User talk:Silver seren/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

Guide DYK

Hi Silverseren, hope your week is off to a good start. Just wanted to check in regarding the DYK for Guide - the discussion didn't get any further after I offered an amended hook last week, does that mean this is not going to move forward? Or is there anything we can do to give it one more chance? Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 13:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

If you look on the T:TDYK page, you can see that there's a huge backlog going back to January. I think we're just fine, especially since most of the other nominations on March 1st (our nomination day) haven't been reviewed yet. Silverseren^C 14:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Aha, fair enough. I'm a DYK newbie, so I wasn't sure if nominations were just considered dropped after a certain point. Thanks again! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 20:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

COI template

I have initiated a discussion at Village Pump Proposals regarding applying Template:COI editnotice more broadly, in order to provide advice from WP:COI directly onto the article Talk page. Your comment, support or opposition is invited. Cheers. CorporateM (Talk) 19:47, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Silver seren. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added John of Reading (talk) 22:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DYK for Guide (software company)

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to pop by and say thanks again for suggesting Guide for DYK and your help with the nomination. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 14:09, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello

A bit delayed, but I did want to thank you for your comments on my talk recently. I appreciate your input. I don't recall ever directly interacting with you (other than to say recently that a ban/block for your comments on the thread was way over the top), but I've seen you working around the project for a good while, so thank you for that as well. Drop by any time. — Ched :  ?  15:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

BP Talkback

Hello, Silver seren. You have new messages at Arturo at BP's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Arturo at BP (talk) 21:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Palm oil RSPO section

Hi Silverseren, I saw your message on my talk page and I wanted to let you know that the part of the request involving WP:MEDRS has been resolved though the other, hopefully simpler, request for the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) section remains. The RSPO section needs to be updated because it is entirely unsupported, except for a link to the main RSPO website. I have also discovered that a lot of what is contained in this section is copied from RPSO publications. If you have time to look at the RSPO request more closely I would appreciate it, so far no one has offered any feedback yet. Thanks in advance. YellowOwl (talk) 22:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply on my talk page. It is no problem for me to see if others are available, so I will look for some appropriate editors today. YellowOwl (talk) 20:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I joined WP:CO-OP. Now what?

Hello,

I added my name to the list of participants for WP:CO-OP, but I cannot really see where (if any) activity is taking place. Could you walk me through the place, and tell how many people are actually active?

Cheers, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC) [TB please!]

Activity from other members of the Wikiproject is indeed the issue. I have to prod them a lot to get them to do anything. But, primarily, we just focus on WP:PAIDHELP. And there's periods of lulls where we don't get any requests for two or three weeks and then we'll suddenly get 4 at once. For right now, the only ones still open are, I suppose, Arturo's, but I think that's being reviewed rather well at this point, and then YellowOwl's, who I suggested to go ask another member for assistance in reviewing, since i'm busy myself. If you want, you can go and help out with YellowOwl's request. Looks like they've already found a reviewer, but another set of eyes is always welcome. Silverseren^C 23:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I wished to learn more about how to deal with such situations, having negligible knowledge of the matter currently. So if I just know the basic outline in handling cases, that will be good. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 09:16, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

COI review

Hey Silver,

I wanted to get your thoughts on some language about reviewing suggestions or drafts from COI folks/corporate reps. Would you let me know what you think about User:Ocaasi/COIreview? Thanks, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 01:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Silver seren. You have new messages at User:Jmh649/Will_Beback#Comments.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Will Beback

I was surprised to see you opposing the unblock for Will Beback. To me the vote so far seems to run more or less along "party lines", with you being one of a handful of exceptions. (Though true, the sides are defined in part by differing opinions about blocking in general) I don't recall much of the case now except that I was convinced enough to award [1]. What did he do that is so unforgiveable anyway?

I ask because I was near to a knee-jerk support there, but you're a good editor and you might talk me out of it. Wnt (talk) 22:08, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

He was a serial POV pusher. Sometimes he was on the side of what I would consider the "right" side, but that doesn't change the fact that practically all of his editing was in line with trying to push his own POV on the subject. Sometimes I agreed with him, sometimes I didn't, but his attempts to control and bias articles toward one side was very obvious. The only reason it took so long for him to get in trouble for it was because of how prolific of an editor he was and all the really nice articles he made. And the fact that he generally picked his fights so that he was negatively biasing minor subjects where the people arguing against him were new accounts, so that he could just end up getting them banned for POV pushing, even though he was doing the same thing in the opposite direction. Silverseren^C 22:18, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

In the end I still had to say unban. A general pattern of POV-pushing wasn't found in the case, and so I don't think it's appropriate to hold it against him now. Wnt (talk) 00:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems to me that they were willfully ignoring the pattern in the case. It was a very obvious thing if you ever observed his editing. Silverseren^C 00:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I should also add that, as the Timidguy case was about, he had the tendency that he had to always dominate an argument and go to any lengths possible to win. it was because of that that he began digging up personal information on his opponents and outing them in order to drive them away. He did this a lot on articles about new religious movements. And, while I understand the topic area is very difficult to edit in, it doesn't excuse his actions. And, considering his actions, I just don't think he can interact appropriately on-wiki. Silverseren^C 00:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Question at PAIDHELP

