User talk:Daniel J. Leivick/Archive 6

Dr. Kim

hi i am trying to get dr kenneth kim's article saved from deletion please please help i have the article that was done on him it is in korean but i scanned it. it says he is eyelid expert and he is fixing eyelid surgery. it was not an ad my parents showed it to me i am trying to find others that were done on him. the one that was done was from korea daily news and it was dated may 20, 2010. he has been helping the korean community by operating on old patients who need this eyelid surgery to treat condition called ptosis hes been operating for free or cheap by fixing the muscles in the eyelid and in the tissue so that the eyelid stays open its not like other surgeons do because most other surgeons dont know how to do this the article is called chuh jin noon soo sool moo lyoh sahng dahb bahd eu sae yoh if you could please help me with this i will really really appreciate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.89.126 (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can't read or speak Korean. You may want to check with Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea to see if anyone can give us a good translation. If there are mulitple good aritcles in Korean language reliable sources than the article will definitely be kept. --Leivick (talk) 19:29, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

hi i saw you left the delete vote for dr kim but i read and found some more articles on him through my parents. he's become a big deal in our community we want a wiki on him my parents dont know how to do this sort of thing so its up to us (the younger generation) to try and get these things up. the articles i have are from korean newspapers. one is from the korea daily and the other is from the korea herald: daily business. they are both printed sources. they are covering dr kim and the procedures he offers. they are as follows:

"the korea herald: daily business" june 16, 2009 "beverly hills yuh suhng deul gam tan" i.e., beverly hills females impressed

--about how dr kim's fat grafting, eye, nose, breast, dark circle, and wrinkle correction procedures are the best

the korea daily thursday, may 20, 2010 "chuh jihn noon soo sool moo lyoh sahng dahb bahd eu sae yoh i.e., get a free consultation on whether or not you have ptosis it also states that "many people are going to see dr kim" now because he can offer this special form of this surgery.

--the rest of the article is about correcting upper eyelid ptosis (i.e., droopy/aging eyelid). New techniques are now used to correct this condition (i.e., during upper eyelid blepharoplasty), which are used by dr. kim since he combines his training from both korea and america to correct ptosis more effectively in a minimally invasive manner. He uses a technique that allows him to treat the underlying tissue.

--> these are directly from the source and these sources are considered reliable (as reliable as the la times to the korean community)

please change your vote from delete to keep dr kim is really important to our community...we're trying to put up people who will serve as more popular role models and dr kim has been helping out with older patients who need ptosis for free. i realize it seems silly because he's a plastic surgeon but plastic surgery is a REALLY big deal to our community (there are numerous articles on this) and if people are going to go see anyone they should go see him because he actually CARES about people... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.89.126 (talk) 20:13, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Dr. Kim

Hi, I am really sorry my roommate above has been a bit emotional these days. I am trying to help her by doing this Wikipedia thing (long, long story), but I was able to find some more articles on Dr. Kim that were more reliable and I have updated his article. I am also really sorry about how poorly written and poorly sourced his article was. It was my first article and I was trying to find sources, learn HTML, differentiate between the hundreds of Kenneth Kim's out there that roam the face of this earth, while also writing the article all at the same time. I spent two days on this project now, and have just gained a TREMENDOUS amount of respect for what the Wiki community does in the past two days. I promise you though that my next article will be a LOT better because I have gained a TON of experience from this (although I am somewhat disheartened as well. I'm starting to think "Wikipedia editing" isn't for everybody...but the elite few who is willing to be so self-sacrificing...

Anyways, the articles I added are there now, along with some translations. On the Talk page for the delete, I also added a link to Babel Fish, which seems to be the best for translating boxes of text. Please let me know if there is anything else I should do for his page, I am really starting to put my heart and soul into this and I want to get this one thing right... Thank you.People bios (talk) 03:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi People bios, thanks for the friendly message. Don't feel sorry about the article at all. One of the imperatives of Wikipedia is WP:BOLD, in short don't worry about making mistakes. In any case the article is very well constructed for someone's first article with great use of formatting and aside from being a touch on the promotional side (easily fixed) it is well written. The main issue right now is determining whether Dr. Kim has been covered sufficiently in a non trivial manner in reliable third party sources. Like I said it is obvious that Kim is respected and accomplished member of his profession, however Wikipedia notability isn't related to those factors. I'm not sure if anyone has pointed you to WP:N, but this is the the policy that is at issue here. Unfortunately I can't read Korean so I am not that good at determining whether the sources provided are acceptable. The concern is that the sources are not really independent of the subject, to me they seem like they might be promotional news items, but given the language barrier I can't tell for sure. I assume you can read Korean so maybe I can ask you. Do the sources provided in the article appear to be entirely independent of the subject? In other words do you think that these articles were paid for by Dr. Kim or his office? If the sources are good then the article will undoubtedly be kept, but if not then I really hope you try again. Don't be discouraged, I agree with what your roommate said; Wikipedia does needs better coverage of Korean Americans and obviously there are many other subjects which meet notability requirements. Feel free to ask me if you have any other questions or need any help editing. --Leivick (talk) 06:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thank you as well I have been really trying to do this right and I feel like they were accusing me of so many things. My biggest concern now is that I made Dr. Kim look/sound bad when I was just trying to get him noted/noticed.

The only one I know for a fact that was not paid was the Ptosis one, because my mom works there. That was the one from The Korea Daily. The other ones I am not certain of, but I can try and find out. It talks about how he's been doing ptosis repair on patients for the past couple of years now, and about how important it is for korean people to get this treated because its a common affliction among korean people that goes unnoticed and it can cause a lot of fatigue and tire out the eye. It can't be promotional because it doesn't make a lot of money for people to do this sort of surgery and dr. kim is doing many of these for free. That's the version that I got from my mother anyways...

