Help desk
< December 12	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 14 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

December 13[edit]

Newish student editor needing help[edit]

Resolved

Could someone please have a look at User_talk:Gemayelc#Jastrow? Gemayelc's sig wasn't linking on article talk pages,[1], so I went to his/her user talk page to help test the sig. I have no idea why his/her sig doesn't link. Could someone walk him/her through it? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:43, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 08:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editing validation[edit]

If a person edits an article, how is it validated to be true ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.167.129.55 (talk) 01:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - Wikipedia:Verifiability should answer many of your questions. In short, additions to articles should be verified through reliable sources. If you take a look at most articles, you'll see superscripted numbers that lead to a list of references at the bottom of the page. These references are typically things like news article, books, interviews, etc. that provide the information you see on Wikipedia. Any reader or editor can verify contributions this way - if something is found to be unsourced and/or questionable, it may be removed. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:10, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing a talk page archive bot[edit]

Resolved

I've come across a bunch of talk pages which have archives that aren't listed anywhere. The most recent case is at Talk:Project Appleseed The original script was added here:[2] It was archived for the first time here: Talk:Project Appleseed/Archive 3 I think I see one error: the counter should have started with 1, not 3. But I don't understand why it's not showing up in the template:talk page header, or the archive box, since the title scheme seems correct. Can anyone help me diagnose what's going wrong? Rezin (talk) 01:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The archival is done by a bot. I would suggesting addressing the question to the operator of the bot, Σ. The issue probably has to do with the bot configuration parameters at the top of the talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:32, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I wasn't sure if the fault was in the configuration, the bot, or some other factor. I'll contact Σ, who is probably rewarded for his contribution by getting lots of little cries for help like mine. ;) Rezin (talk) 02:39, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reason the archive wasn't showing up in the archive box was because /Archive_1 didn't exist so it didn't check for /Archive_3 (or even /Archive_2 for that matter). I've moved the archive and cleaned up the call for the bot to archive the page. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 02:50, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input[edit]

@Jonaug: You will have to give us details on what help you need. -- Gadget850^talk 04:39, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the OP is probably refering to this page: [3]--Aspro (talk) 06:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You need to place the reference between the <ref> and the </ref> markup. See here for an example. Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Information_to_include. Also, please read Wikipedia:Notability--Aspro (talk) 05:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Refusal to add Richard Isaac Fine to Wikipedia in 2009 as a person who is not "noteworthy"[edit]

It has just come to my attention that my name was submitted by others to Wikipedia in 2009. (Redacted) The submission was rejected because I was not "noteworthy", i.e., in publications, radio, TV, received awards, held office etc. I am writing to you to express my amused response. Since I have a B.S., Doctor of Law, Ph,D., been a lawyer, written numerous legal articles, been Consul General for the Kingdom of Norway in Los Angeles for Southern California, already am, and have been in Who's Who in America, Who's Who in the World and Who's Who in American Law amongst other "noteworthy" publications for numerous years, have been interviewed by and appeared in numerous publications and on radio and TV for my expertise and have received various awards for my accomplishments, I was quite amused that Wikipedia, a self described un vetted, non journalistic, composition of unknown writers and critics would challenge the determination of "noteworthy" used by established institutions such as Who's Who. Admittedly, "noteworthy" in Who's Who is limited to individuals, while "noteworthy" in Wikipedia is expanded to places such as shopping centers and other inanimate objects. From this expanded definition of "noteworthy" for Wikipedia, one must pose the question of whether a human must also have some form of an inanimate object in him or her to be considered "noteworthy" for Wikipedia? or, Are those who judge the individuals being submitted as being "noteworthy", themselves inanimate objects totally unaware of the world around them. Help Needed: Require any person judging submissions to review Who's Who before determining that a person is not "noteworthy" for Wikipedia. Richard I. Fine — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.69.132.52 (talk) 05:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"notable" is essentially a Wiki jargon short hand for everything that is written right here . (or the Cliff's notes version). Having an article on Wikipedia says nothing about real importance or relevance in the world. For example, very few doctors or firefighters or teachers have articles, yet we have an article about this. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 06:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Isaac Fine was a complete mess because of offsite canvassing. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 06:13, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above-mentioned deletion discussion makes it clear that if Richard Fine warrants a Wikipedia article, it is mainly on account of incidents involving his imprisonment. I cannot tell what he was imprisoned for, or form a view on whether it was justified, as the links I have tried to follow no longer work. But I find it odd that he does not mention his main claim to notability in the long paragraph above. Maproom (talk) 09:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if the original poster is Richard I. Fine, he has a conflict of interest and should not be involved with his own biography except to request changes on the article talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:45, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the 2009 discussion here concerning Mr. Fine is not the only example of a body ruling against him. [4][5] Dwpaul ^Talk 23:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Richard I. Fine responds:

