User talk:HACNY

Welcome![edit]

Hello, HACNY, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -RFD (talk) 12:44, 7 May 2014 (UTC) I repaired the error problem, adding links, etc. I am working on it these next weeks to add more categories, and links from other pages.[reply]

Hello HACNY, I am a fan of Pat and the RFC, I am also new to this way of communicating to another contributor of Wikipedia. If I have done this correctly please respond.

(Vaudephil (talk) 15:54, 22 September 2022 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, I received your message to my email, and I can respond here. I am not Wikipedia message expert either. I contributed a few articles and just learned along the way. I find Wikipedia an excellent quick reference tool. It is probably also important for people that collect memorabilia, such as posters and other advertisements, they can see information. 2604:6000:DFC0:28:2829:FEF1:DEA7:DD52 (talk) 17:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HACNY, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi HACNY! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To: MilborneOne

Hi, I do not wish to read nasty, harassing messages to me on my Wikipedia. How do I remove them? My cite refs are easily available in libraries. I do not know why I should be subjected to harassment and then asked to make comments about it on Wikipedia? What is this some sort of stalking? It takes time away from me, and it is immature behavior and annoying.

```` Requesting immediate resignations of Editors involved in pulling "White Clothing" article There was no discussion, editors did not wait for finish of article, editors show lack of concern for work in posting. Editors involved--rude, sneaky, not congenial, culturally insensitive, uncaring about cultural awareness and backwards. I would like an update on this issue and for it to go to arbitration. HACNY (talk) 12:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Engaging with the Wikipedia community[edit]

My sincere apologies if my posts here (which you have deleted) appeared like harrassment to you. I intended for them to inform you about things you would want to know about, and to invite you to add your own comments to community discussions. If you like I can stop informing you here, but then you may wish that you had been told! — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add you can delete anything (with a few exceptions) from this page, it is taken as confirmation that you have read and understood the messages. Just open an edit window and remove the text. Steelpillow has questioned the articles that you have created, they are just looking for confirmation that they are notable enough to be in wikipedia but as they cant access any of the references you have used they have raised it at the Biography and Aviation projects to see if others can help. This is not harrassment or immature it is the way Wikipedia works, so your welcome to join in the conversations on the two project pages and give your point-of-view, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 19:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can I comment here as well? HACNY, I started The Rabbit's Foot Company article some years ago, so I'm delighted that you've now given Pat H. Chappelle his own article. But, please be aware that there are conventions here - as on any website, or indeed any collaborative venture in the real world - and removing other editors' comments is not regarded as polite behavior. Most editors here are generally quite well-behaved, but misunderstandings can often arise when we are communicating via keyboards. If I can help at all, or you want any advice (I've been here almost 8 years now), just ask. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:50, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ghmyrtle (talk).

I am happy to see that Pat H. Chappelle was mentioned in another Wikipedia article. I am trying to find media images of Pat. H. Chappelle or his Rabbit's Foot Company during the early years under Pat that are not copyrighted, or are different than the usual copyrighted images used.

I am new to Wikipedia, and it is quite cool to see the different articles and styles used by people for Wikipedia. I am learning how to Wikipedia-format for style as I go along. I have used Wikipedia lightly a few times in the past years, and I figure I contribute a few articles. I probably will contribute about five articles total.

HACNY (talk) 20:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am always open to regular, congenial discussion.

HACNY (talk) 19:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a PS, can I also suggest that you read WP:TP, and in particular the part about indentation. Basically, if you are replying to someone's comments (as you've done to mine), you should insert your reply immediately after the comment to which you are replying - not up above, at the start of the thread. I would show you what I mean, but I would need your approval to format your talk page! Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:18, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! - you've already done it, so I've struck out my comment... Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:19, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would also ask that if I, or anybody else, have implied or made allusion to anything racist, that you could let me know? I had no intention of such a thing, I am rather upset at the thought that I might have blundered, and I would hate to make the same mistake again. My even more sincere apologies if I gave such an impression. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have redacted that suggestion, thank you. I trust that you posted it in good faith but would advise caution in future. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ghmyrtle, I am happy to see that Pat H. Chappelle was mentioned in another Wikipedia article. I am trying to find media images of Pat. H. Chappelle or his Rabbit's Foot Company during the early years under Pat that are not copyrighted, or are different than the usual copyrighted images used.

