User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q1 2015

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sleepy's

I presume you are still an active administrator, despite your lack of activity of late. PhiladelphiaInjustice has brought to my attention that the article cited reads like puffery. It lists the company's 800- number. That can't be right. He claims (and a quick look at the history shows a bit of bother between editors. Could you, if real life allows, take a look at it? If not, could you advice PhiladelphiaInjustice and me how to proceed? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 16:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I've spent the past few days setting the basement to rights, more work to come. One of these days we'll get new HVAC, they promise, and I need to finish the space so the equipment can go in and we can de-clutter. A quick look makes me think that aggressive pruning of both the happy talk and the criticism is in order: I really don't care if it was a great place to work in 2007, nor do I care what Yelp, pissedconsumer or other social media state. No 800 numbers are appropriate, only a link to their official website. Phone numbers are effectively advertising, since they don't offer a path to expanded encyclopedic content. Acroterion (talk) 22:49, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Would you propse I start doing my bit to edit this page, or is stronger medicine called for at this point? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 05:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Dear Acroterion - My recent mistake on Wikipedia was not okay, and I am working towards understanding image policies. I am thankful for administrators like you, and I want to let you know that I am grateful. Thanks! CookieMonster755 (talk) 00:07, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, and I appreciate your willingness to learn. As I've said before, virtually all images you see on the Internet are unusable on Wikipedia: every piece of text and every image has to be freely redistributable for any purpose, and that precludes any text or media that has a copyright, a claim of copyright, or a chance of being copyrighted. Acroterion (talk) 01:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Taft

Thank you for the explanation. I believe my edits give insight into how the school is run. I am not just trying to spam and I apologize if it seemed that way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taftstudent999 (talk • contribs) 05:00, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires sources in major published media: your opinion or mine on school policy are not admissible here. Please remember that this is an encyclopedia, not a forum for airing views on how the school is run. Acroterion (talk) 05:03, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I understand. I will try to find sources for what I've said. Thank you for your quick response — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taftstudent999 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

By sources, we would typically mean two or three newspapers of national or major regional standing. You can't use your friends, the school newspaper or your own observations. Acroterion (talk) 05:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Cat Creek, Montana

I just posted this to some admins. An urban legend/hoax campaign that has consumed hours of administrator time was about to happen again as same/another vandal has appeared. I saw the curious history of Doinhoodratstuff, and there you were!!!. Great job. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:11, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, we're very familiar with Catcreekcitycouncil (talk · contribs), they appear to have some time on their hands. Acroterion (talk) 02:14, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
It's such a dumb crusade. The town was named after a mountain lion that was trapped in the creek. How that hoary story got transposed into a lion is another urban myth gone wild. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:20, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

RevDel

Hi, I recently saw your revision deletions here and here. I don't believe that they meet the revision deletion criteria. Would you reconsider the use of revdel? Thanks! Mike V • Talk 04:45, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

It has been the general practice to revdel Catcreekcitycouncil's edits on the basis of WP:DENY, or to eventually do a delete/restore on the target article histories once they've gone through their spate of vandalism. At present there are 119 deleted edits for Cat Creek, Montana: the vandalism campaign for that article alone overwhelms the valid edits. There are probably more than 1000 edits to anything vaguely cat-related in the same vein. Much the same can apply to edits by John Daker and David Beals socks, though at least their edits are less hoax-ish and it has not been a consistent practice to revdel their edits. The edits are not offensive, but the sheer mass of silly vandalism is disruptive. The Catcreek vandal has been active since 2012 when they were apparently a student or a group of students at a high school in California, and have been a consistent waste of time ever since. You've seen the SPI: while it's not explicitly discussed in the revdel criteria, the repeated insertion of hoaxes over a period of years seems to me to be "purely disruptive." Maybe they'll grow up one day, in the meantime, let's not feed the troll. Acroterion (talk) 13:36, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Nous sommes Charlie

Je ne voulais offenser personne mais je pense que les messages ne peuvent pas être supprimées -95.114.24.235 (talk) 01:35, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

S'il vous plaît ne pas utiliser les pages de discussion pour faire des déclarations, même si nous pouvons symathize avec le sentiment . Ces pages sont à la discussion sur l'amélioration de la sujet . Acroterion (talk) 01:42, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Les gens meurent et tout écoutent.. mais dans quelques semaines, le monde va oublier. Le message doit être entendu. Où est ici la liberté d'expression? -95.114.24.235 (talk) 02:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia est une encyclopédie , pas un forum pour la liberté d'expression. Voir WP:FREESPEECH (en englais). Acroterion (talk) 02:10, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Je comprends maintenant un peu mieux pourquoi il a été annulé. Merci 95.114.24.235 (talk) 02:26, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Parce qu'il ne contribue pas à rendre l'article mieux. C'est une bonne déclaration, mais pas là. Merci de votre compréhension. Acroterion (talk) 02:31, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Rotogrinders - Notability

Hey, Rotogrinders is notable for being the a major online community content generator for the newly blossoming daily fantasy sports industry - citation: http://www.tennessean.com/story/money/tech/2014/08/31/nashvilles-rotogrinderscom-making-waves-fantasy/14896907/ It's a valid, legitimate company based out of Nashville TN.

