User talk:Krashlandon/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

My Signature

If I got it correctly good, if not please give me an example as to how it ought to look.

~~Selma~~Simpson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Selma Simpson (talk • contribs) 10:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Kieran Parry

I'm not aware how that is vandalism? 217.39.43.92 (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, that may have been a mistake. Your edit looked like vandalism at a glance. Krashlandon (talk) 19:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanks 217.39.43.92 (talk) 19:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, why do you make accusations of vandalism when, by your account, you have only taken "a glance"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.0.82 (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Because most rollback-worthy vandalism can be identified in a glance (or if something smells fishy, a brief investigation or Google search). The tools I use are extremely powerful, and though I limit my use of rollback to blatant vandalism, per the rules, it is still possible to jump the gun and falsely label a valid edit as vandalism. I usually catch these errors the moment after pressing the button, and can revert myself and apologize to the user. However, as in the above user's case (which appears to have been on a now-deleted page), valid edits that look very much like vandalism, but which I realize are valid after reading the entire page's context, become "false positives" in my vandalism detection. As you see, the user notified me of my error, and I corrected myself, so no harm done. Everyone makes mistakes. Krashlandon (talk) 05:13, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Addition: The page in question was deleted because it was a "blatant hoax," so no wonder any edits to it came across as vandalism. Krashlandon (talk) 05:33, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Maybe there is a lot of vandalism out there that people need to be vigilant about. My impression is that Wikipedia editors have gotten way overzealous, though. Just to make this point to some friends of mine recently I added some fully accurate information to a page and bet them how long it would take for it to be removed. It was almost immediately. It wasn't a page I really cared about, so I didn't pursue the issue, but it puts Wikipedia in a very, very bad light. In my opinion removing information at a glance is more of a danger to making Wikipedia a resource that an educated person would take seriously than are overzealous editors. If someone adds something ridiculous--let's say that the Pope has the power to allow people to grow wings--another user will obviously remove it very quickly. That is the principle under which Wikipedia succeeds, when it does. However, many Wikipedia editors are neither exceptionally educated, well read, or knowledgeable about the pages they are editing, and thus possess no special abilities to create an accurate, comprehensive and useful knowledge-base for humanity. I would encourage you, and other editors, to step back a bit and let the system work. If something is ridiculous remove it like any other good user should, but keep in mind that something can look unusual or surprising because it simply isn't within your sphere of knowledge (or even something that is Goggleable). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.0.82 (talk) 21:56, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

The vandalism I deal with is mostly blatant nonsense or puerile ranting. I agree that Wikipedia has its problems. Any system as complex as this does, but the problems caused by the safeguards against chaos and false information are outweighed by their benefits. Remember, Wikipedia is maintained by volunteers, some of whom are experts, some definitely not. It is already practically a miracle that the system runs as well as it does. I don't want to sound to negative, but most people reviewing edits don't want to spend more time validating an edit than you spent making it, although there is a dedicated core (the "cabal", if you will) that will eventually arrive and bring order. It may take a bit more work to verify and ensure it stays up, but if pigs start flying somewhere, it will eventually get through the community filters. In any case, Wikipedia is only a starting point for more factually rigorous research; a quick summary of what you need to research further, just like a summary of a book. Using published sources or doing your own research is still king among serious educated people, nobody is saying Wikipedia is a replacement for that.
P.S.
Thank you for having a civil discussion. There are too many people who would start ranting and making personal attacks when making points such as yours. The edit in question, by the way, was a rather ridiculous quote, not a piece of knowledge. Also, remember to sign and date your posts with four tidles (~~~~) Thanks!

Krashlandon (talk) 03:48, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

St Francis of Assisi Catholic Technology College

Dear Krashlandon,

I'm not sure, but one of your edits from Huggle on St Francis of Assisi Catholic Technology College I think you need to rollback to an earlier version.