I am quite new to Wikipedia, and it is really cool to see the different articles and styles used by people for Wikipedia. I am learning how to Wikipedia-format for style as I go along. I have used Wikipedia lightly to look-up things a few times in the past years, and I figure I contribute a few articles. I probably will contribute about five articles total.

I am learning how to use this Wikipedia Talk page.

Hi Ghmyrtle, HACNY (talk) 20:17, 14 May 2014 (UTC) Wikipedia is missing/does not have the important United States Aeronautical Reserve as an article or category. That may be my fifth and final article I write. And, I will be adding a few more additions to the articles I write until, probably around September 2014. HACNY (talk) 21:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on obtaining images I can use for my articles. This will take a few weeks. I have a non-copyrighted image of Charles Ward Chappelle, but I will not add it to the article until I have an image of his airplane or airplane diagram that I can use. I have some images for the others that I may ask for copyright for. I also know of an 1880s non-copyrighted image that I am trying to find. I will also add a few more lines and refs to each. HACNY (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. Did you know that the best place to upload images is the Wikimedia Commons? It then appears on Wikipedia - and all relevant sister projects in all languages - as if it had been uploaded directly. Can save an awful lot of copying! — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:28, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ghmyrtle,

HACNY Thanks for someone for adding the images. I noticed that the section Pat H. Chappelle's business challenges are missing, and I would like them back in as I had them under a separate heading. I will re-enter them. As it is now, it looks incomplete as a bio. HACNY (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for June 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lewis Hayden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beacon Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most edits are not "minor"[edit]

Please use the "minor edit" check-box sparingly. It should only be used for edits that do not remove, add, or change content in any meaningful way. Fixing a typo is a minor edit. Fixing the spelling of a name from a wrong-but-seemingly-correct name to the correct spelling is not a minor edit. You have used this checkbox for many edits that are "small" in the number of words but which actually add, change, or remove content in a meaningful way. These are not minor edits. Please read Wikipedia:Minor edit before using this checkbox. When in doubt, it's best to just leave that checkbox empty. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pat Chappelle[edit]

Please explain your edits on the article talk page. I spent some time in getting the article into encyclopedia-worthy shape, by removing duplication and trivia, copy-editing, and adding reliably sourced material and images. I don't want to have to revert you, but I don't consider that your efforts so far to revert to the first draft of the article are improvements. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:46, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

what was mostly added after what I did were mainly two images. There was still a duplication after what you did before I put back the timeline. I had not looked at this for a few weeks until today. Anyway, there is still one semi-duplication because it is also in the Rabbit's Foot Company area but it is expanded in content, and so it is not that major--it is not because of me. Some of the copy I did was reworked, but timelines are known to be more popular and easy to absorb, and the focus is on his bio as an African-American business person. The graphics of the timeline could be better, but I am not familiar with Wikipedia graphics for timelines. Thanks for your help, but it is not a revert as it was jumbled after what I did and not as readable, and a little bit added (thanks a lot to whoever added). With edits, for example, I edited one of the section's headings because it had just Rabbit's Foot Company and Funny Folks, even though Chappelle Bros. was also mentioned in the article in that section, and it was mentioned in what I wrote also. So I added Chappelle Bros. to the heading, and added an additional sentence regarding Chappelle Bros. and a ref.

Thanks again to whoever added the images and extra copy.

