User talk:Damien Linnane/Archive 1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Phosphate energy system

If you ever come across articles that are duplicate material of existing articles and not a spin-off article (a section turned into an article of its own to suppress the size of the main article), feel free to just redirect immediately. Deletion is not needed and it saves a lot of space on AFD if everyone did it. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I will be sure to do this in the future. --Freikorp (talk) 14:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Turbo B

Hi....You are requesting more information for Turbo B. Email me directly and I will give you historical and current information from his early military career to his personal life (children etc). Please do not send me a message through here as I don't know how to navigate this site well (I literally just signed up). Email me directly at shh071@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shh071 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Jon Gibson

Hello, hope this finds you well. You made some really good edits on this article about the Christian/Gospel musician Jon Gibson, but some were unnecessary. Requiring citations for nearly every sentence is not warranted. The first couple of references include the statements within the entire article that you requested references for. It's a good idea to take everything into consideration and do some "homework" on these types of matters first. Consider the big picture and the context. Within the short article that it is already, the information omitted and the citations requested weren't really necessary. Nonetheless, additional (repeated) references were added. But again, regardless, some of the fixes were appreciate... thanks! Have a great day and/or evening. 69.129.170.102 (talk) 23:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for helping me improve this article. It seems I didn't notice the 'expand' article tab on the soultracks.com profile, and accordingly only saw the first paragraph, missing the information for the reference I requested. My bad. I've cleaned up the ref list so that the same reference can be quoted several times in the article yet only appears once in the reference's section. I've also removed the inline citation to his official website, I'm fairly certain that is against wiki policy. As it stands now I am happy with the way this article looks. Thanks again for your help. --Freikorp (talk) 13:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem, thanks. 69.129.170.102 (talk) 10:17, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Eiffel 65

Howdy! I noticed you removed the citation for a discography cleanup and you said to contact you. Well, here I am. There is actually a lot that should be done to it. For starters, the album section needs to be formatted:

Year	Album details
Year	Album title Released: date Label: label

Okay, moving on. Singles. WP:Record charts states "The number of charts should include no more than ten official national charts, and up to ten additional or secondary charts, but no more than eighteen charts total." In the groups case, there are 21 national charts. I hope we can work this out! Talk to ya soon! =D EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 15:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for contacting me. Thanks also for informing me of guidelines I was unaware of. Unfortunately I'm not going to be able to do anything with this new helpful information you have givin me for a while as I am going on vacation tomorrow. Rest assured if the article still looks the same as it does now when I get back I will work on it.--Freikorp (talk) 16:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd be more than happy to try and help it out myself. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 16:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

HK-47

Thanks for the correction. I incorporated it in a further (& BTW terser) edit, so the entry gets a chance of eliciting an article about not just the individual but the class (or at least other refs to it, so it complies with DABRL), before being evaluated as to whether it is helpful to users, rather than just a dirty trick that wastes their time and attention. (IMO the others in the same section should have similar attention before the Dab-CU tag is removed; i don't know how far your interest extends in that direction.)
BTW, i noticed in the research i undertook in response to your ed summary that HK-47#Development insinuates the two naming stories are inconsistent, while the Wookieepedia article harmonizes them. You (or others) might be more adept than i in verifying the accuracy of that version, so i'm putting our article on it onto my back burner, to see if it gets changed (or commented on) before i come back to it.
--Jerzy•t 02:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Your welcome for the correction, cheers for pointing out that about the HK-47 article on wookiepedia, interesting, I'll look into which entry is correct when I get a chance. Freikorp (talk) 05:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Chill Rob G

You've edited my page some what extensively please contact me in the future before doing so. I'd gladly respond to any message Thank you.

Chill Rob G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.37.144.130 (talk) 05:01, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I was assuming you wanted me to reply to the talk page of your IP however as your IP has been flagged for multiple accounts of vandalism please provide me with further details to contact you if you are indeed serious. I am happy to work with you to help improve the page together however I reserve my right to improve it on my own with or without your permission as nobody owns any wikipedia article. Freikorp (talk) 05:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Murder of Leigh Leigh

A tag has been placed on Murder of Leigh Leigh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. iBen^discuss 23:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Just for archival purposes I want to mention this speedy deletion tag was removed by a third party on the grounds the article is notable. Freikorp (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Straight Edge