(I doubt their motto is "Resistance is futile")
Limideen 21:18, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

It seems to be more messed up than that. I will go through it and clear out any problems. Krashlandon (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok, It was just the infobox that was messed up from an edit before Cluebot got there. Krashlandon (talk) 21:25, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I was busy doing something else and didn't have time to check all the way through and do it myself, I just thought I'd let you know in case you hadn't noticed :)
Limideen 21:54, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I found even more lingering vandalism on St Francis of Assisi Catholic Technology College. I think I've fixed it all now, but I couldn't validate the alumni claims, so I put [citation needed] tags on them. Krashlandon (talk) 03:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the revert on my user page. Beat me to it! Keep up the great work! --GnoworTC 21:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, Krashlandon/Archive 2! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 21:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

excuse me?

What vandalism are you talking about? Don't attack me for good faith edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Your edit to Florida Department of Corrections was unsourced controversial information. If you would like to add it again, please list a reliable published source. Krashlandon (talk) 03:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I added a source. I'm looking for more. Don't disrespect me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:30, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I disrespected you. Thanks for adding a source, but try to do that first next time or at least indicate in the edit summary that you are looking for one. Anyway, you seem to have substantiated that people believe the system is corrupt, however it might be a bit of a stretch to call it one of the most corrupted in the world unless you can find further evidence of that point. Krashlandon (talk) 03:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

lmao I was kidding, you weren't disrespecting me. And yeah you're right about the "world" part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

By the way, you seem to be doing something wrong, what with all your warnings. Please consider slowing down and figuring out why your edits are being classified as vandalism in the first place before you get blocked. You haven't been reported by anyone yet, it seems. Krashlandon (talk) 03:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Never mind... You have been reported by someone else. During your block, take the time to cool down and consider your edits from another perspective. Here's a hint. Calling people "fucking morons" in your edit summaries isn't going to help anyone. Krashlandon (talk) 03:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Reported? I'm SO scared!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.32.47.2 (talk) 22:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

ACC account creation interface request

This is a confirmation edit for the ACC account creation interface access request process. Krashlandon (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

ACC tool access request approved

Thank you for your interest in the account creation process. I have verified that you have signed the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information and approved your request.

You may now access the interface here. Before you begin handling requests, please ensure you have read and understood the account creation guide and username policy to familiarize yourself with the process.

Please subscribe yourself to the private ACC mailing list following the instructions on that page. I also advise that you also join us on IRC #wikipedia-en-accounts connect where a bot informs us when new account requests come in and you can get real time advice on how to handle requests.

Please note failure to correctly assess requests will result in suspension of tool access. Account creation is not a race, and each one should be handled diligently and thoroughly. Releasing personally identifying information (such as IP and email addresses), whether intentionally or unintentionally, is treated very seriously and will generally result in immediate suspension.

Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day, and you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked as "Flagged user needed" on the interface. However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Account creator.

Please don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shell Kinney (talk • contribs) 10:54, 8 January 2011

Call Me Elizabeth

Hi - you recently accidentially nominated the aforementioned for deletion. I would be grateful if you could tell me how to delete an article. The reason for my action is that I have read many news articles which state that the author of the book lied that she was raped, stole from various people and cheated on Benefits. According to news articles, the author of the book lied about rape in hope that the debts that she owed could be delayed. It is just that I do not want any part in promoting her novel when she has conducted herself in this manner. Please nominate it for deletion or tell me how I can do it myself. Thank you (Galaxycat (talk) 08:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC))

Your opinion of the author should have no part in determining whether you delete the article or not. If you really want to delete the article, read the criteria for speedy deletion, especially item G7, which deals with requests for deletion by the sole substantial author of an article, however you should also read non-criteria #7. If you want to uncontroversially delete the article, use proposed deletion. Krashlandon (talk) 13:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Help Request