Hi there, Silver. I just posted a request at Paid Editor Help (see here) about a two-part project on behalf of the company MicroStrategy. I've received positive feedback from editors about each article, but no follow-up; I could use some help bringing additional eyes to the proposals. I'm also going to ping Qwyrxian since both would probably be done best as histmerges, once there's consensus. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 15:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:ANI notification

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may be interested. The thread is Irānshahr and HistoryofIran on 2011-2013 Iranian protests. Not at all about your behavior, but since you made a few edits I figured you should know. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Message

Good morning. I left you a message on my talk page last night. Anne (talk) 12:18, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Wikipedia controversies. I agree entirely with your talk page comments, btw. Prioryman (talk) 18:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For your work on Nelson Antonio Denis. Bearian (talk) 23:49, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Iranian protests article.

I have written something to you in Iranian protests talk page, please take a look at it, and please tell that other guy to stop removing it, he is personal about this and not neutral, i just want you to see if it's good or not. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

You don't appear to have responded to my comment on the talk page though. Silverseren^C 16:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

fyi

random sock accusation. do with it what you choose: [2]. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:25, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Silverseren^C 02:47, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Suzanne M. Olsson (again)

Hi mate. Not sure if you have Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts/Suzanne M. Olsson on your watchlist but I finally got some time to fix it up a bit. I've removed most of the previous links/refs as almost all of them were dead links. I've added some better "news" sources and extensively cited those sections that make particular claims.

We obviously don't have a source for her early career (given the source was the subject working as an editor here).

I'm inclined to think, though, that it's probably okay to move into mainspace with what is there now. I'm also inclined to treat its transition into mainspace a bit like WP:AFC. So if you could "review" it (so to speak) that would be helpful. If you are happy with it I'll work on moving it to the above redlinked location. Cheers, Stalwart111 22:24, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Bluh, I totally forgot about it, i've been so busy. Sure, i'll look it over tomorrow and see if I can find anything else to add or change. If not, then i'll go ahead and move it over. Thanks so much for your help. Silverseren^C 04:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem mate! Let me know if you need me to look at anything else. Otherwise, move as you see fit. Stalwart111 10:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Let's...let's make it tomorrow tomorrow, meaning Monday. Let's pretend I said that all along. >_> My Sundays suck because i'm preparing for my Mondays, but I should be available Monday evening after my Monday is over. It is perfectly understandable if you didn't understand any of that. Silverseren^C 06:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

No, I understand that, though it's made more amusing by the fact that I'm Australian and so it's already Monday evening for me. By the time you get to Monday evening it will likely be Tuesday for me. But let's pretend you said that all along... Ha ha. Stalwart111 07:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I think the article is probably now at the point where it would likely pass AFC and I don't think there's much chance of it being AFD'd, given the sources to substantiate notability. The subject seems happy for it to be published. Time to move it to mainspace? Happy to do it if you like! Stalwart111 00:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I keep procrastinating on doing it because I want to look for more sources. :P Here, i'll do one more reference search and then, I promise, that i'll move it into mainspace today. Silverseren^C 16:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Nicely done! I'll keep working on it when I can. Stalwart111 23:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow. I can't believe I am back on Wikipedia. I didn't think that would ever happen again! Thank you very much. There is something few people know or understand about why I claimed to be "a descendant of Mary Magdalene". It is embarrassing and not exactly the fringe group that I wanted to be associated with. However, as you rightly pointed out, after the destruction of the Bamyan Buddha and the Kabul Museum, by the time I arrived in Srinagar,influence of Taliban and sympathies with fundamentalists was rampant. The Roza Bal tomb was under imminent danger of destruction. As a foreigner and a westerner I had no grounds for speaking out or interfering-claiming a bloodline was the only legal basis I had for taking an interest in the fate of the tomb, including the other tomb in Murree, Pakistan. . I aligned myself with Bashrat Shaheen (Saleem) who claimed to be from the same bloodline. He was so intimidated by the fundamentalists that he died a beaten and broken desolate man, unable to save the tomb or artifacts. That's another long story. Armed with books like 'Bloodline of the Holy Grail" I could prove there was "some" historical basis for my claims and Shaheen's claims. I was facing off against an entire population of fundamentalists and it was a terrifying time for me,to stand there alone, ridiculed, flashing European genealogies of dubious validity. But as you see, it did draw public interest, it did hold off the destruction of the tomb (not entirely- but enough). However it was too little too late to save Mr. Shaheen. He died under dubious circumstances because of his request for DNA testing. I remain in touch with his surviving family on a regular basis. For obvious reasons, they stay a safe distance away. I am proud that I made this little known contribution to saving Roza Bal. It may have turned into negative publicity, but it worked. Being a "descendent" was my only legal basis for interest in the fate of Roza Bal. I had to put myself out there and by make the claim while standing at the door of Roza Bal tomb. Now you know the back story. Can your article include this to reflect reason for my choices there? I remain in constant contact with people in Kashmir- I have been asked to return and continue the DNA Project, but my health is not good. I long to return and finish the DNA Project. No one else has come forward. I pray every day that I will live long enough to see the Project completed and the DNA results acquired. That is probably just a dream now. Thank you again for the article. I am very impressed by what you uncovered. It must have taken you a lot of work. Thank you. Peace and blessings always...Sue (P.S. I would love to send you the current edition of the book. Is that allowed?)SuzanneOlsson (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