What would be great is if Wikipedia would have a "Family Business" category to also link the article. It would be nice to see how many family businesses and different family businesses existed in the past. HACNY (talk) 21:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, at least 80% of the material and maybe more including the refs are what I wrote. My copy and refs were/are solid. It seems that after I submitted material, someone else decided to spruce up someone else's Rabbit's Foot Company article--it did not have images before. Do you know who works in Wikipedia's African American History or African American Culture department? HACNY (talk) 21:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I think you may not fully understand how Wikipedia works. There is no-one who "works in Wikipedia's African American History or African American Culture department" - they don't exist. There is Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora, for volunteer editors to discuss matters, but I don't know how active that project is (many similar projects are moribund). The only changes made after your earlier draft were by me, to bring the article into line with Wikipedia's style guide, add relevant encyclopedic information from reliable sources - especially online sources that can readily be checked by others, which are generally preferred over offline sources - and to remove detail that in my view was not appropriate for the article. You can check who has edited an article by clicking on the History tab at the top of the page. Timelines in biographies are generally not a good idea - it is better to write flowing prose. The heading "Business challenges" smacks of editorializing, which we try to avoid. We (that is, all of us volunteer editors) are not bound to include every scrap of information that we can find - we are to provide relevant information for readers, an overview if you like. Re business families - we have Category:Business families of the United States, but that is for articles that discuss all the activities of a particular family in one place rather than articles like this - an article on the Chappelle family could of course be included (and would be a good idea).

Rather than continuing this discussion here, it would be best to discuss details over at Talk:Pat Chappelle. But, again, thanks for all the information you have provided. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ghmyrtle, why was the Grand Opening of the Buckingham Theater removed? It opened in December 1901, as reported on the front page bottom of the newspaper "The Morning Tribune" Tampa, FL on December 24, 1901. It was the Buckingham Theater's Saloon that opened in 1899 as my version correctly had, as the theater was being renovated. This is an important point. Timelines are often used in encyclopedias, and I have seen some timelines in Wikipedia.HACNY (talk) 12:36, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at Talk:Pat Chappelle - thanks for resolving the confusion. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Atomic Hydrogen Power[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Atomic Hydrogen Power. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Atomic hydrogen welding. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Atomic hydrogen welding – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. VQuakr (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa there! You seem to be confusing two very different concepts in that article. Atomic hydrogen welding is a chemical process in which an electric arc through hydrogen gas ionizes the hydrogen, which continuously recombines to drive up the temperature and heat transfer to a temperature hot enough to melt tungsten. It has nothing to do with nuclear fusion. Hydrogen fusion is an atomic process that transmutes hydrogen into helium - it occurs at temperatures and pressures found in the core of the sun - far, far more extreme than those found at one atmosphere of pressure in an electric arc. VQuakr (talk) 07:04, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia, I put in a request for Atomic Hydrogen Power to be put back on Wikipedia as it is quite accurate. Nobel Prize winner Dr. Langmuir is credited with breaking the hydrogen atom in 1911, and the subsequent technology such as the atomic hydrogen welding apparatus developed by General Electric in the 1920s. My article is composed of quotes from the noted scientists involved. Workers utilizing the atomic hydrogen welder had to wear heavy protective clothing and photographic film to protect/measure potential radiation. Why is Wikipedia not willing to include clean energy technology trying to be developed in 1911 or in general? I noticed that a general Wikipedia General Electric article does not mention much about GE trying to create clean energy, and just about nuclear power after 1940. I wish a Wikipedia manager to get back to me on this. My article also did not just focus on the atomic hydrogen arc technology. It was not a duplicate as my article explained the processes involved with its development. HACNY (talk) 19:26, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A hydrogen arc torch breaks hydrogen gas (H2) into ions (H), using electrical power to operate (it consumes rather than generates energy). This is a chemical process. Like all arc welding processes, the high temperatures release UV radiation, from which welding technicians must