I need an admin to delete Bounded Type (the page that redirects to Bounded Type (mathematics)) so that I can complete an AFC (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bounded Type for a disambiguation page. I moved what was at Bounded Type to the (mathematics) article, now I need to move the AFC disambig page to Bounded Type. I already handled "Bounded type" (with the lower case.) Thanks, Krashlandon (talk) 20:00, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't actually think it is necessary to delete first. It seems to me good enough to just edit the page to make it a disambig page, which I have done. I will leave you to close the AFC, since you changed it to "pending". JamesBWatson (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I just thought the history should get moved over, but I guess it is fine that way. Krashlandon (talk) 20:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Injustice for All Ages

Sir,

I have submitted and submitted and had someone else submit for me. I am the author of this book. Why do you let other author's have their book on Wikipedia but not me. Maybe I gave you the wrong impression. I suffered many tradgedies and as a result I wrote a book. It was written from a purely humanitarian standpoint. It needs to be here to inform people what is going on in America. If Wikipedia censors me, then what kind of country do we have? Please reconsider. Here is a synopsis:

This book was written from the point of view of someone who lost everything because he did drugs and got caught. The author tells of his own personal tragedies without holding back anything. He lost his kids, his wife, his career and went into poverty. He added that you have to be "18 to read" this book because he doesn't want teenagers to think doing drugs is cool.

He confesses his many drug-related crimes and provides the reader with a deep look inside "the hood." He includes a "suicide note," many letters to and from the ACLU as well as poems and a rap he wrote at the height of his struggle. He had to write this book to save himself, as well as hope to have an impact on helping to save children and future families from a similar disaster.

He details the destruction of his own daughter, who was also suicidal. Moreover, he provides a unique perspective because he has taught many psychologically damaged children in the class setting who had also been removed from their home. It is important for people to read this, or the only side they will ever hear is from the Department of Social Services. Without this book, the victims would never have a voice; he shares many true stories from people who went through the same tragedy.

Also, this book serves a much higher purpose to help persuade people to end the law that gets children taken from their parents for just having a positive drug screen. He goes into detail of the damage it causes to both the children (the most) and their families.

The author also holds a Master's Degree in Education and was an elementary school teacher for many years. He is currently drug-free and is working toward becoming a career bartender. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasinsc (talk • contribs) 17:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Please read the guidelines for notability, if you beleive your book qualifies, then please state your reasoning in the comments of your AfC. Also, if you are the author of this book, you may also have a conflict of interest. Krashlandon (talk) 15:09, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Criticality citation needed tag

Hi, I noticed your citation-needed tag on the Cecil Kelly criticality accident article, and I have inserted a specific page reference for the information (p. 236 of the McInroy piece mentioned in the first paragraph). Please let me know if you think this is sufficient to support the [admittedly rather strong] claim regarding US governmental interest in plutonium distribution in a human-- if not, I will gladly pursue further! Thank you for reading the article. KDS4444Talk 22:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

That sounds fine. It was just a strong claim that needed its own reference to stand up to scrutiny. Krashlandon (talk) 14:48, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree, and am thankful to you for suggesting that my claim needed clearer support. If you happen to have any additional suggestions, I am all ears. Thanks again. KDS4444Talk 18:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

speedy deletion of Tesseraction Games

Hey, Krashlandon: this might interest you (and I would appreciate any direction you could give me as to whether or not I am doing this "deletion" proposal thing correctly regardless): Tesseraction Games needs to be removed (or so I believe), and I am stepping up to the plate. Have put a db template on the article's main page and attempted (and failed) to notify the article's original author. Am I following the right/ appropriate procedures? Please let me know. I noticed you interacted with one of the article's interested parties some time back, and were rather blunt with him/ her about the non-notability of the article's subject. Much appreciated. KDS4444Talk 05:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I commented on your AFD. I suggest the article be deleted and all relevant information be merged with the article on their game. Which interested party did I interact with, by the way? Krashlandon (talk) 15:21, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Ooooo, now, I hate it when this happens: I tried to retrace my footsteps to the reference to Tesseraction Games on your talk page, but could not find it there... Which means I very well might have seen it mentioned (and disparaged) on someone else's talk page and then later, when writing my proposal for deletion, recollected that it was you. But it seems there is no evidence to support this belief, and now I am left wondering who it was that led me thus. So my apologies for mistaking you for whoever else it actually was, but my thanks for adding your voice to the discussion anyway. I guess the old gray matter is more thin that I realized. KDS4444Talk 15:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Addition to a page

Hello...