What additional citations and ref should I have added or can I add to contest the speedy deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremypenguin (talk • contribs) 05:07, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

The article made no assertion of why the company is notable, it just describes its existence. For citations, soucres from beyond Nashville would be helpful, to show that the company should be mentioned on a global website. Acroterion (talk) 12:32, 12 January 2015 (UTC)


Okay, so mentions by Forbes.com http://www.forbes.com/sites/darrenheitner/2014/10/08/nbc-sports-expands-presence-in-daily-fantasy-with-rotogrinders-partnership/ and it's partnership with NBC Sports would have done that. Is it possible to retrieve the stub that was deleted or do I need to start over from Scratch? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremypenguin (talk • contribs) 17:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll drop it into User:Jeremypenguin/sandbox for you to develop. The Forbes link helps greatly. Acroterion (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Acroterion!

Thank you for intervention and time. I was named as hacker 32 years ago by an american TRS80-III User (an american missionary) here in Belém-PA.

About Oscar Niemeyer's dispute for the Article's photo I'll win.

1st) It is my best and more important portfolio's photo.

2nd) It was an exclusive angle from an special and historical moment.

3rd) Niemeyer is in the top of National Theater (projected by himself) with the Cathedral of Brazil's Capital under his left hand.

4th) This photo represents more than 20 lenses and all the architects by a 94 years old professional in charge.

My objector is in job for vanity and other non-noble feelings.

And... I'm a Chess Player... - I Promoted a Brian Storm to him.

Best Regards

RevDel on ANI

Hi Acroterion, I've removed the RevDel you placed on this edit summary as I can't see a reason for it to be deleted. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I also don't think RD3 applies to the edit summary, but I guess it's in admin discretion territory. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:57, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Considering they were a rehash of the bizarre accusations, I felt the summaries needed to go too, whether or not they included the entirety of ... whatever the accusations were meant to convey. I'm still trying to figure it out. Acroterion (talk) 04:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
And yes, Arthur's summary should have stayed. Acroterion (talk) 04:05, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For dealing with a conspiracy so well that no non-admin will know that there was a conspiracy that there never was. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:44, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I have to keep up my Illuminati points - I can trade them for free miles or gas points. Acroterion (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Upload image question.

Dear Acroterion - I have a question. Would uploading a organization image to Wikipedia by aloud by "fair use" or would it be copyrighted? Or does it depend? Thanks! CookieMonster755 (talk) 18:58, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, it depends. Can you provide a link to the image or a description? Acroterion (talk) 21:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
@Acroterion: - Twin Towers Alliance logo - This is the link for the logo I was wondering about, if it can be uploaded to Wikipedia for an article. Fairuse or copyright? --CookieMonster755 (talk) 08:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
It would have to be under fair use. See WP:LOGO for a detailed discussion of how to do this and how it should be justified. Be careful about resolution: it should be just big enough to look OK and no more. Acroterion (talk) 19:14, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I uploaded the logo, but if you don't mind, could you check to see if i filled out the information correctly? CookieMonster755 (talk) 21:48, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The entire header is not really de minimis: I would only use the actual logo, the image is both too big and too much of the outside content to qualify as fair use of a logo. Your rationale is fine. Do you want me to delete it and you can give it another try? Acroterion (talk) 02:18, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, please delete the photo, and I will upload it with only the logo. CookieMonster755 (talk) 04:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Trolling expungement

Please do the world a service and conceal this entry too. Thank you very much. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Done, thanks for catching the omission. Acroterion (talk) 03:28, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Caisson (lock gate)

Thanks for closing the ANEW. Please see Caisson (lock gate) - I have no idea why this editor is so keen to delete it again. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:06, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of David Beals

Do you mind blocking him on Commons as well, if you have that capability? https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Dbigcargon

And deleting the ceiling fan image he keeps substituting for the Mohonk aerial view? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mohonk_Mountain_House_2011_View_of_Mohonk_Guest_Rooms_from_One_Hiking_Trail_FRD_3205.jpg (don't delete the correct image, just his fan "version"). Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 03:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

And can you re-semi-protect Mohonk Mountain House so he won't do it again? Softlavender (talk) 03:51, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I would block him on Commons if I could, but I'm not an admin over there, so I've done the next best thing and reported him. I think I'll leave Mohonk Mountain House alone for now and see if other socks appear: he usually has several. Acroterion (talk) 03:53, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Acroterion. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested.
Message added 21:46, 24 January 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sam Walton (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Dumas Brothel

Hello Acroterion,

May seem out of the blue but since you apparently have experience in the area of buildings and the like, could you do a GA review of the Dumas Brothel article. I as because articles in the "Arts and Architecture" section tend to languish for months (the oldest ones has been there since late October and early November. Out of 41 articles there, 3 are on review) and I'd like for this not to happen to that article. Understand completely if you can't. Cheers, --ceradon (talk • contribs) 03:42, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure, as long as you're not in a hurry, I'll do it this week as time and employment/house renovation work permit. I was looking at that picture and recall that there are a multitude of wires out front: that was the only angle that didn't portray a lot of wires with a building behind them. Acroterion (talk) 03:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Firstly, thank you. And, nah, not really in a hurry . --ceradon (talk • contribs) 04:36, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