be shielded to prevent skin burns (similar to sunburns). This is not indicative of an atomic process such as fusion. The nucleus of a hydrogen atom is a proton, which cannot be "broken" in the way you are imagining (this is an example of an instrument that breaks protons into smaller particles, and this is an example of something that generates net energy from fusing hydrogen into helium). There is no grand conspiracy to suppress clean energy information, you are just confused as to what Langmuir did. VQuakr (talk) 00:29, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Langmuir wrote himself that he broke the hydrogen atom and gave formulas, including formulas for its quick recombination (why he thought a lot of harmful radiation would not be emitted) that are printed in early science journals prior to 1933. I also mentioned in the Atomic Hydrogen Power article that the University of Pennsylvania medical doctor mentioned heavy water prior to 1935. My Atomic Hydrogen Power article also mentions the later study of 1976 by scientists that found an additional hydrogen particle when the hydrogen atom is split. Currently, they try to make it look like the hydrogen atom needs to be split by powerful lasers or similar, and Dr. Langmuir during his time was quite concerned about the ethics of the scientific community and wrote papers on that. There is much more in my Atomic Hydrogen Power article than the atomic hydrogen welder. I would like my Atomic Hydrogen Power article put back up on Wikipedia. If scientists or similar want to add to it when it is up, fine. Again, I will mention that there is little early clean energy development technology existing in the media, and about General Electric revolutionizing the welding industry in the 1920s. HACNY (talk) 14:15, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I will add that I do not believe there is a conspiracy to suppress clean technology information. I actually believe that the scientists were so brilliant that most today do not understand what they exactly did. For example, some of Heisenberg's formulas are still not understood. The nuclear power industry that utilizes plutonium and uranium--it is still not known how to neutralize the harmful radiation--that means that these concepts for production are not fully understood.

Please put back up my Atomic Hydrogen Power article on Wikipedia--it also mentions Dr. Langmuir's and Dr. Wood's work on tungsten with thorium, regarding atomic hydrogen. HACNY (talk) 14:24, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was not your article. As noted above, the sources you did cite, do not say what you think they say. A proton that is split into smaller particles does not recombine, and the plasma Langmuir and others were working on in the early 20th century was not and cannot be used as a source of energy. VQuakr (talk) 17:12, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My article on Atomic Hydrogen Power is correct as is. I can add additional early Atomic Theory sources such as by Nobel Prize winner Millikan "Atomic Theories of Radiation, by R. A. Millikan. Science, New Series, Vol. 37, No. 943 (Jan. 24, 1913), pp. 119-133, published by: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Wikipedia is not covering early clean energy technology development, why?. Also, why are you the only Wikipedia person that that seems to be interested in having my article removed, and is able to do so? Please put my article on Atomic Hydrogen Power back up. Who else can I write to on Wikipedia to have my Atomic Hydrogen article put back up? HACNY (talk) 17:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you would know so much about Atomic Hydrogen Power and nuclear power, you would know the formulas for neutralizing it, but you do not. I do not consider you an expert on this physics issue. I used mainly quotes in my Atomic Hydrogen Power article from noted scientists. I am not giving out disinformation. I would like my Atomic Hydrogen Power article put back up--your quibble about vocabulary does not jive with the reality of the discovery of early clean energy technology development. Who can I write to on Wikipedia to appeal your decision? {added around 2:45 pm] I also noticed as a relatively new user that I am being bullied by Wikipedia in reference to the Atomic Hydrogen Power article that was removed without good cause, and I am not being given a contact to where to appeal. HACNY (talk) 17:34, 21 October 2014 (UTC) HACNY (talk) 18:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the early 20th century was an exciting time for physics. Your core assumption that a technology usable as a clean energy source was invented in the 1910's and subsequently forgotten is, however, unsupportable. If you want to write about mainstream physics, our existing article about welding using hydrogen plasma is Atomic hydrogen welding and our main article about power from fusion is Fusion power. I happen to be an editor who has taken the time to explain things to you on your talk page, but I am not alone in concluding that the article was rightly deleted: [1], [2], [3]. At this point, you are verging into WP:IDHT territory. You are not being "bullied", you simply do not like the answer you have received. VQuakr (talk) 01:17, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence that I am being bullied is that the general General Electric company article does not mention early