Promiscuity

I am anxious to see some changes to the Straight Edge page. I do not consider anyone who has casual sex Edge. They have no business claiming edge, and while I am not militantly trying to force others to be edge, if someone claims edge and misrepresents me, I take it very personally. I have spent much time looking for verifiable sources to justify editing the page, and have posted them to my personal user page. The most recent source as of 2006 is very clear about promiscuity, and doesn't even acknowledge those who have casual sex as Edge. I would be willing to compromise and at least mention the existence of people who claim edge, but do not keep that core value. xdevilockex (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I understand what your saying, and I agree the issue should be mentioned somewhere on the page. I also understand it being frustrating the article is in a state that some people are not happy with, however the article being protected is not necessarily an endorsement of the pages current status, the purpose is for all the editors to discuss the issue in detail on the talk page, which is more productive than an on-going edit war. I want to hear more thoughts on the issue before I do anything bold. Good work on finding the references; I'm sure they will be taken into consideration when the time comes. Freikorp (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Freikorp: The whole "casual sex" claim is ridiculous. Straight Edge was founded on the belief that one should not poison the body and mind with harmful substances like alcohol, drugs, and tobacco. Safe casual sex does not harm the body or mind. If we're going to add casual sex to the list of things one must abstain from, then we might as well add meat, eggs, cheese, milk, chocolate, coffee, and cappuccino to the list. We should also then state that you must be a Christian and not wear leather. The Wiki definition for Straight Edge MUST include everything that ANYONE considers a necessity. Catch my drift (sarcasm)? But seriously, the lyrics to "Out Of Step" did NOT define or create the movement. Sure, they were a part of spreading it, but if we found out that some band from the early 80's was going around preaching that to be Straight Edge you had to abstain from showering, would that automatically be part of the movement? I think not. Therefore, what a few people consider a necessity (based on song lyrics) is not necessarily a sound argument; hence, it should not be added to the definition. Please keep in mind, this is coming from a neutral point of view, as I personally am NOT sexually active and do not/have never engaged in casual sex. Hsxeric (talk) 02:15, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Personally I also consider Edge the belief one should not poison the body, and agree that protected casual sex does not poison it (the mind perhaps, but that's a different issue). I'm just accepting that people have complaints and that there are sources available that back these claims up (regardless of whether the people who wrote them misinterpreted what Edge is based on a song). As always on wiki we go by what can be found in reliable sources, which is not necessarily the truth. I understand your point about having to mention everything individuals think should be Edge, but as there are not reliable sources that say Edge is against eggs, cheese etc this is not really an issue. Rest assured I will continue to revert anything that cannot be backed up by a reliable source. Hsxeric I urge you to comment on the issue at the current debate on the articles talk page, as I value your opinions and don't want a consensus to be reached without your input, which is going to happen if you don't voice your view on the matter soon. Freikorp (talk) 08:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Freikorp: I have placed a suggested update to the opening paragraph on the talk page that I would like you to consider.xdevilockex (talk) 19:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

XXX

Hey a user by the name of Ondcp keeps om reverting

A variation involving a trio of X's (XXX) can be a reference to the three tenets of straight edge in the Minor Threat song "Out of Step".

There is a source for that statement but he refuses to accept it because he can't read the source. Any suggestions. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 20:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I've just looked into it and the fact that he/she doesn't have access to the source is their problem. The fact a user does not have access to a source is definitely not grounds for removing the content. Help verifying documents can be requested on wiki here. I saw the change when it happened, and the reason I did nothing was because of the secondary reason Ondcp gave; "it still contradicts the rest of the article. There are no three tenets of straight edge, and certainly not from out of step". While I'm not doubting the reference is accurate in what it backed up, I'm not sure if what it backed up is relevant. Sure one band may have attributed three X's to three certain tenants, but if a different band attributed it to three other tenants should we mention that as well? I am not sure. If you want to by all means you can copy and paste this discussion onto the articles talk page to encourage others to comment on it. Until a time when more information is provided I'm staying fairly neutral on this one. A more neutral way of wording the information if your going to add it back (I will not oppose you adding it back) could be "A variation involving a trio of X's (XXX) can be a reference to the three tenets Minor Threat attributed to straight edge in their song "Out of Step", however these three tenants are by no means universally agreed upon." Freikorp (talk) 00:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

OK I've since done some searching through other references mentioned on the article's talk page and this interview [1] states Ian and Lyle from Minor Threat expressed regret that the three things they mentioned were taken literally as a set of rules by some people. It's a very interesting article. If we are going to add the contested information back to the article, information from that interview should be mentioned as well. Freikorp (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 04:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Plaza_del_Lago

• I moved our recent discussion about this article to the article talk page in case others want to pitch in as well. I did look a bit through article abstracts (mostly Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times) and can't say for sure which ones would be the best to access, really. It could well be hit or miss.--Milowent (talk) 05:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Neuralyzers

Once a prod tag is removed from an article by anyone (including the author), it cannot not reapplied. If you wish the article to be deleted, it must be nominated at WP:AfD for a deletion discussion. I apologize for the revert, but it must be done per WP:PROD. B.Wind (talk) 02:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries, I understand. Thanks for the information, I was unsure how to approach this as I have never had to deal with an author removing a prod tag before. Freikorp (talk) 02:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Clinton David Haines

I noticed you have made some changes to the entry for Clinton Haines that I think are a little unwarranted and incorrect. Can you put back the detail you have taken out. I dont want to manually revert your changes. I can see your intentions were good tho wrong. Its always good to contact the author of an article before completely changing it. Please contact me asap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxrobson (talk • contribs) 12:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

What specific removed detail do you want added back and what exactly have I added that is wrong? As per wikipedia guidelines:

"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true."