I'm REALLY new to all of this and would like to know where and how to make an addition to a page of information that already exists. There's a new parody of "The Twelve Days of Christmas" that came out in December 2010 called "The Metaphysical 12 Days of Christmas" to be found on iTunes and Amazon MP3. It appears to be the only one of its kind so adding it to the "Twelve Days of Christmas (song) page may be of interest to people.

Any help you can be to let me know where to do this and how is greatly appreciated!

Thanks much!! Peter Anderson Iamangelfriend (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC) Monday 1/31/2011

P.S... what is a "tidle"? (see above points to remember...)

Go ahead and put it on the The Twelve Days of Christmas (song) page, under the "Parodies and other versions" section. It should go under the "2010" subheader, and should be formatted similar to the other examples. To edit a section, press the blue edit button on the right of the section title. Use markup similar to what you see on the page already. Links are created using square brackets [[This]], and any talk page comments you make can be signed using tildes (~~~~). Krashlandon (talk) 12:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Delete a sub-page

Hello, I was wondering how I can delete a sub-page that I created. Is it possible? Here is the link: User_talk:Эдуард_Шерешевский/Archive_1 & User_talk:Эдуард_Шерешевский/archive_1

Thank you Эдуард/Edward 00:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

It seems they can be deleted under CSD criteria G7, but I don't know if it is better to just leave them there. Wait a moment and I will try to take care of it for you. Krashlandon (talk) 00:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
I put the proper tags on them for you. They should be deleted in short order. Krashlandon (talk) 00:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Эдуард/Edward 00:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem. If you need any more help, feel free to ask. Krashlandon (talk) 00:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

sorry..

Fake page, was just an experience! Diogo Miguel isn't a mma fighter! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.90.131.238 (talk) 20:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

The article has no sources, but that is no reason to just blank it. I have put the proper tag on it. Krashlandon (talk) 20:11, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...

..for getting that vandalism on my user page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Krashlandon (talk) 20:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

why you keep editing tiverton?

i cited a source for the information i put, i went there. i played soccer with him and he was my coach. why do you keep deleting that stuff? i swear its 100 percent truth, i thought wikipedia was a place for information to be up by anyone as long its true. thats what im doing, so i would like an explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dukeare1 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

What you added was uncited, unwikified, rambling, and contained unencyclopedic appeals for the truthfulness of the information. If you want to add the information, please clean it up and cite a reliable source. Krashlandon (talk) 15:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


theres no sports in tiverton? there is so why did you delete that. come on now, theres no sources out there, but trust me there is sports in tiverton. but then when i put up a source you become a dictator and delete it, i added a source and you didnt care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dukeare1 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

The source you added didn't contain any of the information you claimed. Krashlandon (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

youtube cant be cited as a source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dukeare1 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyright is of particular concern, and Youtube videos are primary, self published sources. Krashlandon (talk) 18:58, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism

Thank you for your report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism about Dukeare1. The editor is certainly very disruptive, but I think it is a case of a good faith editor who does not understand what is wrong with their editing, rather than of deliberate vandalism. I have given advice on the user's talk page, which you may like to read. Please feel welcome to contact me on my talk page if the problem continues, and I will take further steps if necessary. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I guess it was rather ambiguous, but the main problem was the disruptive re-postings of the information, which I reverted (assuming vandalism), and Huggle automatically reported the user. I did only revert him twice on that page, so I probably didn't run afoul of 3RR. After talking to the user, I agree with your assessment. Krashlandon (talk) 16:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Huggle is a great tool, but it has to be used with care. I frequently move from Huggle to a browser, so that I can check exactly what is going on before taking action. It slows me down, but it is still far quicker than manual vandalism patrolling, and helps to reduce the number of problems. Having said that, there are still times when something looks so clearcut in Huggle that it is natural to just click on the button, and later it turns out that it wasn't so clear, which I guess is what happened this time. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:42, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Gemma Mewse

