and get consensus for your edit. --NeilN 22:24, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

I came to a consensus with the first editor. Then you decided to cause problems as well because you believe you know more than accredited medical school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipplewoman (talk • contribs) 22:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

With Flyer22? I very much doubt she would agree with your assessment. --NeilN 22:30, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Did you talk to her? Obviously not because you have your head too far up your ass. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipplewoman (talk • contribs) 22:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

@Nipplewoman: This is what she wrote: "You should take the matter to that article talk page." So, essentially, WP:BRD. --NeilN 22:50, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Nipplewoman, I've commented on my talk page about the matter at hand. I have not come to a consensus with you on the matter (also see WP:Consensus), but I am open to hearing what you have to state on it. Flyer22 (talk) 22:59, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

NeilN,

Thank you for archiving my edit. I was reading through the page about the food chain and realized that my information was different to yours. It is possible that I may have gotten the wrong information. Thank you for the help and I will be more careful when editing something next time!

DrSheldonLeeCooper

— Preceding unsigned comment added by DrSheldonLeeCooper (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Foreskin Page Image Reversion

I'm new to wikipedia. Can a page only have a certain number of images? Isn't it better to have more than only a few, for educational purposes? I don't view the image I added to the Foreskin page as redundant. The lead image is not representative of the average foreskin, so I believe it's good to have more images on the page. I'm not trying to argue. Anonymous 001100 (talk) 22:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Replied here. --NeilN 22:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC) And every guy thinks his johnny is something special... --NeilN 22:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Tropes vs. Women in Video Games

Well I was trying to axe that entire section for being such pointless dribble, but apparently all I did was just revert you. Ooops! Zero Serenity 01:31, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Zero Serenity, no worries. I saw the immediate re-revert and figured it was an accident. --NeilN 01:49, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Reply for your suggestion

Web Design Royale Link is Deleted From Davangere Wiki

Web Design Royale Started it's company basically from Davangere City, and we are the First Firm To Introduce Technology to Davangere so kindly note it's not any advertising, but it's a fact kindly add the link and content back i can provide your reference website created in davangere city. Hotel Pooja International — Preceding unsigned comment added by Praveenbhagawatihubli (talk • contribs) 15:06, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

@Praveenbhagawatihubli: No, this is pure and simple spam. Please stop trying to advertise your company on Misplaced Pages. --NeilN 15:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Laverne Cox 2

Hi, I made the edit on the Laverne Cox page and am now responding to your message. I don't need to hide images or things that may offend me, I am not the problem. However I am very well versed in trans issues and I know firsthand that after transition having your birth name known is less then ideal, especially because people often see it as an invitation to use that name in an attempt to humiliate the person. But what do I know, if you really think information from her birth certificate is vital to the point of the page then there is nothing I can do.

Thank you anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.219.33.4 (talk) 00:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

edits

hi, I appreciate your concern, regarding this current problem. I never violate 3RR, and also I already wrote on the article talk page, a little while ago. And stated the points and positions. About "synthesis" and unsourced unwarranted POV statements. But again, I will not (and do not) violate 3RR. Regards. Gabby Merger (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

I am not a sockpuppet

Hello. Have you seen the long section about how I am a sockpuppet? Is it ok to use your user page to attack editors? I think not, that is why I deleted it. I explained the deletion, in the edit summary, and a message on the users talk page. However, the material has been replaced. What course of action can I take to remove the unsubstantiated, and insulting allegations? Or, alternatively, do you also believe me to be a sockpuppet? Read my articles, and compare them to something by this PassaMethod editor, and see if there's any similarity. Can I see some of his stuff?zzz (talk) 02:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

zzz, I do not see you mentioned anywhere. What are you referring to? --NeilN 02:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Its the sockpuppet section. Pass a maethod is very specifically me - current editor of Boko Haram (which I wrote),and recreational drugs (which I also wrote). She has been accusing me of this for a while, and I just noticed it there.zzz (talk) 02:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Wow, shes listed everything Ive ever done...zzz (talk) 02:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I had a look at his writing, and his grammar is just not good enough. Not even close.zzz (talk) 02:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

zzz, She's detailed the habits of Pass a Method. She hasn't mentioned you by name or even linked to any of your edits. --NeilN 02:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand your point.zzz (talk) 02:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: There are no accusations against you on Flyer22's page. You have no cause to delete it. --NeilN 03:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Everything in this para, except the Erection bit, applies to me.

If you find an editor doing several or more of the following things, that editor is very likely a Pass a Method WP:Sockpuppet: Significantly editing the Boko Haram article and other Islamic articles (I mean any editor who is the current main/continuous editor of the Boko Haram article). Editing religious topics in general, including the addition of anything about Pope Francis (whether it's the Pope Francis article or, for example, an addition to the Recreational drug use article about him). Editing LGBT articles. Editing political articles. Editing sexual articles. Editing medical and/or anatomy articles. Editing science topics such as the Big Bang article, or topics about black holes; the Stellar black hole article, for example, could be a candidate. Visiting the WP:Help desk. Focusing on leads. Focusing on British topics; using British spelling. Using editing summaries that are meant to deceive. Using Urban Dictionary as a source, whether it's at the Erection article, or, for example, the Roach (smoking) article. Adding a picture of someone smoking to their user page or talk page. Makes notes on his user page of the articles he's edited, soon after editing those articles.

I don't understand, what diff does it make about mentioning my name? She has made certain noone can fail to know exactly who I am. zzz (talk) 03:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: No, until you brought it up, it's very unlikely anyone looking at her user page would think she was referring to you. I edit a lot of pages infested by socks. I'm not going to say, "hey, you're referring to me!" if I see a list of articles on a user page along with the sockmaster who has edited them. --NeilN 03:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I didnt understand that comment. Are you saying , as you appear to be, that you believe I am "the sockmaster"? I asked you that to begin with, and you denied it. If this is just a private joke between you two, I can take my grievance somewhere else. zzz (talk) 03:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

zzz, I have no idea if you're a sockpuppet - I haven't looked at your edits that closely. I noticed you wiping out Flyer22's user page repeatedly so I stepped in to stop it. When you said it contained accusations against you I looked and could find nothing on the page pointing towards you. --NeilN 03:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

"the current main/continuous editor of the Boko Haram article" etc, etc, etc...zzz (talk) 03:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

That is undeniably specific. I couldnt possibly refer to anyone but me, with this account, that is, not any of my illegitimate accounts. I dont understand what the problem is with removing a personal attack.zzz (talk) 03:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: "I mean any editor who is the current main/continuous editor of the Boko Haram article" If you have concerns with a portion of her user page, the proper course of action is to discuss it with her on her talk page, and not just blank the whole thing repeatedly while issuing a threat. --NeilN 03:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Any means me, as you can see from the history of the article.zzz (talk) 03:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

But, your saying I should go and discuss whether she might take down the personal attack section of her page. If she feels like it. That's ok, she can just carry on attcking me, I guess. Cheers. zzz (talk) 03:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I am willing to remove the "any main editor" commentary that I very recently added, per my comment on my talk page about this case. Flyer22 (talk) 03:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• The Signedzzz account was created 26 May 2014, but the first edit was 10 September 2014see below. After that date, the only changes to User:Flyer22 relevant to this discussion were to add the following: "(I mean any editor who is the current main/continuous editor of the Boko Haram article)" and "or talk page. Makes notes on his user page of the articles he's edited, soon after editing those articles". There is no way that text can be interpreted as an accusation against Signedzzz. Why all the fuss? Johnuniq (talk) 04:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Johnuniq, I was under the impression that I had been editing for months! This whole discussion has been most enlightening. Thanks to all concerned for revealing the way that WP is run nowadays. An experienced editor can attack anyone he/she chooses. I did not know that was how it was. Thanks again. zzz (talk) 17:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

People make mistakes and it's best to just point them out without circumlocution. Checking shows that I made a blunder above—I've struck it out because your first edit was 6 June 2014. Johnuniq (talk) 02:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I understand

Who are u exactly? And why are you editing things on MY page if it's MY page. I completely understand the final warning I was just testing wikipedia this is my first day on this thing. Even if I didn't write what I did how did u find out. And could Kim and kanye find out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janaewiki (talk • contribs) 03:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