The only information I added to the page is from reliable sources, and the only information I removed was statements I could not find proof for, some of which were already contested by other users (other users had requested references for certain statements). Please specify exactly what you have a problem with. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 12:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Also you are incorrect, nobody owns any wikipedia article, I am not required to contact the author before making any changes. You are displaying ownership behavior, which is strongly discouraged. Freikorp (talk) 12:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I am aware nobody owns wikipedia articles, I never said or indicated anyone did?? But if you see somebody who has gone in and added a whole lot of detail from a first hand account for you to then simply remove it all without questioning what your doing is infact correct or acurate is a little reckless without any reasonable justification. I was with the guy throughout the whole episode and we talked in detail about everything. You have removed all links to Clintons corresponance, the only picture of him, the group references, alot of the detail to his activities, flagged the fact he was on the front of the newspaper as "you doubt this" even tho it is absoulely true as I was with him almost every day during this event(if your unsure, ask the person that added it. why would I make this up?) Your edits have made this entry far more inaccurate and contain far less important and interesting details. I'm all for people fixing up this entry, adding to it or whatever. I would love for people to do so but changing it the way you have is just wrong. Just because you cant verify something that is there with a quick google search doesnt mean it is not fact. A lot of the material relating to his viruses is long gone and you seem to have found a quote from some dchebag that I would strongly disagree with. If you really want to help this article what you can do is take the picture I have of him (that you deleted)and put it on the page. That would help. I appreciate you are trying to help the integrity of wikipedia but in this case you have done the complete opposite. I cant tell you how angry this makes me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxrobson (talk • contribs) 13:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not the one who removed the picture of him. I have absolutely no problem with there being a picture of him, It would definately make the article better. It may have been removed because you did not fill out of the information correctly when you uploaded it, I'm not sure. I also did not remove the most of the external links (I am not IP: 207.69.137.20) but at first glance it appears most of them should have been removed as per WP:ELNO. Also I understand you disagree with the quote, but there isn't much you can do about that, if something is verifiable you can't remove it just because you disagree with it. Wikipedia is a bad place to create a memorial about someone, as the neutral point of view policy ensures anything written about the person can be added to the article. I have to go to Uni now, I'll look into this in more detail when I get back in several hours. Freikorp (talk) 21:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok now I get it, it was just an external link to a picture of him, yeah it was another editor who removed all the external links. His reasons seem valid but quite frankly I don't feel strongly either way about them so I did not remove them myself.

Any editor can request a source for any piece of information, if it is "absolutely true" it should be abundantly easy to find a reference for it. The fact of the matter is I searched the online database of the newspaper in question, and I found no verification. By all means if you know the date and issue of the newspaper the virus made the front page for you can use that information as a reference. Just because something is "interesting" is not grounds for inclusion in an article. Once again, the threshold for inclusion on wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. I did not remove anything without searching for the information first, and if it is in fact available "with a quick google search", by all means, find a reliable source and add the information back. I could not find a reliable source, hence why I removed the information. The fact that your version of events is from a first hand perspective mean it is probably difficulty to edit without violating Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Obviously I don't feel personally about the man one way or the other, so adding referenced information about an expert opinion of his virus does not make me angry. I believe my edits were as neutral as possible, I mentioned what an expert thought of the virus, then I followed this up with information about the damage the virus did, thereby allowing the reader to make their own mind up about the matter.

You have blatantly removed five reliable sources I found for the article, and replaced it with unverified information. Please stop removing referenced content from wikipedia. Freikorp (talk) 04:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Heavens_Burning_poster.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Heavens_Burning_poster.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:17, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Straight Edge

Hello Freikorp,

I do not understand why you don't see Promiscuous Sex not being a core value of Straight Edge. Please take a quick look at the reference you gave me again, and read 'The 3 Rules'.[2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blink44182 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Directly under the "rules" section is the following statement:

"While the intentions of the band were not as such, many people took the words to the song to heart and formulated a way of living fashioned around (at least partially) denying themselves things such as smoking, fucking (in extreme examples)"

The whole article is about how certain people misinterpreted the lyrics as a set of rules. The quote above from the article itself states that even amongst the small percentage of people who misinterpreted the lyrics, the no sex rule was only followed in extreme examples. The simple reality is while some straight edgers choose to abstain from sex, no sex has never been a core value of straight edge. Read the other references in the opening paragraph of the article, which states:

"In its simplest form, straight edge is a simple philosophy of staying clean and sober: no drinking, no drugs, no smoking. For some, that extends to a vegetarian or vegan diet, no animal by-products, caffeine, or even promiscuous sex and prescription medications."

and also the very long debate we had about the issue on the articles talk page. Talk:Straight_edge#Promiscuity Freikorp (talk) 08:02, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Alright, i'll give you that, but Ian did feel casual sex was fucked and wanted to rebel against the Sexual Revolution in the 1960s up to the 1980s where it was about cocaine, booze, and sex. I will properly state my references this time, sorry. What you describe is "Hardline" for denying prescription drugs, caffeine, etc. Blink44182

3RR

Hey man. Just remember not to violate the 3RR while cleaning up the straight edge page. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 19:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I didn't even think of that. I'm finding it a bit frustrating since the other editor keeps changing our well referenced intro paragraph, attibuting statements which completely contradicts the references we provided. Anyway I'll leave it to other people to watch the page for the next couple days, cheers. Freikorp (talk) 00:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson

Hello. I noticed that a user and you have been constantly changing the number of album sales on the Marilyn Manson discography from 11 million and 68 million. The original number on the page was 44 million, and 11 million seems far too low, however I think 68 million is a little bit over the top. Also, the band page, Marilyn Manson, is also being updated with that info but I don't think that album sales should be recorded on the band page so I have deleted that info. I feel that you have a hate towards Marilyn Manson, and the user Snake 1090 is obviously the opposite, so therefore both of you have not maintained a neutral view. I would be happy to discuss this with you. Cheers - Roll Maniac 03:58, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