The reason they did the most recent one, the ptosis one, was because he was offering/helping a bunch of patients for free or for really cheap. The people in the Korean community were trying to help him because he's been doing so many things for the community. I don't know though now I just feel horribly embarrassed by this whole fiasco. Ugh...Thank you though...People bios (talk) 06:34, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

• I should add...by "that version" I mean when the "it doesn't make a lot of money for people to do this sort of surgery and dr. kim is doing many of these for free." —Preceding unsigned comment added by People bios (talk • contribs) 06:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Really, don't feel embarrassed. You didn't make him look bad at all or doing anything wrong. From what cab said on the AfD page, it looks like it is a borderline case. There are ok sources, but nothing that really pushes it over the edge. We will have to see how it pans out, but it isn't a fiasco by any means, it is just how Wikipedia works. If this one doesn't work (or even if it does) out let's try another one. I would be happy help you select and write about another Korean American subject and I'm sure we could get additional help from other editors here. (I have to go to bed as I have work to do in the morning, so I wont be responding until sometime tomorrow) --Leivick (talk) 06:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much I really appreciate it you have no idea how much this means to me. I am now trying to figure out if there are other articles on Dr. Kim and trying to see how I can support it. I am very grateful though. I am trying to think of some other people but I have no idea how I can do one on someone that isn't going to be a COI one now, especially because I realized just about anything falls under the COI category...

Hi, I have been doing more research on Wikipedia and am starting to feel like I am going to die sitting on my laptop these days...

I am trying to find out how to get Dr. Kim's picture back up. Two different users removed it because it was on Dr. Kim's site and they say it was based on copyright claims, but I got that picture from my mother and I had the right to use it. I was wondering if it was okay for me to use it. I will write a letter to Dr. Kim and get him to sign it if I have to - I read that this was one way to get it removed. I didn't think I would need to do this since I felt like the picture was mine, but maybe it would help? Please let me know if I can do something like this to get it back up on his site. I really liked the picture and thought it made his site look a lot better. I am really into art and I like things to look pretty and be formatted well. I wish Wikipedia had more pictures on its articles to be quite honest, mainly because I really believe in the whole theory of multimedia forms to teach and reach others (this goes back to Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences). Any advice would really be appreciated.People bios (talk) 17:51, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I realized I should clarify...No I don't know Dr. Kim I was just going to write a letter to him to ask if I could use the picture, and see how he responds. I am really big on making sites on Wikipedia more visual, and I want my articles to include these things, so any information on how to do this for Dr. Kim's and all other subsequent articles will be greatly appreciated. I think pictures are important, especially because they are more universal in terms of accessibility when it comes to trying to understand a concept.People bios (talk) 19:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

We definitely want to have pictures in the article. I recommend waiting to see if this article is kept before contacting Dr. Kim. As for other articles about Korean Americans, don't worry about COI to much. Unless you personally know the subject or have a financial interest in them or their organization it shouldn't be a problem. Another piece of advice I have for you would be to maybe make fewer edits to the AfD page. It may seem counter intuitive, but sometimes the harder you push to get an article kept the harder other people push to get it deleted. In the end people get entrenched in their positions and are very difficult to sway them. I would also remove the last post you made at the AfD accusing Xxanthippe of racial bias. I have no idea whether it is true or not, but you need to assume good faith on Xxanthippe's part. Posts like the last one you made will lead to drama and will side track the main issue at hand. Your time would much better be spent finding good sources and adding them to the article. Just to let you know at the end of the AfD (usually 7 days) another admin will come through and see if there is consensus to delete. That doesn't mean 100% delete votes, but it means a strong majority of the quality arguments favor deletion. If their isn't a consensus to delete then the default action would be to keep the article. You don't need to respond to every delete vote, the admin will weigh their merits for themselves. --Leivick (talk) 20:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I deleted the comment. I also appreciate the clarity on "grounds for deletion", as I was unable to find any direct information on what constituted deletion.People bios (talk) 20:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm Glad you deleted the comment. Here is a link that explains AfD in detail Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Let me know if there is anything that needs clarifying. I will be out most of the rest of the day so I probably wont be able to respond until late tonight or tomorrow morning. --Leivick (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for being so helpful. I am really beginning to understand more and more about Wikipedia, and I am starting to get really excited about the community. I feel like I am back in Ancient Athens, except with a more logical process based on quickly and easily accessible information/resources. I am also really appreciating the humor here and there, and a lot of the people along with what they are about. Plus, I love editing English and writing, which I know is a bit ridiculous, but it keeps my mind sharp.People bios (talk) 08:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for my very first Barnstar! I am truly honored and excited about my new hobby. I have a question (actually, I have a ton of questions) — I am interested in making videos for some of the pages on Wikipedia, because I am really into video technology (I did a lot of research on the topic and its impact on improving student performance when it comes to education) and was wondering what the rules were for doing this. I was thinking of taking pictures/images from Wikimedia, then mixing them together with information from the original article, some non-copyrighted music, and some on-screen text (or perhaps even a narrative voiceover) in order to add some variety in terms of how the information on the pages are presented. Is this something I would be able to do? I love making videos, and I would love to make some for the WIki community if this is something that the Wiki community would want/need. I am also open to ideas and suggestions.People bios (talk) 22:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Your idea for videos is really interesting. I have been thinking about a similar concept regarding video lectures for college classes for a few years now. Information can be a lot easier to absorb when it is in multiple formats (text, image, audio) at the same time. Wikipedia already has a function set up for spoken versions of articles. I have never really liked them because I can read an article much faster than it would take to listen to it and I can skip over parts when I am reading much easier. Also spoken versions of article sort of defeat the instant updatability nature of a wiki (you really have no idea how out of date a spoken word file is). On the other hand I can sometimes learn much better from a video than from a written article which can be pretty dry and difficult to hold one's attention. I think there might be something worth pursuing here. It might be better to talk about this over skype or something like that, as this sort of communication (User talk pages) is a little slow (use the E-mail this user function to shoot me a mail if you interested). I'm not positive Wikipedia is exactly the right place for this sort of project, but the free nature of it makes side projects really easy. Let me know what you think. --Leivick (talk) 23:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Although I hate acting like a noob asking noobish questions, I am afraid I am left with no other options: How exactly do I use the "E-mail this user function"? I am trying to figure this out, but I can't seem to find the link for it.People bios (talk) 01:30, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

