User talk:SummerPhD/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

United States Sanitary Commission, Legacy changes

You reversed my most recent changes to the Legacy section of United States Sanitary Commission and listed it as trivia/primary source.

This Legacy section was created by a young college student from the Boston Branch of our organization to highlight its work rather than acknowledging the larger national organization of which they are but a part. My changes were made to correct this oversight.

2011-2015 is the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War. We feel it is especially important at this time to give the public the broadest access to our resources whether for their own research purposes or an interest in attending or joining a reenactment group. The main site consolidates 25 years worth of research from well-known academicians and amateur researchers alike. Duchesswiki (talk) 08:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC) Duchesswiki

Wikipedia articles are based on independent reliable sources. Material drawn from primary sources is generally not acceptable. If material is significant, independent sources will discuss it. If such coverage does not exist, the material is generally considered trivial. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

If this is the case, then why is the original entry from this young man acceptable for his branch of this group, but the inclusion of the entire group is not? If you're looking for a secondary recommendation of the parent group's link, his very group gives this recommendation to every new visitor/member. The link I've tried to post is also recommended by The Authentic Campaigner Forum, considered by those involved in this hobby to be the most research-based and source of information on what is authentic. I can look for other references to it if two are not enough. Duchesswiki (talk) 04:19, 7 August 2012 (UTC)Duchesswiki

I removed material that did not cite independent reliable sources. If you feel there is additional material that does not cite independent reliable sources and should be removed, feel free to remove it or discuss it on the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

In all honesty, I'm only here because I thought your name was pretty

The color combo, mostly, but the name looks cool too. I just couldn't help but click on it. Anyway, hi. John Shandy` • talk 21:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Might you try adding this to the top of your user page and previewing it? You may not like it, but worth a shot:

{{DISPLAYTITLE:<span style="display: none;">User:</span><span style="color: #D70270;">Sum</span><span style="color: #734F96;">mer</span><span style="color: #0038A8;">PhD</span>}}

Cheers, John Shandy` • talk 03:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Nice! Thanks! - SummerPhD (talk) 02:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Might you tell me how you added that message that shows to people when they are editing your talk page? It starts with "Hi! If you are reading this, you're probably here to talk to me. Gee, that's swell.:P". I looked for a template, but didn't see one. Oh and by the way, I'm not denying the obvious, not the biggest liar and traitor known to America, and not a banker who receives bonuses for printing money. John Shandy` • talk 04:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh... um... OK... so, you're, um, part of the NWO, trying to expose the Illuminati or... er... yeah. Wow. Why'd they block that one?

Anyway, back on topic. The answers you seek are poorly hidden. (Actually, I had forgotten that was even there. On the page that opens to edit this page, there's a link "Page notice" that leads to the notice page. I'm guessing reviewing my edits on the appropriate date will show how it is done.) - SummerPhD (talk) 04:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! One of those editors also accused me of declaring that "fractions are not fractions," and I'm still scratching my head over that one. I haven't really ever kept track of these things, but seeing your list of "nots" has inspired me to start. :) John Shandy` • talk 04:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Valley Girl

Hi Summer PhD,

I am responding to your message where you informed me of your removal of my addition to the Valley Girl page because it lacked a reliable source. I have since found a source for drummies, which is wrong, the actual term is yummy drummy. I'm sorry to say that given the nature of the content i.e.'slang', no reliable sources exist for BOP's, it is basically a localised pop reference. But it is in common usage. I am now going to reinstate the content.

Also, if you feel so strongly about properly referenced content why have you not removed the other references on that page which have no reliable citations ?

Regards,

Roccy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roccyracoon (talk • contribs) 16:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I removed an unsourced additon. There are certainly other unsourced "facts" in Wikipedia. Feel free to remove or challenge any you would like. - SummerPhD (talk)

Animax India PAGE EDIT

Well I recently update the Upcoming Programming of Animax India. The Content that I add is "Sket Dance", a Upcoming anime on Animax Asia which includes Animax India also. You say that I don't give any reliable source.OK fine But Before Editing Anything You must check it's official site www.animaxindia.com, the moment you open it you see a POP-OUT saying that Sket Dance Premiere on 6th September on 11:00 P.M. on Animax India. Another reliable source is Animax Asia Official Facebook Page which conform Sket Dance as an upcoming anime a month Ago !!!!