First of all I am a Marilyn Manson fan, but that is irrelevant. Secondly Snake1090 has been blocked for sockpuppetry (see here), he/she obviously has no regards for wikipedia's rules and therefore obviously has no intention of making wikipedia better. Now to the actual issue, I am fully aware the original number on the page was 44 million, and had been that way for quite some time. I am also fully aware that there was never a reference for that number, it is almost as if the original person who wrote the article just pulled a random number out of a hat. As always, the threshold for inclusion on wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. It does not matter if the number seems low, we can only go off what reliable sources say. (Personally I think the number 11 million is accurate, he only has 2 platinum and 2 gold albums in his home country America, which only equates to 3 million records sold there, I find it very hard to believe if he has only sold 3 million albums in his home country that he has sold more than 40 million elsewhere). The simple fact of the matter is forums are not reliable sources on wikipedia, so I reverted the forum reference you provided accordingly. I am happy to discuss further also. Freikorp (talk) 04:13, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Personally, and I believe many would agree, I find it hard to believe that someone as well known as Marilyn Manson has only sold 11 million albums worldwide. I think you will find that Antichrist Superstar has sold 7.5 million albums worldwide, and Holy Wood has sold 9 million albums worldwide, thus equating to more than 16 million albums just out of the two, both with accurate sources to back that information up. I think you will find Manson is more popular overseas than in the United States as well. At the moment I will leave the discography page for now, but can you get back to me whenever so we can discuss this further. Cheers. Roll Maniac 09:36, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

The source on the discography page that says he has sold 11 million albums is from the official french Marilyn Manson website, I'll admit it surprised me a little, I was expecting the number to be higher (not 30 million higher, but higher nonetheless), but why would the official Marilyn Manson website lie and say he had sold less albums than he had? Yeah I came across those figure from the spanish MTV website that says those albums sold 7.5 and 9 million copies a while ago. I wish there was a second website that further backs them up, because conversely those numbers are much higher than I expected (Holy wood sold barely over 500,000 copies in America, a big step down from his previous albums, yet that website says it was his most successful) It's all a bit confusing. I wish there were additional reliable sources. Freikorp (talk) 10:30, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I actually think that Spanish MTV is correct that Holy Wood sold more then Antichrist Superstar because those were the days when the trilogy was selling more and more, and Holy Wood was not subject to acusations on the Columbine Massacre. I think the Spanish MTV is accurate, also the official Marilyn Manson website (not the French one) does not state any album sales, so the French one I would say has the wrong figure. 00:37, 9 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.239.7.27 (talk)

Hmm, I'm going to have to take your word for it that that number 11 million quoted in the French reference is saying he has sold 11 million albums in the US, seeing as how I don't speak French (or Spanish for that matter, I really wish there was at least one reliable source in English lol). Anyway assuming that translation is correct I think we can agree that keeps everybody happy for now, and that further changes should not be made without reliable sources. Freikorp (talk)

The video translated says: more than 11 million albums sold worldwide, including 1 million in France. Yawaraey (talk) 20:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Well then, it that case I recommend you change it back. Thanks for the correct translation. Freikorp (talk) 00:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

French is like my second language (might I apologize that at first I did not look at your source to begin with and began making changes without watching/reading it). I am glad that we can agree and have resolved this issue at long last. May I add that as a user you are really good to work with and negotiate with. Regardless of what you are going to do, I will keep watch of this page to make sure that the information stays accurate, and I agree, I also wish that there were more sources of information in English. Roll Maniac (talk) 06:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Cheers. Yeah no worries, I've decided editing information based on references I cannot completely understand is a bad idea, so I'm more than happy to leave it how it is until more detailed information becomes available. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 07:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

List of drug related deaths

You are correct about Leah Betts. As for Anna Wood, she died due to a cerebral oedema caused by water intoxication. This is according to the coroner's report. Yonskii (talk) 04:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Even if that were true, I wasn't doubting you per se, I was stating what you added to the article was not backed by the reference attributed to it. Again the threshold for inclusion on wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. The reference states she died after taking an ecstasy tablet, so that's what is written in the article. Upon further investigation the coroner's report states her death was "cerebral oedema caused by water intoxication secondary to use of MDMA". Once again the water alone would not have killed her. Freikorp (talk) 07:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Rogers High School (Rogers, Texas)

On the Rogers High School (Rogers, Texas) article, you made an edit that put the references below the external links, which is out-of-order compared to the usual layout guidelines. Jason Quinn (talk) 19:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I am aware of the correct format, I think (at least I hope) it was an isolated error. All the same thanks for pointing it out and I'll double check I do it correctly next time. Freikorp (talk) 10:54, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Gear

Thanks. Wasn't sure from the article if it was the Washington Post or some other "Post" -- Horkana (talk) 00:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Freikorp (talk) 00:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Please start a page for me called Gertrude Friedberg

Please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.129.194 (talk) 04:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Umm, well for starters who is Gertrude Friedberg? If you can provide a couple reliable references regarding why this person deserves an encyclopedia entry I'll look into it. Freikorp (talk) 05:01, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

She has a German Wikipedia page (but was American).

She has a redlink from Ace special SF novel list, here.

She has a NYT obituary with details of her writing.