In my own book- I categorically deny any belief that Jesus and Magdalene wed and had children. I refer to this as a European legend unfounded in historical fact. I found a different wife for Jesus- a girl from Kashmir, a place where I have a DNA match,same as the family of Bashrat Shaheen. At the time I lived there, I did not yet know my DNA results. This research appears in my book, Jesus in Kashmir The Lost Tomb. I wonder if you could write your article to reflect this, as I think this is very significant for people to know about. That is why I offered to send you a copy of the newest edition. Thank you very much. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 15:05, 27 April 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 15:05, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I see you have a personal website at [3], correct?. If you could make a page on there explaining this information (maybe make a History page on your life and what you did, that would work both as a good page for your website and a primary source for use here.) Now, i'm not saying we would be able to use all of it. In fact, we would be really limited in what we would be able to use because of it being from a primary source, you, without independent coverage, but i'm sure we could make use of some of it. And if you have access to any other news articles that cover you that we weren't able to find (possibly news articles from a non-English newspaper that I wasn't able to uncover), those would be helpful to add to the article. I added all of the reliable news articles I could find about you that had useful information.

P.S. Thank you for the current edition book offer, but i'm fine without it. The whole point is to neutrally cover information on Wikipedia and not get too close to any one subject. Silverseren^C 20:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Dear Seren; My children and I went over your excellent page and we are most grateful...it's just this tiny niggling about how much things have changed since I researched the desposyni topic extensively and changed my results accordingly..This is not reflected in your article, and I fear it may mislead people to believing misleading info about me. I will take your advise and add a web page stating my views clearly there. Meanwhile, would you be so kind to make some slight changes in your wording? This would remove the misleading ideas the current wording conveys. My editing suggestion begins here (I have not got these Wiki edit touches quite right yet. paragraphs pop up in strange places);:::According to local reports, Olsson arrived in Srinagar, Kashmir in 2002.[1] She sought DNA testing of Yuz Asaf, interred in Roza Bal tomb. She produced several popular books on genealogy and the desposyni (family of Jesus) seeking DNA verification of bloodline claims back to Yuz Asaf, who is alleged to be Jesus. Books including “Bloodline of the Holy Grail” by Laurence Gardner had included her family among desposyni. She used this as the basis for her concerns about the tomb.

Olsson also investigated a series of other sites across northern India and Pakistan and was nicknamed Indiana Sue (see Indiana Jones) for her persistent attempts to gain access to locations in areas of political and civil unrest.[3] She also tried to obtain DNA from other graves including a grave in Murree, Pakistan, thought by some to be the grave of Mary, mother of Jesus.[4][5] After several years of preliminary preparations and travel between countries, and on the eve of commencing the DNA of God Project in Srinagar, the project was halted by an "act of considered indiscretion" by one of the officials.[3] After the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan and Joseph's Tomb, she broadened her area of interest to include protection of the ancient tombs, expanding the‘DNA of God’ Project to obtain DNA from Biblical and religious sites that remain worldwide, pointing to the imminent destruction of these sites by fundamentalists. After years of research, she no longer supports the theory that Jesus and Magdalene wed and had children. She outlines her updated research ar DNA Project in her recent book, ‘Jesus in Kashmir The Lost Tomb’.

With regard to Roza Bal, in particular, Olsson has claimed[4]: “The tomb's history was recorded from 112 AD, much earlier than the advent of Islam and around the same time Jesus Christ lived. [...] At Roza Bal tomb the sarcophagus is laid in an east-west direction, in line with Jewish traditions, rather than the Muslim tradition of north-south. ”

She has also written that she believes the tomb of Solomon and Haroun (Aaron) are in Srinagar as well, along with Moses being buried in Bandipore.[6] Other media

Olsson has collaborated with several independent film producers. She appears in several documentary films as an expert commentator about Roza Bal tomb, including Paul Davids 2008 film ‘Jesus in India’ [7] and Government of India 2010 film by Yashendra Prasad, 'The Roza Bal Tomb'

http://www.cultureunplugged.com/storyteller/Rai_Yashendra_Prasad

Reviews of her research have appeared in the Times of India (March 2002) and the Greater Kashmir (February 2002) newspapers. She has made guest appearances on Coast to Coast and various radio programs".