SummerPhD Hope this will satisfy you. Thanks for writing me . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anime2460985 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

For whatever reason, I didn't get the popup before. I have added it back to the page, with a citation. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:10, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I got a message from you about Jennette McCurdy's wiki page. I only changed it because on Ariana Grande's page it has the same show. But it doesn't matter. I was only changing it because i knew the show is going to exist next year, but i guess you can sort that out next year!

bye :)

109.145.176.88 (talk) 17:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Biruitorul

Hi, please take a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Biruitorul/Archive

Biruitorul deserves ban for abusing accounts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nagyszikszai 100% RedParty is also Biruitorul. Biruitorul uses to reply his other accounts. The case is intricate and many other users warned before.

You could also please check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anonimu http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bogdangiusca http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/SidoniaBorcke With this user he replied himself: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Csangos&action=history (Full page of his users)

I could also add that Biruitorul found Dutch and German VPNs. 100% it`s him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.149.241.202 (talk) 23:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Um, wow, that seems to be a whole lot of claims wrapped into one. I'm not entirely clear what you think you see here, but I'll help you out with a few claims that seem to be included here that are VERY unlikely.

• Biruitorul is not Bogdangiusca as both edited at 8/20/2012 3:37:00 PM and Biruitorul made three edits at 7/14/2012 12:40:00 PM and two edits at 7/14/2012 12:43:00 PM, with one edit by Bogdangiusca at 7/14/2012 12:41:00 PM.
• Biruitorul is not RedParty. (RedParty x2 @7/14/2012 12:38:00 PM; Biruitorul @7/14/2012 12:39:00 PM; RedParty @ 7/14/2012 12:40:00 PM; Biruitorul @ 7/14/2012 12:40:00 PM.) and (Biruitorul@ 7/7/2012 10:48:00 AM; RedPary x2 @ 7/7/2012 10:49:00 AM; Biruitorul @ 7/7/2012 10:49:00 AM.)
• Anonimu is not PANONIAN (Again, due to conflicting edit times.)
• PANONIAN is not Biruitorul (Again, due to conflicting edit times.)
• PANONIAN is not Bogdangiusca (Again, due to conflicting edit times.)

There are plenty of other issues here, not the least of which is the fact that these various editors have (at times) hotly disputed each other's edits. If you are quite convinced that more than one of these user names is being used by one editor, please open a sock case, giving specific, detailed evidence. I would strongly suggest that you start with a portion of what you seem to be claiming here -- preferably a straightforward claim ("Editor X and Editor Y are one editor.") with strong evidence. If your strongest, most straightforward case doesn't make it, it is likely the others will fail as well.

Remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I see extraordinary claims here, but I do not see extraordinary evidence. Cheers! - SummerPhD (talk) 01:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Thanks for your contributions to WP! Logical Cowboy (talk) 03:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I like pie. Wait, that is not what I mean. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• I ate a pie. 66.168.247.159 (talk) 02:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing, Have we met? - SummerPhD (talk) 03:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes we have, but I'm obviously incognito. Just slumming with the other disenchanted registered accounts. Hope you are well. Ssst. 66.168.247.159 (talk) 03:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012

Sorry about that hit worng button on huggle.Kyle1278 05:24, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Garden gnome

Just a heads-up: an IP has been reverting your removal of the "in popular culture" segment of Garden gnome. The same IP reverted me after I did the same. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 06:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I've been watching. I've added a note to the IP's talk page and some discussion to the article's page. We'll see where it goes. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:04, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

September 2012

You really think i care about your "warnings" (for what!?) your the one who should be warned since you removing discussion posts that dont agree with your opinions(!) how silly can one be? now stop stalking me with your laughable excuses — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.145.38.52 (talk) 13:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC) If you've read the warnings, you know what they're for. If you don't care about the warnings... well that's your choice. Continuing with the personal attacks will lead to a block. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:32, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Baseless uninformed COI warnings

You unnecessarily and without basis posted a COI statement on the CPESQS talk page without any knowledge of the matter. Each post, of which you take it upon yourself to issue a warning, was specifically in approval of and working directly with an admin for the protection of a Living Person Bio. Next time, check the history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.78.50 (talk) 01:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I checked the history. Here's what I found: "...the person concerned or their representative" posted by this IP, defended by you. My warning said, in part, "if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Laura Kightlinger, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest." - SummerPhD (talk) 02:05, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

