User talk:SWF Trainer

Welcome!

Hello, SWF Trainer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

You might also be interested in joining WikiProject Cetaceans Kla'quot 04:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SeaWorld edit war[edit]

Thanks for your help dealing with the current sock puppeteer. The editor is going after the Disney articles, too, so we've definitely got our hands full. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 17:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's at it again ... waiting for a few more bits of his M.O. to appear before I add to the sock puppet case. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The idea may be to semi-protect the articles. That would allow editing from all but anonymous accounts and new accounts (less than, say, 4 days old), which would be the best defense against this sock-puppet attack. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 21:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The current consideration is to do a range-block, which would block all addresses with the first one or two components of the puppeteer's most-commonly-used IPs. To me, that seems like a bit too broad a response, but I'll leave that to the powers-that-be. They are aware of the situation, and admins are reviewing what to do next. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's on Sock Puppet #13 now ... I think higher-ups are starting to get the picture. Do yourself a favor, and read up on Wikipedia:3RR. If challenged on it, you should have cover because you are reverting edits made by a blocked user who is using sock puppets to evade the block. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 23:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware of two separate discussions taking place on WP:AN/I regarding this user: here and here. At this point, I think reverting his or her edits and category changes again and again is adding to the perceptions of some administrators that this is a petty content dispute or edit war—and that all users involved are equally at fault. It might be more effective to explain your position in those discussions and hope an administrator will understand and take action. Whoville (talk) 01:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SeaWorld photo[edit]

Thanks, SWF Trainer, for improving the captions I used on a couple of recent SeaWorld photos. I'm thinking of adding another photo to the article, and would be grateful if you would help me out with a good caption for this one. Tim Ross (talk) 13:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SW Orlando animal names[edit]

Hey there. I saw that you added the names of some of the animals to the article. I like the idea, but I have raised some concerns in the talk page that I think should be addressed. I haven't reverted anything, but I would like your assistance in improving this as much as we can. Thank you for your help. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 16:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shamu[edit]

I mostly got the information out of a leaflet - Seaworld should consider making it more clear. As you can probably tell, I am not a vandal, just someone who completely misunderstood. Have a nice day. asenine ^t/_c 00:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation for seaworld related article expansion[edit]

Hi there :-) ,

i just created the article Dolphin Cove (Seaworld) and noticed that you seem to be a person who actually works for seaworld. Because this seems to be the case, i hereby invite you to expand and improve the article with your knowledge. kind regards SomeUsr | Talk Contribs 18:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SeaWorld and Discovery Cove conflict of interest[edit]

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article SeaWorld and in the article Discovery Cove, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you.--Rtphokie (talk) 20:21, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

COI[edit]

You're welcome! I don't think there's any need to "remind" you of the rules when your edits just don't warrant such a warning. Even if you work at SW as your nickname suggests (and perhaps I've met or seen you at some point last month then if you do), you're not trying to "censor" the article when it comes to more controversial matters or things SW would rather forget about; such as SW's history when it comes to obtaining animals (which goes for most dolphinariums, really) and the Kandu V incident. Further, working at SW would also mean that you probably know more than Joe Average about it! BabyNuke (talk) 21:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Descriptions of Barack Obama's race[edit]

Regarding these edits, please see Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ, Q2. That's the consensus of editors at this site, informed by policy. We've discussed it many times.--chaser (talk) 02:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Tilikum (orca)[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Tilikum (orca). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tilikum (orca). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amusement Park WikiProject[edit]

Hello SWF Trainer. Recently, the Amusement Parks WikiProject was reformatted and revived. As part of this process other related WikiProjects (such as Disneyland, Herschend Family Entertainment, Universal Parks & Resorts and Walt Disney World) were also revived and have now become part of the Amusement Park WikiProject as task forces. If you would like to remain listed as a member on these WikiProjects please re-add your name to the appropriate lists at the participants page. All names currently on the list have been cleared. If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Thank you for your cooperation, Themeparkgc Talk 08:25, 6 November 2010 (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) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]