@Janaewiki: Nothing on Misplaced Pages is "your" page. Talk pages are there for editors to use for communication about Misplaced Pages and its articles. Anyone can see exactly what you've written. Right now, you're this close to being blocked so please start contributing constructively. You can read Misplaced Pages:Contributing to Misplaced Pages if you want tips on how to do that. --NeilN 03:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok how do I protect my page like the others are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janaewiki (talk • contribs)

@Janaewiki: What page are you referring to? --NeilN 04:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I have a page where I edit the latest updates but it's not protected with the lock on the pencil how do I get that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janaewiki (talk • contribs)

@Janaewiki: You don't. The only one causing issues at Wounded Knee Massacre is you. --NeilN 04:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes you have told me that already. But how do others get a protected page from vandalism like beyonce or nicki minaj. But another page that I have which is very important can't have one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janaewiki (talk • contribs)

@Janaewiki: Please read Misplaced Pages:Protection policy. Requests go to WP:RFPP. I strongly discourage you from making any requests until you are more familiar with Misplaced Pages. --NeilN 04:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Jairaj991

Hi NeilN,
Seeing as you've had a bit to do with Jairaj991 (talk · contribs) you'll undoubtedly be delighted to know they've created a new page Rajput warrior, with lots of references. Too bad only one out of the 45 or so 'sources' isn't a Misplaced Pages page. Just FYI!--220 of 12:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

220, sigh. Thanks. Article redirected and editor given final warning. --NeilN 12:37, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

hello

I was responding to the individual who's page I was on. Anyone who could have assumed that his comments were racist. I assumed someone reacted that way via his comments. Upon review of the talk page of the article in question it doesn't seem that anyone has. Though you did react to the comments there it seems you were suggesting something similar. That they should focus more on the consensus process and watch what they say as it could be taken wrong. Though that is an assumption. Anyway good day.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Serialjoepsycho: You've read the discussion incorrectly. He was calling my comments racist. --NeilN 13:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

It's probably because I don't actually care. I contacted the user to ask them not to canvass. After further request I offered them some advice. Before more careful with their language because they have to work with the other editors involved. I'm unsure how or why a discussion between me and you came about but what ever. Have a good day.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 18:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Edit War on GamerGate

I'm trying to prevent an un-revert of my article that was trying to un-bias the article.

I'm requesting some official moderation on the matter, we need to skin the article and lock editing, or delete it entirely and take it from the top.

As it is, the whole article is an edit war and I'm trying to re-establish neutrality.EvilConker (talk) 14:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@EvilConker:. You believe your edit improved the article. Others don't. So... WP:BRD. --NeilN 14:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Other users have raised concerns about the paragraph, saying that it not only is possibly biased but also repetitive as there already is a Misplaced Pages page for Depression Quest with the same information. So instead of reverting, I modified the opening paragraph to have a link to the article in question, which I think is appropriate in this situation.EvilConker (talk) 14:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

And yet only you are reverting to your preferred version. You need to stop and wait. --NeilN 14:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I will stop. However, let's be very clear that this entire article is contested. I believe it needs to be stripped entirely and locked, give the basics, what happened, no 'why it happened.' Looking at the comments section, it really looks like Masem and NorthByBrandford are the only two users both opposing neutrality and adding in biased edits. If that's what this article is, then it needs to be deleted entirely and rewritten by a true neutral team. I believe the same happened to the Occupy Wall Street/Ferguson/Trayvon Martin articles while the situation was developing.EvilConker (talk) 14:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with Masem being biased. I've worked on the article for over a week already, and Masem tries to stay neutral - although he should be more aware of adding too much detail. NorthByBrandFord however (and RedPenOfDoom) are clear biased.MicBenSte (talk) 15:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

NeilN, either the article becomes balanced again like it was viewing both the harassment and misogeny as well as the allegations of corruption and wrong ethics in the game industry, or the article shouldn't exist at all.MicBenSte (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I retract my statement about Masem. Looking over his edits I see he's not that bad. NorthByBradford, however, is a definite issue. I apologize for my accusations.EvilConker (talk) 19:36, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I second this. There is far too much 'opinion' and not enough facts. It's written far too much like an essay instead of a neutral, informative, article.EvilConker (talk) 14:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The only way to get rid of that article is through AFD. And a piece of advice: "Make the changes I want to this article or delete it" won't work. This will take significant time and patience to hammer out. --NeilN 15:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Not aimed at you, but I'm getting tired of being bullied around by some senior and some less-senior editors who like to think that their POV is everything just because RSes think it's best to copy&paste from other RSes without investigating and the editors agree with it. That's why I lashed out a bit at you, sorry for that.MicBenSte (talk) 15:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm trying to say it's in violation of the rules, it's very biased. There is already a large call for it to be deleted and rewritten from scratch, but this anarchistic way of doing it on such a complicated issue that's leading to anti-GGs pretty much overpowering the narrative is just not alright. I consider myself a neutral person in this whole debacle, and I'm trying to keep the article neutral, as are a lot of others, but just because a person has seniority (though Masem is not a mod to the best of my knowledge) doesn't mean they are free of bias that is breaking the integrity of an article. How are we supposed to be constructive and neutral when every change made is reverted to something more biased? I'm asking for your support, I think you're a neutral person with no real connection with the issue, but you're giving the aura of supporting a person who keeps reverting every single change that has been discussed by several people. Reverting doesn't put you in the right, you can revert a good change just as well as you can revert a bad one.EvilConker (talk) 17:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

IP copyvio

Your edit removed the same copyvio being added by 31.49.113.139 (talk · contribs), both from Wales. I see the IP has been advised to get copyright permission and copy it. Dougweller (talk) 14:59, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller: Thanks for the heads up. Added the article to my watchlist. The original IP added copyvios to multiple articles so if they pop up again, hopefully we'll spot it. --NeilN 15:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I hope so, I've just blocked about 1/2 dozen Irish school IPs, a real pain. I emailed the listed abuse address. Dougweller (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller: I had a look at the book the webpage is likely copied from. 11,000 pages and $2,000. Holy heck. --NeilN 15:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I wonder if they know someone's copied some of it to a website. Dougweller (talk) 15:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Suicide methods

Ok. Please cite the information in said article that cannot be linked to any references. Please also consider the fact that the existence of the predescribed is a moral issue. Misplaced Pages is also go-to website which is accessible to all age groups, and thus the ability to access such a page might enfringe upon laws involving the protection of more vulnerable users. I'm sorry if my tone was impolite in any of the prior messages, but as somebody who has suffered with mental illness, I believe my stance on the topic is valid. The page has been viewed by 80,000 people in the past 30 days alone and many of those viewers will be mentally ill or distressed. Redzimus (talk) 21:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Redzimus: If you think content in the article is not referenced properly then you can bring it up on the talk page or remove the info carefully when you are autoconfirmed. You should know "but it's the moral thing to do" probably won't get you very far as that argument is used without success when people try to blank articles related to sex ("children are reading this") or religion ("that's against our religion"). I sympathize with your position but what we should be doing is making sure the information is factual, dispassionate, and does not fall afoul of WP:NOTHOWTO. --NeilN 23:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Just wanted to say thanks for your last edit. The only reason I was communicating this way was due to the fact that I'm new to wiki. Have mainly been editing articles such as part-time terrorism (which is admittedly quite funny in concept) Redzimus (talk) 13:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Wow, I must be thoroughly annoying you (not the intention). That's fine, sorry for taking up your time

Replied here. --NeilN 14:01, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Have the key admin explored this issue and been made aware of the article/ unnecessary overcategorisation?