List of law enforcement agencies in New York

Could you please look at the recent edit history of this page. An editor with an unpronouncable user name has taken exception with my cites. He seems like a serious editor, and so I am trying to see his point. I regret that I am failing. These are just cites that show the two police departments are real. Am I being unreasonable? As always, I value your thoughts. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 06:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The objection (apart from the repetitive cites, which can be named and consolidated) is that the cites should show basic existence rather than point to an event in which the departments are peripheral. Acroterion (talk) 02:11, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, I asked you for a ruling, so it would rude not ot accept it. I shall let it be, as they say. Tell you what, if you could look at the first two entries in List of law enforcement agencies in Pennsylvania, the city police department section you can see I made a stab at consolidating repetitive cites. If you can show me what I did wrong I will fix that page up. Thank you again. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 05:59, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Delition of DiY networking page

Hello, you delete the DiY networking page. However this action does not meet the promoting a specific person criteria because there were enough references from scientific papers and journals from diverse researchers. Please answer in my talk page. Thank you. Christostsiaras (talk) 18:12, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1.1)

(i) The community Gamergate general sanctions are hereby rescinded and are replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed.

(ii) All sanctions in force when this remedy is enacted are endorsed and will become standard discretionary sanctions governed by the standard procedure from the moment of enactment.

(iii) Notifications issued under Gamergate general sanctions become alerts for twelve months from the date of enactment of this remedy, then expire. The log of notifications will remain on the Gamergate general sanction page.

(iv) All existing and past sanctions and restrictions placed under Gamergate general sanctions will be transcribed by the arbitration clerks in the central discretionary sanctions log.

(v) Any requests for enforcement that may be open when this remedy is enacted shall proceed, but any remedy that is enacted should be enacted as a discretionary sanction.

(vi) Administrators who have enforced the Gamergate general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing discretionary sanctions and at Arbitration enforcement.

1.2)

Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to monitor the articles covered by discretionary sanctions in this case to ensure compliance. To assist in this, administrators are reminded that:

(i) Accounts with a clear shared agenda may be blocked if they violate the sockpuppetry policy or other applicable policy;

(ii) Accounts whose primary purpose is disruption, violating the policy on biographies of living persons, or making personal attacks may be blocked indefinitely;

(iii) There are special provisions in place to deal with editors who violate the BLP policy;

(iv) The default position for BLPs, particularly for individuals whose noteworthiness is limited to a particular event or topic, is the presumption of privacy for personal matters;

(v) Editors who spread or further publicize existing BLP violations may be blocked;

(vi) Administrators may act on clear BLP violations with page protections, blocks, or warnings even if they have edited the article themselves or are otherwise involved;

(vii) Discretionary sanctions permit full and semi-page protections, including use of pending changes where warranted, and – once an editor has become aware of sanctions for the topic – any other appropriate remedy may be issued without further warning.

The Arbitration Committee thanks those administrators who have been helping to enforce the community general sanctions, and thanks, once again, in advance those who help enforce the remedies adopted in this case.

2.1) Any editor subject to a topic-ban in this decision is indefinitely prohibited from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, (a) Gamergate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. These restrictions may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

4.1) NorthBySouthBaranof (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

5.1) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

5.3) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Language Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

6.2) TaraInDC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.

7.2) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

7.3) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee.

8.2) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

8.3) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is prohibited from making any more than one revert on any one page in any 48-hour period. This applies for all pages on the English Wikipedia, except The Devil's Advocate's own user space. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

8.4) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely prohibited from editing any administrative or conduct noticeboard (including, not not limited to; AN, AN/I, AN/EW, and AE), except for threads regarding situations that he was directly involved in when they were started. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.

8.5) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee. Further, the committee strongly suggests that The Devil's Advocate refrains from editing contentious topic areas in the future.

9) TheRedPenOfDoom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.

10.1) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Tutelary (talk · contribs) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Tutelary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

12) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic bans preventing ArmyLine (talk · contribs), DungeonSiegeAddict510 (talk · contribs), and Xander756 (talk · contribs) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. The topic bans for these three editors are converted to indefinite restrictions per the standard topic ban.

13) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Titanium Dragon (talk · contribs) from editing under BLP enforcement. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Titanium Dragon is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

14.1) Loganmac (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

15) Willhesucceed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.

18) The Arbitration Committee urges that knowledgeable and non-conflicted users not previously involved in editing GamerGate-related articles, especially GamerGate-related biographies of living people, should carefully review them for adherence to Wikipedia policies and address any perceived or discovered deficiencies. This is not a finding that the articles are or are not satisfactory in their present form, but an urging that independent members of the community examine the matter in light of the case.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


Sukhoi Su-25

Can you keep an eye on this article. It has been the object of operatives that are trying to change the specifications page to bolster a completely spurious claim by Russia that a Ukrainian SU-25 was responsible for the downing of MH17. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Again? I've watchlisted it. The editor that "corrected" it could be warned for deliberately inserting false information, but I'll let it be for now unless they pursue it. Acroterion (talk) 13:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Deleting an article

Hey, could you delete Deepesh Krishnan? It clearly meets CSD A7, but the author keeps removing the A7 tag. Since that would remove it from the CSD-tagged category, an admin might not find it. Thanks, Origamiteⓣⓒ 01:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Done. Acroterion (talk) 01:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Explanation