She wrote a minor SF classic in the 60s and some Broadway plays in the 40s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.129.194 (talk) 05:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've found the URLs for her obituary and other details. I have enough information to start a basic page. I should get it done today. Freikorp (talk) 05:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. If you find any other sources just list the URL here and I'll work on it as time permits. Do have a look at Help:Contents, as well as the Gertrude Friedberg page in edit view to get an idea of how it all works. Editing on wiki may appear a bit intimidating at first but it's not too difficult. :) Freikorp (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I would have built the page. I just needed something started. I can't open a page since I'm an IP.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.149.94 (talk) 16:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow. Well done. You got the film of the same name and all the categories at the bottom and all. Kudos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.149.94 (talk) 16:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

RVC Bodley please

Can you start a page on him. He wrote a pretty notable book, Wind in the Sahara. A passage of it was popularized by Dale Carnegie as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.150.236 (talk) 04:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll look into it when I get a chance, I'm slowly working my way through a rather large project at the moment. By the way can you please sign your comments by typing four ~'s like this ~~~~ at the end of your messages. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 04:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. While I must admit I enjoyed researching and writing these two articles, University holidays end this week and I won't have the time to create any more. I recommend you make an account so you can create articles yourself as I won't be able to do anymore for you. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 01:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

You rock! It's ironic that real history and letters is so poorly covered here (what you did is rare), while they have lists of all the Star Trek characters...

I'm permabanned and there is a liberal admin who has it out for me. (I was banned for a good reason, though...being "rough".) I'll try to find other ways to get decent stuff started. I should be careful, though. I'm sure the liberal admin will try to mess with my real life situation. Maybe I should just obey my ban. I actually did for a year. but then I came back since wiki is kinda fun to mess with.72.82.33.69 (talk) 08:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah good point regarding the Star Trek characters, ironic huh. Well I'm not going to encourage anyone to defy a ban per se, but everything you've asked me to do has been constructive and non-controversial, maybe if you stick to stuff like that no-one will notice you're here? Just a thought. :) Freikorp (talk) 05:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I saw Minor Threat in concert

I was about 16 or so. early 80s. They were very authentic. They came on for their set and said, we think the stage belongs to all. And they meant it.

I was not into punk, got dragged there by a buddy. But I had an awesome time slam dancing and stage diving. Very physical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.150.236 (talk) 04:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Alexandra Raisman page please!

She's well notable. Google search will get lots of good sources. Can use Rebecca Bross page as a template. As a second class citizen, IP, I can't start the page, but if you just get it started, I will finish. Although I love the work you do, so if you want to do the whole thing that would be nifty too. Screw uni... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.156.19 (talk) 20:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks like someone else you asked beat me to it before I even noticed your message. Well I suggest you start editing the stub before someone deletes it. I was going to say I'm hesitant to create an article without any references; I don't want to attribute my name to any work that isn't well written and reliable (even if people are planning to expand it), and I really don't have the time to find reliable sources for any new pages right now. While i'd love to forget about uni work my commitments on wikipedia are already taking a tole on the amount of study time I have already. By all means if you want to list articles you would like me to expand you can do so here, just don't hold your breath for me to get around to it :) Freikorp (talk) 07:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

List of drug-related deaths

The sources you used to support the inclusion of Michelle Carpenter is not reliable. Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are copied from Wikipedia. Fences&Windows 20:42, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Does wikipedia have an official policy on not using Icon Group International? I've been using one of their books quite often and the information i[t] provides does [not] always match content on wikipedia. The book was actually advertised as being a reference book for journalists and writers. Freikorp (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC) Errors corrected Freikorp (talk) 07:52, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

These are computer-generated books, see Icon Group. And this was from Wikipedia: that's what the little [WP] means.[3] Remember that Wikipedia changes, so our current article might not match their book's entry. Where was it advertised as a reference for journalists?! If you have been systematically using these books, please correct this. Fences&Windows 21:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Crud. At Amazon the book states it is designed for "speechwriters, journalists, writers, researchers..." [4] Wish I had of known they'd just compiled it from wikipedia before I bought the book, funny they don't specifically name wikipedia as their main source in the Amazon description. Anyway I used it for 3 other references in the article; I'll remove them accordingly. Freikorp (talk) 06:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

It's a total con, isn't it? Akh, I can see why you didn't want it to be unreliable. Did you buy it from Amazon? If so, you may be able to get a refund, some people who were duped by Alphascript Publishing got refunds when they complained.

Ronald Bodley is another affected article, it was used for his d.o.b. That doesn't seem to have come from Wikipedia, but I don't trust Icon Group as far as I can throw it. In "Indiscretions of a Young Man", Bodley writes that "It is only twelve years since I was a Military Attache' at the British Embassy in Paris and danced to the music of Monsieur Blanc's orchestra, only thirty-eight years since I was born on a raw March afternoon in Paris." (visible as a snippet). This book was published in 1931, but if it was written the year before then a y.o.b. of 1892 would be correct - and now we know his place and month of birth too! The Library of Congress catalogue of 1932 confirms his d.o.b. as 1892:[5]. Fences&Windows 15:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, ordered it off Amazon, will be asking for a refund shortly. I've submittedd a review of the book telling others of this issue. Hopefully the review will be accepted and no one else will end up in the same position I am. Cheers for letting me know, and for finding new references for the Ronald Bodley article. Freikorp (talk) 02:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. -- œ^™ 02:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh Yeah and The Mighty Boosh

Hi, I was wondering why you removed my edit from Oh Yeah.

I noticed that your comment said "Original research that he is referencing the song." But I'm not sure what that means. Are you asking for a source because it's original research? Or because it's simply referencing the song and not playing it, are you saying that the edit belongs in another section?