80,000 have viewed it in the last 30 days, I mean I can't see need for its existence, it's just over categorisation of the already discussed topic (Suicide) I will look into the meedical issue too, I just want the key admin to do the same if possible. I think it'll save lives Thanks, Al Redzimus (talk) 20:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)Redzim

@Redzimus: Again, there are no key admins. Admins do not dictate content. As for WP:MEDRS, I was referring to the Hüseyin Cahit Firat article you created. --NeilN 22:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd like you to discuss it with them and no

It's about time somebody else took responsibility around here. I respect that you have a job to do, but I haven't deleted the article. I am actually in the process of creating a more balanced argument eg By writing about the potential for later liver damage in the majority of overdose cases. It's akin to alcohol abuse and thus my work is also scientific. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redzimus (talk • contribs) 13:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

@Redzimus: Your proposed header has no consensus. This topic has been discussed multiple times on the talk page. Also, Misplaced Pages does not want you to "take responsibility" for an article. See WP:OWN. --NeilN 13:32, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to discuss it with the user, but he's now unnamed and absent from Misplaced Pages

So he's absent, and used to go by DeirYassin. Can you pass on my details to him to discuss my edit (with his permission), Thanks, Al Redzimus (talk) 13:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)RedzimusRedzimus (talk) 13:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

==To discuss my edit and reach a potential agreement Redzimus (talk) 13:51, 18 September 2014 (UTC)RedzimusRedzimus (talk) 13:51, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

@Redzimus: No. I'm going to say this is plainly as possible. No one editor can dictate the content of an article. Even creating the article does not give you a special say in content. Everyone needs to use the article's talk page. Again, see WP:OWN. --NeilN 13:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

I was not getting it because he was not really speaking clearly. Somehow you managed to make it clear in one sentence. See? Now I got it. The more time I spend on this Misplaced Pages thing, the more I like my job and Football, American Football, that is, the best sport in the world, not soccer. --Mondschein English (talk) 08:16, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mondschein English: "the best sport in the world" :-) --NeilN 14:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN: We do not need a citation, we do not need reliable sources: it is a known fact, kind of like that "fire is hot". We don't need a ctitation to state that fire is hot, now, do we? :-) --Mondschein English (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mondschein English: Actually, Fire#Flame_temperatures is pretty poorly written and sourced... --NeilN 17:17, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN: Hmmm I am now wondering whether maybe my wife got a Misplaced Pages account with the nick "NeilN", because I don't think I can possibly win here: every single thing I say and/or do is inherently wrong!!! LOL Are you sure you are not my wife in disguise? Maybe my mother-in-law, if not my wife? LOL --Mondschein English (talk) 18:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mondschein English: You need to take your beautiful wife out for a nice dinner for thinking such thoughts! -- Your mother-in-law aka --NeilN 19:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN: WOW!!!! You are GOOD! I can tell a ladies' man when I see one! I will have to get pointers from you on how to be smooth with the Missus, Neil!!! :-) You have yourself a nice afternoon! It is just a couple of more hours for me and then it is finally going to be 5:00 pm on a Friday Night!! YAY!!!!! :-)

It's my right

As admin do you not want to take some responsibility for what you host? You have blood on your hands. 80,000 views mate. Accessible via a google search of 'suicide' and how many suicidal people will be doing that? Loads and it's the fault of irresponsible people like you who hide behind all this red tape. Frankly I think you have an over inflated sense of self worth. You're actually refusing to be of any help, which tells me that you're just as much as a psychopath as the people who have contributed to this article and maybe you even reach the level of people who referenced the suicide guides-Which have now thankfully been deleted. I think you should climb back up inside your arse where you came from, and quite honestly, you're going to need quite a powerful torch to find your way out. This is now a matter for the police web unit now. Why don't you actually show that you're human and demonstrate a scrap of morality? There's already an article for suicide, you don't need a 'methods category'. If you want some Misplaced Pages jargon then it's unnecessary overcategorisation and entirely irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redzimus (talk • contribs)

@Redzimus: 1) I'm not an admin. 2) You'll note that I removed the suicide guides based on your reasonable comments and Misplaced Pages guidelines (as I detailed on the talk page). 3) Diatribes like the above are only going to get you blocked. --NeilN 14:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I know it's your right, I just think wiki needs to do more to protect its users and this has lead to me losing my temper a few times. Regrettably when you want to change the world for the better as badly as I do, you reach hurdles and often don't get the help you need. I'm sorry for the comments I made as they are a product of the latter. This is not an apology to redeem the warnings or for gaining leeway on the matter, I don't really care if I get blocked. However, I intend to follow the proper channels from now on so I can continue my campaign Redzimus (talk) 14:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)RedzimusRedzimus (talk) 14:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the continuation of the debate despite the minor disagreement, please find my counterpoint on the page in question under 'talk' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redzimus (talk • contribs)

Hi

Hi could you please remove the personal attacks on me that Cass put back on this edit ? If you look close he left the attacks in a dif and i want it removed but he won't do it and I can't because of the 3rrr rule. Caden 22:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Caden. I sympathize but both my attempts were modified by Cassianto. That discussion is now closed and if I changed anything, no doubt he or another supporter would revert my edit, continuing the drama. I see you've asked again on ANI - your best hope is that an admin agrees with you and removes the pointy diff. --NeilN 22:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Neil. I hope another admin sees it and removes it. I don't know what more i can do. Caden 22:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Caden - you can thank Chillum for oversighting. Good call! --NeilN 22:30, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Does that mean its gone for good? If so, that's great. Caden 22:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

@Caden: Yes. See? --NeilN 22:39, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok thank you for letting me know :) Caden 22:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Request

My friend 88.108.126.68 (talk) 14:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)Redzimus88.108.126.68 (talk) 14:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC) has been blocked without sufficient warning. Can you unblock him please? He wants to start again and he promises no daft edits this time.

No idea who you're talking about. Plus, I'm not an admin so can't unblock. --NeilN 14:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Sensible addition of current events

Hi, just added some content I wantec your opinion on, thanks Al. It is in 'Starvation' and also a very slight reword in 'Overdose' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redzimus (talk • contribs) 16:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@Redzimus: There's now an undue emphasis on force-feeding in that section and you refer to a U.K. law without stating it's only applicable in the U.K. --NeilN 17:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I mean it is relevant, people can add right? Also UK law does only apply in the UK right? I will add more on US law — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redzimus (talk • contribs)

@Redzimus: Basically, you are coatracking. The section is about starvation as a suicide method, not force-feeding. Adding more about force-feeding will only exacerbate the problem. P.S. Can you please take a few minutes and read up on talk page guidelines? Please don't create a new section with every post and please post on the correct page (not user pages as you have now done twice). --NeilN 17:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I do

Look, I know I might have offended you and I'm well aware of this. I did say sorry and I am going to cease contacting you. I can reassure you that all I am doing with the article is hightlighting the physiological, psychological and sociological implications of methods and providing strong references for each statement. Other users like boneyard agree so it isn not biased like you say, in fact he article is currently biased itself and reads like a suicide guide. Regardless of my subjective opinion this is true and a knowledge of the facts is necessary for the article to read well. Any grudge won't help vulnerable people. I represent the people in my writings and thus I am neutral in regards to consensus. My intentions are good and not flawed in the slightest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redzimus (talk • contribs) 18:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Replied here. --NeilN 19:20, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Contention on Aquiline Nose Article

I find it interesting that you write to me with a source and then I get a reported message from another person with another name. I am not sure if you work together or are the same person: Bbb23. Either way, I have been reported, when it should be this person that should be reported. You said that mine is a "opinion" when I am actually removing something instead of adding something. The person with the opinion is actually the user who added the term Hook Nose, that is the person you should be questioning, which makes me think of your intentions as dishonest. The article is on the term AQUILINE NOSE, the article is not on HOOK NOSE, these are two different terms not interchangeable. Look for Aquiline Nose, and its definition, which is Roman Nose, eagle-like, prominent bridge nose, or curved nose; these are the official terms to describe this in all reputable pages on the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wazzabee7 (talk • contribs) 03:30, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I can't help you if you edit war, engage in sockpuppetry, and can't read sources. --NeilN 03:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I like your pretty name

How do you get your name all prettiful and colorful like you did? I copied your first line on this page, and tried to put my user name in it, but it didn't work right.