There was no intent to attack Bbb23. I shared the mere fact that this editor has deleted articles 5,000 times more than he has created articles, and he/she has blocked 2,000 more people than unblocked people. These data are posted on his/her talk page as the only data about this editor. Wonder if such a high ratio of delete to create can allow somebody to qualify for the privilege of being an "editor". If mentioning the same data are considered "attack", then I am truly sorry and have learned something new.S.Burntout123 (talk) 05:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I've deleted more things than Bbb23 has, it goes with being an admin. You're verging on harassment, though, with the repeated posts, the "neovandalism" essay the and needling. As I said, please stop. Acroterion (talk) 05:32, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Even their "apologies" seem to move this user closer to a block for WP:CIR and WP:BATTLE. Amazing. --Kinu t/c 17:07, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

User: 82.5.165.92

Hello Acroterion, Many thanks for action regarding the above vandal. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Advice needed please

Hello Acroterion. I need some advice from an admin so I hope you don't mind me messaging you. I found your name at WP:AIV which led me to your edits and these show me that you are somewhere near your editing device as I write to you. Basically I requested a move at Talk:Pustec but since discussing the subject in more detail with Local Hero, I now realise that the move was in error. Only two people voted and both opposed as I too would now oppose knowing what I do. My question is, since the move was requested do I as proposer have the right to make the changes so as to remove its category status (I've struck it out but won't do any more). If not, is there a procedure for proposers in this case? If not, then can I simply request you as an admin close the discussion, there really is no reason now for anyone to favour the move since it was a misguided request on my part. Thanks. --Oranges Juicy (talk) 13:18, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

You can close the discussion as proposer under these circumstances, or I can close it for you. I'll go ahead and close it. Acroterion (talk) 13:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. This time I'll "watch and learn how the job is done"! --Oranges Juicy (talk) 13:28, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, well ... I haven't closed one in a long time and had to look up the instructions, but it's pretty simple. Acroterion (talk) 13:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Brianna Wu

Is Breitbart usually considered an unreliable source? 3hunna (talk) 23:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Nearly always. Don't do that again. Acroterion (talk) 23:12, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Wild Mary Sudik

Copied from User talk:Acroterion/New articles

Ah, you're welcome! I was pleased to see the article in the first place, so naturally I was even more excited to edit and expand it somewhat with information I was able to easily gather since I have been in the oil and gas business for 30 years now. I have been to the well site a number of times, once as a rookie landman on a field trip sponsored by my employer, and on other occasions just to soak up the history there.

I am somewhat of a greenhorn here on Wiki and as such I was completely flabbergasted by your experience and the number of articles you have written and edited. The volume of your work is massive, and the quality is excellent. There must be thousands of hours of work invested in your articles. I have written JUST ONE article, Herbert Strong (golfer), and it took me more than a month to get it done. And then a guy came along and deleted half of it, but he did make some improvements (believe it or not) after whitewashing half of my hard work. I guess a rookie editor like me just has to take the punishment. I suppose I did have some unnecessary "puffery" in it since Mr. Strong is my grandfather. That has since been removed by the other editor and also by myself.

Of the articles you've written, one in particular caught my attention - other than Mary Sudik - Glacier Park Lodge. My home town is Kalispell, Montana so being from that area I have actually stayed at the lodge a couple of times. As a high school kid I worked at a nearby restaurant in Babb, Montana to make money in the summers. I must admit I was not a very good waiter. The funnest part about that job was when I got off work. There was a pond on the nearby Blackfeet Indian Reservation at Browning and I used to go there every day after work and catch a couple dozen or more brook trout. I think the government stocked the fish in there because, literally, I could catch a fish on almost every single cast of my bait.

Nice photo of the TWA structure by Saarinen! I like the way you centered it so perfectly in the frame. --EditorExtraordinaire (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, you're very kind. Many of the articles I've written have had something to do with the National Register of Historic Places. It does take a little while to get the knack, and you must detach yourself from the subject as much as you can. I wrote the Sudik article as part of a series of petroleum-related NRHP articles, which branched off to include Jackson Barnett, who I suspect (but can't prove) was an inspiration for The Beverly Hillbillies. I also wrote the Devil's Cigarette Lighter, about that time, which got a lot of hits as a WP:DYK article, and which still gets a lot of hits. Nowadays I have much to do in real life at work and at home - I spent the weekend cutting holes in 100-year-old plaster walls to run lines as part of a geothermal HVAC project, so my participation at WP has declined over the past year.
The odd thing about the Glacier Park Lodge is that, even though it's a slam-dunk National Historic Landmark or NRHP entry, it's neither, and it's not documented all that well. We've stayed at the lodge once, around 2000, I think, and passed through a couple of other times. It's a remarkable building.
Keep up the good work, and remember that there's a steep learning curve. If you have any questions, please ask any time. Acroterion (talk) 13:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
There is a steep learning curve! I have already made some errors that I regret. Good luck with the geothermal project - sounds like a lot of manual labor involved with that. --EditorExtraordinaire (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Page creation for Ricochet.com

I created a page called "Ricochet.com" first, then created an additional page called "Ricochet (website)." They have identical content, but I wished for the second page to be kept, as the name was more in line with what I saw as normal on Wikipedia. Both pages were immediately tagged for deletion, and the second page was ultimately deleted, although I expressed to the moderators that only the first page should be removed. If you could change the name from "Ricochet.com" to "Ricochet (website)" I would appreciate it. Also, there have been notices on the page concerning its content and the way it was written. I have tried to write objectively on this subject, but apparently it still does not meet Wikipedia standards. If you could assist me in learning how to write more in line with the standards here, or could point me to resources which would assist me in this, it would again be appreciated.