Let me know. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nk80 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I removed it because, according to your edit (I do not recall that particular incident, though I am a fan of the series) the only thing linked to the song is the character saying "Chick-ah chick-ah". I understand the phrase "Chick-ah chick-ah" is used in the song be Yello, but how can you prove that the character is in fact referencing the song? I'm sure that phrase has been used elsewhere throughout history. You have drawn a connection between the two things, but since it does not, at least to me, appear overwhelmingly obvious that he is in fact referencing the song, I believe this is your original research. Like you said, the song isn't actually played in the episode (by the way do not use contractions in wikipedia articles, say "is not" instead of "isn't". A reference from a secondary source would be required backing up these claims, and I doubt one exists. Thanks for enquiring with me, and if there is additional information regarding why you think he is referencing the song, let me know and we'll talk about it. Freikorp (talk) 00:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

See aso

I see you've been fixing a typo that's been around for a long time! It seems to have come from User:Gasta220. I'm using WP:AWB to go through the rest of his contribs to check for this same typo. I think you got most of them and I've cleaned up the one or two that you hadn't so far. My scan of his contribs should be done in a few seconds. Dismas|^(talk) 05:33, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, everynow and then I get bored and search for a typo to fix. I wasn't expecting to get so many hits off that one though. Anyway good job finding the last of them :) Freikorp (talk) 00:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Straight Edge

Hey freikorp. Could you please look over Straight edge and look for any reasons why it shouldn't be bumped up to a B class. There is already a bit of a discussion going on on the talk page. cheers--Guerillero | My Talk 17:39, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Tis the season....

		Happy holidays.
		Best wishes for joy and happiness. Guerillero | My Talk 02:42, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

:) Thanks mate, hope you have a good one too. Freikorp (talk) 06:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Drug Death Page

I so admire your adoption of the drug-related death page. Your hard work has provided the world with a unique, long-needed list. Thank you. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 16:46, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Paul. Yes that page has been my magnum opus here on wiki. It was taking so much research time my grades at uni started to drop while it was still being finished. I found so much information I actually started writing a book on the subject, but I've decided to wait until I finish studying before I put any real effort into it, or finding references for the list of potential candidates I left on the articles talk page. I hope you don't mind if I modify the award you've given me so that I can place it on my userpage with a link to the article. Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 01:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Tomorrow, When the War Began (film)

Just wanted to say "thanks" and tell you that you did a good job reducing the word length of the Tomorrow, When the War Began (film) plot. So, thanks and feel free to edit that article all you like. Alex Douglas (talk) 11:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

No worries mate. Just watched the film today and thought I'd check the page to see if a sequel is planned, glad to see one is. :) Freikorp (talk) 12:32, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Daryl Braithwaite The Horses.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Daryl Braithwaite The Horses.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Robert Palmer - Rhythm & Blues

Hello, a short while ago you edited the article for the Robert Palmer album Rhythm & Blues and stated it charted at #118 in the UK. Do you have any proof of this as I expect other wikipedians will begin to ask soon. Thanks. Ajsmith141 (talk) 19:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I didn't state it charted at 118 I just corrected the formatting error. Before I got there it said "#118" and WP:MOS clearly states not to use #'s when listing chart or ranking positions. The two acceptable ways to list chart or ranking positions are "number 118" or "No. 118"; I chose the latter. I'm going to do a quick search for a reference anyway and see what I can find. Freikorp (talk) 01:31, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Most of the chart listing websites for the UK don't go above position 40, let alone 100; accordingly I can't find a reference for this. If you challenge the information feel free to remove it. I can't imagine where somebody would of found that it charted at 118 in the first place. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 01:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedball (drug)

Just a suggestion... perhaps the page should retain my edits, but have 'citation needed' tags. Sounds good? I only suggest this because I've also personally heard the term being used for other combos (quite a lot, in fact), not just heroin and cocaine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DemonicPartyHat (talk • contribs) 01:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

The Flight Before Christmas Poster

Hi there, I know this is late notice, but I am just wondering if you are the user that has deleted the image that I uploaded on the page. If this is so, please refrain why you didn't just talk to me on my talk page instead of just going ahead and deleting the image. Wiki won't let me upload it again, obviously. Please explain this to me. Monkeys 9711 (talk) 21:48, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I did not delete the poster - my full changes to the article can be seen here. Checking the pages history it would seem User:Explicit removed it. He has given the reason that it was removed as the file was already deleted (therefore would of appeared on the page simply as a red link). He is an administrator so I doubt he is lying; I'd say the most likely reason it was deleted before he got there was because incorrect licensing tags were placed on the uploaded image. As you'll see from my talk page I have forgotten to put licensing tags on uploaded images before as well, It's an easy mistake to make. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 23:18, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, okay, thank you for all of the info that you gave me; I didn't know that he was an administrator; and you are right since he is an administrator, then he must know what he is doing. Thanks again. Monkeys 9711 (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk back

Hello, Damien Linnane. You have new messages at Guerillero's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

If that link dosen't work try this one cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 14:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Purana Task Force