FYI, I've filed a SPI on this user here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RRIESQ. TDL (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Gravity/Accusations of assuming bad faith

Saying you're wrong about the notability guidelines and haven't checked thoroughly enough for sources isn't assuming bad faith. Assuming bad faith is when you think someone is a vandal or a troll, much as you often do in your anti-vandalism work. DreamFocus and I don't think you're that, we're not assuming bad faith, we just disagree on the notability of the article pbp 20:26, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

"Nominator has not conducted WP:BEFORE". - pbp, "Please follow WP:BEFORE in the future." - Dram Focus. You are both stating I did not conduct/follow WP:BEFORE. Your claim seems to be based on the assumption that I "haven't checked thoroughly enough for sources". I searched for sources and found numerous passing mentions, similar to those that have now been added to the article. Sources of that low level are available on virtually every single ever released by most notable acts (and every song ever released by many superstar acts). The applicable notability guideline here, WP:MUSIC, is clearly looking for considerably more than those cursory mentions. I searched thoroughly enough to determine that, in my opinion, the song is not notable. Yes, you disagree on what those sources show. You do not, however, have any reason that I can see to assume that I did not search thoroughly enough. The repeated claim, in the face of my statement to the contrary, is an indication that those making the claim feel either that I am claiming I searched more than I did or cannot comprehend fairly basic English. With the sources that have been added, I still do not believe the song is notable. I see no indication that a more detailed search would have changed my mind. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:31, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

No. (Rock Band) (LA)

Hello Summer!

I submitted an article with cited sources for the LA based rockband No (http://nomusicfor.me/). I am not exactly sure why the submission was not accepted. Are we to speak only via wikipedia? Feel free to email me at itsashaunparty@gmail.com

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsashaunparty (talk • contribs) 22:35, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I rejected the article because the article did not demonstrate that the band is notable. The criteria for bands is available at WP:BAND.

The current version seems to be aiming for the first criterion: substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. The sources given, however, are problematic.

• #1 is Time's daily "populist". While it is certainly an independent, reliable source, the coverage is skimpy. It really doesn't say much about the band. This is, by far, the best source shown (based on the sources I can see).
• #2 is not independent of the band. No help.
• #3 is not independent of the band. (It's also a dead/bad link.)
• #4 is not independent of the band.
• #5 is not independent of the band.
• #6 might be helpful, but is currently a dead/bad link.
• #7 is a subscription only site. I don't know what it says. I have questions about whether or not it is a reliable source.
• #8 is a link to content that is no longer available. Without being able to see what this is/was, I have no way of judging it.
• #9, a link to their video is not independent of the band. Additionally, it does not seem to make a credible claim of copyright status.

Unless you can make a credible case that the band meets one of the other criteria at WP:BAND, I'd say the sources still need some work. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Sept 2012

Thank you for your message on my talk page. Common sense tends to improve articles, I think it was that kind of observation that you wiped from the article talk page you drew my attention to. I note that while you have hoovered up one or two other contributions to the page you haven't wiped away all of the 'chat'. (So) atm, my impression of you is distinctly lukewarm. I welcome pruning for reasons of space/clarity, some talk pages are 'over-archived', clearly. Sometimes, however, it looks like idle scrubbing. Regards. Hakluyt bean (talk) 13:05, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk pages are for discussions meant to improve the article. Your opinion about what may have happened cannot be added to the article and cannot be used to improve the article. If you feel there is additional "chat", feel free to address it yourself. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:00, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Message

I have removed the proposed deletion tag of both Pirate Falls and Viking's River Splash as they are both notable rides. Many theme parks have article for their rides! Both articles have been on Wikipedia for a long while now. I will improve both of them soon, but I am quite busy at the moment! -  Willrocks10  Speak to me  21:45, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

"Many theme parks have article for their rides!" - Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.

"Both articles have been on Wikipedia for a long while now." - Irrelevant.