""

Sarahrosemc (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Sarahrosemc. Details on customizing your signature are here: WP:SIG#CustomSig. If you need more help or want me to come up with the HTML (after you tell me what you want your signature to look like), just let me know. --NeilN 20:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, did you want to customize the name at the top of your talk page or your signature? --NeilN 20:33, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I think I can figure it out from here. Thx NeilN! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahrosemc (talk • contribs) 20:33, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Wanted some advice

Greetings. I recently came across Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, a page which certainly seems to meet GNG and so forth, is well referenced, but in which the majority of the content is non-english. Specifically, there are a lot of quotations from the original sanskrit verse. I am not entirely sure how to deal with this; would you mind taking a look? Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Vanamonde93. The main issue I see is with sourcing. All English translations and interpretations of the primary source need references. The modern world and current usage sections also need sources. I will tag it accordingly and material should be removed if sources are not forthcoming. --NeilN 12:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks friend. I guess I should clarify that "well referenced" was a misleading phrase on my party; what I should have said was that it seems to have some good references, which are not used enough. Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hi NeilN,

I have recently edited an article about premature ejaculation as the information was misleading. I really like wikipedia and am very interested in contributing but this seems very discouraging. I have been suffering from PE and promescent is definitely not the only one product available, and is not the one helping in my case. I believe people should know about the other alternative, moreover I have mentioned a substance benzocaine which is crucial for people and their health. I have submitted a wikipedia link, anchor tag and no extrernal links. I have nothing to do with the product and only wanted to do the good deed. I have also created a wiki article about the product with help of the company, again with no intentions of promotion, its not mine I am a patient.

Can you help me please?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew74123 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Andrew74123. In order to add this, you also need to add a source. Since it's a medical claim, it should be a medically reliable source (e.g., a peer reviewed study). --NeilN 15:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Youssef Bey Karam Foundation

Please review our website at http://www.youssefbeykaram.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saroufim1 (talk • contribs)

Hi Saroufim1. An organization's website does not establish notability. Please see WP:ORG: "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability." --NeilN 15:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello again

Hey NeilN,

Sorry for disturbing I am sure you are busy. I am not sure if i do understand completely, as if you go to the article, promescent only provided a FDA link which is not linked in no way to them.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew74123 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Andrew74123: Where's the link to a peer reviewed study on Xperform? --NeilN 19:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

Thank you for your reply. As I said I do not work with the company and dont have material of this kind. I am just curious understanding the rules, as i read them a couple of times already. Is there any peer reviewed study for promescent in the article?

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew74123 (talk • contribs) 19:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Andrew74123: No there isn't, so I've removed that sentence. Feel free to remove any unsourced or poorly sourced content that should have a cite. --NeilN 19:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy

Thanks for all the help NeilN and deletion of the tag, i appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew74123 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Ill try to find some but as i said i am a customer of the company thats it. I never thought submitting a simple article on wikipedia is going to be a hell of a trouble :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew74123 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

@Andrew74123: Yeah, you ran smack dab into one of our core policies - notability. There are millions and millions of "things" in this world and we don't want articles on every one of them. Only the ones that have independent coverage. --NeilN 20:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Paris

The change was by User:Sesto Elemento:
User:SchroCat is reverting that change, 3 times already: , , . Der Statistiker (talk) 20:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

@Der Statistiker: You also have plenty of reverts. If other editors are contesting a change, the article should go back to its previous state (especially a Good Article or Featured Article) until agreement is reached. --NeilN 21:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

These editors have a history of ALWAYS contesting changes in this article. So what you are saying is they own the article and nobody can change it if we don't have their permission in advance. Der Statistiker (talk) 21:10, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

@Der Statistiker: To get outside views you can follow dispute resolution. RFC, WP:DRN, etc. --NeilN 21:12, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

LOL. Why didn't you tell this to SchroCat in the first place instead of pandering to his warring instincts by reverting my edit back to his version? Der Statistiker (talk) 21:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

@Der Statistiker: It's not his version. You are edit warring to change something that's been there all year. --NeilN 22:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The montage is itself the result of an edit war by Dr Blofeld and his friend SchroCat which they forced into the article last year (in June), thereby changing the picture that had represented Paris on top of the article for years. They did so without asking for people's opinion on the talk page, or withdrawing their montage when they saw that many editors opposed it. It's a case of brutal enforcement of their will against the wishes of other editors. Der Statistiker (talk) 23:28, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Speed of gravity

Zhuyin (talk) 07:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC) Dear Sir NeilN,

Thank you very much for your message.

I am very glad to be a Wikipedian.

According to your message, I am drafting my revised article here. If you should proofread it, I should thank you very much.

My best regards.

Sincerely Yours, Zhu

The revised article

In November 2013, Y. Zhu announced that he observed the speed of gravitational force, calculating the variations of the orbit of the geosynchronous satellites perturbed by the Sun. It is shown that the gravitational force of the Sun acting on the satellite is from the present position of the Sun. It indicates that the speed of gravitational force is much larger than the speed of light in a vacuum. From this observation and the recent experiments, the structure of the fields of a moving source (a body or a charge) is studied. A method to measure the speed of gravitational force in laboratory and a line to indirectly test the wavelengths of gravitational waves are presented.

End

Hi Zhuyin. Who has cited your paper? Also, I see no evidence of a peer review process. --NeilN 22:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

References

1. Yin Zhu (2011). "Measurement of the Speed of Gravity". arXiv:1108.3761.

Dear NeilN,

My article entitled “Measurement of the speed of gravity” is published in Chinese Physics Letters, 28, 070401 (2011). It was peer-reviewed while some parts of it have not been peer-reviewed.

From google scholar, it was cited by Syska J., Frieden wave-function representations via an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiment. Physical Review E, 2013, 88(3): 032130. Трунев А П. СКОРОСТЬ ГРАВИТАЦИИ И СВЕРХБЫСТРОЕ ДВИЖЕНИЕ В ОБЩЕЙ ТЕОРИИ ОТНОСИТЕЛЬНОСТИ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhuyin (talk • contribs) 01:41, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@Zhuyin: I suggest you post the above on the article's talk page to get feedback. "It was peer-reviewed while some parts of it have not been peer-reviewed." gives some cause for concern. --NeilN 01:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN:These parts were added in arxiv after the article was published in Chinese Physics Letters.

report an admin

Hi, just wondering how I report an admin? It's just you seem to like the use of weasel words within the article on 'Mansplaining'. Why is this? Can you justify where it says that that mansplaining is a common experience? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.132.163 (talk) 21:09, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Your edits are kind of bizarre. You put back in one of the phrases you wanted to remove. And if you look at the sources:

• "Men explain things to me, and to other women, whether or not they know what they're talking about. Some men. Every woman knows what I mean."
• "Of course, it's not just my journalist friend who has experienced mansplaining. There are countless other examples of this phenomenon."

And I'm not an admin. BTW, your other edits also had issues. --NeilN 22:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, you say here that hearsay is sufficient enough to make quantifiable claims, yet I have just reported you for removing a reference... (see below).

I don't see why you are reverting edits on animal models of ADHD it was a paper cited 16 times. You obviously lack the science training to make changes to an important, otherwise you would really the idea of "just one study" is a fallacy. I have now highlighted your account on the report user page, as this you are clearly starting the early stages of harassment rather than trying to improve articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 12:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Apple Store

Birk just started reverting my stuff without any reason, did he confuse me with someone else that he has a vendetta against? BenefactorDubsta (talk) 02:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Binksternet can answer that. Meanwhile, it would help if you used edit summaries. --NeilN 02:33, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Reported

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm letting you know I have reported you here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#NeilN_2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 12:33, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

And unsurprisingly closed quickly at ANI. --NeilN 14:19, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

It was closed quickly, but another user acted as a mediator - and now the point I wanted to remain in the article, has been included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 16:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I hope you're more precise with any research you do. --NeilN 16:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

^ actually originally I did disagree with the wording you used (hence why it sounds clumsy what I wrote), but then decided to let it go this time, and then change it at a later date when I generally improve the article by adding references etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 16:32, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I get the impression a lot of this from you was partly academic snobbery - trying to 'get one over' on somebody who works in science... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 16:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Not at all. It was about getting the article to state what the source actually said. --NeilN 16:20, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

And the source says that the CR sourced animals are the better choice for animal research. Also, you never addressed my point about other metrics -- claiming something is not true, because it is only one reference is erroneous. If you feel you are qualified to continue editing neuroscience articles, then I suggest you take my comments about using other metrics such as number of times cited, pedigree of author etc, journal printed in etc, rather than using the folk-scientist argument of "it's just one paper". Although I feel satisfied that I've potentially benefited your science literacy and you've hopefully learnt something from this exchange :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 16:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

This link contains some useful information for you: http://mamidala.wordpress.com/2011/07/10/25/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 16:27, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

"...better choice for animal research." But, yet again, that's not what you added to the article. And, yet again, a link for you: WP:SYNTHESIS. --NeilN 16:34, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Where have I made synthesis? I used three references to support the point. The final reference, the dynamic model, also mentions within the text the important of using CR strain. Please, explain to me where I have synthesised a point as I'm not sure you are comprehending correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 16:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

And yes I did make the point that when modelling ADHD, the CR strain has been validated as the best. And there are all sorts of methodological reasons why that is so, that are beyond you, but the gist is -- one of the most influential models of ADHD was developed using rats, and the person who did most of the research on that model of ADHD, used the CR strain (he also authored the other papers I linked). So his view has more weight than the science fair reply of "its just one study". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 16:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Your second edit presented one source that stated that the CR rat "is at present the best-validated animal model of ADHD". Do you really not see that there's a difference between this and "with the main emphasis on models purchased from Charles Rivers"? --NeilN 16:48, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

But then when I presented three sources which did support my claim, you still kept reverting. You know, its also fine to keep titivating an article. That's how it works in the real world.