I am most grateful for your help. The offer to send you the book still stands.  :-) Many thanks, SuzanneOlsson (talk) 22:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 22:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello, Silver seren. You have new messages at WWB Too's talk page.
Message added 13:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dispesing American novelists

Thankyou for helping to disperse Category:American novelists into more specific categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome! There's actually a lot of genres that have yet to have categories made for them, so i've made a few as i've come across authors that wrote in them, such as with westerns. Silverseren^C 01:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

JESS3

For some reason the Talkback template isn't working—because of the "?" in your heading on my page?—but in any case, I've just replied. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 03:16, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, one thing is wrong about the current version of the JESS3 article: the India incident occurred in February 2013, not in 2012 as it says now. There is also a mention of India on the Jesse Thomas page itself, which is accurate, but also perhaps not all that could be said about it. What else should be said I'll leave to you or others. An interesting situation, to say the least. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 03:23, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Subheadings

Did you mean to change the subheading here [[4]]? I have put it back there as that is what is on peoples links to ANI Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand. This was my edit, a reply to another comment. I didn't change any subheadings. Your link there is looking at 17 different edits. Silverseren^C 05:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

My apologies didn't hit Prev apparently and hit Cur. Oops! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

new LGBT cat

I'm not sure if this one is a good idea - and the name is confusing and quite close to the other one. Is this really a defining genre for novels?--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 08:01, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

LGBT literature is most definitely a genre. I had to make the clarification within the cat though because it has nothing to do with whether the author is gay, straight, or otherwise, but whether they write literature that features LGBT main characters or otherwise looks at the LGBT community.

Why would you think it isn't a genre? Silverseren^C 01:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I guess, perhaps it's drawing too fine a line and will definitely confuse people. We already have a category for LGBT writers - do we really need to distinguish novelists who write about LGBT themes regardless of whether they are gay or not? I just see it as potentially very confusing - and especially so because you are classifying novelists here, not novels. For novels, it makes sense : Category:American LGBT novels for example as a genre - but when you're classifying a novelist-by-genre they write, but the way you name the cat is American LGBT novelists, it will be very confusing indeed (especially since you made this a subset of LGBT American writers - which isn't necessarily the case!). So, I think at the very least we need a better name for it, and a better parenting structure. Also be careful in creating new novelist genres - the novels project had a bear of a time sorting their novels into genres, and adding new genres for novelists is also not to be taken lightly - I think JPL created a few that were rather rash... --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:07, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually now that I think about it, we should try to mirror as closely as possible this: Category:American_novels_by_genre if creating new genres - I haven't looked but I bet they're different... Then we should link each genre page to the novel page, and vice versa. That would make it easier to navigate between the two. But my comments about somehow renaming that category still hold. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:12, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm fine with renaming the category to make it clearer that we're referring to the novels that they write. What do you suggest?

Hmm, I wonder...would Westerns fall under historical? I mean, Western is a pretty well established genre by itself, so i'm not completely sure. Silverseren^C 02:14, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi guys, would you mind having this conversation at wikiproject novels so the editors who know the answers to these questions can weigh in? Thanks. Oh sorry for butting in ... Truthkeeper (talk) 02:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Would it be best just to copy this discussion over there? Silverseren^C 02:36, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Frankly I no longer care. Whatever you think is the most constructive and the most collaborative way of doing it. If I did care, I'd suggest pulling in the subject experts who know the field, but ya know, WP is all about winning and using force to do so. So whatever. Truthkeeper (talk) 03:02, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

TK has a point - perhaps just bring these questions there, re: genres - esp as we expand the novelist genres - I don't see any reason they shouldn't in most cases match 1-1 - but they may have other ideas. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Note: I've framed a question here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Novelist_genres perhaps we could continue this discussion there? best, --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Pick your brains

Hi Silverseren, I noticed that you have recently returned to the BP Talk page and, as you will have a fresher perspective, I wanted to pick your brains a little about my recent experiences there, particularly as an editor experienced in dealing with COI issues. Recently, I have found that my requests and comments on the Talk page are being responded to negatively by a few editors. There have been comments that my involvement on the Talk page is causing the article to become skewed, despite that the most active editors on the article are opposed to making edits in relation to any of my requests except for minor factual corrections I suggest.

I came across a user talk discussion between a few of the editors from the BP article, where Petrarchan had issued a call-to-action about finding a "professional" (an environmentalist, potentially) to come and offer an opposing POV / COI to mine. I thought about replying that it is not something I would be opposed to, so long as it led to constructive discussion and did not distract volunteer editors by focusing on ideology, but wasn't sure if it was appropriate. In your experience is it appropriate for me to comment in a user talk page discussion that I was not invited to? Secondly, have you seen this approach (bringing in an editor with an opposing POV / COI) on any other pages and do you think it would help editors better assess whether material in the article is neutral?

