User talk:Will Beback/archive71

Religion/LA

Hey, we seem to have stalled. I liked what you wrote. You thought it was too long, I thought it was fine lengthwise (FYI, if you had told me you were going to write a whole article about Religion in LA, I'd think that might even be too short). I think me and Alf came to a consensus on a few changes that could be made to the Protestant paragraph, and I'd appreciate if you made the changes and then added the paragraph. If you're busy ATM, I can add it in myself. Thanks, Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 19:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

M.O.H 2

Dear, Mr Will, It was notified that you deleted my page. It was not yet complete, at least you should have given me some time to finish it. M.O.H 2 is a popular rock band from Kolkata. I was not writing the article for the band publicity, but it was about the band's history. Moreover, I have no connection with the band. I am just a fan, and I want to add about M.O.H 2 on wiki.

You Are a Party in a Dispute Resolution Issue

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Spelling of Article Title: Maharshi vs. Maharishi". Thank you.

Zbigniew Jaworowski

In this[1], you state that Jaworowski is both a physician and a physicist. Do you have any reliable source for this claim? Or are you relying on SEPP, the opinion article in the National Post? The 21st Century Science and Technology is not a reliable source (at all) ... Or? --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 19:57, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Maharshi See Also List. Thank you.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Enjoy your time away. Cheers!-- — Keithbob • Talk • 22:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, relax and enjoy! Take as long as you like. --BwB (talk) 03:00, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your participation in the Dispute Resolution forum-- Keithbob • Talk

• Dear Will Beback, Regarding this comment you left on my talk page:
  • "Kbob, thanks for the note. However I find it a bit confusing. On the noticeboard you complained extensively (and inaccurately) about my editing, then you thank me for participating and wish me a good holiday. I don't want to assume you were being disingenuous, so I guess I'd take that to mean that you endorse my points after all and want me to continue acting as I've done in the past."
• I'm sorry you are confused. Let me clarify for you. I left a thank you note on the user talk page of all ten participants of the DR forum, regardless of their comments or position on the issue . It was a simple act of community and universal civility. I'm sorry that you are having difficulty accepting it for its simple face value. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Swinton Circle

Hello Will. If you're on a wikibreak you may not see this for a while, but you're one of the admins who has tried to calm this dispute in the past. I've left a 3RR warning at User talk:AlanDHarvey#Edit warring at Swinton Circle. We are in the familiar position of needing information from insiders to tell what is really going on, but facing a revert war by insiders at the same time. The best answer might be to strip the article down a stub containing only the information that can be easily verified from sources. There is a lot of infighting but it could be too much trouble for us to document it carefully, especially if this is not an important group. Thanks for any input you can provide, EdJohnston (talk) 18:30, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Eduardo J. Lopez-Reyes Entry

Hi Will, on the entry on Eduardo J. Lopez-Reyes you mentioned that reference number 8 doesn't provide the information references before that. It actually does. It mentions those that are specifically supporting the candidate in a potential State Senate bid following the Secretary of State bid: "an impressive group of supporters, including Fred Lippitt; Eileen Slocum; Nancy Mayer's former campaign treasurer, Joan Gray; and Casa Diablo regular John Arcaro (son of former Democratic state Senator, Harold Arcaro." Fred Lippitt has his own Wikipedia article - I am working on one for Eileen Slocum. These are noteworthy political figured in Rhode Island politics. I don't quite understand why you felt the information referenced was missing but it is there.--PoliticalJunkie2012 (talk) 00:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Rick Ross

Hi Will, I wanted to thank you for your work on the Rick Ross page. I added some new content to it a few days back and with your expertise in wikifying, the page looks a lot better now. I wanted to ask about one of the sources I used, a report by Religious Freedom Watch. I know that the Religious Freedom Watch probably doesn't qualify as a reliable source for Wikipedia normally, but the report has the actual court documents, police reports, doctor records, etc. that were mentioned in the article which is why I made it a reference. I'm perfectly fine with it not being included but was just wondering what the policy was and if it could be allowed because it has those documents in it. Thanks again Will. LogicalFinance33 (talk) 17:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I should have checked the talk page before posting here. Sorry about that; rookie mistake. I didn't realize there was a discussion about it there already. I'll post the info on the talk page instead. LogicalFinance33 (talk) 18:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