"I will improve both of them soon" - I'll tag the articles as unreferenced and of questionable notability, let them stew for a bit and, if they aren't improved, I'll send them to AfD. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay I have added some refs and done some improvements but I have not finished yet! :) -  Willrocks10  Speak to me  10:37, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

East Germany

Yes, I noticed that you also edited the same article and provided no source either. "Marxist-Leninist socialist state" is a POV-term used in place of "Communist state" to purposefully mislead people, as a response to the widely held, negative view towards the system. Communism and "Marxism-Leninism" are synonymous, but "Marxist-Leninist socialist state" leads to no single article, I replaced it with a synonymous term that does. Like saying "the sky is blue", referring to a Communist (or "Marxist-Leninist") system of government as "totalitarian" is common knowledge and needs no specific reference. If you feel it does, you should not be asking others to cite their information, when you yourself have not cited your own entry for the same bracket of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.145.251 (talk) 05:49, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• "Communism and "Marxism-Leninism" are synonymous" Incorrect. Marxism-Leninism is an interpretation of communism, which pre-dates Marx.
• ""Marxist-Leninist socialist state" leads to no single article," Marxism–Leninism for "Marxist-Leninist" and socialism for "socialist". "Marxist-Leninist" characterizes the variety of socialism. "Communism", meanwhile, is vague.
• Like saying "the sky is blue", referring to a Communist (or "Marxist-Leninist") system of government as "totalitarian" is common knowledge and needs no specific reference." Your replacement implies not only that all communism is totalitarian, but that all totalitarianism is communist, which is patently absurd. If we accept that all communism is totalitarian (which is incorrect, BTW) while rejecting the latter, your replacement would be similar to replacing, say, "apple" with "fruit" or "dime" with "coin". Further, if this is so obvious, the replacement is both unnecessary and easily cited.

As you have been reverted by two different editors on this point, please take any further questions on the topic to the article's talk page before reverting this again. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 06:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• "Your replacement implies not only that all communism is totalitarian, but that all totalitarianism is communist, which is patently absurd " Your interpretation of having "Totalitarian dictatorship" listed as facet of the East German government is what's absurd sir. Its laughable that someone would be so illogical as to assume that. I don't see why that listing would occur to you as me saying that all totalitarianism is communism. It's as if under a list of "coins" someone lists "dime" among many others, and you contest the listing of "dime" because to you not only does it mean that all dimes are coins but that all coins are dimes. "Totalitarian Dictatorship" is also listed under 'Government' on the page for Nazi Germany, so according to your logic that would mean that not only was Nazi Germany a totalitarian state, but that all totalitarian dictatorships are Nazi regimes. No information on what exactly a "Totalitarian Dictatorship" is, is given on the page for "East Germany", so someone would have to click the link for "Totalitarian Dictatorship" to it's article to find out whether every Totalitarian state is communist, or they're all Nazi, or that countries of a variety of ideologies could be described that way.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.145.251 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 23 September 2012‎

Please take any further questions on the topic to the article's talk page, as you said you would.[1] (You'll find this has already been discussed and you are editing against the established consensus.) - SummerPhD (talk) 06:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• "Further, if this is so obvious, the replacement is both unnecessary and easily cited. " How can you say that, your contesting my listing of East Germany as Communist and then contest that i've also listing it as Totalitarian because i've ready listed it as Communist! Do you not hear yourself?
• Like many other words, it has more than one meaning, communism with a lower-case 'c' is vague and in referring to the idea of being communal, Communism, with a capital 'C' refers to the ideology you label "Marxist-Leninist." (i.e. Secretary General of the Communist Party, Communist Party of Germany which ruled throughout the entire existance of East Germany as a state)
• Please take any further questions on the topic to the article's talk page, as you said you would.[74] (You'll find this has already been discussed and you are editing against the established consensus.) -- it certainly doesn't look like a consensus to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.145.251 (talk) 07:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to believe that you have a PhD sir — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.145.251 (talk) 07:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

READ THIS: Please take any further questions on the topic to the article's talk page, as you said you would.[2] You'll find this has already been discussed and you are editing against the established consensus. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I just wanted to let you know that your work on Wikipedia does not go unappreciated!

Xblgrant (talk) 21:18, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Gee, uh, thanks and welcome to Wikipedia. An odd edit to be making so early in your time here... - SummerPhD (talk) 02:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Pauley Perette

I reverted your removal of a pronunciation reference on the page. It was discussed before it was added, so let's that it to talk for a consensus !vote. I don't have any problem with it being removed, but since it was discussed, I think it should go to talk for a consensus !vote.