This is not a "conflict of interest" as I was not the original poster. In fact, I was illegally incarcerated in solitary, coercive confinement in the LA County Jail from March 4, 2009 until September 17, 2010 which was the time period that the original posting was discussed.

Further, I am not advocating for my inclusion in Wikipedia. I am only registering my amusement at the process and recommending that the editors look to reputable sources. Here it is clear from the discussion to delete the article, the editors did not consider CNN interview, the National Review article, the American Thinker article, the California Journal article, and other reputable journalistic sources which discussed the approximate $350 million in illegal payments to the California state judges by counties appearing before them as parties causing the judicial corruption occurring at the time, the judges, the counties and the county employees being given retroactive immunity from California criminal prosecution, civil liability and disciplinary action under Section 5, of SBX 2 11 for having taken and being paid such monies by counties and the retaliation against me for exposing and fighting such corruption resulting in the illegal incarceration and illegal disbarment.

I am only registering my amusement at the process and recommending that the editors look to reputable sources.

Additionally, any person viewing my life and legal accomplishments would find such things as: (1) conducting grand jury investigation of international pulp, paper and newsprint cartel, representing the Department of Justice for the first time in Tariff Commission [now International Trade Commission] hearing and indicting GM and Ford for price fixing while a prosecutor in the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division; (2) investigating the former Mayor of the City of Los Angeles for Corruption (Special Counsel to LA City Counsel Governmental Efficiency Committee);(3) founding the first municipal antitrust division in the United States for the City of Los Angeles; 4) changing the way United Way deals with donations to require it to allow donors to designate where their donations should go (AID v. United Way et al.); (5) defending and litigating charitable trust case creating RP International (RP v. RP International); (6) bringing and litigating the lawsuit against OPEC (IAM v. OPEC); (7) bringing and litigating the lawsuit to compensate purchasers in Lake Havasu; first time settlement was used for "public good" (MacNoye et al. v. MCO); (8)bringing and litigating the lawsuit which changed the workings of the California service industry to require fair payment for servicers (CSEA v. Matsushita et al.); (9) reorganizing a worldwide Japanese religion (Imuta v. Nakano); (10) litigating lawsuit on behalf of the Republic of the Gambia to enforce the Treaty of Vienna after the United States seized its diplomat in Switzerland and brought him to the United States for trial(U.S. v. Sissoko); (11) bringing and litigating lawsuit to return approximately $71 million plus interest from the Insurance Reserve Fund and transferred to other funds by the State of California Dept. of Veterans Affairs resulting in a 500% increase in insurance premiums for veterans who have Cal Vet mortgages (Debbs et al., v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs); (12) bringing and litigating a series of lawsuits returning and saving approximately $1 Billion to California taxpayers from monies taken by the State, counties and cities of California from trust funds and special funds (Malibu Video Systems et al. v. Hayes et al.; Veltman v. California State Lands Commission; Amjadi and LACAOEHS v. County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors et al., and others in a series of cases); (13)bringing and litigating the lawsuit which resulted in changing the City of Los Angeles' method of calculating sewer service charges (Shinkle et al., v. City of Los Angeles; (14)bringing and litigating the lawsuits which resulted in closing the California government, stopping 26 years of budget crises and winning the case in the California Supreme Court holding that a government cannot pay anyone without an appropriation (White v. Davis et al., Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Westly et al.); (15) bringing and litigating the first terrorist shooting at a U.S. airport (Hen et al., v. Hedeyat