technology, and that the atomic hydrogen welder does not have its development mentioned, nor any patent information. I created a fuller developed Atomic Hydrogen Power article to cover an overall early development, patent information, image--yes, they were concerned with clean energy since as they developed they welder they made it more energy efficient, using less hydrogen gas and electric with modifications. How the hydrogen atom was broken, or chaffed, is in the formulas in the journals--as I wrote before, no scientist even today seems to be able to neutralize harmful radiation, so the formulas are probably not the whole story (same with oil chemistry). This is why I used the scientists quotes including by early 1930s Nobel Prize winner Dr. Langmuir. Anyway, I put my Atomic Hydrogen Power article up on another website, as I am writing several articles on early clean energy technology during the next several months. I am sorry that Wikipedia is not interested in early development of early clean energy technology such Atomic Hydrogen Power (1911-1945) and the issues involved, or other. I do not see how a world can progress with less pollution when there is little information in reference media to the subject. It is quite sad.HACNY (talk) 16:38, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will also mention that I consider VQuakr comments disrespectful of the early scientists involved in the creation of Atomic Hydrogen Power. I see no evidence that Wikipedia is interested in reference articles on early, clean energy technology; and, dictionary definitions do not count as much. HACNY (talk) 16:45, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Crowd watching seven planes in air at Belmont Park air show, New York year 1910.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Crowd watching seven planes in air at Belmont Park air show, New York year 1910.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Stefan2, I am unsure of how to respond exactly as I do not use Wikipedia that much and I am unsure of the style format to respond. The file you removed "Crowd watching seven planes in air at Belmont Park air show, New York year 1910.jpg" I received from the historical online public library in Washington, DC and it the photo is supposed to be under public domain, and it is more than 100 years old. I find many images that are under public domain through different USA public library sites. I do not understand why you removed it. HACNY (talk) 03:46, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I do not understand your message. The photo is also on another aero topic written by someone else, and it is a Library of Congress photo in the public domain. Please return the photo, it is in the Wikipedia files. HACNY (talk) 19:08, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, HACNY. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from The Wave (2008 film) into White clothing. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🇨🇦 (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WIKIPEDIA needs better quality editors because of them not covering important cultural aspects of human civilization. The lousy public schools do not cover any cultural issues, i.e. most people do not know why women from India sometimes where a red dot on their forehead. NYC has more than 136 race/ethnic groups and no one knows anything about their customs. I started to contribute to "White Clothing" for Wikipedia because white clothing has significant religious, cultural, and more aspects in society historically. American racism, leaving people in ignorance even though there is a UN is quite weird, and uncivilized, etc.

I have not finished adding to "White Clothing," I was going to add photos of white clothing, etc., and links.

Do your so-called editors know why white clothing is worn by USA astronauts? I know why, and it is important. I have not added that yet.

Please get real. If you can criticize "white clothing," then I can criticize your lack of quality editors.

Please put "White Clothing" article immediately back up or it goes to arbitration.

What happened to the "white clothing" article? Can Wikipedia stop being so very culturally racist and close-minded, put it back. I believe the white clothing article was removed due to cultural insensitivity, and against the original poster who showed some innovative cultural diverse initiative to upgrade Wikipedia. And, yes there should be articles on red clothing and black clothing. I had not finished working on the White Clothing article. Wikipedia is backwards n this issue. Using the photos for the White Clothing article to grandstand another article is weird. This needs to go to arbitration because of Wikipedia in the box. Just because Wikipedia did not invent "White clothing" as a subject does not mean it should not be there. It is possible that the White Clothing article is way too advanced for Wikipedia and today's world, but it should remain on Wikipedia anyway. HACNY (talk) 12:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY [User:HACNY|HACNY]] (talk) 12:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Nomination of White clothing for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article White clothing, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White clothing until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please put "White Clothing" article immediately back up or it goes to arbitration.