Hi Krashlandon,

I see that you reverted a blank of Gemma Mewse page by User talk:Mdanie2. This revert included my speedy delete that Mdanie2 previously blanked. The speedy delete has been blanked again. This might be inexperience on the part of Mdanie2, but I doubt it, having edited and created an article previously. Acabashi (talk) 18:29, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

  • I see that you reverted blanking of Gemma Mewse page by User talk:Mdanie2, and gave the user a warning about blanking, using Huggle. While this is normally the right thing to do, there is an exception which covers this case. This could be an example of the dangers of Huggle which I mentioned above, or it could be because you actually thought this was the right thing to do. Since I don't know which it was, I will comment on both possibilities. Please forgive me if some of this is like telling you that grass is green. If a user blanks an article which they have created, without any significant contribution from anyone else, then it is taken as indicating a wish to have the article deleted, and you should not warn the user about blanking, but rather tag the article for speedy deletion with {{db-blanked}}. Very commonly a new user sees their article tagged for speedy deletion, and decides to accept it. However, being unused to how Wikipedia works, they think that blanking the page is how to delete it. It is really better not to give such a user, who was just trying to do the right thing, a reprimand. If you knew all that already, and it was a Huggle problem, then it is worth saying that this is one of the most unsatisfactory aspects of Huggle, in my opinion. If you try to revert blanking of a page by the author of the page, Huggle is supposed to warn you, but it usually doesn't, because it usually takes longer for the information Huggle uses to be updated than for a user to click on the revert button. I'm afraid the only way I have found of avoiding this problem is to make it a rule that I never revert blanking of a page unless I am 100% sure that it is not being done by the author. Sometimes it is obvious: blanking Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion is never OK, blanking of an article by an IP is never OK (since an article can only be created by a registered user), and so on. However, 90% of the time it is a question of looking at the edit history of the article in a browser and then going back to Huggle. This is one of the situations I mentioned above. Yes, it slows me down, but it is necessary. There will always be occasional mistakes, but it is essential to keep them to a minimum. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry. Yet again, it was a Huggle problem compounded with the fact that the edit was tagged as a removal of a deletion tag. Unfortunately, Huggle offers me no in-program way to see if it is the author blanking (maybe that warning would come up if there had been no other editor on that page) so I jumped the gun again. In light of this problem and other incidents, I will slow down with Huggle, and actually go to the page to appraise anything other than blatant vandalism. I think twinkle has less opportunities for mistakes, since I have to be on the page to use it. I apologize for any misunderstandings or trouble I caused. Krashlandon (talk) 04:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
That's OK. I know only too well from making mistakes like that myself how easy it is to do so. As I said, Huggle is supposed to give a warning, but it almost never does. I have seen a good many of your other edits, and you are clearly a good editor, and over 90% of your use of Huggle is fine, but I thought it might help you to warn you about this sort of problem. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Hold status on articles for creation

RE your comment on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Andrew M Manshel. Please note that following a community discussion (found here), the hold status is no longer used for review, and has been disabled. Cheers - [[CharlieEchoTango]] 04:37, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Times Silk Screen Trading

Hi,

Thanks for your feedback.

Can you please check it again ? I have made some changes. The thing is, It's about a private firm, so getting many references is quite a difficult task. Can you please tell me if there are any more changes to be made ? Thanks.