The Email-user button is on the left hand side in the "toolbox" below the "interaction box" and the search box. I thought of a good possible test idea on my drive home from the studio today and can tell you about it when I have a bit more time. You may have to activate a email account with wikipedia, I can't remember how this exactly, but it should prompt you. --Leivick (talk) 02:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmm....Is it possible that because you have an admin account that you have an "email user" function that I do not? I am unable to find this function, which makes me think that I am either really blind or I am not able to access the same things that you are.People bios (talk) 04:28, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not that much of a 1337 wikipedia haxor, but I think you need to go to your user preferences page which is at the top under "my preferences" and enable your email. This is a good thing to do in any event as it will allow you to retrieve your account if you lose your password. I know you don't have to be an admin because I didn't use the function until I was nominated for the position and had to activate it before I went through the nomination process. If you can't get it to work I can give you my email here and than quickly oversight (permanently remove the edit, as I don't normally like to give out my email address to everyone). Looking forward to hearing from you. --Leivick (talk) 07:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I am starting this back to one colon before we run out of space to talk and leave comments. Anyways, what is a "1337 wikipedia haxor"? I hate to be asking another noobish question, but I realized that by asking, I would be able to figure out things and I would minimize the amount of time I spent acting like a noob...responding to messages left by bots and whatnot...People bios (talk) 01:32, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

A 1337 haxor is the opposite of a noob. It is internet slang for something like elite hacker. Just trying to be funny. --Leivick (talk) 03:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Haha how much of a noob am I if I don't know the opposite of a noob...oh for shame...that must have been the most noobish thing I did/say in all of my short-lived wiki career...People bios (talk) 09:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Ana Masulovic?

I do not understand why you deleted the page "Ana Masulovic? You know, the United States are not the only country in the world and that there is a Europe as a continent in which there are smaller countries such as Serbia, where there are singers who are famous throughout the Balkan Peninsula (Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Bulgaria, Macedonia...). Ana's 50,000 fans speaks about her popularity and how much is known. Her song on YouTube is heard by over a million people. if page wasnt written enough, it was because page was not completed. Please return a page so I could write about Anna... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubalibrebgd (talk • contribs) 23:25, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

The article did not assert any form of notability. It did not mention if she toured or had albums released by major record companies. In order for the article to survive you will need to show multiple reliable third party source which discuss this person. Seeing as the Ana Masulovic's page was deleted from the Serbian language Wikipedia for the same reason accusing me of a US centric bias is a pretty weak argument. --Leivick (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Al Melling page

Yes, criticism accepted. I got all of this from the articles in the references, but didn't have time to put them in the right places. For example the bit about being most prolific engine designer is from an article in autocar by Steve Cropley. Some of the journalistic pieces are somewhat hyperbolic, and I can't deny I'm a fan myself. Other information is from newspaper and magazine articles which aren't online. Korzenioffski (talk) 10:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Enthusiasm for the the subject is great, but keep in mind that you need to remain objective in the article. One of the main issues with the article is the fact/opinion distinction (encyclopedias don't express opinions). I tried to remove some of it, but a there is plenty remaining. As an example of what might not be clear: "May be the most prolific engine designers" is an opinion as there really are not statistics on the matter and there are so many ways to define prolific. Let me know if you need any help editing. --Leivick (talk) 19:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Golden Gate Bridge/Kevin Starr

I see that you deleted a reference I added to the Golden Gate Bridge entry, listing a new history of the Bridge, GOLDEN GATE by Kevin Starr. I'm new to editing Wikipedia so apparently I erred in including a link to an Amazon page for this book. However, I believe the book should certainly be listed as a reference for anyone who wants further information about the bridge, especially as no other full history of it is listed here. Although Starr's Golden Gate was published in June 2010 after most of this entry was written, and is therefore not cited above, it is an authoritative history of the GGB by a scholar recognized as California's leading historian. I replaced the Amazon link with a link to the publisher's catalogue page (disclosure, I'm the publisher). But that page includes third-party reviews that indicate, I think, GOLDEN GATE is a first-rate source for someone interested in the Bridge. Pginna (talk) 22:42, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

As the publisher of the book, it is inappropriate for you to add links to it on Wikipedia. See WP:COI for information on conflict of interest. Also the book is not used as a reference in the article so it should not be listed in the reference section. It could be appropriate for a further reading section, but it would be best to let someone who doesn't have a financial interest in the sales of the book to add it. Let me know if you have any other questions. --Leivick (talk) 22:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Nova

Hi Dan. How are you? I did the whole Nova article over including the images, but that popular culture section I didn't check. Check my user page. Let me know what you think? How do I make the image links work on the contents bar? Please check out Chevrolet Chevelle, Chevrolet Chevelle Laguna, Chevrolet Corvair, and Chevrolet Corvette. Some of the articles I have been working on. Can we get them nominated for GA? I spent a lot of time on these.Vegavairbob (talk) 04:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey Bob, I'm doing great, about to move from California to Arizona for school. Hope you are doing well. Great to see you back and being as prolific and productive as ever. I don't quite know what you mean about the image links in the content bar. What do you mean by the "content bar"? As for the articles you linked to, they are fantastic and much improved. If we want to go to GA I would be happy to help, but they all have minor issues that will probably prevent them from making the grade. I have suggestions for all of them, but it gets it is complicated to list every problem with each article and I don't have the expertise to fix them myself. Let's pick one work on it. Which one do you think is the best? --Leivick (talk) 04:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately...