More generally, I would like your advice on how best to continue working with editors who feel that my contributions are counterproductive, especially as I very much do not believe this to be the case. Along the same lines, are there any policies I should be aware of with regard to interacting with editors, particularly those who are negatively inclined towards me? I mentioned WP:AGF previously, but it was suggested that this policy does not really apply to interaction with COI editors. I would like to make sure I stay within the rules and it would be useful to know how to assess when editors step "over the line" in their interactions with me. I would appreciate any advice you can give me. Thanks. Arturo at BP (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't have much to offer you. I do my best to avoid having to deal with POV pushers like them. I've had to on occasion and generally going to various noticeboards and otherwise giving focus on the issue with more people helped make it more neutral. But the problem is that Slimvirgin is involved and I don't know how to deal with her. Her POV in this area is very clear to anyone who observes her editing (i.e. always working on writing negative things on corporations) and anyone who's tried to stand up to her in one article or another has invariably been blocked or otherwise been driven to leave the project. I've tried discussing with her a few times on several articles, but she subscribes to the wall of text and dozens of surreptitious edits to an article (often with misleading edit summaries) method of shutting down any opposition. I don't know how to deal with her or work with her, no one does. It's her way or no way.

So i'm afraid that I don't have any advice to offer you. Perhaps try to get more attention on the issue, draw in more people? I don't think commenting in that user talk page section will be helpful. It'll likely just fuel the fire and be an attempt to get you to say something that can be used as "evidence" against you. That or just verbally bully you into agreeing to things that are neither appropriate or neutral for the article. And, no, i've never seen this approach done. It doesn't sound like that bad of an idea, but it really all hinges on who exactly they try to get. If it's someone from the EPA, so long as they're able to properly present reliable sources, then I don't see a problem with it. But the issue of Due Weight remains a problem that you and I both know they are never going to address.

P.S. I know I am being blunt and outspoken here, but it's because I want them to read it. Silverseren^C 20:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for offering your thoughts, Silverseren. I will continue to focus on content and stay out of discussions about COI or POV as much as possible. As you say, having more eyes on the article is ideal and I am pleased to see that more editors have become involved in discussion in the last few days, hopefully they will stay. Thanks. Arturo at BP (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

What do you as a career in a non-offline setting?

Nothing i bet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.129.240 (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

lol rude Equivamp - talk 18:53, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Thinking of updating my ED article to try and make it actually insulting? I wish you luck, the previous editors left it a mess of gibberish. The only good insulting part is the last part about my writing style and that was written by some other IP. Kinda sad that the IP did better than Meepsheep or H64. One would think they would have experience with actually writing good ED articles, but I guess not.

Anyways, this coming fall i'll be a senior at Texas A&M University, majoring in Molecular Biology. Hope that helps. Silverseren^C 21:39, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Winton

Hey there, thanks so much for following up my request on Winton Capital Management. I understand why you'd prefer to leave the naming issue alone, and I'll follow up with Keithbob about it sometime soon. Meanwhile, I want to be careful about not asking too much of your time, though I have two more rounds of small requests for correcting and updating the article ahead. The next one is now posted here. If you're busy elsewhere, that's totally cool, and I'll look for assistance from others a bit later in the week. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 22:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Categories

Well, Category:American novelists is in need of by-century diffusing. Category:American women poets has only been developed through g. Category:American women journalists is very undeveloped, and Category:American journalists should probably be dispersed into the magazine, newspaper, television and radio sub-cats. We also have other sub-cats like Category:American photojournalists. None of the sub-cats have been well developed. One other project I have been working on is getting more entries into Category:American women judges. That category is still smaller than the mark of shame on wikpedia, Category:American female pornographic film actors. For what it is worth that category has shrunk by 5 articles in the last few days. While Utah with a quoter of the articles at Category:Utah state court judges being females is above average for states (I think Indiana had no females in Category:Indiana state court judges), it is clear that we have way too few articles on women judges. I was able to dig up some like Jennifer Faunce, which I created a while ago that had not until today been categorized as a judge at all, although the article clearly says she is currently a judge. I am not sure what the best course of action is. We may really have fewer articles in wikipedia on women judges than female pornographic film actors. It may be a much more difficult problem to fix. Federal judges are notable, but which state judges pass notablity I am unsure of.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:01, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

novelist cats

Note: there is an RFC brewing at category_talk:American novelists, and in general my feeling is, the by-genre categories are no longer going to be diffusing, but the century cats (if kept) are. If you want to help, I'd suggest the first thing would be to go over all of the ethnic american novelists and make sure they are in the by-century cats and any relevant genre cats. Also, if you touch the special bio, you will likely be dragged before ANI, so I suggest staying away. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 04:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

• You asked if I thought Category:American biographical novelists would work. My first guess is it is just too narrow. Do we have an article biogrpahical novels or Category:American biogrpahical novels. I diffused Flynn to the century specific category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:32, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Further to your comment at the American novelists cat page, I'm not sure I fully agree - that is to say, I think a consensus to say "this category is non-diffusing" is acceptable for a sub-section of the community to agree on (and they're calling for an RFC, thus it would be the whole community technically) Look at Category:Presidents of the United States - all of the sub-cats are non-diffusing, as people want all of the presidents in the top cat. This is fine with me. The same would apply to categories for awards (suppose you have a cat of American physicists, and a sub-cat for nobel prize winners - the sub-cat should be non-diffusing). So, if they want _all_ novelists in the head cat, they just have to make the argument that the gender/ethnic cats are non-diffusing (they are, by our rules), the genre cats are non-diffusing (this isn't a hard argument to make - you could say there are always things this writer does outside of that genre), and the century cats are non-diffusing (that's the hard one, as it's different than every other century cat that I've seen, but such an argument could be made or the community could decide to IAR) - and if consensus of editors around those cats is that they don't diffuse, it would be acceptable and wouldn't violate anything major. Just my opinion. (added: But, the reason I've called for a wider RFC on Category:Writers is that there should not be different rules for American novelists than British poets, etc) --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:38, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