And main emphasis on models purchased from, and present best validated do mean the same (and if you read the actual articles, you would see that I was correct as that point was explicitly made - to use CR purchased ones: Don't rely just on abstracts...). It's also a lot clearer than saying "used within ADHD research". how clumsy is that? Used how? As feed? As a reward? Perhaps as pillows for the animal model...

And also there you go again - one source. That is not a valid argument when it comes to science, look at the other metrics I presented. You just keep repeating the same, erroneous point. Really, do you actually feel comfortable editing this stuff? Like really, do you feel comfortable that you're gating important information from students etc (as trust me, many people head to those pages as a first glance, usually because you expect only people who know what they are talking about would edit such pages...)

Again, I hope you're more careful with your research. Might want to check exactly who was reverting and when. Are you comfortable with your accuracy? I'm certainly not. If you want to write something like, "The Spontaneously Hypertensive Rat (SHR) is also used as a model of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, with the main emphasis on models purchased from Charles Rivers" you need to cite something like a Cochrane meta-analysis. --NeilN 17:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

You don't need that at all. You are wrong. People make claims such as "a main emphasis" constantly in published papers without referring to the Cochrane. Are you just making this up as you go along? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 17:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

And check here again: http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?client=safari&rls=en&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.76247554,d.d2s&biw=1784&bih=1038&um=1&ie=UTF-8&lr=&cites=12080056026627108100

82 citations of a paper advising the CR strain.

Please tell me, what is your academic background/training to make changes to such an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 17:16, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

And over 600 articles directly using the term "with a main emphasis on": http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=%22with+a+main+emphasis+on%22&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 care to tell me how many are linking to meta-analysis, reviews etc? Or perhaps it's now clear that "with a main emphasis on" is standard academic phraseology... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 17:35, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@147.143.95.63: If "with an emphasis on" is the point of contention, why have you not cited one of those 600 articles to support the assertion of an emphasis? —C.Fred (talk) 17:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Follow the discussion - I'm showing its accepted practise within science to use that phraseology without linking to a meta-review, its standard academic speak and perfectly acceptable. The main issue is a non-specialist wading in on an esoteric topic and acting as if they're an expert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 17:40, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

If it's actually in the cites and if there are multiple papers agreeing with the assertion. If it's not in the cite, the phrase should not be used. If the papers have one primary author, the assertion should be attributed. The main issue is a self-declared expert thinking they don't have to follow Misplaced Pages guidelines. --NeilN 17:48, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

No, the main issue is you got angry when I made some changes to an unrelated article yesterday and I challenged you when you reverted them, and then you started reverting changes to this current article. You lied about the reason for the first revert - when really this was just a personal thing against me. You have never, ever edited a science article before, and now you have, you come across as ill-informed and out of your depth.

And please, you've still not told me what your background is that makes you qualified to edit such an article as this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 17:52, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

"You have never, ever edited a science article before, and now you have..." Holy hell, now I really, really hope you've got someone else overseeing your work. What methodology did you use to determine that out of the 25,000+ articles I've edited, none was related to science? P.S. It's standard practice to look at other edits if you come across a questionable edit by an editor. --NeilN 18:01, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Whats your level of education. Oh and expertise? As it's clearly not ADHD... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

More than enough to comprehend and analyze sources on a wide variety of topics. If you ask any veteran editor who has worked with me, I'm pretty sure they'll agree with that assessment. Reading Misplaced Pages:Expert_editors#Warnings_to_expert_editors might be useful to you. --NeilN 18:09, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, answer this: you said the other article it was fine to say "commonly experienced by" on the say-so of one author. Yet here you are now 'splaining why you feel the SHR comment was wrong... ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 18:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect again. I said, "Read the sources in the body.". And I provided two quotes up above. --NeilN 18:14, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

And as for getting people to check my work, seeing as I have ADHD, yeah of course I get the people I collaborate with to read over my work ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 18:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

":More than enough to comprehend and analyze sources on a wide variety of topics. If you ask any veteran editor who has worked with me, I'm pretty sure they'll agree with that assessment. Reading Misplaced Pages:Expert_editors#Warnings_to_expert_editors might be useful to you. --NeilN 18:09, 25 September 2014 (UTC)"

Really? But you also seemed to think that here... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 18:21, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Sergecross73, Ohnoitsjamie, C.Fred. What veteran editor has disagreed with me? --NeilN 18:26, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear, this is not going well it is. I said you believed you were an expert in this instance too... Which you tried to demonstrate by deciding if articles (which probably took years to write in some instances) were corroborating a point I made solely by reading their 150 word long abstracts... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 19:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

This seems pointless. The article now has proper wording. I'm not going to change the way I edit. You can continue down your road. Try to make less incorrect statements in discussions and refrain from edit warring. Good luck. --NeilN 19:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, although seriously, comments like "I'm an expert on a wide variety of topics" to the level that you can decide content on specialised things like this are arrogant and reflect poorly on you (especially when you're reading the articles wrongly and only going by the bit that most academic authors spend about ten minutes writing when they've finished the paper), otherwise whats the point of people like me spending unto a decade learning about this stuff... And as for not changing your editing style, perhaps reflect on if thats a good or bad thing for wikipedia and the public service it provides. Good luck to you too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.95.63 (talk) 19:20, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Perfect illustration, thank you. "Whats your level of education. Oh and expertise?" "More than enough to comprehend and analyze sources on a wide variety of topics." turns into "I'm an expert on a wide variety of topics" Just perfect. --NeilN 19:27, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Adieu, Adijou

Sorry to beat you to the punch there! Seemed like a level4im was appropriate for someone making the same "lalala, can't hear you, delete delete" edit summaries minute after minute, and a quicker way to get it stopped. --McGeddon (talk) 22:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@McGeddon: Actually that's a good thing! Yes, the user would have undoubtedly gone on reverting while the 3RR report sat there until an admin looked at it. --NeilN 22:53, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

CSD notification

Hi NeilN. This is just to let you know I CSDed Talk:NeilN. I assume this was a misplaced comment directed to you. Altamel (talk) 23:00, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

@Altamel: Thanks. Yes, the editor added a comment here after. --NeilN 23:05, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Bible

Can you please join in a discussion on the Bible Talk page rather than simply deleting my edits?

Frankly, your one-line commentary seemed a bit moronic. Are you a moron? Can you prove you are not? I await your response.