It appears User:Vegavairbob is resuming his previous combative behavior on the articles he believes to be his.

Another user began the process of splitting Chevrolet Impala into more manageable and readable articles. VVB proceeded to delete a talk page comment, revert the edit splitting the content out of the main article (both times using rollback), make a snide comment to the editor who warned him regarding his deletion of a legitimate talk page comment, and then leave an edit summary which pretty much affirms that he still has not given up his ownership behavior.

Based on my previous attempts to deal with this user's edits I refuse to try it this time, I don't have the patience to deal with his attitude. --Sable232 (talk) 23:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I will see what I can do. Although last time my advice fell on deaf ears. --Leivick (talk) 00:07, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I ran into a problem in the Corvair article, after restructuring that section for clarity. This note followed on one of his first edits to basically revert the restructuring. It's been fairly downhill ever since. There are a series of automobile related articles that contain much unsourced expository and where quotes are used for wp:synth purposes — to bolster a viewpoint or story that's essentially unsourced. These articles warrant trimming and culling. The Woodie article is a recent example where I trimmed a great deal of unsourced expository from the article — to find it reverted. Perhaps a team effort here could help. 842U (talk) 21:38, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Little Miller Act Picture

Hi. I noticed your edits to the photo on Little Miller Act. I'm pretty new at this...

I added the credit because I wasn't sure about the photo credit policy. Thanks for removing it. I had the picture large in part to setoff the state list in the index. Without the large picture... there's huge gap before you get to the substance.

Do you have any suggestions for reformatting this, or would you object to me sizing it back?

Thanks.

John2510 (talk) 20:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Definitely don't re-size the image to a giant size. It creates accessibility issues for people without broadband connections. What we could do is make the index collapsible and get rid of the gap. --Leivick (talk) 21:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I'll try to learn about modifying the index (which is critical for this). If I resize the picture at all... I'll keep it to a minimum. Thanks again.John2510 (talk) 22:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Dan

I'm having a discussion on my talk page with a User. Every article I work on he's there ready to tweak my edits and I've worked with him and haven't deleted one thing he's changed. Vegavairbob (talk) 21:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

There aren't private conversations on Wikipedia you need to be civil regardless of where you are having the conversation. 842U asked me to help in this situation and I was hoping I wouldn't have to intervene, but your actions have not been acceptable. I think a break might not be a bad idea, hopefully when you come back cooler heads can prevail. --Leivick (talk) 21:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

He and I have been working together fine ..even have given each other barnstars. that's right, he gave me The Barnstar of Diligence... so his complaint was isolated to one instance (or disagreement) Conflict hasn't been the rule, so please don't assume anything because of a former problem with a particular User. Thanks. I apologise for my unfriendly tone.Vegavairbob (talk) 01:57, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Corvette articles

Hello Dan- I have restructured and added to all the Corvette articles, Chevrolet Corvette and Chevrolet Corvette C1–C6 for many months. (with some help condencing the main article). I think they're ready for GA nominations. The main article had featured status previously. Does it need to recieve a GA rating first? Vegavairbob (talk) 17:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You are probably aware...

...but if not, fyi: [1] [2]

Cheers -- Writegeist (talk) 23:14, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Barry Bonds

Thanks for your editorial contributions. You may want to post this on your user page.

This user helped promote Barry Bonds to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:26, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Honda and Hyundai recalls

Hi Daniel, regarding the recalls: the Honda one is fairly significant affecting c. 500,000 vehicles. The Hyundai recall only affects about 1,000 cars, of which only 30 have actually been sold [3]. I can certainly see why Go porch books is getting annoyed.

There seems to be POV pushing from both User:North wiki and Go porch books. I have thusly edited some pages to include information from both editors. OSX (talk • contributions) 22:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah looks like two POV pushers to me. I trust your judgment on which recalls are notable. I just was concerned by porch book's obvious pointy editing. --Leivick (talk) 23:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Islamabad Medical and Dental College

You know, I was quickly cleaning up this article while it was nominated for speedy deletion because somebody had put copyright information in it. I even placed an hang on template, but you deleted it without giving me a chance and I lost all of my work. You could have talked to me on my talk page. I have created the article again with minimal information. The article is not orphan anymore. Farjad0322^{(talk|sign|contribs)} 23:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion, but I don't understand, what work did you lose? In the future, you can just remove the speedy tag from articles you didn't create no reason to use hangon. Do you need any of the info from the deleted article? I would be happy to pull anything you need. --Leivick (talk) 23:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

No its okay now. I was editing the article and when I clicked save page, the screen said that the page had been deleted. After that my work was lost. But now I created the article again without any copyright violations and I would be adding references in coming days. Farjad0322^{(talk|sign|contribs)} 23:14, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

If that happens again, you can always use the back button and copy any text you need. That works, at least in Firefox. --Leivick (talk) 23:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the help. Farjad0322^{(talk|sign|contribs)} 23:18, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem, the article looks like a good start now, good work. --Leivick (talk) 23:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

PIAT

Dan,

I see you deleted my addition referencing George MacDonald Fraser's description of using a PIAT in the Burma campaign in WWII as 'too trivial'. I'll accept that. It was my first foray into editing an article, which I had looked up after seeing the weapon described in Fraser's book. He actually relates an anecdote over a few pages of using it to shoot at Japanese ships coming upriver, and (having lived in England for six wonderful years) I thought that one quote captured the device and its country of origin quite nicely. In any event, you may wish to check it out; I think Fraser was (RIP) a great writer of fiction and non-fiction in his brutally honest, yet hilarious descriptions of various historical events. His fiction is known for its historical accuracy. Regards. Jdstallmeyer (talk) 23:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedai, I hope you continue to edit! I don't doubt the quote is interesting (I might have to check it out as I have been fascinated by the PIAT for a long time), but the paragraph into which the reference was inserted is about the weapon's use in general so a description by a writer isn't all that relevant. --Leivick (talk) 23:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

User Vegairbob

Can we revisit this discussion at User talk:Vegavairbob?