--Braydenslv (talk) 02:41, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

You could move it, though that might not be possible until you've got more edits. On examination, consensus seems to be to go with the Website (website) rather than website.com, so I probably deleted the wrong format. I do not entirely agree with the stated deletion rationale and am on the fence about deletion overall. I'll take another look. Acroterion (talk) 02:45, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
On a second look, the Atlantic article clinches notability. I've left the advert tag, you could probably make it a little more just-the-facts, but it's not obviously promotional. I've moved it to the consensus name. Acroterion (talk) 02:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for your GA review @Dumas Brothel. Don't have to apologize that it took long. Real life comes first. Cheers! ceradon (talk • contribs) 16:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


Master?

Curious who the puppetmaster of TheGreenPenOfHope is. The comments by the user reminds me of a past encounter with a user, but I can't place when/where and it's driving me nuts. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't know who the master is, but you can't create another account to needle other users. Acroterion (talk) 04:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Okay. Maybe I'll wake up in the middle of the night remember who/when/where it was. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Better to get a good night's sleep and not worry about it, but if you do think of it, let me know. Acroterion (talk) 04:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

LAUNCH Incubator page deleted

Hi - it seems as though you have flagged a page my friend tried to upload. It was for the Launch Incubator. She was flagged for speedy deletion.

Can we get the page re-added perhaps? Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordancstone (talk • contribs) 20:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

plz send me lists of distributed components-based frameworks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.36.34.43 (talk) 09:25, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, won't happen again

Hi, I apologize for having posted a viral rumour on Wiki, I am not from the US and hadn't realized I had to go by the rules over there. Many thanks!

Peaceandpie (talk) 10:23, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

It's not a US thing, it's an encyclopedia thing. Don't post rumors on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 12:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: deletion of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive-web-pages

Good day,

Is it possible to recover the content of the deleted wiki page and if so could you consider sharing it via a reply to this message ?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.117.25.240 (talk) 22:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Nope? Not possible or merely unwilling ? Saddened by your overzealous attitude but hoping to receive attention and support without residing to the manners I noticed that captivated your attention above and below this request. Thank you for your help and contribution to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximaker (talk • contribs) 12:50, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I'd missed this request because of all the big words below and an incipient cold. Now that you've signed in with your account I can place the deleted content into a sandbox in your userspace. Acroterion (talk) 16:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Located at User:Maximaker/sandbox. Acroterion (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

On sanctimony

Hello.

It's been some time since we last conversed.

As it very well should be--after all, what impetus could their possibly be behind a frequent dialogue between us two? We hardly know each other, after all.

You may forget the circumstances under which we met. At the time, you were remonstrating me for a certain philippic I posted---on the GG article talk page, no less.

As I recall, your justification was that I was using Wikipedia as a 'soapbox to denigrate people'.

At the time, I was oblivious to the megalithic hypocrisy of this statement. Now, however?

Let's just the say the pot and kettle and doubled over on the floor, wracked with guffaws of spasmodic laughter.


My post was openly libelous--this, I am not contesting.

Tu quoque, however.

If you're going to remonstrate me for spreading libel, perhaps you should examine the adjoining article with a bit more studiousness.

As you most likely do not recall, the GG article--especially the opening passage--is rife with enough unwarranted libel to make even the most jaded polemicist lime green with envy. Why, you might even say that the editors were using the article as a soapbox to denigrate people. Living people, no less.

Moreover, they seem to believe that quantity is immaterial. In actuality, however, it magnifies the seriousness of the transgression. Thus far, however, no action has been taken to rectify it, or to vilify the perpetrators. At best, this is inattentiveness. At worst, this is complicity. Seeing as how this manifestation of the article has been so long abiding, I'm inclined to believe that it is the latter.

Libel alone is an abject offense by our criteria--libel without citations, however, is doubly so.

As you may recall. the chief complaint of my post was that the opening section does not adduce even a single source to substantiate its allegations. This is easily verifiable--I invite you to examine the document.

As such, your pretensions towards precluding libel are betrayed for the meaningless superfluities they are by this blatant double standard. Ergo, I'm somewhat dubious about your efficacy as an arbiter of such things.

This offense does not dismiss my own--however, it calls your conduct into question.