Dynasteria (talk) 21:07, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

It seemed moronic because it seems you need the obvious pointed out to you. --NeilN 21:13, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Cherokee indians

Yes I edited what you wrote because it was misleading and not factual about my people the cherokee / Aniyunwiya . We were dark brown , Tan as myself and olive colored . We wore our hair long down our back even to the ground.the long hair clan took pride in our hair..you said that cherokee shaved their heads accept one patch of long hair false not all cherokee did this ..This shaving of the head was among the wolf tribe the warrior of our society. So yes you need to not edit on my people if you do not know my people history customs traditions etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historicfuture12 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Historicfuture12. Please read the article carefully. You actually deleted a quote from Henry Timberlake, describing the Cherokee nation as he saw it in 1761. If you think the quote doesn't belong in the article then please discuss that on the article's talk page. --NeilN 13:24, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Henry timberlake visited one village of cherokee out of over 30. Also the chiefs he went to Europe with (2 of 3) of them were not cherokee by blood but adoption. Henry timberlake is not the only person who described the Cherokee John Haywood also did George Catlin an American painter early 1800s painting them dark also the Spanish which claim their skin was from negro dark to fair according to moyano and pardo in 1540s. ..so what you posted about henry timberlake holds no weight and doesn't explain the full range of the Eastern cherokee nation prior 1839. You posted this so as a cherokee indian I'm asking you to remove this as it is false ...Please do some research before you tamper with others history it's very ignorant and misinformed history..I'm very unpleased and assaulted.I recommend you look at all historians description of my people before you chose the most bias of them all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historicfuture12 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

@Historicfuture12: Again, use the article's talk page to discuss content issues - Talk:Cherokee - but be aware that being a Cherokee will give you no special say or status. Your deletion of existing text (that did not originate with me) had no explanation and left a leading sentence. --NeilN 16:08, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Simple as put you need to remove it. I removed it from the Cherokee page and you added it again due to your lack of historian skills you put exactly what you found first that's need qualified research at all.You need to delete it, I tried due to its inaccuracy.Maybe you are trolling information I don't know why but I'm sure any historian or scholar would agree that your tactics are invalid case and point. **Delete the Bias description which doesn't depict my people just a portion of us ** If someone from China was reading my history they would be mislead, So you can do my people a favor and delete it. I am among my people everyday trying to better ourselves and we already had or land, People etc tooken from us we just ask for our history to be handle properly as it's sacred to us and who we are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historicfuture12 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

@Historicfuture12: No, I don't need to do anything. Seriously, why aren't you making these points at Talk:Cherokee? --NeilN 17:06, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Do not edit any Misplaced Pages's if you do not have the right scholar/historian tactics/skills. Research have to be collected and analyzed before you post bias statements, some ones history is not to be misleading, gladly we have our own relatives and oral traditions to fall upon (because the pale man always distorted destroyed and covered up over people and history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historicfuture12 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Historicfuture12 The right historical skills would not use personal websites, etc. I (who have studied those skills), would be looking for the for academic sources discussing the original Spanish sources. More on Caitlin if I find time. Dougweller (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Santorum

What is it that you think I should have done, or could do now?deisenbe (talk) 18:19, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi deisenbe. As I alluded to on your talk page, find a reliable source that covers the point you want to add to the article. --NeilN 18:21, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I've seen that policy before, it's not new to me, but for what it's worth, dealing with such obvious, easily available facts, I don't think it's good policy. If you care to, you can see what I said about it on my User page (not Talk page). deisenbe (talk) 20:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: It's not only about checking correctness, it's also about ascertaining how important the information is. Bits of trivia are being added to articles all the time. We use the depth of coverage in third party sources to determine what weight (if any) the new addition should have. If no one else has brought up those points, Misplaced Pages, being an encyclopedia, should not engage in original research. Another thing - you say that we're dealing with obvious, easily available facts. Yes and no. The fact that Santorum has never won another election is easily verifiable. However "though the extent to which Savage contributed to his defeats has not been studied" is not easily verifiable as that requires research to prove (or close enough) a negative. That's why we need a secondary source. --NeilN 20:33, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

OK, point granted, so what would you think about just saying "After Savage began his campaign, Santorum never won another election"? It's certainly important as the whole section is about Savage's intent to damage Santorum politically. deisenbe (talk) 20:41, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: Well... I know you don't want to hear this and it's frustrating but anything like that would probably be reverted as synthesis if there were no sources. You are implying there might be a cause and effect here. Editors frown on that as all kinds of wild cause-effect theories could be added to articles if we allowed combining of sources in this way. --NeilN 20:51, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Ops! sorry received your message late, already made undo with reason on Indian Foreign Service Page. Please feel free to re-edit.

Hello NeilN,

Thank you for your active and prompt interest on my edit on Page- Indian Foreign Service. Sorry I recieved your message late & I had made revision by that time. Please re-edit if you don't find it appropriate. Following points I would like to bring in your notice regarding edit:

1. the count of offices you entered was 3(three) (in first paragraph) ambassador, high commissioner etc. but correct count is 4 four).

2. there are many more important & lesser important post/offices/designation/deputation held by members of this service but the mentioned ones are often associated/recognisable with this service often by masses.

Please feel free to add or remove words/sentences from my edit with view of points I have mentioned above. Again Thank you very much. Have a good day.

Yours Truly, Writereditor009 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writereditor009 (talk • contribs)

Hi Writereditor009. I have no issue with you adding that info to the article but it needs to be done with a neutral tone. "The Ambassador, High Commissioner, Consul General and Foreign Secretary are most recognisable offices held by the officers of this illustrious service." Illustrious is a peacock term and "most recognisable" needs a reference. I've corrected the count - thanks for pointing that out. --NeilN 16:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello again :) Yes I agree with you. Please make it "The Ambassador, High Commissioner, Consul General and Foreign Secretary are some of the offices held by members of this service" I am asking you this because I am not able to make edits due to conflict situation. Thank you very much again.

Please also correct spelling of 'commissioner'. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writereditor009 (talk • contribs)

I see you've already done that. Thanks for your efforts in improving this article. --NeilN 17:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Putin khuilo!

Let's discuss it in the article talk (or in mine, if you want). 24.201.216.214 (talk) 04:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

You're one kind of a guy, aren't you? "click" rv, "click" unsourced, "click" people spent hours to write -> into the garbage... Don't filter nada, don't discuss nada. This was the THIRD time I added ПТН ПНХ to that article... Do you work for the Kremlin or what? 24.201.216.214 (talk) 04:45, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

This navel-gazing took you hours to write? If different editors keep reverting you maybe that's a clue to read why? --NeilN 04:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

What is "navel gazing"? Is that sarcasm? 24.201.216.214 (talk) 04:58, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Adding content to Misplaced Pages articles discussing Misplaced Pages matters. --NeilN 05:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

And? What's wrong with that? Is this why Wikireality was blacklisted here? 24.201.216.214 (talk) 05:04, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

It's navel gazing if the only sources that cover it are Misplaced Pages or Misplaced Pages-focused sites. Which is why wikireality was blacklisted - it's not a reliable source. --NeilN 05:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Sick policy, frankly. There are sometimes important things you would only find in WP (like, our present discussion for instance) that no news agencies will cover. Also, while at it, the article seems to accept the sentence "The expression is abbreviated as птн x̆ло (ptn kh̆lo)." just fine unsourced (only the picture proved it exists), while ПТН ПНХ must necessarily be sourced 200%. Weird. 24.201.216.214 (talk) 05:14, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

If it's not covered by independent sources then perhaps it's only important to a subset of Misplaced Pages editors, hmm? If you find anything poorly sourced in the article you are free to challenge or remove it. --NeilN 05:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Could this perhaps back up ПТН ПНХ? 24.201.216.214 (talk) 05:24, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

What's ICTV? Is it a professional news gathering organization? --NeilN 05:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

ICTV (Ukraine) 24.201.216.214 (talk) 05:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Looks like a good source to me. --NeilN 05:41, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

thanks for catching that

I only log in so many few days now....have seen stuff like that before...usually from within BC.....but it's interesting that that one is from St Louis MO. Could be from a news forum post on some article to do with Ferguson....or not. Quite often I see political POV stuff on Canada/BC from US IPs...last one was from Leavenworth KS. Sticks and stones etc....Skookum1 (talk) 02:12, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Haider

Is this way to notify some editor that I may be blocked. If you think I copied or like the words in the box office section were too similar to the cited source you can remove it but what is the point in putting such stern claims on my talk page. Its so lame. Arjann (talk) 04:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

@Arjann: It is stern because Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations seriously. You cannot expect other editors to check if your contributions are indeed copyright violations. It's up to you to not commit them. --NeilN 04:25, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

STOP UNDOING MY CORRECTIONS

You are muslim right? Why do you wish to change my edited to cover up the truth and take up for illuminati and oppressive, war mongering jews? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.135.18 (talk) 22:32, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

^^^ That's why. --NeilN 22:44, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Dandeli (page)

sorry it was by mistake i have updated dandeli external link kindly check now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suresh danghal (talk • contribs)