What happened to the "white clothing" article? Can Wikipedia stop being so very culturally racist and close-minded, put it back. I believe the white clothing article was removed due to cultural insensitivity, and against the original poster who showed some innovative cultural diverse initiative to upgrade Wikipedia. And, yes there should be articles on red clothing and black clothing. I had not finished working on the White Clothing article. Wikipedia is backwards n this issue. Using the photos for the White Clothing article to grandstand another article is weird. This needs to go to arbitration because of Wikipedia in the box. Just because Wikipedia did not invent "White clothing" as a subject does not mean it should not be there. It is possible that the White Clothing article is way too advanced for Wikipedia and today's world, but it should remain on Wikipedia anyway. [User:HACNY|HACNY]] (talk) 12:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

=Where can I get the formatted code for "White Clothing" before it was deleted?[edit]

I posted this question several times because no one has responded. I want the formatted code so that I easier post "White Clothing" with a different encyclopedia. One of the reasons that I contributed to this Wikipedia article is because sometimes people are harassed in the USA for wearing white clothing because it is sometimes just associated with nurses, lack of cultural awareness. I was happy to see "White Clothing" as a category with Wikipedia, and I do not understand whatsoever why it was deleted.HACNY (talk) 17:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Wikipedia needs a better editorial team that includes important religious, cultural inclusion, diversity and inclusion[edit]

WIKIPEDIA needs better quality editors because of them not covering important cultural aspects of human civilization. The lousy public schools do not cover any cultural issues, i.e. most people do not know why women from India sometimes where a red dot on their forehead. NYC has more than 136 race/ethnic groups and no one knows anything about their customs. I started to contribute to "White Clothing" for Wikipedia because white clothing has significant religious, cultural, and more aspects in society historically. American racism, leaving people in ignorance even though there is a UN is quite weird, and uncivilized, etc.

I have not finished adding to "White Clothing," I plan to work on it this summer. I was also going to add photos of white clothing, etc., and links.

Do your so-called editors know why white clothing is worn by USA astronauts? I know why, and it is important. I have not added that yet.

Please get real. If you can criticize "white clothing," then I can criticize your lack of quality editors.

I believe the article on white clothing is for deletion because of racism and sexism. I feel that you should have an editorial board that is interested in diversity and inclusion of historically significant articles that are cross-cultural. "White Clothing" is a worldwide historically significant attire most often attached to religious values and social status. I probably will not have more time to format the article well, just adding text and images.

Disambiguation link notification for June 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

White clothing

added links pointing to Wimbledon, Prince Albert, Victorian, The Wave, Aran and Victoria

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding quotations[edit]

Please stop adding quotations to White clothing. Wikipedia articles are written in our own words so as to be available to be freely re-used under license. Short quotations are allowed, but only when there's no alternative. In this case the alternative is prose that you write yourself.— Diannaa (talk) 20:14, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer quotes for this particular article on White Clothes, more interactive and professional with quotes[edit]

--I like the quotes, it makes it interactive. Why should I have to paraphrase someone who is knowledgeable about their writings, scholarly writings? You are editing out valuable information. I do not have any more time to contribute to this now--this could be dynamic with photos. I find it weird that you edit out quotes that have translations (such as Japanese text) of foreign languages for white foreign clothing attire next to the English version. That seems so important. HACNY (talk) 20:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

--I will add that I read a lot, and what makes most books interesting are the quotes, the mass market books, its the quotes not the narratives necessarily that cause interest. For this "White Clothing" article, it is better with the quotes I used, it makes the article more interesting and gives it a more worldy appeal. I was going to add more transitions later. I wish what was undone to be put back, especially since it is foreign contributions/scholars on foreign white clothing with some foreign text translated for White Clothing items. I want the NASA text put back, that's supposedly government, non-copyright issue. None of it seems like copyright infringement, etc since there is a cite link. Anyway, this is how I view this issue. And, like I mentioned before, this article can be made dynamic with white clothing photos. I do not have tome to work on this anymore now. May this article work out well. HACNY (talk) 20:54, 2 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Someone keeps taking out my description of Japanese white clothing, it keeps disappearing. Weird. The Shinto photo is in public domain from the library of congress. https://www.loc.gov/item/2020632729. I may have not entered the item number incorrectly. I have no more time to work on this today, probably next week.HACNY (talk) 00:47, 11 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 11[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited White clothing, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Victorian, National Socialist Party and Countess of Strathmore.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added some photos to the White Clothing article. I am not sure these are the best photos for the article, but they are okay. The photos I added from pixabay.com are free images files, royalty free, not copyrighted. Unsure if the photos will stay up, some of the pixabay photos have authors, but pixabay states one does not need to put names, unsure if they would want their names on Wikipedia. Unsure of Wikipedia's thoughts about author names on photos. There were no dates on the images, so I just entered January 2000. I will add some more images, maybe around three images unsure of which images or sources yet, but later next week. HACNY (talk) 20:12, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Heddi[reply]

Please put "White Clothing" article immediately back up or it goes to arbitration.