There is a significant difference between Presidents of the United States and novelists. Same with Nobel Prize winners and novelists. The former are limited in scope by their very design and are very small in growing. However, novelists as a category is already huge and has an essentially infinite possibility of growth rate in terms of percentage of Wikipedia articles. Silverseren^C 02:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you - its more of an academic point - e.g. non-diffusing cats, even for reasons other than gender/etc, are allowable. But in this case, I think it should be diffused. I put forth my proposal on the novelists cat talk page, welcome your input. cheers. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:37, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Vision Capital, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:22, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:American LGBT novelists

Category:American LGBT novelists, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Winton again, and related question

Hi there, Silver. I appreciated your help with the Winton article last week, and as I mentioned there, I posted a second request on the Talk page (with a third planned) last weekend. Since then, I've sought feedback at WikiProjects Investment and Companies (I know, not very active, but still worth a try). As yet, no reply to either, so I thought I would come back to you and see if a) you'd be willing to look at the second round, and b) would it be better if I just posted the rest of these questions at the same time? All are fairly simple, but my goal in spreading out the requests is to keep it simple. That said, I think it means I'm more of a bother, and I like to be mindful of the volunteer time that I ask for. So another option might be for me to implement all desired changes in a userspace draft and offer them up all at once, with a clear explanation of each change. What do you think? Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 20:06, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, someone else got to the request (then inquired about why I don't make the changes directly, which I explained back at that user's page). Upcoming: I'll have one final round for the Winton article soon, and then I think just one for David Harding (finance), about the company founder, afterward. Any help is always welcome, but absolutely only if you have the time. Cheers! WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipediocracy article

I added the link to Kohs in the contributing blogger section. This is because it confirms him as the owner of the domain name at the bottom of that post.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 06:25, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

But see, that just emphasizes the problem. If he is not "invested financially in the site’s operation, nor does he have moderator’s access to its forum", then who cares if he owns the domain name? Isn't the person who pays for the website more important or the people who are in charge? This is exactly why primary sources aren't meant to be used in this manner. The section is being propped up entirely by primary sources which beg the relevance of why it needs to be included. That's the whole point of relying on secondary source coverage. Silverseren^C 06:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Certainly it has relevance as it is effectively like owning the building in which a business operates.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 08:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion about novelist categories

Greetings! You are invited to take place in a conversation happening Category_talk:American_novelists#Stalemate here about how to move forward with discussion on subcategories of by-country novelist categories.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

AN/I

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Poisoned AfD. Thank you. Mangoe (talk) 20:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Duck!

Too late...

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

SS, I appreciate that you can't stand Wikipediocracy, and maybe with good reason, but the correct way to overturn a Keep result at AfD is to appeal the case to Deletion Review, not to immediately relist. You know this already, of course. Be advised of Streisand effect and all that. Best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 21:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I've closed the AFD provisionally for the reason that Carrite cites. Please go to Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 May 24, where I've copied your entire deletion rationale; you don't need to do anything unless someone asks you a question. Nyttend (talk) 22:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Khuzestan

See Khuzestan conflict article, your additions are welcome.Greyshark09 (talk) 12:24, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, some guy is back to "downgrade" the 2011 Khuzestan protests article to "non-conflict" status. Give a look before, before i revert him myself. Cheers.Greyshark09 (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Not sure what you did this time, but you should probably stop doing it

I suspect you will take this as some kind of affirmation, but I doubt that others will see it that way. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 22:45, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't really care about Violet Blue's opinion on anything, especially not when she's bringing up something from 8 months ago. And, if you notice, she didn't actually respond to my comment, which was about her actions on Wikipedia (and my opinion on how I don't really consider her name change to be a real name anyways). Her bringing up a bunch of legal jargon about her name change is irrelevant to what I said. Silverseren^C 00:57, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Erica Andrews

Hello Silver seren, my name is Howicus. I saw the edits you did on Erica Andrews, and I think you may have misunderstood. The info that I removed and you re-added was not added by Qworty. It was added by User:Lightspeedx. Most of the citations in those sections are poor-quality, and they were removed by several editors: Qworty, User:Little green rosetta (now blocked for reasons I don't know), and User:Coffeepusher. I came into the discussion in this DRN discussion Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_70#Erica_Andrews_article, where I gave a complete rundown of the sources involved. Now, Lightspeedx is using Project Qworty as an excuse to add the poorly-sourced info back into the article. I'm going to remove anything that doesn't fit the WP:BLP guidelines. Howicus (talk) 21:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't notice that. I've now added back the ones with good sources (and stripped off all the sources to Youtube videos and such). More sources for some of the other stuff that was taken off can probably be found if you look for it. Silverseren^C 22:35, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Alright then, glad you understand the situation. Also, good job separating the good sources from the bad. Howicus (talk) 22:40, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Gibraltar TFA heads up