The problem of Ownership seems worse now than ever.842U (talk) 18:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Olena Onufriv

I would like to re-create the page about Olena Onufriv. My initial mistake was bad citing. Here is what I am going to create now: Olena Onufriv belongs to the generation of those young Lviv artists who started working in the 90s of the 20th century. During past few years creative work of Olena Onufriv took a prominent place in artistic environment in Lviv. Despite the fact, that lately she did more work in Kyiv and for Kyiv, creative methods she adopted in Lviv art school can be traced in almost all of her projects. Painting of Olena Onufrive, an artist from Lviv, in the first place, strikes a viewer with its pictorial strength and southern temperament, with its bright colors, as if these paintings were not from Lviv, but from the very heart of the tropics, from the distant shores of the South Seas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsisaryk (talk • contribs) 13:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Sin City

Thanks for this. I have been reverting the non-helpful gun obsession of that editor for months now to my own great frustration. He's obviously well intentioned, and has done some great work on gun related articles, but he adds gun models (that are almost never verifiable) to almost every article he touches. Millahnna (talk) 23:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Mass merger

First thanks for restoring my request. Second, I do not understand your closing of the whole discussion since there were several ongoing ones. Do you mean they will have to start again on the corresponding article page? or you enclosed the last part by mistake (it is clear to me that the initial discussion was indeed closed). Best regards.-Mariordo (talk) 22:59, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I closed the whole thing by mistake and reverted myself. I just wanted to close the mass merger part where consensus was clear, as I wanted to simplify the page. The template I used didn't work with the sub heading syntax that is being used and I don't know of a different template that would work. --Leivick (talk) 23:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Predator

"The information you are adding is largely original research and fan speculation. It also discusses elements of fiction as if they were real. Please do not readd this information without gaining consensus for its inclusion on the talk page. --17:39, 23 December 2010 (UTC)"

I disagree, anywhere that is speculative had been noted as being speculative using terms such as 'it is believed' or 'it has been noted'- If thats not allowed then i will accept that. What do you mean "It also discusses elements of fiction as if they were real." - The top of the current page has states "The Predator is a fictional extraterrestrial species". If you mean someone who didn't read the top might believe its being discussed as though it were real, wouldn't statements such as "The Predator also makes use of a light-bending cloaking device." fall into the same category? Just found that a little confusing.

I agree if something isn't right it should be removed, but the vast majority of what i wrote can be seen in the movies, admittedly with the exception of one ore two statements taken from things learned in comics and novels (i assumed that all counted towards the character, as it has in other sections of the same page, and is hardly 'largely' made up of them). If some parts don't meet Wikipedia's guidelines then i will omit them. Please edit, not just delete.

Thanks.

I will respond to what I see as your two main point separately to keep things as clear as possible:

anywhere that is speculative had been noted as being speculative using terms such as 'it is believed' or 'it has been noted

This appears to be original research, who believes or notes this? If some reliable source has made this speculation than it should be fine.

What do you mean "It also discusses elements of fiction as if they were real."

Encyclopedia articles need to focus on the real world impact of a subject, not its fictional properties. See WP:MOSFICTION.

--Leivick (talk) 02:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Some weapons have been shown to be completely resistant to the effects of acidic blood belonging to Aliens, while other weapons of the same design are melted. - Can be seen in AVP

It is believed the lesser the rank, the lesser the quality of the weaponry, therefore a novice predator's blades might be effected by the Alien's acid blood, while an Elder's is unaffected. - Speculation by the brothers Strause in empire magazine, though this is not a word for word quote. In addition, several of these tools make use of thermal imaging to track prey. The Predator's bio-mask also houses a viewing system that allows the creature to see primarily in infrared, though other visual spectrums are also utilized should the predator feel them more appropriate. - Mask was called Bio-Mask in Predator 2 script and the use of different spectrums can be seen in every movie since Predator 2

It has been noted that while there are some Predators more adept at building weaponry, (and weapons made by these individuals are more sought after) - This information comes from a novel, so I will accept the decision not to include it

all Predators are capable of making their own weapons and maintaining them even when operating completely alone for extended periods. - Can be seen in all movies, but most notably in AVP2:R

Most predators are depicted wearing a set of gauntlets. The most common depiction in the movies shows the left housing either a double, or single serrated blade (called a 'wrist-blade'), the length of which the predator can vary. Some predators have such blades in both gauntlets. The left gauntlet however houses a computer, and communications system with which the predator is able to track its prey, detonate explosive charges and ever project 3D holographic maps. Another widely used function of the left gauntlet is an extremely powerful explosive, generally employed when the predator feels it's death is inevitable. - All this information can be seen in the movies, the 3D holographic display can be seen in AVP - wrist-blades, gauntlet computer and explosives can be seen in every movie.

On either shoulder (and both in some cases) the Predator has powerful energy based weapon known as a 'Plasma-Caster'. The Plasma-Caster is targeted by a triple-laser targeting system emitted from the bio-helmet. The predator can intuitively choose his own targets using the bio-helmets infrared display. The plasma-caster's power seems to vary from film to film, and even from engagement to engagement as can be seen in Predator. - can be seen in all movies, as explained.