Also, you might want to archive your talk page as it is VERY slow while typing. Just a head's up there. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any discussion of this on the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, to be honest, I can't remember if it was on the talk page for the article, mine or someone else's. I just know there was one. I know, not alot of help. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:20, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Mesereau

The material I've restored to the article is sourced to a CNN interview with Mesereau which, although favorable to him, is nonetheless a reliable source. Please don't remove it and don't break references. 24.22.217.162 (talk) 04:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

As you are discussing article content, please discuss this on the article's talk page (see the section immediately before this one for a reason why...). Thanks. _ SummerPhD (talk) 01:20, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia can be

a complex dance. It was your work at that Forefather's Monument (on my watch-list) that sent me off trying to find a source, and then, since I take sculptors without an article to be a gauntlet thrown down, picked it up and then you rounded it off by making it notable back to the Forefathers. Thanks and life is good. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:09, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

P.S. And thank you got improving the link I added at Forefathers. I was mildly depressed about using a source with Mitt Romney's name attached, I mean, how trustworthy can that be? but, I supposed, any port in a storm. Carptrash (talk) 16:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Pizza cheese merge discussion

There is a merge discussion in which you may wish to participate.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 21:39, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Just because I like your Ye Olde Rules and Common Sense and they made me smile. lol MisterShiney (talk) 22:01, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, SummerPhD. You have new messages at Talk:Martha Raddatz.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fishwife (band)

What up in the hood G Dawg. I noticed that you were the editor who left the message on my talk page about the deletion of my article Fishwife (band), so I assume you're the one who tagged it as well. The subject unambiguously does meet the notability requirements found at Wikipedia:Notability (music), so I was thinking about simply re-creating the page as it was, but I figured the same thing could just happen again. That's why I'm here; I'm trying to find a way to make my case to an admin or other established editor and get the go-ahead to put that article back up, so if you know where I can go to have that kind of discussion please let me know. The original text of the article can be found on my userspace at User:SlimJimJones/Fishwife (band).

Fun fact: Several editors, including one admin if I remember correctly, help clean up typos and formatting before it was tagged for deletion. Speedy deletion, no less!

SlimJimJones (talk) 00:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Cleaning up typos and formatting problems does not imply that an editor feels the subject is notable.

If the subject meets the notability requirements it was not clear from the article. I nominated it for deletion under Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions#A7. "An article about ... (an) organization ... that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant.... The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines."

In other words the admin who deleted the article agreed with me that there was no credible claim of significance. If you would like to clarify which of the criteria you feel the band meets, I'd be happy to re-examine the article. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I suppose I'll take that as an invitation to state my case here and now. I'll be referencing specific items by number from the list at Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles:

1. Fishwife has been referenced in a variety of publications, both in print and online. For instance, The notable magazine the San Diego Reader did a retrospective on the band (this article was plagiarized in the original incarnation of the Fishwife (band) page) that I included as a reference. The wordpress site Do you Compute also did an interesting spotlight on them: http://killingtechnology.wordpress.com/2009/06/11/fishwife-ritalin/

6. All of the musicians from Fishwife have gone on to play in other musical projects that are significant independently of Fishwife. Chris Prescott drummed for the nationally famous group Pinback, Matt, Gar, and Chris all played in the local band Tanner, and Ryan Foxe has sang for the Let Downs and more recently Ghettoblaster (which I intend to create and article on shortly).

5, 7. Fishwife contributed significantly to the San Diego punk scene. Fishwife's dynamic, dissonant sound was an early example of the so-called math rock genre that was developing in San Diego around that time. Fishwife played shows with and were signed to the same record company (Cargo Music) as groups like Drive Like Jehu, Rocket From the Crypt, and, though their musical style differed considerably from the aforementioned bands, Blink-182. As I stated above, members from Fishwife went on to do various other notable projects. Gar Wood plays in Beehive and the Barracudas, Chris Prescott plays in No Knife, and Matt Ohlin owns the local skateboard and record shop Route 44 in North Park. Fishwife was an important part of a particular place, time, and culture, and ought to be documented on Wikipedia.

SlimJimJones (talk) 01:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Since you hadn't gotten back to me in awhile and I felt I had adequately presented my points, I took the liberty of putting the article back up. I confess that this is an act of impatience and presumption on my part, so please do not take offense to it.