Hi! Why did you change my edit "In 2008, following the halt in killings, the purview of the task force was expanded" back to "the task force was expanded"? After the killings stopped, it makes sense that the purview of the Task Force expanded in order to justify their existence, and apply their expertise to other related crimes in the gangland war. The statement that you altered it back to implies that the Task Force was expanded in terms of staff numbers even though their job is completed. If you are going to leave the edit as it is, you need to justify why the Task Force numbers have increased if the killings have stopped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.173.211.50 (talk) 10:14, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

It helps if you explain your edits using the summary provided, that's what it's there for. Your change was unexplained and unreferenced, hence the reversion. Considering the original statement is also unreferenced I don't have a problem with you changing it now that you've explained your edit. As per my user page I currently do not have regular access to the internet so I may not be able to reply to further questions any time soon. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 07:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Syren Sexton

Blatant IDON'TLIKEIT prod at Syren Sexton. Your input might be required, one way or the other. --82.41.20.82 (talk) 00:01, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Now AfD'd as PROD nominator's teddy comes hurtling out of the pram. Your input may be required one way or the other. --82.41.20.82 (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

To be honest with you I don't feel strongly about the article one way or the other, I stumbled across it by bulk correcting typographical errors. I'm staying neutral on this one. Freikorp (talk) 03:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Straight edge

Do any of these look ok to be at the top of the straight edge article

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 17:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

If any I think the last one, the one of the mosh pit that is currently featured in the article is the most appropriate. I don't think the current one that is there, the "example of a straight edge tattoo", is a great choice as XXX is an ancronym for a lot of things, and it's fairly ordinary looking anyway. The first tattoo is far too basic in my opinion and I'm pretty sure the fifth picture is in violation of wiki's guidelines for advertising a website in the bottom right hand corner. Freikorp (talk) 23:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

bad penny turning up again...

You helped me back when I was a permabanned IP. I'm legal, now. Could you please get a stub started (or teach me how) for this fellow Addison Clark Jr. (see [6]). TCO (talk) 08:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello again. Well as usual the first thing you're going to need is a couple reliable secondary sources, and I'm not getting any good google hits off that name. Anyway if you click on the red link you've created you get taken to a page giving you the option to create the article. All you really have to do from there is look at how any other BLP stub is written. I.e:

Addison Clark Jr ("date of birth" – "date of death") is a "whatever he is notable for, faculty member etc".

The only sub-section that is vital is the references section:

==References==

{{Reflist}}

And just remember to format your references throughout the article using as approved Template:Cite web format.

Don't forget to add at least one appropriate category; either [[Category:Living people]] or [[Category: "year" deaths]] are the first place to start. If you can find an appropriate stub tag add it to the bottom of the article, for example for the article I created Beth Anderson (singer) the most approriate stub tag is "{{US-pop-singer-stub}}". If you can't find a specific one just add the generic "{{stub}}" tag.

I'm not sure which part of creating the stub you're having trouble with so sorry if that was condescending. Let me know what you need to know or find me a couple sources and we'll go from there :) Freikorp (talk) 12:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Having a hard time finding the dates of life in an RS. Also, I just wanted you to do it since you whipped out the Gertrude and RVC stubs so fast. TCO (talk) 14:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Leigh Leigh

Thanks for your work on the Leigh Leigh page. We trust she will never be forgotten. I was at school with her and am from Stockton. I think about her occasionally but was reminded of her this week when I slipped into a country NSW pub to find one if the boys involved sitting back drinking beers with his new mates them all unaware of his past crimes. She was a bright girl, out going with a future. Taken too early. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.148.117.81 (talk) 11:02, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

You are very welcome. I was too young to remember the incident when it actually happened; I first became aware of it about 10 years ago when my high school decided to perform the stage play Blackrock (which never ended up getting up off the ground after parents complained middle-school students weren't mature enough to perform a play involving rape and murder). I was shocked to not find an article already here on wikipedia so I took the liberty of writing it. I've been extremely moved by the case, I researched it so heavily and got so emotionally involved in it sometimes I actually felt like I knew her. In a way I wish I had of, she sounds like such a beautiful person, I wish there was something more I could do. I sure would have liked to give that man at the pub a piece of my mind. Anyway I'm glad you appreciate the article, take care. Freikorp (talk) 08:41, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Snap snap song

The media reference to a song you removed, now I cannot find it, for the series is 15 hours long. I also noted most other media references are with tag, and I wonder why they stand and my youtube reference was removed. Tigerjojo98 (talk) 13:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Vantom destruction of one's work is the main cause of vandalism. I have no idea what bothered you with my simple entry of factual observation, I even went as far as stating the minute and second where the song is played.

Look at the articles history. All previous versions of the page are listed there, and your previous edits should be extremely easy to find. Why did I remove your reference? Because I'm following wikipedia's guidelines. WP:YOUTUBE: " Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked to." As far as I can tell your youtube link is not hosted by the owner of the show's copyright licensing. Even if it was secondary sources are needed when dealing with trivia (or almost anything for that matter) anyway. Why did I remove the text as well? Because I am an Immediatist. Without your youtube reference it was unclear which episode the song is played in. Not only would I have had to add tags I would have also had to add tags asking to specify the episode. Having so many tags on an article looks messy, and there is more than enough unreferenced and unprofessional looking information on the page as it is, which is why I reverted it and asked you to specify the episode in my edit summary.