POINT

Obviously I'm not going to template you: your behaviour is an obvious violation of POINT and is disruptive. Your citing of the "one source rule" falls under "discredit the rule or interpretation thereof by, in one's view, enforcing it consistently." You don't personally agree with expanding the project, yet you are adding articles. This falls under "making edits which he or she does not really agree with." So... stop. – Lionel ^(talk) 23:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Will Beback: On the Matthew Nye article, the discussion contributors seem to be in a bad position to be pushing for a page to be deleted without their own work coming into question: can you help me understand what Dream Focus does and why his profile has been suggested for deletion? (I am asking honestly). On Whpq: how can he propose deletion of the Matthew Nye article on account of "(lacking) significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 14:29, 29 November 2011 (UTC))? Can I ask (and again, this is a sincere question) how I can nominate the majority of his articles for deletion on the exact same grounds? I made my case in the deletion discussion on Matthew Nye. I find it unbelievable this type of double standard is tolerated on Wikipedia without anyone pointing it out...?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PoliticalJunkie2012 (talk • contribs)

Re: Judd Wilhite

Hello, Will Beback. You have new messages at LogicalFinance33's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

An Original - The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I am awarding you the original (a WIKI classic) Barnstar for all you've done this year. "Will", Thank you for all your help and guidance this year. I have learned a lot, and you've made my WIKIPEDIA experience a lot more enjoyable. I appreciate everything you've done for me here in the WIKI-World and I look forward to future interactions and further improvements on my end regarding editing. Take care, and have a nice holiday season! -Mike NECRATSpeak to me 09:58, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Youreallycan

Shouldn't this user stay away from controversial pages and try to work on lesser known pages? Viriditas (talk) 06:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

• Viriditas, Will--I just dropped by here to say "hey Will, thanks for your note on my talk page." But while I'm here--Viriditas, yes, no, maybe. Rob is a staunch defender, staunch to a fault. I often disagree with him, but I have found his instincts to be correct on more than one occasion. As far as I'm concerned, the bottom line is that his edits to BLPs are made in good faith, even if they're not always right--and I say this as someone who's borne the brunt of some personal remarks of his on ANI. We've probably all crossed that line once or twice (I know I have), and I can't fault him too much. Cut him a little slack, and remember that Rome wasn't built in a day either. BTW, Will, thanks for your note on my talk page. Best, Drmies (talk) 14:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Purging their chosen targets

"First they came…" is a famous statement attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. The text of the quotation is usually presented roughly as follows:

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Some of the discussions in the background are truly scary; unseen (or so some claim) by 99.9% of editors which make them even scarier. Silencing the opposition (or even just a contrary voice) is an old tactic which has no place here. Esprit d'corps encompasses ALL WikiEditors. Stay the course.Buster Seven Talk 08:01, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Huge section on Santorum and school board

I rather think it really pushes UNDUE to the max - care to pare it down to the proper size? Cheers. Collect (talk) 18:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Appeal of ban for COI

Hi Will. I've posted an appeal at Arbcom and named you as a party.[2]TimidGuy (talk) 12:18, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Madneuli Page

Dear Will, Thank you for pointing out the rules of information use. I have edited the information presenting it in my own words. Would appreciate your further edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beesy123 (talk • contribs) 06:54, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Could you please have another look at my edits to make sure that they are in line with the rules as I am not an experienced use and will value your assistance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beesy123 (talk • contribs) 07:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

TimidGuy ban appeal arbitration case

An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/TimidGuy ban appeal. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/TimidGuy ban appeal/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 28, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/TimidGuy ban appeal/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 09:43, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

David Chan

This article should not be deleted for lack of asserted importance because:

David Chan created a new martial art style called Xinyi Meditation which he has been teaching since 1976. I have been doing research on him for the past 2 to 3 weeks and have learned much, including that he has a significant contribution to both Philippines and Hong Kong in the world of Martial Arts, but am still looking for English references since almost all of them are in Chinese. He has been mentioned in a few books and magazines.

