User talk:Akerans

Revert notification

Hi. Here, I've just reverted a good faith edit you recently made, preferring the characterization used by the cited supporting source over editorial characterization. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Akerans (talk) 01:14, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the contribution

Thank you for the addition of a notes section to algorithmic trading. Financestudent (talk) 23:07, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Comment alterations

These were accidental and I apologize. As for the not reading citations, I stand by my comments as relevant, supported and not personal, but the 4th example makes no sense, since it's an edit of my comment. Have you found a reliable source challenging CBS's scientific estimates yet?The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 07:21, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Linkspam

Re (diff | hist) . . Naturism‎; 23:59 . . (-189) . . Akerans (talk | contribs) (→Further reading: Removed linkspam; none of these links offered previews of the books.)

Is it policy that links are removed unless there is a preview? Or still merely a wish? Can you give me the policy link- then I will happily go back through my watchlist and do a major cull. Culloden will seem like a picnic. I have been leaving them if there was any valid information such as a review. Please respond here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClemRutter (talk • contribs)

I removed them per linkspam, which says external links to an article for the purpose of promoting a website or product is not allowed. However, I'm not a strict follower of that. If the link provides a preview, and by preview I mean that the material is readable online, then that is of far greater value and I will not remove the link. If there is no preview, then I will try and find one through google books. Here's the google book links for the six links I removed. Baxandall, Boyd, Basford, North American Guide, Charles, Egger. Unfortunately, none of them offered previews. So, I didn't see any value in replacing the links, and removed them. I understand the point of further reading is to offer suggested reading material, but it should not be used as a means to sell the material. Akerans (talk) 17:24, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks: That statement alone should be made policy!--ClemRutter (talk) 09:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Chemical Warfare

Thx for correcting my erroneous revert of vandalism; somehow I undid one edit less than I should have, I guess. Greetings, Lost Boy (talk) 04:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Juvenia

You removed the notable owners part. Wouldn't it be better to include it in the text somehow instead of just deleting everything? Just a thought, thanks. Ponkatron (talk) 10:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I didn't think a list of customers, or customer in this case, would ever be complete. So, I didn't see the need to relocate it. Also, I don't think a list of customers is due space, or significant enough to worth mentioning. If you think it's worth mentioning, then feel free to reinsert the information. Please consider removing the {{trivia}} tag, however, as the information probably best serves the article in its own section. Cheers. Akerans (talk) 17:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Stumbling upon

In regards to this edit, how did you happen to stumble across the page I was making? Thanks for the input on it, by the way. Useight (talk) 21:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

The lack of {{Reflist}} or <references/>, when using <ref> tags, at the end of the article generates a cite error. I usually find pages that way through WP:NOREFLIST. Akerans (talk) 21:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I was not aware of that page. Useight (talk) 21:28, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Want to remove a link on NSEP's page

I am the Communications Strategist for NSEP and while I'm a good writer, I really don't know how to code. I want to remove a random link that apparently someone placed on NSEP's page a long time ago but is no longer valid. The link I'd like to remove is http://www.unl.edu/fellowships/fellowships.shtml.

When I click the edit button, I don't even see this link and therefore, don't know how to remove it. When I delete

the link goes away but I then receive the error message that the links are invalid.

Can you let me know how to make this edit?

Thanks much for your help and for cleaning up the bulleted list.

Laura Porter Lporter6 (talk) 16:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The link is in the body of the article, and is being generated automatically by the {{Reflist}}. If the link is no longer valid, then you can remove the link from the body by deleting <ref>http://www.unl.edu/fellowships/fellowships.shtml</ref>. Alternatively, you can update the link by replacing it with a valid link. This helps readers verify information in the article. Cheers. Akerans (talk) 16:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Akerans, first thanks for your attempt to help me with the article. Since i'm very new in Wikipedia world as a creator, so it feels very hard for me to create a decent article about this musician. I have all the links and I can write a good article but it's hard for me to place in the wikipedia because I don't know how to arrange it in a good shape, so I can send you everything and you place it please because you know better than me. waiting for your answer and thanks again. and if you have anytime please teach my the first things to place any article later. thanks :)

(Frankenstien13 (talk) 23:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC))