--SlimJimJones (talk) 04:52, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't responded yet as a point-by-point was more than I felt like dealing with that day. I have already done ... something (I don't immediately recall what) to the restored article. I know more is needed. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for your cooperation. I read your talk page some (sorry), and I was curious if you consider yourself an inclusionist or a deletionist. Obviously nobody wants a whole bunch of advert, non-notable, and POV nonsense on Wikipedia, but as a New Pages patroller I like to think I err on the side of simply marking pages as patrolled or doing my best to clean them up in spite of notability concerns. SlimJimJones (talk) 06:27, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't consider myself. I am (I think). It's been said that an optimist is a deluded realist and a pessimist is a realist who's been around the block. By the transitive property (ooooo... math...), an optimist is a pessimist. Everything is its opposite. Labels are for canned soup. Yes, I've worked to have an article about a garage band (featuring someone's favorite gym teacher) deleted. Yes, the creating editor mentioned a rumor they might have a recording contract. Articles like that need to be killed with fire. OTOH, I worked to demonstrate the notabiliyt of roof cleaning. Go figure. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:55, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Mesereau Edits and Additions

Dear SummerPhD:

I have been researching Mr. Mesereau's background and career. I have been examining numerous newspaper articles, magazine articles and books. Mr. Mesereau has handled numerous high-profile cases that, I believe, are of public interest. For example, his defense of Ms. De Cruz in 1994 was the first time anyone had been charged with knowingly accepting and receiving false immigration documents. She was accused of harboring illegal workers at medical clinics in Los Angeles. I think this case should be mentioned. Mr. Mesereau's defense of prominent Los Angeles newscaster, Larry Carroll, involved allegations of investment fraud. Again, this subject is of current interest. I also discovered four capital murder cases that Mr. Mesereau defended in Alabama. Two of these cases resulted in prominent editorials in the Birmingham News about problems with the justice system. One of them, the case of Wesley Quick, resulted in an official exoneration. I believe that problems with our capital justice system are of great current interest in society. All four of these cases were very high-profile in the state of Alabama. I have not included any of my personal opinions or commentary on these cases. Nor have i interjected anything that is designed to promote or detract from the facts of Mr. Mesereau's life or career. I do not understand why you think there is a problem. I have looked at biographies of other celebrities on Wikipedia. Most of the biographies don't cite as many source materials as I have used. I have made every attempt to cite valid and reputable sources for my information. I have also double-checked the sources by searching the facts of these cases. I hope you will reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soyoungangie (talk • contribs) 18:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

If you are claiming you have no connection to Mesereau, you have failed to make that explicit. Please clarify.

If there is a reason for your selection and presentation of material in a way seemingly designed to present Mesereau in a positive light, you have failed to explain it.

Have you edited at any point under another user name or without signing in? - SummerPhD (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Screw it. Let me clarify: Your "research" of Merereau was pretty damned easy because you are editing from Mesereau & Yu. Your obfuscation of this simple fact is rather telling. Rather than admitting the obvious conflict of interest (which explains the apparent bias in your selection and presentation of material), you've presented (above) a carefully worded argument that states, essentially, that you have no idea what the problem is. You are merely interested in Mesereau and all of the wonderful ways he walks on water, farts out rainbows and -- it would seem -- never loses a case or has need to wipe his ass.

Knock it off. If you have material that you feel should be in the article but isn't, go to the article's talk page, disclose your conflict of interest and explain what you feel should be added. Thanks and have a wonderful day! - SummerPhD (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thomas Mesereau, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deposition (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey

Do u sag i do why do you like about sagging and what type of underwear do u wera if u wear boxers and boxer shorts u rule if your a girl i don't know what this post is about leave a comment thanks24.125.95.184 (talk) 01:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not thrilled about it, but I'm told a bit of sagging is unavoidable at my age. At your (apparent) age, a bit of questionable clothing choice is also inevitable. As I grow into more of mine, you'll grow out of yours. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Translation: I dont like sag but cannt stop and here it because im old u r not old and wera stuff u think r cool an i get old an sag sum more an u stil wera dum stuf sum more til u dont animor u think thanksSummerPhD (talk) 03:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Juicing

Hi summer, i am new to wiki pedia, i noticed that on the juicing page that reference links one them "juicing healthy article" goes to a suspended domain?, i thought that my site would be a good replacement rather than a page full of advertisements, my site ins an information site on juicing. Please let me know what you think, I have many pages on my site about juicing thanks a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.88.80.35 (talk) 03:16, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