Kind Regards,

````Chirag bhutra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbhutra (talk • contribs) 16:13, 13 March 2011 (ET)

Unfortunately I had to decline your submission because of a copyright violation. Please see the template on the page for more information and rationale. If you are able to re-write the article without copying and pasting from outside sources, please feel free to do so. Krashlandon (talk) 23:12, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi

I had written an article on a company named Times Silk Screen Trading, and it was declined by you because it was a copyright from www.alibaba.com. However, the stuff you found on alibaba.com was written by me itself, and alibaba.com then verified it and let me post it on their website. So you can say its my copyright ! I also posted the same alibaba.com link to my references on the bottom of the page.

I would like to request you to please accept my article as its 100% genuine and its all written by me.

Thanks.

Kind regards, Chirag — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbhutra (talk • contribs) 20:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Assuming you are indeed the supplier on that page, you have a conflict of interest in writing about a company you are associated with. Citing yourself, as you would be doing by using your own promotional text, is generally discouraged, especially where you may have a financial conflict of interest. It seems the overall tone of your article is still biased, and the guidelines say "you are very strongly encouraged to avoid editing Wikipedia in areas where there is a conflict of interest that may make your edits non-neutral (biased)." In this case, I think it would be best to wait until a neutral third party writes about your company, or you could disclose your conflict of interest in a new AfC and seek the help of a third party in writing your article. Also, you can request a new article by presenting your idea on the talk page of a relevant article or WikiProject. Please read the WP:COI and be familiar with the policies before proceeding further.
If you have any specific questions further than what you can find on that page, you can find more experienced users or topic specialists through Wikipedia:Questions. You can also get live help. The underlying problem is your COI, then you can address the copyright issues. I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help here. Krashlandon (talk) 22:42, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Civility?

Where was I not civil? Also, please do not threaten me. I am not a child. 65.32.47.2 (talk) 02:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I am not threatening you, I am simply informing you of the guidelines. Here are some examples of bad civility. [1] (what do you think a talk page is for?), [2] (as an anonymous user, you don't "own" your talk page.), [3] (and your other sarcasm-laden, personal-attack-esque, redundant unblock requests). If you believe those admins are acting in bad faith, then please, seek mediation or present your information in a calm, respectful way with multiple strong sources. You can even request mediation, which would guarantee neutral third-party involvement and mediation between both you and the admins. Krashlandon (talk) 03:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok let's move forward, but you've reminded me of something. Can you please take a look at my last edit in the FL DOC page? i was banned for it when I reworded my sentence to fit my FOUR sources. I have no idea why I was banned for it. I think MaterialScientist must not have read the sources. The FL DOC has been documented as having corruption problems. So I changed the sentence to mention that it has had corruption problems. Is there some sort of agenda to keep this under wraps? it's ridiculous. I am requesting some sort of consensus thread or something. Anything where a majority can rule on this because I feel it NEEDS to be mentioned. the FL DOC loves to make itself appear perfect and that is what the page is doing. 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

One more question.. if I make an account, can I have a clean slate? I'm done with any bs. 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

  • That's better. Now, after careful consideration, I do believe your sources are good (except perhaps the one from D.B.A press), and I would judge those reversions as bad faith and too hasty. You have my support for the information in those sources being mentioned on the article, but perhaps it should be re-worded. I would say something like "There have been several recorded instances of corruption in the Florida Prison System" since generalization usually makes things more easy to label as bad information. I would be willing to add the information for you, or if you leave this discussion up on your talk page and calmly direct hasty reverters here or to me, I will support you.
  • As for creating an account... Yes, you will generally be free to make a new start, but be careful not to do anything that seems like you are trying to evade scrutiny. Checkusers can still connect your IP with your account, and suspected sockpuppet activity and vandalism will turn up in any investigations or RfAs.

Krashlandon (talk) 03:44, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Nah, I'm not trying to evade scrutiny. I would rather have a username instead of my IP all over the place. Is there a way to transfer the material on my talk page to my new account? I'm not going to make it right now as I'll be hitting bed in a little bit, but I will tomorrow. Thanks for the support on the addition. It would be appreciated if you could add it for me. I might be followed LOL. Also, as I mentioned on Acet(other admin on this page)'s page, I was thinking of creating a section detailing some of the corruption the DOC's previous director had to deal with. There's a big CNN article as well as another on it. Would it detract from the article or is it appropriate? I've been banned twice for a long time so I don't want to do anything to get banned again since I'm sure I've used up my warnings. 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