Further to your recent discussion with Jehochman and others here, note Wikipedia:Today's_featured_article/requests#History_of_Gibraltar. (In the interest of fairness, I'm dropping Jehochman an identical note.) Andreas JN466 17:04, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Dawkins' position on Lewontin in Race and Genetics

Hello. There is currently a discussion on whether to include or remove Dawkins' position on Lewontin in the section "Lewontin's argument and criticism" of the article Race and Genetics. Since you are the original person to input the text into the article, your opinion on the matter will be greatly appreciated. Thank you. The discussion is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Race_and_genetics BlackHades (talk) 22:43, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

RfC has been opened now at Talk:Race_and_genetics if you wish to participate. BlackHades (talk) 20:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

re I would say baconerrific, but I don't want to give myself an aneurysm

Thanks very much! — Cirt (talk) 05:12, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Herbert Schmertz

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

MicroStrategy

Hi there, Silver. Thanks for taking the new draft of the MicroStrategy article live in the last 24 hours. Earlier this morning, I had posted again at PAIDHELP to note that the logo still needs to be enabled, and this is still the case.

Funny thing, though, in the last hour or so an unusual new editor (User:Mikefromnyc) has appeared and done the following: a) deleted the external links section, b) deleted the categories, and c) added an "advertisment" warning tag to the top of the article. (This is the same editor who had wholesale deleted Products from the previous version.

Now, I've gone ahead and explained myself on this editor's Talk page and I've asked if he will reconsider. However, if you look at his contributions—which I would characterize as deleting all kinds of information from company pages, bad and good alike—I'm not really expecting a favorable response. But I figured I should try with him, and let you know as well. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 01:25, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

This isn't an isolated incident, considering their contributions history. So i've taken them to ANI. This removal of well referenced information and categories and such seems like an issue. Silverseren^C 02:29, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh yeah, definitely not isolated. Thanks for hopping on it, and definitely worth bringing up with ANI. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 03:41, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Silver. Thanks again for the help with the MicroStrategy article. Alas, on re-read I found a handful of superficial typos. They are described in the collapsed box here:

List of my own typos in MicroStrategy

Complete list: Infobox—"Sanju Bansal" should be "Sanju K. Bansal" to reflect usage elsewhere throughout, however his biographical article is called Sanju Bansal, so it needs to be piped or his article should be renamed. Second paragraph of Overview—"commerce platform" should be "commerce platforms". Third paragraph of Overview—semi-colon in the first sentence should be removed. Final paragraph of History—it would make a lot more sense if the "Facebook like" wikilink was in the first occurrence of "like", rather than the second. Final paragraph of Products—the phrase "the ability" should be inserted between "other merchants" and "to create".

If you prefer, I've updated my own usperspace draft, and here's the diff. I feel dumb asking, but would you mind handling? Fortunately, you are still the last to have edited the live article as of this writing.

Relatedly: I recently got pushback from an editor who felt strongly I should make the last round of updates to the Winton article, which are also essentially copy-edits. His point: Jimbo's "bright line" conflicts with WP:COI, and the latter is a real guideline, so go ahead. Needless to say, I haven't done that. But this morning I did raise the point at Village pump (policy), although so far the limited discussion is about as inconclusive as one might expect. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 18:12, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, Silver. I saw that you had made the redirect for Sanju Bansal, but not yet got to the rest? If you're busy, I'll understand, and I can ask for help somewhere else. One place I'm surprised I haven't thought to try: WP:COPYEDITORS. I'll probably try them tomorrow unless you say to hold off. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

And just to close the loop, I did in fact take the request to WP:COPYEDITORS today. Best, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 15:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Opinion requested at Winton Capital Management

Hi SS, your opinion here would be appreciated. Thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Reply regarding "Reception" on CCI

Hey Silver, not sure if you saw, but I posted a reply to you over at Talk:CCI regarding the reception section. Curious about your thoughts on this. Cheers, ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 16:51, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey again Silver, thanks again for your help with the Center for Copyright Information article. I'm wondering if I can ask one more quick favor; I've now uploaded the CCI's logo; could you add this to the infobox on the article? Cheers, ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 14:03, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

From TDA's page

• Oh, you. My ears were tingling so I just had to drop by to clarify. What I primarily object to is the immediacy of the matter. You can't just have someone say "call me Chelsea" one day and expect the entire universe to just do a 180 and act like the man known as "Bradley" never even existed. That's...I don't even know what that is, it's like everyone is mortally afraid of causing any possible offense, so they go out of their way to cater to this person's whim of what to address them as. He may feel like a woman, act and dress like one, but it doesn't make it so...to the point where the outside world must acknowledge it unquestionably. You know I hate political correctness and this positively smacks of it. If/when Bradley Manning goes through with the actual change, I'm all for altering article titles and pronouns and such. I'd never in a million years address Chaz Bono as "Chastity Bono" at present, but if someone in mid-2008 changed the article name when the first rumours were going around, rather than waiting til 2009 when it was official, I probably would've raised the same objections.