What happened to the "White Clothing" article? Can Wikipedia stop being so very culturally racist and close-minded, and put it back. There was no real discussion of it being removed. I believe the "White Clothing" article was removed due to cultural insensitivity, and against the original poster who showed some innovative cultural diverse initiative to upgrade Wikipedia. I feel harassed by the lowly character of the editors involved in removing it--very rude, saw no real discussion about it, they did not wait until the article was finished, etc., and I request their resignations. They may also be anti-Asian biased--someone kept messing up the Asian section formatting. And, yes there should be articles on red clothing and black clothing. I had not finished working on the white clothing article. Wikipedia is backwards on this topic, request better editors. Using the photos for the "White Clothing" article to grandstand another article is weird, its like Wikipedia is too lazy to upgrade articles already there, and uses material from a sneaked deleted article they sniped for upgrading other articles. This needs to go to arbitration because of Wikipedia not being straight forward. Just because Wikipedia did not invent "White clothing" as a subject does not mean it should not be there. It is possible that the "White Clothing" article is way too advanced for Wikipedia and today's world, but it should remain on Wikipedia anyway. What happened to the format of it? Where can I find it? I would like an answer. HACNY (talk) 13:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

New message from Serial Number 54129[edit]

Hello, HACNY. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion.
Message added 13:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

——Serial 13:39, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021[edit]

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:HACNY, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Drill it (talk) 14:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find the original formatted coded version of "White Clothing" before it was deleted[edit]

===Where can I find the original formatted coded version of "White Clothing" before it was deleted?=== If it cannot be posted somewhere, can I receive it by email?HACNY (talk) 14:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Where can I get the formatted code for "White Clothing" before it was deleted?[edit]

I posted this question several times in different areas because no one has responded. I want the formatted code so that I easier post "White Clothing" with a different encyclopedia. One of the reasons that I contributed to this Wikipedia article is because sometimes people are harassed in the USA for wearing white clothing because it is sometimes just associated with nurses, lack of cultural awareness. I was happy to see "White Clothing" as a category with Wikipedia, and I do not understand whatsoever why it was deleted.HACNY (talk) 17:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY

Signing posts[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:43, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_bias_on_Wikipedia It does not cover lack of cultural awareness such as topics "White Clothing" issues with worldwide implications, white clothing that originated in Africa, Middle East, and Asia. The above racial bias article on Wikipedia is Wikipedia's article, not mine.