  • You can just move it or copy it over if you would still like to be associated with this IP (not that you have to be). It's getting late, so I'll deal with the article tomorrow. Go slow for a while. I'll help you with the admins. Krashlandon (talk) 03:54, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Chuck Hayes

There is no way to cite that Chuck Hayes' nickname is "the Chuckwagon" as it is from Houston Rockets broadcasts, but it is mentioned in every broadcast of every game of Houston Rockets basketball, but you already knew that considering you are the expert on the subject. I had a look at your talk page and perhaps you shouldn't be the one watchdogging people's edits since it seems everyone has a problem with the way you do things. By the way friend not everything on wikipedia is cited, sometimes people just put things up and later someone else sees it and attaches an appropriate article. With that said Chuck Hayes is not a widely covered player, in the few articles that do cover him they tend to refer to him as Chuck Hayes, man talk about formality, but what can you do. But let me ask you would I have to cite that Kobe Bryant is sometime's referred to as "the black mamba" or would it just be accepted? And what exactly about having an article attached to a statement makes said statement anymore true? I posit that because much "news" is speculation that becomes accepted as fact, that an article does nothing to make an article more factual. But then I'm ignoring the fact that having a journalism degree makes someone infallible, and if a journalist says something untrue it will soon become true. Oh and by the way people who work for "reliable" news outlets wouldn't do half the research into Hayes' nickname that I've done to do exactly what I did and that is simply type the name into an article. So if you want you can come down to Houston and watch the local rockets broadcasts, or you could simply let me call Chuck Hayes "the Chuckwagon".Stl4ever8 (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)Stl4ever8

Just cite any use of the nickname in reliable media. Cite the radio stations, even. It isn't that hard. We do this for the benefit of those who aren't experts, since anyone could just attach a nickname to someone all of a sudden, and if nobody else has heard it, there is nobody to verify it. The purpose of adding a source is so that readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source. I admit, I probably should have just put a citation needed tag on it, though. See Wikipedia:Verifiability. Krashlandon (talk) 20:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hello can you help me make a good story? --Beyonceworldtour (talk) 17:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The article needs copyediting for grammar, and lacks sufficient sources. You are free to do this yourself, or if you are not a native English speaker, you can request help from the Guild of Copy Editors or another user. Krashlandon (talk) 18:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey there.Thank you for fixing the links on my user page!--Damirgraffiti (talk) 23:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Adding "unreferenced", "uncategorized" tags to disambiguation pages

You (or your bot) added these tags to the Chirography (disambiguation) page. However, there are the following rules in Wikipedia:

Do not include references in disambiguation pages; disambiguation pages are not articles. Incorporate references into the disambiguated articles as needed.

The usual template to use is {{disambig}}, which produces a general disambiguation notice, and places the page in Category:Disambiguation pages. Most disambiguation pages do not need to be placed into any categories other than those generated by the template.

Please do not add "unreferenced" and "uncategorized" tags to disambiguation pages (or adjust your bot if it was the bot's error). Ufim (talk) 05:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, my mistake. I didn't notice it was a disambiguation page. I have removed the tags and I will pay more attention in the future. Krashlandon (talk) 14:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:ACC tool users' pledge

Wikipedia:ACC tool users' pledge, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:ACC tool users' pledge and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:ACC tool users' pledge during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Wifione ....... Leave a message 09:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Rhbsihvi

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Rhbsihvi's talk page. Seen. Krashlandon (talk) 00:41, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Rhbsihvi's talk page.
Seen Krashlandon (talk) 18:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Belov Mikhail (talk) 10:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for correcting my first article! it was helpful I always forget something) best wishes!

No problem. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. By the way, you should put the subject of your message in the section title, and use your signature at the end of your comments. Krashlandon (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

hey man

hey man I am the IP from March that you were helping with the FL DOC page. The reformed IP LOL.

Well anyways I got around to fixing up the page if you'd like to take a look. Florida Department of Corrections