Sometimes the weapon will fell trees, other times (as can be seen in the scene where the predator is polishing skulls) it will leave a baseball sized hole. This has led many to speculate the predator can change the level of power emitted from the [plasma-caster, raising the suspicion that perhaps his power supply is limited, as in the video game Predator: Concrete Jungle. - This is a discussion of the speculation regarding the power source, based on information from designers of the game ‘Predator: Concrete Jungle’ as an explanation as to why they made the power was made limited in the game, but I agree it might not be as relevant as most of the other points made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Y9dnkbe (talk • contribs) 04:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Sooooooo can i edit it now without getting blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Y9dnkbe (talk • contribs) 14:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Why would you be blocked? I never said anything to you about blocking. You are welcome to edit the article. I think most of what you suggested is a little too detailed and focuses on the in universe capabilities rather than their real world significance. If something can only be observed by watching the movie but hasn't been commented on by a third party reference, it probably isn't all that significant, but you are welcome to add a part of what you suggested and see if nobody else removes it. There is a whole wiki devoted to Aliens and Predators called Xenopedia you might try there as they don't have the same type of focus. --Leivick (talk) 18:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I was temporarily blocked last time for some reason, not sure why. Sorry, didn't mean to suggest you did it, just didn't want to be stepping on your toes without confirming it was all good. Yep, no worries, ill re-write it a bit better (i agree it was quite slapped together last time). Id say its more someone not liking me messing with something they've written, but of course, i cant be sure. I checked out Xenopedia, but was trying to bring the wikipedia page up to speed with it, assuming wikipedia was the 'one stop' reference page so to speak.

Thanks for your time, and i do apologize for this whole situation's pettiness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Y9dnkbe (talk • contribs) 04:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Mdvanii - please help me

Hello,

I have been really trying to get a good editor to help me make the Mdvanii article perfectly encyclopedic and neutral, ...I have had some really good help for doing citations and adding the necessary references in the right way,....but nobody has been able to really explain specifically how I can improve the article....

The challenge is that the artists work is controversial and cross over in several very different fields, ....dolls, which usually are a commercial product and art whichit has been understood as by museum shows and exhibitions.

I have tried to lay out the article chronologically and by event to illustrate the evolution and briefly explain what the work evolved into in the 90s ,...as an ism which is greatly respected and accepted int he art field in Europe.

The creator principal, BillyBoy*, has worked in many fields and it is difficult to explain with without going off topic, so i have restricted it to only doll related things which contribute to the general publics knoeldge of Mdvanii.

ALso, since the ework is controversal, the artists have seriously weird stalkers, one who has severely vandalized the article with slurs, insults and changing the name to a commercial toy as an insult...../this proves my point of the mixed reactions between the art and dollworld who battle at times trying to define the Mdvanii and Mdvaniiism concept.

Mdvanii ispolitical and sociological and also aethetic, so it involves many unrelated usually, ...fields.

I really want the COI to be removed and I really want to make this a great article which is entirely encyclopedic, so do you think you can help me a little bit? Ihave asked others and have had no replies of reditorial assistance and guidance.

I feel the COI is inappropriate as I have no desire to make this a "puff piece" or a ad. It would be infact not ina ny interest to the makers or the work, which is strong enough to stand on its own, it already has a huge amount of press...Ihave been slowly cleaning the article as best as I can as I understand it and adding citations.....

If you look at my talk page, one person has been realyl helpful, but that's about it...

Please help me... I would really appreciate it.

thank you, AJ Alec jiri (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for being accepting of criticism. I don't know what your specific connection with the artist is, but you definitely are connected. This makes it hard for you to write an article on the subject that is objective and neutral. I went through the article and took out some of the most glaring examples of "peacock" language and unsourcable content. There is still a ways to go and I'm not all that knowledgeable about this particular field in art (I'm a photographer). Unfortunately this is a volunteer project, so no one is obligated to help, but there are a few ways to get a little more attention. There are a variety of wikiprojects that might have knowledgeable members, they can be contacted on their project talk pages. It would also be helpful to not deny having a conflict of interest, it is clearly there. I'm not saying you are only trying to promote this subject, but your connection to the subject makes objectivity difficult. Being upfront about your connection is more likely to attract other volunteers to help, no one wants to feel like they are donating their time to promote someone else. --Leivick (talk) 20:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Can you please give a few examples for my knowledge? CTJF83 chat 20:51, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Take a look at the edits I just made. The article has a tendency to promote the subject in an unencyclopedic way, it repeatedly refers to people as "hair stylist to the stars" and "the grand french tradition" the like. Since the author of the article is connected with the subject and the article is far from a neutral and encyclopedic, the tags are entirely appropriate. One way to remove the tags would be to trim the article extensively and leave it at just the bare facts without any commentary. --Leivick (talk) 21:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I am an observer of the artists for a long time,....I have absolutely no say whatsoever in the work and have my own work which is unrelated to theirs. I do not get a financial reward in any way from the artists. Many Mdvanii sales are given to a non-profit cultural organization in any case. I am not sure exactly what I am asked to confess. I think the work is worthy of a wiki article and since I know so much about it, and have access to all the documentation, as does Mlle Kwon, I feel we are qualified to write it and initiate it (with hope for help). I know all the stories and have seen all the shows, since the beginning...When I say I am not in "COI", I mean, my genuine objective is NOT to promote for sale or advertise Mdvanii. The artists have enough of that already. What is a great challenge and a great work to do is to make the subjectneutral in put it in context with the rest of the LGBTQ arts etc. etc. We really just wish to do a neutral and excellent article to help those who are interested in Mdvanii and help them simple to know the basic facts. Its a really provocative and rich subject so naturally I'd need help, (and expecting it) and never had the conviction to do this on my own and with Mlle Kwon. We expected and hoped for help as we know this is usually how wikipedia works. It started however when we were severely vandalized by a stalker once the start-up article was in place....and then mysterious COI and vanadlism occured a few times more.... I have so much documentation, if you'd actually read it you'd see what I mean....

The artists are photographers and had a major show at the Musée d'Elysée in Lausanne. This is a prestigious photography museum in Switzerland and William Ewing was the curator,...he is a world authority on photography history andhas many books and shows to his credit and long career. This is no mean achievement. So, I added just the facts...this is an example. I Am trying to do it chronologically and give PRE history which is essential to understanding the subject.

I think with help, it can be a great article, I just am reaching out for it....it's a very unusual subject concerning LGBTQ politics, contemporary conceptual art and fashion in Europe, so it is bound to appeal to specialized people and also create vandalism from those opposed to these subjects.The stalkers will have a field day as well.