@Suresh danghal: Still spam which Mike Rosoft has correctly removed. Pleased read WP:ELNO. --NeilN 16:17, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

ANI

Hi mate. Saw your note at ((User talk:MayVenn)) after posting mine. Doesn't relate to you directly but I read some of the others and decided this needed admin action. So I've taken it to ANI asking that they be closed and he be blocked. St★lwart 03:25, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

I would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at Roger Federer. I am posting this notice based on this edit and this edit , I'm inclined to believe you are not only going against WP:AGF, but you are also now hounding me. WP:BLPN is a disputed policy, some (such as myself and long-term editors and administrators) believe it says to keep the names and identifying information of non-notable minor children of article subjects out. Others believe it doesn't say that at all. What is your plan, to follow me around Misplaced Pages, reverting the edits that go against your interpretation of BLPN policy? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: Don't be absurd (and read WP:AGF yourself). I've been watching the Federer article long before you got there. And since you made a problematic edit there, I checked your other recent contribs. If I see you making edit that I don't agree with, I will revert them. --NeilN 02:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neil

Hi Neil,

I'm just wondering if there was a particular reason why you deleted my amendments to the Robin Hood page? Have I repeated content, your commentary appears to suggest that I have? If so, please work with me to alter this rather than just reversing my amendments to an earlier edition.

Thank you.

Siggasonswein (talk) 15:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Siggasonswein: Did you check your version? You duplicated the entire article (check the table of contents). --NeilN 15:48, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neil,

Thanks for pointing that out... I'll copy / paste what I've revised and hopefully that will sort it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siggasonswein (talk • contribs) 15:56, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Wendy Davis

• Wendy Davis
  • Hi, can you please tell me exactly where you got this picture? It may be copyrighted. --NeilN talk to me 21:40, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I found it online. I know the image itself originates in the Texas Senate as taken by the Texas State Government. The photo is available on display on the 83rd Legislature portrait in the Senate Chamber. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imurlex (talk • contribs)

Replied here. --NeilN 13:55, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Examples of Hearsay as requested

Your message to me on the Andrew Rosindell talk page asks for some examples of hearsay - here are several from one article alone

From the article on the British actor and scriptwriter Jeremy Lloyd

He was lauded in America where they loved his patrician upper class depiction of an Englishman. (no reference)

A decision had to be made as to whether he would return to America for the start of the new season or remain in the United Kingdom and marry Miss Lumley. He never returned to America (no reference, Lloyd is listed as living in Tennessee)

Lloyd has been the subject of a persistent urban legend which claims that he had been invited to a dinner party at the home of Sharon Tate on the night that she was murdered by followers of Charles Manson. This was verified as true, not a myth, when the octogenarian was interviewed by Emma Freud on BBC Radio 4 Loose Ends on 10 December 2011. (this is very important as the phrase urban legend is used to formally refer to witness knowledge that has no formal reference UNTIL he is claimed to have said it on a radio programme - suddenly informal knowledge has value !!)

Lloyd appeared in A Hard Day's Night and Help!, two films starring the Beatles, and also had a brief role in The Magic Christian, which starred Peter Sellers and Ringo Starr. Starr appeared in an episode of Laugh-In, recalling the films he and Lloyd were in together, while Lloyd looked at him as a stranger, saying "Sorry, you can't expect me to remember everybody." (no reference given for the quote) CaptPeacock15 (talk) 09:53, 8 October 2014 (UTC) CaptPeacock15 (talk) 09:56, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Replied here --NeilN 13:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Simpleshow foundation

Hello NeilN, the videos we removed recently have been uploaded by another user. In terms of usage/license, it was fine for us, but we received a lot of requests whether it's really OK, etc. Thus, we wanted to upload it by ourselves to avoid such unnecessary requests – that's what we're actually doing right now. So, you don't have to revert our changes we'll re-upload the videos today right away. Anyway, thank you for trying to take care of it, we appreciate that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpleshow foundation (talk • contribs) 09:29, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Replied here. --NeilN 13:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Re:Hoshiarpur

thanx for helping me @NeilN on the page Hoshiarpur I want ur little help could u please tell me why some pages using wikipedia articles on facebook basically city pages show their country ex: New Delhi, India while the others like Hoshiarpur is just Hoshiarpur without India after a comma — Preceding unsigned comment added by SahilBhaskar (talk • contribs)

Hi SahilBhaskar. Misplaced Pages has no control over how Facebook displays article information. We only control what articles are titled on Misplaced Pages. For example, New Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai have no "India" after them because there are no other well-known places in the world that have the same name. Places like Karli, India and Lakhani, Maharastra have an additional geographic qualifier because there are other places called Karli and Lakhani. Does that help? --NeilN 20:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Swamifraud

Wow ... I did, you're right. I have made so many username blocks that I have completely forgotten about that one. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Software oversight...

Is the reason why I rollbacked your edit. I was in my watchlist, saw that he deleted a bunch of content (and previewed the edit with POPUPS without leaving the page), and hit 'rollback'. Only, it didn't capture the intended edit, (because you already reverted it) but your edit. Apologies for that. Tutelary (talk) 20:02, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

@Tutelary: No worries. I figured it was something like that after you thanked me. --NeilN 20:04, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	As you have made so many intelligent comments around,(e.g. - ) you deserve this barnstar. Hope to see a lot more from you! Bladesmulti (talk) 03:18, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Bladesmulti. I just try to help where I can. --NeilN 03:21, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Question

Hello dear user. Could you explain me with more details the cause of your reverting of my edition in Barack Obama article? Thansk in advance. M.Karelin (talk) 00:32, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Миша Карелин. Please read WP:LEAD, taking note of "Apart from trivial basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article." Obama's reaction to the Crimea situation appears nowhere in the body. So the appropriate first step is to draft the body detail and get consensus to add it. Next, see if there's consensus if the material is important enough to the biography of Obama to merit a sentence in the lead. --NeilN 00:53, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

Hey NielN, I want to say that iM back — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zacattack4 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

@Zacattack4: Okay. Who are you? --NeilN 03:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Chowdhury Irad Ahmed Siddiky

The article written on Chowdhury Irad Ahmed Siddiky that was trimmed had well sourced information. It is not fair to trim relevant information. Thanks.83.81.39.74 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:48, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The text I removed had no relevant sources. --NeilN 21:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello: I have provided valid textual reference for ancestry and uploaded the degree certificate for education of this living person. If these are not acceptable, could you please specify what is acceptable. Thanks.83.81.39.74 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:48, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Replied here. --NeilN 22:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I am working on finding a reliable source and I will update the page with a more credible and acceptable source complying to the terms and conditions of the Misplaced Pages. Many Thanks for your kind feedback.Westcott001 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:23, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Swamiblue violating BLP?

Can you see Pramukh Swami Maharaj, I think Swamiblue might be violating biography of living person. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:35, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit war warning

Just curious why you did not put an edit warring warning on Bladesmulti talk page but you did on mine? I agree that I need to find more sources of a judicial preceding but isn't it a bit unfair to place a notice on my talk page and not the person that is reverting my edit without even talking about it on the talk page? I feel like you have taken sides on this matter and do not feel welcome on this forum.Swamiblue (talk) 04:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Swamiblue I don't have to be curious that why Anthony and Jim1138 also considered your edits to be gossips. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:26, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@Swamiblue: As Anthony Bradbury said, your text was a WP:BLP violation. Removal of such content is exempt from WP:3RR. --NeilN 04:28, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

He said it after your warning. Swamiblue (talk) 04:34, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@Swamiblue: So? Just because he explicitly stated it doesn't mean others weren't thinking the same thing. --NeilN 04:38, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Just wanted to make sure because Bladesmulti could have done it himself if that was the case and literally minutes if not seconds after I made the edit, he reverted the edits and contacted you which I found odd. We can move on though. Let's talk about the WP:LASTNAME policy for that article. I read the policy you should do a find and replace. Swamiblue (talk) 04:44, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@Swamiblue: Please add your LASTNAME comment to the appropriate section of the talk page. --NeilN 04:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

I couldn't revert you again because I never had this type of incident before, at least not about a guru or swami. But now I have seen one and I was correct, next time I will try making more than 3 reverts. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:47, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@Bladesmulti: Please remember each situation is different and depends on the content, not who the subject is. If you are unsure, it's best to post at WP:BLPN or ask another experienced editor to look at the situation. --NeilN 04:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Links to audio pronunciation

Hello NeilN, this is Edoardo Lombardi Vallauri. Thank you for revising some interventions by GIO.CARELLA, we are moving our first steps here and we have lots of things to learn. Could you tell us why you qualified links providing pronunciation of difficult names as "unneeded"? Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edoardo Lombardi Vallauri (talk • contribs) 18:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@Edoardo Lombardi Vallauri: Misplaced Pages already has a style guideline on how to add pronunciations to articles - WP:PRON. Before you start adding external links across articles you need to open a discussion and get feedback. I recommend posting on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous). --NeilN 19:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN:Thank you again... Actually we had read that, but it is all about transcriptions. In our case, we tried to provide different information, namely, audio pronunciation, which seems to be useful, and even indispensable to all those (the great majority) who cannot read IPA symbols. Before we post on Village pump, as you suggest, we would like to know: What is your opinion regarding specifically audio, not trascription, of difficult pronunciations? Thanks!