• I do heartily believe that one at least begins with the "normal" gender. All those people who were tweeting "don't pick the gender that's for the child to decide" stuff when the Royal Couple announced a male heir positively infuriated me, for example.

• Finally, regarding "...have never really liked each other...", I realize that much of that blossomed over the Marcus Bachmann thing. While I do not proffer apologies, as that isn't really my nature, I will say that much of my rhetoric in that was calculated towards achieving a specific outcome, it wasn't personal. I knew it would be an uphill battle to get deleted, and any chance of success rested on getting a few balls rolling in the right way. One of them was pissing someone off enough to run off to ANI and cause a drama ramp-up, and that just happened to be you. Water under the bridge. Tarc (talk) 00:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Niggers in the White House

[5]

• Why do you think it shouldn't have been on the main page? Granted, I'm not a big fan of the n-word and I'm not exactly sure how WP:DYK works, but is it because of the title? Erpert ^{WHAT DO YOU WANT???} 06:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• Because the sources never existed for it in the first place. The DYK reviewer is meant to review the sources before passing it. I don't know how they missed that almost all of the sources say nothing about the subject. As for the offensiveness, I think what exactly the title is meant to point at is rather obvious, considering our President. And look at the discussion on the article's talk page and what the article's creator said. Silverseren^C 06:39, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• Some tend to get a teeny bit upset after seeing or hearing the much-used N word. I do not get it; it is not like I'm starting a racist banter page disguised as an informative article on a historical poem. Anything racist or whatsoever is contained only in the poem in question. If there was anything not meant to be in the article, the approving admin would never have allowed it to roll into the mainspace. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:39, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• So your essentially disputing the political correctness "I think what exactly the title is meant to point at is rather obvious, considering our President." Did you miss that the title was created over 100 years ago? Please explain that remark. I do not know what intentions you are implying of the article submitter and I definitely will not go there. The fact is the article does address the level of racism of that era and should not be buried. I have no idea of your background and any claims on wiki are suspect but this attitude of the times needs to be acknowledged so we can understand our cultures history even the ugly parts. No offense is meant towards you as I am sure you had well meaning intentions and that is respectable but we need to deal with our past and not try to pretend it does not exist. 172.56.10.211 (talk) 12:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

• No, not at all. I don't care about the term Niggers being used or anything like that. However, based on Bonkers' several comments on the article talk page and elsewhere, it very much seems like the reason why the article was created and written was not a neutral one. And I am not trying to bury the article or the information in it. I seriously do not believe it has anywhere close to the notability it needs to have a stand alone article. An article on the White House dinner would have much more notability about it and information on this poem could be a paragraph in such an article. Silverseren^C 23:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Night Vale

Hello listener. I did check the diff - I eventually realised that you'd reverted to your own last edit, from two weeks ago, yet your edit summary only mentioned removing the character list. I assumed you'd just been unintentionally editing an old version of the article. --McGeddon (talk) 15:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I did revert back to it, but only because the only change since that edit two weeks ago had been the removal of the two sections and the addition of the unreferenced character list. Otherwise, I would have just reverted to whatever was the edit just before that happened and added in any changes that were important after that. Sadly, there hadn't been any (except for the removal of the quote marks around fake, which I made sure to keep removed in my second revert when I noticed it.) Silverseren^C 19:15, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

You seem wise, could I ask for your opinion?

I saw your posts here, and I had a bit of fun writing up Murder Kroger/Kroger (Ponce de Leon Ave.). It looks destined for the trash can, but I was disappointed no one discussed my position on WP:CHAIN. Is it not persuasive to you at all? Do you not see any notability at all? Why won't people even discuss having a paragraph at the street article? I wrote an article about a store and all most people want to say is "delete" as a knee-jerk reaction. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 17:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Draft article proposal - Brevan Howard

Hello Silver, I'm getting in touch because I see you've recently been active in the editing of a hedge fund's Wikipedia article, and have been working effectively with Keithbob, who I have approached separately.

Brevan Howard's Wikipedia page has been left as a stub for a number of years. I've been asked by Brevan to fill it in with some information on the company, rather than leaving it empty. Because I have a conflict of interest, I'm hoping to get your feedback and maybe your agreement to update it with my new version, which can be found here. I would be grateful if you could take a look and let me know what you think. DanJay000 (talk) 12:27, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey Silver, would you mind weighing in on some of the discussions here? Particularly the Jersey HQ question. I'm looking for the final article to be well written and accurate (backed by sources of course) and being a COI editor, it's proving difficult for me to establish basic facts on the company for the current live article without additional input from others on the talk page. DanJay000 (talk) 11:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)