So, all we are asking for is for help.....please help us do this the right way. It is a genuine hand out for support.

Kind regards,

AjAlec jiri (talk) 21:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your intention to make a quality article and I'm not asking you confess anything. You should just make your connection with the artist clear to others when you ask for help. I do need to ask why you refer to yourself in the plural. Is this an account with multiple users? This is against policy, I'm sure you didn't realize this and that if it is a shared account, it is an honest mistake. If it is a multi user account, new accounts for the different users will have to be created. --Leivick (talk) 04:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

No, Alec Jiri, the one which is related tot he artists is supplying me the material and I am writing the article but I am doing it with another editor, the person who iniitated the article, who is in New York. i am in switzerland where I get the documents from the source. When I say "we" I mean, those working on it....they each have their own accounts, I have just this account for myself. USER Orumsonu is trying to OUT me and it's very annoying, he is a brand new wiki user and it's clear he is a vandal and a detractor of the artists, he is NOT interested in contributing to the article, but is clearly annoyed that the achievements of the artists are being layed out...as I stated, i want to simply do this article correctly and 100% within the rules and regulations, which i find perfectly normal...I want a neutral article and this user is trying to crawl up my nose! As I explained, Mdvanii is a controversial subject still, it's a "living art work" and still very controversial...so the detractors will stop at nothing to sabotage this article.I am requesting help.

Also, i thin the last two citations ABOUT the article....are no longer appropriate. I removed the thing in question and we are discussing the other thing. There is no original research, I am NOT a writer for the fondation tanagra, nor have anything to do with it. My only association is that Alec Jiri allowed me to use his name, maybe it was a mistake, but we thought since he was the source of the documents, it gave it credibility. The documents he can give me are very rare. He has a complete documentation, so I had to go to him for them to do the article. I have his benidiction to do this and regardless of who I am, I feel i am following the rules and trying to perfect the article, so why do I have to be haranged by users such as Orumsonu, who I simply do not understand his agenda. If there is not one, I'd like to know what this aggressive approach is....

These I think are not right for the article. What do you think Mr leivick?

This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page. (December 2010) Text document with red question mark.svg This article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) Alec jiri (talk) 13:28, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Is insulting and outing a common thing on wiki?

Just a question. I have been insulted by Orumsonu on the Mdvanii Talk page. Is this a common procedure or phenomenon on wiki? AM I expected to repeatedly discuss myself rather than the article? I have explained who I am but why is it such an issue? I am dedictaed to making the article neutral and encyclopedic, I am discussing with serious people for practical help, I am complying willingly to make this a perfect article, so is it part of wiki to have personal attacks on you on these public pages? I know things are different in the USA, but I am not accustomed to personal attacks on a forum of any sort, so what is the policy and the way to deal with this? Its not something I am familiar with and don't think it's appropriate at all...any help, or suggestions? Clearly this Orumsonu doesn't like or understand Mdvanii and wants to express it....a detractor as I mentioned before. I don't think this is paranoia as he/she says, it's just plain weird and rude to be accused of such when it is far from the truth. This wiki user doesn't seem to want to help the article. Alec jiri (talk) 14:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I went through the Mdvanii talk page and don't see any insults from Orumsonu, could you point out specifically where there are actual insults. He doesn't believe you when you say that you are not Alec Jiri. That is not an insult. It also isn't outing to assume that a user with a name identical to the adopted son of the artist is in fact that person. It is a problem that you are using the name of a living person and are now claiming not to be that person. I'm going to have to bring this to an admin noticeboard to get me eyes on the matter. AS for Orumsonu, you both need to calm down. You continually refer to him as a vandal when he has done zero vandalism. It also isn't a problem if he doesn't like Mdvanii, you obviously do and I have no opinion on it, that is how we can reach a neutral article. I don't see any indication that he doesn't want to help the article. --Leivick (talk) 17:45, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok I see the part where he/she calls you a pathological liar. That isn't ok, but you actually should understand that using someone else's name and then claiming not to be that person could be seen as lying (either prior to making the claim as a lie of omission or afterwords a direct lie). I will bring it up with him/her on their talk page. If it continues it will require further action on my part or that of another admin's. --Leivick (talk) 17:52, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I never claimed to be THE Alec Jiri (Alec Jiri is one first name,...like Jean Pierre, Rose Marie, Marie Louise etc...Jiri is not a surname) who I know would most probably use his full name with his surname if he were to do anything (he would be incapable of doing a wikipedia article himself)... I said clearly I was using his name with permission as most of the important citation documents come from him. He was happy to supply them and I used his first name since he is clearly giving me the documents, I had no idea it would implicate him to this degree,...we did not see a problem with it since I made the account with his permission. I am only interested in getting the documents from the original source, because pretty much nobody else can have them. There are no archives which are public on Mdvanii which can be used. There are so many docuemnts necessary to do this properly that one would need to go to someone related to the artists for a rich source, they are mostly pre-internet era so they are not available easily (though many are now on-line since major magazines are now starting to put up their archives, like L'Officiel etc) I genuinely did not mean to seem in any way, lying about anything...I have been upfront...it never even occured to me that anyone would bother about my wiki user name and I immediately pointed out I am not THE Alec Jiri when it came up. If I made an error in any way, it was be sheer ignorance, not bad intentions of any sort. It was a large presumption which just came up (with great bad will) and I could never have guessed anyone would even think about. I think I have now made it it's pretty clear, quite immediately after the presumption and error of the person who said so, that I have gotten the documents from him. Alec jiri (talk) 19:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Photo Revision: Subaru Alcyone SVX

Daniel,

I am responding to your revision of the photograph.