and the City of Los Angeles); (16) bringing and litigating the lawsuit to require the LA District Attorney to pay $14 million to mothers and children in support money that he was illegally holding (Silva v. Garcetti); (17) bringing and litigating lawsuits to preserve the Long Beach Naval Station (Howser v. City of Long Beach; Cantrell et al v. City of Long Beach); (18)bringing and litigating lawsuits against district attorneys and casinos in Nevada for prosecuting people who did not pay their "markers" (lead case Fleeger v. Caesars Palace et al.); (19) bringing and litigating lawsuit against California for not paying small and minority businesses during budget crises (Lido Financial Services v. State of California);(20) exposing and bringing lawsuits against California judges for taking illegal payments from counties who were appearing before them in cases (LACAOEHS v. County of Los Angeles et al., and Silva v. County of Los Angeles et al.); (21) bringing and litigating series of lawsuits against LA County and developers to declare LA County leases in Marina Del Rey, California unconstitutional and obtain $700 million in lost revenue for the LA County taxpayers (lead case Coalition to Save the Marina and Marina Tenants Association et al., v. County of Los Angeles et al.); (22) litigating lawsuit to enforce writ of mandate against City of Los Angeles and uncovered illegal lobbyist payments to City Council members requiring their recusal from voting on development (Grassroots Coalition et al., v. City of Los Angeles); and (23) bringing and litigating lawsuit to stop redevelopment of 200 plus unit apartment complex in Marina Del Rey, California into 500 plus unit apartment complex when developer made contributions to two LA County Supervisors within six weeks of the LA County Supervisors vote, the contributions were concealed, the two supervisors illegally voted, the project passed due to these illegal votes, the County made illegal payments to the judge, the judge and the County concealed the illegal payments and the judge ultimately admitted to the illegal payments, was disqualified, refused to leave the case, entered an illegal judgment, an illegal contempt order, illegally approved the project, later admitted that he made an illegal order and ultimately it was admitted that he was biased against counsel for petitioner who he illegally incarcerated for violation of the illegal contempt order. (Marina Strand Colony II Homeowners Association v. County of Los Angeles et al.)

As one may determine, the imprisonment was not the most "noteworthy" part of my career. Its importance was that it reflected the largest judicial scandal in American history and the political retaliation for exposing the $350 million of illegal payments taken by the California state judges from counties appearing before them in cases.

The imprisonment was caused by Judge David P. Yaffe who admitted in open court that he was taking payments from Los Angeles County, the Respondent in the case of Marina Strand Colony II Homeowners Association v. County of Los Angeles. Judge Yaffe refused to get off the case after I disqualified him. He then entered an illegal judgment and then held me in contempt when I refused to give financial information to enforce the judgment. Judge Yaffe and all the judges who received the illegal payments from counties received retroactive immunity from California criminal prosecution, civil liability and disciplinary action under Section 5 of California law SBX 2 11 enacted 2/20/2009, before he ordered me to jail on 3/4/2009.

Subsequently, on July 10, 2010, Judge Yaffe admitted in court papers that an order that he stated he made on 3/18/2008 stating that I could not challenge him, was never made. The U.S. Supreme Court did nothing upon receiving this information of a "fraud upon the court". The U.S. District Court delayed until I was out of jail and then did nothing stating that the issue was moot.

In December 2012, Alan Parachini, the retired LA Superior Court Public Information Officer admitted in an interview with Leslie Dutton of the Full Disclosure Network that the LA Superior Court judges told him in 2002 that they had a a "visceral hatred" against me, wanted "revenge" against me, wanted to "silence" me and wanted to "take me out of communication" for my keeping the issue of the illegal payments before the courts and the legislature.