I have concerns about linking to an obviously commercial site instead of uploading the sound files to Wikimedia Commons and linking to them. --NeilN 20:35, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@Edoardo Lombardi Vallauri: By the way, please read our conflict of interest guidelines as they may be relevant. --NeilN 20:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN:Thank you again... Although the website at issue is not commercial and only aims at providing a cultural service, we understand that you are right as concerns the Misplaced Pages policy, in view of the page you have referred us to. Do you think that a link to that service in the section "External links" instead than in the body of the article would be more appropriate?

The site is not promoting the Pronny the Pronouncer app? The External links section won't work - not enough content. It'll either have to be a reference or a link like what was done here. But again, Wikipedians are inherently suspicious (and some outright hostile) of links going to a site advertising a product, especially when the content could be hosted on Commons. Be prepared for that. --NeilN 21:14, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN: You are right, we will simply remove that App (which has no importance and no commercial function) from the Pronouncer page. As for the info being supposedly not enough for an external link, are you sure? I mean, who can say how much information is an audio file (providing information that cannot be obtained from a written source), as compared to a portion of text? Don't you think that such a link would be better (i.e. providing more useful info) than its absence, in a Wiki page? After all, what is best for users: to get the pronunciation, or not to get it? Thanks for your patience, we need your advice on all these aspects we didn't even imagine in advance.

See WP:ELYES and WP:ELMAYBE for guidelines on links. One question you will have to answer is why you don't simply upload the files to Commons. --NeilN 21:45, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN: Right, we should have told that before: because all audio files are the exclusive property of Pronny the Pronouncer (realized by a team at the University Roma Tre), and cannot be alienated from it. So, the only way to make them available is to link to the Pronouncer website. All in all, I think it would be a loss for Misplaced Pages not to make such contents available to its users. Very many articles concern persons and things whose pronunciations are puzzling for millions people all over the world, and links to pronunciations carefully controlled by professional linguists would improve the knowledge provided by Wiki on those persons and things.

Okay, then I think the next step is to present your proposal and rationale to the general community. --NeilN 22:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN: You mean we should post a short explanation and request for opinions on Village Pump, right? (Which was actually your first suggestion...)

Yes. --NeilN 22:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

@NeilN: Thanks, thanks, thanks,-)

Who do you think you are - GOD?

Where the hell do you get off deleting my notice that someone has taken info from here and is selling it? Or are you the little ebay bottom feeder doing the selling?

172.242.144.104 (talk) 22:49, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Replied to this charming missive here. --NeilN 23:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Cherokee

we the cherokee indians origanlly called ourselves Aniyunwiya...the name cherokee was giving to us from the muskogee and pronounced in our language tsalagi. That is why i put real name Aniyunwiya because this is the name we titles to ourselves and not giving from outsiders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historicfuture12 (talk • contribs) 23:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

1. http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Cherokees.aspx
2. http://books.google.com/books?id=fA3RWv8jQqwC&pg=PA140&lpg=PA140&dq=they+originally+called+themselves+aniyunwiya&source=bl&ots=YRVAACrhH8&sig=ZRdzBlriuraobu_HKYhQ49hqhU0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YlRAVN_PMrSHsQSL2oJo&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=they%20originally%20called%20themselves%20aniyunwiya&f=false

@Historicfuture12: You'll have to explain that in the article (as opposed to "their real name") and add the sources. --NeilN 23:33, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

ok real can easily be changed with (original)- meaning first — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historicfuture12 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Sge! That isn't how it works. In Misplaced Pages, the article title is the most commonly used name in English for the subject matter. Thus, the article Swedes begins, "Swedes (Swedish: svenskar) are a nation and ethnic group". Nothing about "real name" or "original name"; just "the English for the people; what the people call themselves". And by the way, that's better rendered as "Ani-Yuwiya". --Orange Mike | Talk 00:09, 17 October 2014 (UTC) (Inali)

Hey Orangemike. Can't the sentence, The Cherokee refer to themselves as Tsalagi (ᏣᎳᎩ) or Aniyunwiya (ᎠᏂᏴᏫᏯ), which means "Principal People." be expanded to include more details? As it stands, the present content is unsourced. --NeilN 00:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Islam

Would you talk a look at the Islam article. A user has added a lot of unsourced, uncited material.Swamiblue (talk) 00:02, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

@Swamiblue: Reverted and dropped a note on the editor's talk page. I see that they added the same material to Quran which you removed. It's helpful, especially for a new editor, to explain why you're reverting them. You can do this through the use of template messages. --NeilN 00:15, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

This page always had some kind of edit conflict, and during the days when Septate edited, there was some controversy about the picture. Obviously, those pictures are the biggest issues on these pages. Bladesmulti (talk) 12:23, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

That user reverted your reverts and mine. See . May need to be have it protected for some time.Swamiblue (talk) 12:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

@Swamiblue: Articles aren't generally protected if only one user is disrupting them. The editor usually gets escalating warnings and then blocked if the disruptions continue. --NeilN 13:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

There is a mop reserved in your name

You are an exemplary editor—indeed remarkable. You would be a good administrator in my opinion, and you are qualified! You personify an Administrator without tools, and have gained my support; already!

—John Cline (talk) 10:40, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks John. However the community seems to want some content contribution from its admins and I don't have that. I like maintaining articles, helping other editors, and contributing to discussions. --NeilN 13:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

The vast majority of Misplaced Pages administrators, at least from what I've seen, aren't heavy on content contributions. You do more than many of them do in that regard. That stated, there are Misplaced Pages editors who were heavy content contributors before they became Misplaced Pages administrators, so it's like the "heavy content contributions" aspect helped them get "the mop." Flyer22 (talk) 13:59, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neil; I should tell you that I really enjoyed reviewing your account, (contributions, conduct, and care), to ensure for an accurate assessment and an appropriate declaration thereof. There were many interesting things learned, which I look forward to sharing with you when time permits. Since I don't have the time to compile it now, I'm just going to tell you a few of the conclusions reached; and later I'll show you the "wherefor art thous and hows. (1.)You can accept an RFA nomination because you are "fully qualified". (2.)Your RFA will not fail from discovering any or all things that comprise your account. (3.)The review showed you to be even better suited for adminship than what was originally believed. Cheers.—John Cline (talk) 15:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Apparently I've been welcomed to Misplaced Pages by the Welcoming committee

Thanks for your comment, I've replied back at User_talk:Cirt#User:Cirt.2FGutting. — Cirt (talk) 04:11, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Read this article

Here and here. Thanks. Monart (talk) 16:41, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

@Monart: Please read WP:BLP (again). This is not acceptable without several rock-solid sources. --NeilN 16:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

My friend, these are absolute rock-silid sources. Everybody in Portugal knows that. He is the spokesperson of the family assets of Madalena family holding. This is his first job and not Planet Earth Institute. This Planet Earth thing is only created to cover criminal financial activities of this man. He has stolen (or diverted) billions of US Dollars to members of the nomenclatura of the Angolan government. And this is the reason why the justice of Portugal is in a row with the Angolan government - because of the bancrupcy of Banco Espirito Santo. These are pure facts and every child in Portugal know that. Let me do my edits, I am a profound connaisseur of these things. Monart (talk) 04:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)