1. 08:48, 31 December 2010 (diff | hist) Subaru Alcyone SVX

You stated: "This is a better picture, larger, less reflections, better angle. If you really think your image is better discuss on the talk page, but several people disagree"

I still believe that the original photo is superior. While my photo may not be as large, the vehicle itself is shown in absolute pristine condition. This is an award-winning show car, perfectly stock and correct, without blemishes or imperfections. From a reference standpoint, this is the kind of photograph that is needed in this article.

As to the "several people who disagree", I can name at least 100 people who agree with my photograph as representing the marque, Everyone of them an SVX enthusiast/ owner. I have been a network officer of the SVX World Network for over 10 years and have considerable experience and technical knowledge about this car. One of my other SVX's (as equally pristine) is proudly owned by the former President and CEO of Subaru of America. It now resides back in Japan

Some of the published quotes

"None can compare to John's car. Svxcess' is much better than factory, period."

"Completely mint, exquisitely tasteful and meticulously cared for"

The photo you are using shows tinted windows and a very scarred front bumper. I sincerely believe there needs to be a better photo, as this one does not measure up to Wikipedia's standard of excellence. As very rare car of historical importance, it should be represented at its very best. If needed, I can provide better shots to address any deficiencies you feel are in my photograph.

respectfully,

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Svxcess44 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree that having the car in good condition is important. However the quality of the image is more important unless the car's condition actually distracts from understanding what the vehicle looks like. Whether it is a show car or not isn't a factor. I can't tell which car has a cleaner engine bay. If you want to use an image of your car, I suggest making another photo of it. Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles/Conventions has the criteria for choosing images in car articles along with a handful of examples. The key here is getting the car to stand out from the background some and eliminate distracting reflection. If you need any tips about getting a good image, I would be happy to help. --Leivick (talk) 18:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

You reversed edit to Mick Hazen's page. This info can be verified on the CBS bio which is referenced on his page. Please restore it. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jadh1 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Restoring accurate info

I would appreciate it if you would restore Mick's volunteer work with Friendly Visiting as this is not trivial. As for playing guitar and reading, this points were approved and actually posted by a previous administrator (please see history) when help was needed deleting libelous text. I would appreciate it if the bio could be restored close to it's previous state, especially in light of a recent inappropriate deletion citing "Mick does not read"...which is why I choose to restore this in the first place. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jadh1 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think being an avid reader is worth mentioning. Nor is playing guitar as a hobby. If you really disagree, you can bring it on the article's talk page. -Leivick (talk) 05:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Let it stand. I see your point. Thanks for your help.Jadh1 (talk) 05:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Blog is not reliable resource

Hi Daniel, I am facing a lot of trouble getting Honda India to understand the manufacturing defect that all Honda Jazz in India seem to have. (Reference: Edit on Honda Fit page). Please let me know what are reliable resources in wikipedia terms and if there is a way for me to make my blog a reliable one. Thank you very much. - Chandresh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.248.140.115 (talk) 04:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Please read WP:RS to understand what a reliable source is. Let me know if you have other questions. --Leivick (talk) 04:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The defect in Honda Jazz is a real one as can be seen in the video I have uploaded to youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3ctW27JYwg&feature=player_embedded. Also, it is now published at an independent site as well: http://aryanclasses.com/Consumer/Honda-fuel-tank-defect-car-india.html This video is on facebook as well and one of my friends Arun Kumar in Mumbai, India - is also facing this issue. I suspect that this is a global issue that has gone unnoticed so far. Also, in the USA the problem is not so serious as the petrol tank is located on the same side as the driver. I will be thankful to you in bringing this to the notice of one and all and in ensuring that a corporate giant like Honda listens to customers. While this has not been posted to a news site as yet but wikipedia has also become sort of a news site in that all latest news is up-to-date here. Is it possible to post now that "Honda Jazz in India seemingly has a manufacturing defect" ? (Let someone deny that with a video evidence or otherwise !) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cprakash (talk • contribs) 14:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC) Video on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1737006354019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cprakash (talk • contribs) 14:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but Wikipedia's goal is not make corporations listen to customers. Reliable sources are required, no exceptions. --Leivick (talk) 23:16, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Corporations

Corporations and Divisions of Corporations (such as Chevrolet) consist of people who make decisions - people have emotions. Chevrolet without emotion trimmed the Vega... means Chevrolet people without emotion trimmed the Vega. What the statement means is there was no fanfare or event (as was for the Corvair) Many Chevrolet executives and employees were sorry when the Corvair was discontinued, and there was emotion when the last car went down the assembly line. Not so for the Vega. Vegavairbob (talk) 05:30, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Fanfare would be a much better word. Why not bring this up on the article talk page where everyone can see it? --Leivick (talk) 05:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

It's not that important. It's fine as is.Vegavairbob (talk) 05:53, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Time Will Say Nothing

I'm wondering if it's worth going to WP:WQA. The alternative is probably ANI unless another Admin steps in and blocks him first, which could happen. What do you think? Dougweller (talk) 08:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

There is already a WQA on him and it is more of the same. I'm going to go to bed, but I would see zero problem in a one week block if the behavior continues. He has been warned plenty. --Leivick (talk) 09:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Missed that, thanks. I'd go for a topic ban on articles connected with the Shaw family. Dougweller (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

NLT issue

FYI, re your edit here, just wanted to point out that their comment of "no intention ..." was not a refactoring after the decline, but included in the same set of edits that had made an additional threat prior to the decline (see here). Hopefully, they will take the given advice and make a clear and unambiguous retraction of the multiple threats; but at this stage, I don't see how that comment meets that requirement. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 07:42, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

You are right about the order of the statements, I will clarify. --Leivick (talk) 07:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Daniel J. Leivick. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Doc talk 10:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

In light of the history, might your intervention...

...help with the issues raised here [4]? Writegeist (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I really don't think my words have much effect on Bob, I've tried a number of times before. I'm also to involved to function as an administrator in this issue, so I think it would be best to contact someone else or use a noticeboard. --Leivick (talk) 19:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Understood. Writegeist (talk) 07:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)