You have a wikipedia article about Chan Yik Yan, and I am beginning to learn that David Chan is one of the disciples, making the number of Chan Yik Yan's disciples 7 and not just 6. I've been informed of magazine articles in the U.S. and Philippines who talk about David Chan, but am still looking for real copies for reference as most of them were written during the 1970's to early 1980's.

He is known in close circles as a master of masters, teaching many who are already part of wikipedia.

Please give me a chance to build on this article, or leave it live and see if others will build on it. I am confident about this topic being significant.

Rummyness (talk) 04:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes sir, I've read the rules you sent me. I hope to be able to fulfill the Notability clause as best I can. Thank you for giving me a chance.

Best regards,

Rummyness (talk) 10:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit War/Sockpuppet

Would you take a look at this gentleman?-

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Sulumore
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rolusty33

He never documents his additions, and reverts without limit.--Galassi (talk) 21:23, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Another

This gentleman made 6RR today -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/MikeWazowski --Galassi (talk) 03:18, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

6RR is a bit of a "misrepresentation", a word you appear not to understand. Reverting vandalism (in the case of AriBenami's edits]] does not apply to 3RR. And you continued to revert even after informed you were in error. MikeWazowski (talk) 03:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Richard Arthur Norton: Revisiting topic ban; Should it be removed or made indefinite?

Hi Will Beback. You participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive228#Richard Arthur Norton copyright violations, in which a one-month topic ban on creating new articles and making page moves was imposed on Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk · contribs). The closing admin has asked for community input about whether to remove the topic ban or make it indefinite at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Richard Arthur Norton: Revisiting topic ban; Should it be removed or made indefinite?. Cunard (talk) 09:00, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of David chan

A tag has been placed on David chan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 06:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Mahesh (name), you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Mahesh (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) 11:50, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Avalanche topic

In re: Avalanche

You're welcome. I'm going to clean up the basic stuff first, and move onto citations second. The page is such a mess that I'm not sure it can be fixed as it is. I may recruit other professionals to help.

Thermodynamic (talk) 10:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Avalanche topic, scope of work, seriousness of errors

There are many serious errors in the topic. I'm honestly not sure if they can even be fixed without gutting, but I'm going to try and take a stab at it ( fixing that is, not gutting ).

For example:

"The angle of the slope that can hold snow depends on the ductile and shear strength of the snow, which is determined by the temperature and moisture content of the snow."

This statement uses the right technical terms, but in the context of the number of omissions, the statement is falsely authoritative. The temperature and moisture content of snow are only two variables ( and in any case, the moisture content of snow is highly related to its temperature...! ). Not to mention, there are numerous other variables related to strength of snow such as layer configuration, interface characteristics, and grain morphology. So, while the description is "accurate", it's incredibly misleading in that it makes it seem as if these are the only variables.

I'm not really sure how to fix this type of problem. Should I just simplify it? Or should I include the other variables?

Thermodynamic (talk) 02:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Rescue material

Some of the rescue material is "how to". Should this be cleaned up before attempting to use WP:SPLIT? Thermodynamic (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Uploading Images

Any chance you can grant me permission to upload images so I don't have to wait for another day or two? Thermodynamic (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

COI allegations

Will, besides LittleOlive, TimidGuy, and KeithBob, have you alleged COI by any other editors involved in the TM topic area? This would help me in adding evidence to my evidence section. If you don't feel that you've done anything wrong in making those allegations, then I don't think you would mind me posting those diffs. Thank you in advance. Cla68 (talk) 00:48, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, who do you believe is an activist in the TM topic area and have you ever accused any of them, besides KeithBob, LittleOlive, or TimidGuy of that on-wiki or by email? Cla68 (talk) 01:02, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I've asked you to answer those questions on the Workshop page. Cla68 (talk) 01:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

The Rind et al. controversy article.

Hello, Will Beback. Mind weighing in on the Proposing some adjustments to the Intro discussion, since it is partly about one of the edits you made? Flyer22 (talk) 10:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Christian Action Network, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Allen West (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) 10:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Season's tidings!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:34, 25 December 2011 (UTC).

Magi: Lost Kings or Aliens w/ GPS

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension.

Happy Holidays..--Buster Seven Talk 25 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Although you are incidental here, and may not have even seen the posts, I'm required to notify: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement/Evidence#Evidence submitted by SandyGeorgia. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)