The LA Superior Court, Judge Yaffe, the LA County Sheriff Baca and their lawyers concealed from the U.S. District Court, the 9th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court that Judge Yaffe and the LA Superior Court judges had a "visceral hatred" against me, wanted "revenge" against me, wanted to "silence" me and wanted to "take me out of communication" as shown in court papers filed in the U.S. District Court and the 9th Circuit in 2013. These actions were a "fraud upon the court" and violations of the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The U.S. District Court and the 9th Circuit Court refused to follow U.S. Supreme Court precedent and overturn the denial of the writ of habeas corpus. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to follow its own precedent and file the motion to set aside its denial of certiorari.

These actions confirmed the corruption of both the judges in the California and U.S. judicial systems as none of the decisions were certified to be precedents and only applied to me.

The Wikipedia editor Dwpaul#000666 who writes that:"Apparently the 2009 discussion here concerning Mr. Fine is not the only example of a body ruling against him." is an example of lack of research.

If Dwpaul#000666 had adequately performed his research, he would have found the above information regarding the habeas corpus case after the U.S. Supreme Court decision and the interview with Alan Parachini, the retired LA Superior Court Public Information Officer in December, 2012 on the Full Disclosure Network in which he admitted to the bias of the LA Superior Court judges and Judge Yaffe against me since 2002 when the LA Superior Court judges informed him of such.

Additionally, Dwpaul#000666 would have found that in 2011, the State Bar Court and State Bar Court judges admitted in a 9th Circuit brief in the case of Fine v. State Bar of California et al., that the reason for the disbarment was my bringing of cases against the judges for taking the illegal payments from counties and not the reasons stated in the State Bar Court Review Decision cited by Dwpaul#000666.

Further research would have revealed that in 2012 and 2013, I brought three motions to set aside the Disbarment in the California Supreme Court on the grounds of "fraud upon the court", each of which the State Bar did not oppose. The California Supreme Court summarily denied the motions, despite the refusal of the State Bar to oppose the motions and despite California Rule of Court 8.54(c) which states: "A failure to oppose a motion may be deemed a consent to the granting of the motion."

These actions by the California Supreme Court justices further showed their bias and hatred as they worked to protect the judges, including some of their own, who received retroactive immunity from criminal prosecution under Section 5 of SBX 2 11 for taking illegal payments from counties and the approximately 90% of the California Superior Court judges who currently receive such illegal payments without any immunity from criminal prosecution.

Finally, in 2010, the NGO Human Rights Alert brought the problems of the California and federal courts and my case to the UN Council on Human Rights which referred to the problems in a footnote in the 2010 staff report on the United States.

Hopefully, you may now understand my amusement. If the research conducted by Dwpaul#000666 is any indication of the level of research of Wikipedia "award winning" first class editors, my comments on the quality should be taken very seriously.

Finally, it is clear that I am not as "notable" as Paris Hilton who was used as an example of a "notable" person, nor do I wish to acquire such level of notoriety.

I prefer to be known for my accomplishments. One of which is exposing, litigating and eradicating judicial corruption so that no one will be victimized by corrupt judges. In this regard, I am the Chairman and Founder of the Campaign for Judicial Integrity [6], a national grassroots organization dedicated to eradicating judicial corruption and restoring our constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial.

In deleting material from this response, Wikipedia deleted the response to its editors Maproom and Dwpaul#000666 depriving the reader of the opportunity to read and evaluate this complete post. The following is the relevant deleted portion.