Please learn how to format references using as approved WP:Cite web format, instead of just using bare url's. If you have further questions please feel free to ask. Have a read of WP:Assume good faith before you accuse other edits of "destruction" in the future. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 02:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Tireless deleter, because of your deletes, I am going to stop editing. To hell with it.Tigerjojo98 (talk) 01:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Drug Related Death page and Katy French

Hi Freikorp,

I have read your defining characteristics for the drug related death page. It would be more accurate to remove Katy French's name from that list as the information that her death is drug related is just media speculation and post mortem results were never released and were actually inconclusive. I have unbiasedly cited articles on her wikipedia page. I look forward to hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jillefrench (talk • contribs) 01:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for contacting me regarding this. I looked at your change to the Katy French page, and as you have probably already noticed I have reverted your edit. Your edit is extremely biased - you have completely removed valid references and the claims they back up. WP:Verifiability currently states "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true." You cannot remove a reference just because you disagree with it. If you find a reference that contradicts something that new reference does not override the previous ones - you must intergrate these contradicting sources into the paragraph. For example 'according to RTE(reference) and the DailyMail(reference) traces of cocaine were found in her body however XYZ(reference) states this is incorrect.' Unless the newspapers who have made these claims print a retraction I'm afraid I think Ms French should remain on the List of drug-related deaths page. The statements from the Gardai that drugs are suspected to be involved combined with the established sources stating traces of cocaine were found seems like a strong case to me. The best I could do is add contradicting information from a reliable source, assuming one is found. For example if you notice the "Cause of death" for Johnny Thunders on the drug-related deaths page you will see contradicting information from reliable sources. When contradicting claims are made from different reliable sources the most neutral thing to do is mention all of their claims, not favour one over others.

Furthermore the references you added to the page do not seem to back up your claims. E.g you state "However, Irish police confirmed that the results have not been released due to a continuing investigation." and then added this reference after it ->[7] However this reference does not appear to mention anything about Irish police or the post mortem, so why have you placed it there? You have also removed the "Further reading" section without explanation, and the valid sources that state she previously admitted to using cocaine. I find these actions of yours disturbing. I am happy to answer any questions you may have or discuss the matter further however based on your username I am assuming you are a relative of Katy's and accordingly I think you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before continuing this discussion. I have no personal interest in what gets added to or removed from the page, other than my general desire to see wikipedia as a reliable source of verified information. Freikorp (talk) 14:17, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson discography

Hi Feikrop, i'm trying to reach cause i've been trying to improve the marilyn manson discography article, by putting it more information but every time i do it, it changes again to what it was like before, i know i'm going to need some time to improve the hole section, but i'm trying my best to make it a better article for readers, if you can help me, i woud be very pleased to help the article PD: sorry for my english i'm argentinian. --Fallengrademan (talk) 00:11, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for your question. One way to solve this problem would be by creating a subpage, copying and pasting the entire Marilyn Manson discography article into your subpage, and editing it piece my piece, then copying and pasting it back into the actual article once you have finished. This way your edits will not be reverted and you can work on it as slowly as you need to. If you are having trouble making a subpage, I can do it for you if you like. If you have any other questions feel free to ask. :) Freikorp (talk) 00:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much Freikorp for your answer, I have already finnished the page if you want to revise it this is the URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fallengrademan/Subpage.

--Fallengrademan (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome; it looks good. :) Freikorp (talk) 23:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

List of predicted dates of the end of the world or similar events

Fair enough. I've started a new section. I was going to post a question about religioustolerance.org/ on the RS noticeboard, and then I saw that it had already been done. In fact, you can check out Wikipedia talk:Verifiability/Religioustolerance.org - it's been done to death. And the consensus seems to be that it doesn't belong. StAnselm (talk) 23:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

ACL Mediation

Hi Freikorp, I dropped a note on PhilKnight's talk page about where to go next with the ACL article, and he suggested mediation as the next step. Why don't you check out informal mediation? --Deadly∀ssassin 21:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this for me. I'll give it a couple days for that user from Peer review to have a look at the article, and if he doesn't drop by or if he is unable to provide any constructive feedback I'll take it to this informal mediation. If you wanted to take it there in the meantime that certainly does not bother me. Freikorp (talk) 04:41, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Damien Linnane. You have new messages at DeadlyAssassin's talk page.
Message added 19:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deadly∀ssassin 19:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Tis the season...

		Happy holidays.
		Best wishes for joy and happiness. Guerillero | My Talk 05:36, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again mate, same to you to :) Freikorp (talk) 05:41, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Confused...not a surprise really

Hi..You show up on my "My contribution" page under a page that I have never read, never mind commented on or created lol. Why would that be? Thanks Shh071 (talk) 05:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I knew I'd seen your username before; you commented on my page on November 22, 2008. As is common procedure on wikipedia, I moved old comments on my page to an archive page. The comment you left here is now located here: [8] I recall we had some email correspondence for a time; are you still affiliated with Turbo B? Freikorp (talk) 06:32, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Michael McCaul Tenure Section

Friekorp,

After looking at Michael McCaul's tenure section and recalling local news the summary seems very different from what the local media portrayed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_McCaul

I appreciate your desire to respond as news comes as that is seemingly what you did.

Please comment on the talk page of the McCaul article where I wrote my criticism. Since this is no longer an immediate issue, should it be removed in interests of "immediatism" or should it be edited to conform to facts?

~Astros2000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astros2000 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

For archival purposes I'd just like to mention I replied to these concerns on the talk page of the article in question. Freikorp (talk) 11:17, 30 April 2012 (UTC)