I await your rebuttal. Ghost Lourde (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

?
This isn't a debate. I declined to unblock you because it was clear that you thought it was fine to dump 210K of other people's talk back onto the page so you could post nasty snark. You can make your case concerning GamerGate's lead at the relevant talkpage, sans policy violations, if you wish. Just don't use the talkpage again as a forum for your personal analysis, and don't call anyone a "smug hipster pustule." If that happens again, you'll be topic-banned if you're lucky, or just blocked. Leave the ten-dollar words at home. Other editors are more likely to take you more seriously if you don't communicate in such an mannered style. Acroterion (talk) 23:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Actually, that was a mistake. My apologies--I did not mean to delete any content. Leave the ten-dollar words at home? And here you are remonstrating me for 'nasty snark'. You know, I at least attempt to maintain a pretense of civility, you know--sans the aforementioned incident. Moreover, I never posited that this was a debate--I was merely curious regarding your inaction upon certain issues. No matter, however. Insomuch as you promise to stay your blocks if I comport myself in a regulated fashion, I'll be opining upon much the same issues once more--in that so mannered style of mine. Ghost Lourde (talk) 18:53, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Acroterion: You might want to take a look at [1] on the GamerGate talk page -- already hatted by TRPoD, but .... MarkBernstein (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

That went about the way I expected it to. However, mere pomp isn't a sanctionable offense. Acroterion (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
@Ghost Lourde: However, wasting other editors' time and not taking the encyclopedia and its processes seriously on controversial topics have been sanctioned, and have been in the topic at hand. If you persist in treating the encyclopedia as a stage upon which to parade your talent for circumlocution rather than as a well-written source of knowledge, you might face difficulties. Acroterion (talk) 00:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Obama Conspiracy Theory Edit

Sorry about the Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories edit. I thought it saying "false" was a clear subjective opinion and thus not being an impartial page. Wasn't trying to vandalize or support the claims on the page or anything. That is my mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TropicAces (talk • contribs)

Don't worry about it, happy editing! Acroterion (talk) 00:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

RD2 Request

Hi, I was hoping you would be able to perform a RD2 / RD3 on 107.139.240.12 and 199.116.175.21 , both are racist personal attacks and edit summaries. thanks Pvpoodle (talk) 05:00, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I've taken care of the worst of them. Acroterion (talk) 13:16, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Asteroid Day

You deleted the declararion. what would you suggest instead, just add a quote from the declaration? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.232.129 (talk) 19:45, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

A short excerpt would be good, the whole thing becomes excessively large compared to the overall content and has a promotional tinge. Acroterion (talk) 20:24, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
What about this in Quotation, since its the 3 main GOALS:
  1. Employ available technology to detect and track Near-Earth Asteroids that threaten human populations via governments and private and philanthropic organisations.
  2. A rapid hundred-fold acceleration of the discovery and tracking of Near-Earth Asteroids to 100,000 per year within the next ten years.
  3. Global adoption of Asteroid Day, heightening awareness of the asteroid hazard and our efforts to prevent impacts, on June 30, 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starmusfestival (talk • contribs) 20:40, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Tungsten Network

Dear Acroterion,

I would like to create a page for Tungsten Network which is an London Stock Exchange listed e-invoicing company like Basware and Ariba for which wikipedia pages already exist.

My previous page was deleted as it breached certain criteria. I would like to create a page for Tungsten Network that does meet the criteria. Please could you offer guidance so that my new one will not be deleted.

Thank You,

Chemistdude — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chemistdude (talk • contribs) 14:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Sjc229

You just blocked Sjc229 (talk · contribs). A sock, Art though mad brotherin? (talk · contribs), just recreated Chief Kirby if you want to delete it and possibly create protect that page since this is its third reincarnation. APK whisper in my ear 03:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Banninated and salted. Thanks for the spot. Acroterion (talk) 04:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Creating a Page

Hi My Name is Amanda, I wish to create a page called Villa Velmarie. I had previously created the page however I made a mistake and also made a page called Ville Velmarie and both were deleted Via speedy deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amp48 (talk • contribs) 08:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The articles appear to be promoting a new hotel. Wikipedia does not accept advertising. Acroterion (talk) 12:38, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Amp48 -- Please read WP:NOTSOAPBOX for more Information about why Wikipedia is not a place for promotional or soapbox articles :) Sincerely a friendly talk page stalker, CookieMonster755 (talk) 20:20, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the IP on my talk page, very much appreciated! I see the range has also been blocked now. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:36, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Block of User_talk:Hsbdfnrndnd

Hello. I am going through the requests for unblock on IRC and I am currently handling this user. The explanation given in the unblock request[2] seems plausible to me. Given the new information do you think that this may have been a misunderstanding of how the wiki works? How do you feel about an unblock if I keep an eye on the user? Chillum 02:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

OK with me, provided they're not a sock of David Beals, who has plagued that particular article. Acroterion (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
However, there is ceiling fan image vandalism going on right now at Commons, so I'm very suspicious. See the file delinker edit. You might want to talk to INeverCry, who protected the file a few minutes ago after it was overwritten with a ceiling fan. Acroterion (talk) 03:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
And now checkuser says it's Beals, along with two more socks. Acroterion (talk) 03:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. The contributions seemed so generic it did not occur to me that it may be a sock puppet. I was not aware of the history of the article. Chillum 03:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Question in the article "Limerick (poetry)"

Someone asked "when?" right after "and in the United States in 1902, but in recent years." What is this? Try to look @ it and then let me know on my talk page . Here's the link Limerick_(poetry)#Origin_of_the_name Συντάκτης 02:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

They're asking that someone make the "in recent years" statement more specific and to pin it down to at least a decade, depending on the source. "In recent years" will eventually become outdated, so we would avoid things like "presently," "currently" and "in recent years" where we can. 03:07, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Acroterion (talk)