Where can I get the formatting codes for "White Clothing" that was deleted on January 15, 2021? Some of my posts for getting the codes are being removed. 2604:6000:DFC0:28:2829:FEF1:DEA7:DD52 (talk)HACNY — Preceding undated comment added 19:35, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

White clothing[edit]

Hello, HACNY,

If you look at the deletion discussion that occurred about this article, you'll see that the closer said that some of this material could be merged into other articles, like the section on white gloves could be added to the glove article. If you stopped being adversarial and worked with editors to come up with solutions rather than issue threats, you'll have more success. Making more threats and demands will result in a block rather than a restoration of content. Since I believe your goal is to include this article material somewhere on Wikipedia, getting yourself blocked will not help you achieve this goal. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am a Christian-Buddhist pacifist type, I do not make threats. My goal is not to include the "White Clothing" article elsewhere on Wikipedia, it is to have the "White Clothing" article reinstated. If Wikipedia does not want the "White Clothing" article, why cannot it go elsewhere to another encyclopedia where it is appreciated? How come Wikipedia staff do not give me the formatting codes? Very strange. Again, some people are harassed in the USA for wearing white clothing because it is often just associated with nurses, so the "White Clothing" title of the article is important. How come Wikipedia does not address cultural awareness issues like this?HACNY (talk) 18:42, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Also, why am I being threatened with blockage when it is Wikipedia not accepting a "White Clothing" article, and not giving a good reason for it, not addressing cultural awareness of "White Clothing," wanting to add the "White Clothing" article material to other categories less advanced."HACNY (talk) 18:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

Sentences of the type "Do X immediately or I will do Y(, which you probably don't like to happen)" are threatening. At the moment, the only threat I see from you is a threat of "arbitration", which refers to a Wikipedia-internal process and is thus not the issue described at WP:NLT.

Accusing others of racism without evidence ([4], [5]), however, is a personal attack that casts aspersions.

Regarding the deleted article: While you have contributed a large amount of text to it, it was originally created in 2006 and had a size of 5,569 bytes when you started editing it, by correcting a typo first. If you had been the original creator of the article, I'd provide your original revision to you. However, you have contributed to a shared work, and your proposal to copy it "elsewhere to another encyclopedia" seems to imply that you would violate other editors' copyrights by ignoring them, and I won't help to make that happen. It may be possible to extract only the text written entirely by you from the article, but that's going to be a lot of work due to intermittent edits. I'm currently not interested in doing this work for someone who has baselessly accused other editors of racism. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_bias_on_Wikipedia It does not cover lack of cultural awareness such as topics "White Clothing" issues with worldwide implications, white clothing that originated in Africa, Middle East, and Asia. The above racial bias article on Wikipedia is Wikipedia's article, not mine.

Where can I get the formatting codes for "White Clothing" that was deleted on January 15, 2021? Some of my posts for getting the codes are being removed. 2604:6000:DFC0:28:2829:FEF1:DEA7:DD52 (talk)HACNY

Please log in to edit. I have removed the duplicate question at the Teahouse, as this was forum shopping:

Raising essentially the same issue on multiple noticeboards and talk pages, or to multiple administrators or reviewers, or any one of these repetitively, is unhelpful to finding and achieving consensus. It does not help develop consensus to try different forums in the hope of finding one where you get the answer you want. (This is also known as "asking the other parent".)
— Wikipedia:Consensus, section "Pitfalls and errors"

The only way to receive a copy of the deleted article source is to find someone kind enough to provide it. This is unlikely to happen as long as the unfounded accusations are still outstanding. You can either insult the community, or ask them to help you, not both. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:47, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_bias_on_Wikipedia I agree with the above article about Wikipedia's racial bias except it does not address even more racist issues like Wikipedia denying cultural awareness of minority and marginalized groups. Unfortunately, I just read the racial bias article, and I find that Wikipedia's responses to "White Clothing" extremely racist, marginalizing, condescending, trolling, and not straight forward--never experienced anything like it in my life. So, I will not pursue this "White Clothing" article anymore with Wikipedia, it seems a waste of time and energy. The Teahouse is supposed to have a congenial atmosphere that is why I posted my request there for the format codes for the "White Clothing" article. HACNY (talk) 19:59, 15 June 2021 (UTC)HACNY[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]