I see no indication that "your" site is a reliable source. It seems you are here to add links to your site, not to build an encyclopedia. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Betsy Ross

I'm perplexed. I was trying to give some information to help a guy who had questions about Betsy Ross. I told him the details of how the American flag design came to be. This is history. Hephatsheput (talk) 19:23, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

You replied to a request for help with a school project from over 5 years ago. That alone was brilliant. Adding to this the fact that nothing in your reply was true suggests either your reply was vandalism or that you are seriously out of your depth. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually I have a question. There was no time stamp on the request. I still don't see one. I had no idea when it might have been posted. How could I have known how old the request was? Hephatsheput (talk) 15:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Read the thread you responded to. Given the absurdity of the fiction you added to the thread, I am done here. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Money for Nothing/Don't Stand So Close to Me - verse vs chorus

Please see my response on the Money For Nothing Talk section. I realize you feel the the melody is from the chorus, but I respectfully disagree. The word repetition is similar therefore often leading to the belief that that is where the melody is from, however the melody {I want my, I want my, I want my MTV) is identical to the verse (Young teacher, the subject, Of schoolgirl fantasy) - note for note. It is not identical to the chorus (Don't Stand, Don't Stand So, Don't Stand So Close to Me) - different notes, different chord progression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.62.242.239 (talk) 03:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

You don't seem to have commented at Talk:Money for Nothing (song), so I am responding here. (I do see your comment at User talk:69.62.242.239, but IP talk pages are easily lost.)

As should be obvious, I disagree. That said, it's a fairly minor point and -- at the moment anyway -- unsourced. I tried to find a source to answer this, but came up empty. There's probably something out there somewhere, but most press coverage from 1985 isn't online and I'm not at work to use my access there to dig. Until someone finds a source for this, I'm going to edit around the issue at both Money for Nothing (song) and Don't Stand So Close to Me.

Both of these articles could use some sourcing for the whole copyright bit, but I don't have it right now. I'll try to do a bit of digging at work next week and see what I can come up with. If you find anything, have at it. Cheers. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:24, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Tory Belleci

HAHAHA I TOLD YOU I KNEW IT WAS RIGHT; I TOLD YOU — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.90.226.95 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 20 November 2012‎

You seem to believe you have been proven "right" by... something. I see no indication of this. I am reverting your changes. If you disagree, please discuss the issues on the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:38, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

meat

I read what you are saying and we are almost completely in agreement.

Also, I tested your user page and found that the counter is manual. I did update it. Perhaps you could ask people not to vandalize as your counter almost is an invitation, particularly the last sentence in the counter.

Cheers.

Auchansa (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Re the counter: [3]. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:18, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

BooN

Thanks for keeping an eye on Henrietta Lacks, at least once a month someone comes along who thinks that boon is a mistake and boom is correct... Shearonink (talk) 02:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Neuro-linguistic programming

If you like I can message you. give me a way and you can make your mind up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enemesis (talk • contribs) 06:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

If you have concerns about Wikipedia, address them on Wikipedia. For concerns about the content of an article, address them on the article's talk page and, as needed, associated notice boards. If you have concerns regarding an editor, address them on the editor's talk page and, as needed, associated notice boards. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:07, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

How can you edit without logging in? I am always logged in, so that claim is just weird without a link to show me where this occurred and please tell me how this can happen. also do I have to download the pdf attachment to those links on the NLP page, which means I would have to register with that group? :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enemesis (talk • contribs) 09:07, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I've strated a sock case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Enemesis. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi SummerPhD, I think that it is possible to improve the articles related to NLP. I would suggest that you read closely the WP:FRINGE guidelines. Do you think that it applies to writing an article on NLP? I'm trying to find fertile ground in editors can work collaboratively. -Reconsolidation (talk) 09:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

ALLSTEEZY

This question is for the ALLSTEEZY page for producer "All Star". We have received a request for deletion for some reason, also a comment for no references. What can be done to correct these issues. Wikipedia is quite confusing when creating a valid page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ALLSTEEZY (talk • contribs) 18:47, 2 December 2012‎

There are several problems here.

1: ALLSTEEZY, you appear to have written an article about yourself, ALLSTEEZY. This is a clear conflict of interest.