I added the last part to Abuse about Lancaster CI, as well as prisons being closed, new secretary, population, etc. :) Grim Littlez (talk) 04:21, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Cool. I'll take a look at it later, but it looks decent at first glance. Glad to see you've reformed and made an account! ;-) Krashlandon (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Howdy - found you on adopters, and am pretty new and not very computer savvy - but love Wiki, and would like to help. Dr. John (John@DrSmileworld.com

found you on adopters, and am pretty new and not very computer savvy - but love Wiki, and would like to help. Dr. John (John@DrSmileworld.com Dr. John Carpenter Dealey (talk) 01:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy first edit day!

Happy First Edit Day, Krashlandon, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

Socks 01 02:16, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Message from adoptee

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Rhbsihvi's talk page.

Stamped Krashlandon (talk) 16:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Krashlandon/Archive 2! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Stamped for archiving Krashlandon (talk) 16:53, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help!

Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently the are 2708 submissions waiting to be reviewed.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Are you autoconfirmed?
  5. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Stamped for archiving Krashlandon (talk) 16:53, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ

A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:Fæ. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

2/2/2012

Request for removal of copy/edit tag at this article Blurbzone (talk) 08:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I removed it. For old tags like that, if you see that they are no longer relevant, feel free to remove them yourself. Krashlandon (talk) 15:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

2/3/2012

Thanks for the update & no need to respond. Reason you received the request is that I have no ADMIN access, so I couldn't remove it. Blurbzone (talk) 00:12, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

You don't need to be an administrator to edit that page. That only happens with certain types of page protection. I also fixed your malformed sections on my talk. You need to do a return after the section header, or just use the "new section" button at the top of the page. Krashlandon (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal

Articles for Creation is backlogged and needs YOUR help!

Articles for Creation is desperately in need of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors and administrators alike, to help us clear a record backlog of pending submissions. There is currently a significant backlog of 2708 submissions waiting to be reviewed. These submissions are generally from new editors who have never edited Wikipedia before. A prompt, constructive review of submissions could significantly editor retention.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Are you (at least) autoconfirmed?
  5. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Click here to review to a random submissionArticle selected by erwin85's random article script on toolserver.

We would greatly appreciate your help. Currently, only a small handful of users are reviewing articles. Any help, even if it's just 1 or 2 reviews, would be extremely beneficial.

On behalf of the Articles for Creation project,
AndrewN talk 23:51, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Krashlandon. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amateur radio.
Message added 22:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I don't want to spam you, but I think this is important, and would like to know your opinion. WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 22:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help!

Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 2708 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our Help Desk.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions.

PS: we have a great AFC helper script at WP:AFCH!

News

Good article nominee AFCH script improvements
  • 1.16 to 1.17
    • Batman still works!

Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation. If you do not wish to receive anymore messages from this WikiProject, please remove your username from this page.
Happy reviewing! TheSpecialUser TSU

WikiProject:Articles for Creation October - November 2012 Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 22, 2012 – November 21, 2012.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

EdwardsBot (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation needs YOUR help!

Articles for creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 2708 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our help desk.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. Plus, reviewing is easy when you use our new semi-automated reviewing script!
Thanks in advance, Nathan2055talk - contribs

Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation at 22:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC). If you do not wish to receive anymore messages from this WikiProject, please remove your username from this page.

WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter

Delivered 01:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC) by EdwardsBot. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the spamlist.

Wikiproject Articles for creation Needs You!

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 13:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!
Hi Krashlandon! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! EdwardsBot (talk) 14:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Krashlandon/Archive_2&oldid=1151051504"