Thank you Acroterion. Συντάκτης (talk) 02:32, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

question re:BLP violations

Small observation- neptunes trident has established a fairly thorough history of editing BLP a content with very little concern for policy or even decency. I have a bias in this as I was involved in three AFDs for articles he wrote all of which were in violation of wikipedias BLP policies. In my honest opinion I didn't see this user ever caring about following BLP guidleines or even paying attention to them. Neptunes trident was previously blocked for two weeks after using a sock puppet to edit BLP after he had gotten blocked for edit warring over the same article. It is reassuring to see someone stand up to this type of wiki-bully, but my concern is that he will continue where he left off wreaking havoc after the block is lifted. What wiki policy exists to keep someone like this from continually abusing their privileges as regards to editing BLP articles?17:27, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Shark310

Well, as I noted in my block note, we can enforce topic bans or blocks, and I can still do that if you can provide some diffs that indicate a pattern of problematic behavior. I did a brief check to see if this was a current issue, but did not go through the January history. Is there anything you can point to that would be of assistance? Acroterion (talk) 17:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


sorry for the delay, i have not logged on very frequently this month...

so, about a year ago, neptunes trident created an article entitled nate moore (actor), and dave oren ward (actor), both of which contained egregious BLP violations. subsequently, these articles both became the subject of AFDs, and the community in its wisdom came to an almost unanimous consensus to delete these two articles. Not to be deterred, Neptunes Trident created a third article, "the killing of dave oren ward", which contained the exact same content. This article was also quickly deleted, for the same BLP violations. I think his edits were redacted or deleted, but the AFDS are (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Killing_of_Dave_Oren_Ward) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nate_Moore_(actor)) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dave_Oren_Ward) Also of a disturbing note, Neptunes Trident several times during these discussions attempted to "OUT" different editors, once accusing someone of being the mother of one of the subjects. In any event, if you are able to see the editing done by NT, I'm certain you will see a pattern of blatant BLP violations. Shark310 03:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

full page protection needed

after the imposition of the block User talk:Editingstrong has persisted in converting their user page into a WP:FAKEARTICLE. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:08, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

IP 71.96.64.169

Hello. You recently blocked this IP, but they're continuing their disruptive behavior, despite their ironic unblock request. I'm thinking a hard block may be in order. Regards. - Amaury (talk) 04:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Amongst 71's antics was the creation of Wikipedia talk:Don't be a pussy, about which I received an eMail notification of. It contained its edit summary, which contained the first hundred or so characters of his rather amusing rant on the page. Is there any chance you could eMail me his comment?--Launchballer 21:08, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Done. It's not all that fabulous. Acroterion (talk) 21:16, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Meanie

Acroterion IS SO MEAN ALSO GOGO DODO =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:53, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Back atcha! Acroterion (talk) 02:54, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Y'all have fans! I'm jealous. APK whisper in my ear 02:56, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Why was I blocked?

Hello, hope everything is well!

Just writing to enquire why exactly I was blocked from editing articles? I'm not currently aware of any wrong-doing or having done anything negative?

Thanks, TommyGiffen — Preceding unsigned comment added by TommyGiffen (talk • contribs) 23:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

The log indicates that your account has never been blocked. Acroterion (talk) 00:22, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


New User

Hi Acroterion I am Kind Dude.I am new to wikipedia.I am not sure in things like sandbox,editing,violating articles,etc.Could you explain me all of these in my talk box and we together can clarify our mistakes in writing articles,sources,using wikimedia,etc and be EDITING BUDDIES.

PLZ. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kind Dude (talk • contribs) 19:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

User: Lightning Sabre

Hello Acroterion, Could I please bring to your attention the activities of the above user on the United Airlines Flight 93 and United Airlines Flight 175. This user keep deleting captions and pics without any explanation and in some cases (not all) reverting back again. I have asked them to stop to no avail. I have no intention of breaking the 3RR rule, but this does not seem to worry them in their actions. Could I please leave this with you? Thank you and regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 12:00, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Further to the above, they have now made a personal attack (in wrong position) on my Talk page. I have answered all the points, but I fear this will get us nowhere. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 12:11, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to labor the point, but they now have totally deleted the aircraft pic on United Airlines Flight 93, without any explanation. I have not reverted back, due to 3RR rules. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 13:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
And yet another strange barely legible unsigned "contribution", on my Talk page. At least in the correct position. I am trying to help this person, but they appear not to want to listen. My only concern is that the United Airlines Flight 93 and United Airlines Flight 175 articles have been the work of committed editors and that their work is being undone. I really think the time for action is here. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 14:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I've left warnings and a polite note about collaborative editing, and I've semi-protected both articles for 10 days. I have concerns about their photo uploads that I'll pursue when I have a little time. Acroterion (talk) 14:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks so much. Unfortunately since your contribution, user is still making same edits. I don't think the note will have any effect. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 15:01, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
They're already autoconfirmed, so semi-protection doesn't help. I've reverted the last removal from the infobox, since they're editing disruptively they can be blocked for that and personal attacks, apart from edit-warring. They're new, and I would prefer to get their attention rather than blocking. Acroterion (talk) 15:07, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I tend to agree with you. However, they have now totally deleted all editors comments/help on their Talk page, including your warning. It does not appear that they are going to stop, having reverted other editors contributions on the Flight 93/175 pages. I just don't think this is going to stop; perhaps a short block might bring them to their senses? Thanks for your help. As ever, David, David J Johnson (talk) 16:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
  • A Commons admin should update/alter/or delete his image uploads because I don't tbink they are the planes claimed to be, but the image resolution is such that I cannot tell.--MONGO 16:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm afraid this user is at it again. They have uploaded pictures of Jeremy Glick and Tom Burnett, on their respective pages, victims of United Flight 93 and claiming them as "own work", which they are clearly not. These actions clearly have to stop. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 13:17, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
The Tom Burnett images appears to have been lifted from this website...a Commons admin should examine the licensing.--MONGO 15:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)