2: There was no reasonable claim of notability in the article.

3: The article did not cite substantial coverage in independent reliable sources to support that claim of notability.

As a result, the article was deleted. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Rauch's husband link

Melissa Rauch clearly answers "yes" when Conan O'Brian says "I've seen you with your husband and he is a lot taller than you". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magickallwiz (talk • contribs) 01:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to this edit. I reverted the edit because it did not cite a reliable source. I see that you have made a second attempt in the article. I haven't yet looked at it, but I'll address it there. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Before restoring the material, please discuss the issue on the article's talk page. While the clip does indicate she has a husband, none of the details you are including are in the clip. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:05, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Hand-coding

Hey all :).

I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).

You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).

If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office ^connect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Summery

How do I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orr971 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Please see edit summary. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:26, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

reliable source

the reliable source for the Kieth Olbermann article was a YOUTUBE CLIP of him doing exactly what I said he did. What is more reliable than that  ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Crd721 (talk) 23:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

We need a reliable source describing what he did the way you described it. We've been through this repeatedly in this an other articles. Review the article's talk page. If you disagree, address it there. For whatever reason, numerous editors (with more names then there are editors) have made claims, citing video clips and blogs with video clips. Many of them refuse to discuss this on the article's talk page. Discuss it there. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:33, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Diet Coke and Mentos eruption

Thank you for acknowledging that my edit to the article was in good faith....would the information be more appropriate if presented in a more concise manner? Such as:

"Creating a massive diet cola and Mentos explosion is a significant plot point in the climax of the 2012 film Wreck-It Ralph."

-- Pennyforth (talk) 20:10, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that the information is far more significant to the movie than it is to the cola-Mentos thing. Try it this way: Think of a movie that includes God. Oh God, Evan Almighty, whatever. Or maybe a song: "Dear God", "One of Us", whatever. Should the article on the movie or song mention God? Well, yes. God is a significant part of the movie or song. You can't discuss Evan Almighty without mentioning God. However, you can easily discuss the history of God without mentioning any of these movies or songs. God is significant to Evan Almighty but Evan Almighty is trivial to God. Similarly, ants are significant to Antz, but Antz is trivial to ants. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. --Pennyforth (talk) 03:40, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Rumi

You: "#3: There is no #3" -- either you've read too much Rumi, and/or you have a great sense of humor! Bearian (talk) 17:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

You give me too much credit. I lifted it from a Monty Python skit. "In comedy, 'originality' means forgetting your sources." - Mel Brooks (I think).

SpinSpider edits

I may edit the page SpinSpider and add more ideas about it. Is that ok with you?Leave me a message on my talk page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Starship9000 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 20 December 2012‎

The article needs verifiable information about the ride,citing independent reliable sources, not "ideas". - SummerPhD (talk) 04:02, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Not everything needs a reference

As stated in the submit, it's in the article. I will add one now. Please promise to stop being a lazy edit and start typing {{Citation needed|date=December 2012}}. It's not that hard. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:45, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't look in the edit summary for a cite. Having the cite in the article is a good idea as you certainly can't expect people to read through edit summaries looking for a citation that should be in the article. Now please promise to watch the personal attacks. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:13, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Lombard Street Riot Talk

Hi SummerPhD!

Thanks for the invite to talk and discuss the Lombard Street Riot on that wiki talk page. I am new here, that was my 1st edit. Now that I had a better look around the rules and such I know I messed that up pretty badly! Sorry about that. I will try to follow the rules better and cite work and make sure I am more rigorous in my entries and talk. thanks for all the good work you have already done :) P.Mothoin (talk) 11:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Evan Williams (actor)

The above article has been undeleted as the prod was contested at WP:REFUND. I always inform people when I do so, so that they can decide whether to take to AfD.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've yanked the unsourced bio info and updated the filmography as best I can. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion Moved

I moved this discussion to Talk:Penn Jillette because it concerns the content of that article. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Ancient Astronauts and Salvador Freixedo

Salvador Freixedo is notable. Take a look at his article.

Thanks,

--Ljfeliu (talk) 07:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

...now that the article exists. It needs some work. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Layla

I wonder if you can fix issues that I raised in article talk page. --George Ho (talk) 05:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Layla/archive2. --George Ho (talk) 04:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)