"Additionally, any person viewing my life and legal accomplishments would find such things as: (1) conducting grand jury investigation of international pulp, paper and newsprint cartel, representing the Department of Justice for the first time in Tariff Commission [now International Trade Commission] hearing and indicting GM and Ford for price fixing while a prosecutor in the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division; (2) investigating the former Mayor of the City of Los Angeles for Corruption (Special Counsel to LA City Counsel Governmental Efficiency Committee);(3) founding the first municipal antitrust division in the United States for the City of Los Angeles; 4) changing the way United Way deals with donations to require it to allow donors to designate where their donations should go (AID v. United Way et al.); (5) defending and litigating charitable trust case creating RP International (RP v. RP International); (6) bringing and litigating the lawsuit against OPEC (IAM v. OPEC); (7) bringing and litigating the lawsuit to compensate purchasers in Lake Havasu; first time settlement was used for "public good" (MacNoye et al. v. MCO); (8)bringing and litigating the lawsuit which changed the workings of the California service industry to require fair payment for servicers (CSEA v. Matsushita et al.); (9) reorganizing a worldwide Japanese religion (Imuta v. Nakano); (10) litigating lawsuit on behalf of the Republic of the Gambia to enforce the Treaty of Vienna after the United States seized its diplomat in Switzerland and brought him to the United States for trial(U.S. v. Sissoko); (11) bringing and litigating lawsuit to return approximately $71 million plus interest from the Insurance Reserve Fund and transferred to other funds by the State of California Dept. of Veterans Affairs resulting in a 500% increase in insurance premiums for veterans who have Cal Vet mortgages (Debbs et al., v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs); (12) bringing and litigating a series of lawsuits returning and saving approximately $1 Billion to California taxpayers from monies taken by the State, counties and cities of California from trust funds and special funds (Malibu Video Systems et al. v. Hayes et al.; Veltman v. California State Lands Commission; Amjadi and LACAOEHS v. County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors et al., and others in a series of cases); (13)bringing and litigating the lawsuit which resulted in changing the City of Los Angeles' method of calculating sewer service charges (Shinkle et al., v. City of Los Angeles; (14)bringing and litigating the lawsuits which resulted in closing the California government, stopping 26 years of budget crises and winning the case in the California Supreme Court holding that a government cannot pay anyone without an appropriation (White v. Davis et al., Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Westly et al.); (15) bringing and litigating the first terrorist shooting at a U.S. airport (Hen et al., v. Hedeyat and the City of Los Angeles); (16) bringing and litigating the lawsuit to require the LA District Attorney to pay $14 million to mothers and children in support money that he was illegally holding (Silva v. Garcetti); (17) bringing and litigating lawsuits to preserve the Long Beach Naval Station (Howser v. City of Long Beach; Cantrell et al v. City of Long Beach); (18)bringing and litigating lawsuits against district attorneys and casinos in Nevada for prosecuting people who did not pay their "markers" (lead case Fleeger v. Caesars Palace et al.); (19) bringing and litigating lawsuit against California for not paying small and minority businesses during budget crises (Lido Financial Services v. State of California);(20) exposing and bringing lawsuits against California judges for taking illegal payments from counties who were appearing before them in cases (LACAOEHS v. County of Los Angeles et al., and Silva v. County of Los Angeles et al.); (21) bringing and litigating series of lawsuits against LA County and developers to declare LA County leases in Marina Del Rey, California unconstitutional and obtain $700 million in lost revenue for the LA County taxpayers (lead case Coalition to Save the Marina and Marina Tenants Association et al., v. County of Los Angeles et al.); (22) litigating lawsuit to enforce writ of mandate against City of Los Angeles and uncovered illegal lobbyist payments to City Council members requiring their recusal from voting on development (Grassroots Coalition et al., v. City of Los Angeles); and (23) bringing and litigating lawsuit to stop redevelopment of 200 plus unit apartment complex in Marina Del Rey, California into 500 plus unit apartment complex when developer made contributions to two LA County Supervisors within six weeks of the LA County Supervisors vote, the contributions were concealed, the two supervisors illegally voted, the project passed due to these illegal votes, the County made illegal payments to the judge, the judge and the County concealed the illegal payments and the judge ultimately admitted to the illegal payments, was disqualified, refused to leave the case, entered an illegal judgment, an illegal contempt order, illegally approved the project, later admitted that he made an illegal order and ultimately it was admitted that he was biased against counsel for petitioner who he illegally incarcerated for violation of the illegal contempt order. (Marina Strand Colony II Homeowners Association v. County of Los Angeles et al.)