New User

Hi Acroterion I am Kind Dude.I am new to wikipedia.I am not sure in things like sandbox,editing,violating articles,etc.Could you explain me all of these in my talk box and we together can clarify our mistakes in writing articles,sources,using wikimedia,etc and be EDITING BUDDIES.

PLZ. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kind Dude (talk • contribs) 19:41, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

A discussion at Ulysses S. Grant where your edit history could prove very helpful

There's a civil disagreement going on at Talk:Ulysses S. Grant surrounding Grant's role, if any, in the founding of Yellowstone Park. I asked MONGO and he suggested you as one of two editors who have extensive experience writing on Wikipedia about related pages. Would you be aware of sources which could help? Please consider commenting. Thanks. BusterD (talk) 02:17, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

At first glance, I would be interested in knowing whether Grant was a prime mover in the establishment, or whether the main impetus came from Congress and Grant just signed a bill that he was presented with. The discussion on sourcing implies that Grant was not a prime mover, that he just signed the bill Congress passed. I have some references on the park's establishment that I'll dig out to see if they can shed some light on the political environment. Acroterion (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Very kind of you. BusterD (talk) 03:46, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


United 93

Hi I am Kind Dude.I found the transcript of Flight 93's CVR.Could you help me add it in the article with a tiltle FLIGHT 93 CVR Transcript.Just send me message in my Talk Box,whether you are happy with it and add it below MEMORIAL section of the article.If you add it,it would add further information about flight 93.Here is the transcript and say if you are okay in adding it.If you are happy or not,just send me a message in my talk box.Plz.

Kind Dude (talk) 10:54, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

<trim text>

It's probably too much detail for an encyclopedia article. See WP:SUMMARYSTYLE (it's too much detail for here for that matter). The appropriate place to discuss it is at the article's talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 11:35, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Um...

Ya missed. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:46, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Dang. Blocked. Thanks. Acroterion (talk) 00:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

The user RABBIT XVII

I am pretty sure there was a duck that edited the page also with the name KRabbit-but since I can't find the user or remember if that was the exact name I'm not sure. Wgolf (talk) 02:05, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Krabbit27 (talk · contribs). I'll leave them alone for now. If it's the same user autoblock will take care of them. Thanks for the note. Acroterion (talk) 02:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Bosnipedian

The IP in this 3RR case is presumably WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Bosnipedian, since he is promoting the work of Mensur Omerbashich. This may not be worth adding to the SPI since he constantly makes new socks. EdJohnston (talk) 21:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

warx2 to WARx2

Please allow redirect warx2 to WARx2 – case sensitive. I tried, but it requires your permission. --Lifetough (talk) 23:34, 29 March 2015 (UTC)Lifetough

Hello Acroterion, I have opened a SPI on this user. JMHamo (talk) 01:04, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Obvious sockpuppet, now blocked. Thanks for the tip. Acroterion (talk) 01:14, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Hatershamo (talk · contribs) has been created to abuse me. Could you please block too. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 01:46, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Done. Lots of angry sockpuppets on the wiki tonight. Acroterion (talk) 01:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Thank you Acroterion for keeping Wikipedia sock puppy—free! CookieMonster755 (talk) 04:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

WARx2

Yesterday, you deleted WARx2 as a G4. However, the page was not substantially the same as the deleted one and thus not eligible under that criteria. G4 is not a license to delete any article on a subject that was previously deleted, but only an actual repost, which was not the case here. A fresh AfD will be needed if notability has not been established. As such, I am kindly asking you to restore the article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

You're right, the version I deleted had even less detail than the version that was deleted by AfD. I couldn't verify the claim that it had been nominated for an award on PBS, or find much of anything else, though the case-sensitive nature didn't help and the PBS link wouldn't load. It does appear on PBS when I just checked, but there's not much else there and I can't follow a link from there. The "audience choice" PBS business looks like a hoax or something rigged through social media, the references don't go to solid third-party sources and much of the content is nonsense. However, I'll restore it so there can be a debate. Acroterion (talk) 16:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Much appreciated. To be clear, I am not convinced it is notable either. I just felt a discussion was warranted since new information (or at least a new claim) was present. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Project MUSE

You should have received an email from me about two weeks ago regarding your application for Project MUSE access. Could you please complete the form linked from that email, or if you did not receive the email (check your spam folder), email me? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:21, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Request for Comment

Could you take a look at this and contribute, if you feel the need? Talk:Misconduct in the Philadelphia Police Department

Paul, in Saudi (talk) 03:30, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Acroterion/Archive_Q1_2015&oldid=1138937881"