If you have stuff to add, then be bold and add material to the article. Don't worry if the material is in the wrong place, other editors we help fix the article. I'm keeping an eye on the article right now, so I'll help fix anything that needs fixing. I see someone has nominated the article for deletion. The subject doesn't appear to meet notability standards. If you have information on studio recordings, tours, additional media coverage, then go ahead and add that stuff. That material will help satisfy the notability guideline. Again, don't worry how it looks. Others will help. Happy editing. Akerans (talk) 01:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Restoring Honor

Thanks for the barnstar and thanks in general for your work on the article. Usually I'm on the losing side on political article disputes so it's nice to be working good editors with solid arguments for once! BS24 (talk) 23:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm sure you meant the estimate to be sarcastic, but I thought it was in good humor. It gave me a laugh. As far as the debate goes, there's still the request for comment. I'm hoping that will bring in fresh eyes and new arguments. Perhaps someone will say something, that hasn't been said already, that better explains the weight issues. Akerans (talk) 01:18, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

ok

why you revert my edit to Michelle Phan? It is very constructive in understanding how her fans perceive her, and is very relevant to the article. WIKIPEDIA:NPOV —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.6.72 (talk) 03:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello Akerans

Hello Akerans, I have done with the article and links. Everything's going fine but I don't know how to remove the deletion nomination above in the page ? what should I do ? I guess the article is very useful now and I brought links and sources. Tell me what I can do ? and how I can upload photos of this artist playing live ? Thanks :) (Frankenstien13 (talk) 14:24, 17 September 2010 (UTC))

The deletion nomination remains there for seven days, to give editors a chance to discuss and improve the article. You can read more about the process here. You'll have to wait for the process to end before the tag is removed, or the page is deleted. I can see that you've added more material. Unfortunately, I don't think the material is enough to satisfy notability guidelines. A subject has to meet the general notability guidelines to merit its own article, or has to meet specific guidelines. In Ally W. Salem's case, the specific guidelines would be the notability (music) standards. Unfortunately, she doesn't appear to meet those either. If the article does get deleted, she will have to become more notable before recreating the article. As far as images go, I'm not the best person to ask about that. I don't know much about uploading images. I would suggest asking the help desk for help on that. Akerans (talk) 14:44, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

email as reference?

Thanks for helping with my entries. However you removed those that listed an email as a reference. The email was a public post on a definitive mailing list by the artist. I don't know how much more reliable it could be? I could not find anything in the wikipedia guidelines prohibiting this. Please advice. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr707 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I was just re-examining the e-mail, and it looks like it comes from the artist itself. And, self published sources can be used to make claims about ones self. However, there might be a BLP issue involved. First, it was a private e-mail that was made public. Was it made public by the artist, or someone else? Second, there's an address attached to it. There may be a privacy issue involved. Will contact the BLP noticeboard and see if it's acceptable for use. Akerans (talk) 18:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. The email was on a public email list. The website are the public archives for the list. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr707 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome Polsciwatch (talk) 03:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Eastern National

Hello,

Please stop removing the revisions I have made to the Eastern National Page on Wikipedia. The version I am posting is officially sanctioned by Eastern National, and I would ask you to cease your edits, since you have no connection to Eastern National, and are posting inaccurate information. Thank you for your cooperation with this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EN470Maryland (talk • contribs) 20:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Christy Walsh

Thanks for the welcome. I have attempted to redirect 'Christy Walsh case' stub to 'Christy Walsh (Case)' page? It did not work and I have no clue how it went wrong? Can you please assist? Thank you. Diplocksystem (talk) 21:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

It did not work because your redirect was reverted. I can't speak on behalf of those that reverted the redirect, you will need to contact those editors for the reason why. However, from my perspective, 'Christy Walsh case' does appear to be a better way to identify the subject than 'Christy Walsh (Case)'. I would suggest working on the Christy Walsh case page, rather than creating a new article and redirecting to the new article. Akerans (talk) 01:16, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Followed your advice, and perhaps my error in starting a page with similar name. Many thanks. Diplocksystem (talk) 08:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for mediation of Restoring Honor rally

A request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Restoring Honor rally was recently filed. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is entirely voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to mediation requests and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you would agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request welcome at the case talk page.

Thank you, AGK 21:35, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Sakhr

All material on that article was used with permission from the owner of the company. They are contacting the wikipedia admins. Please give it some time. :)

Debolina Sengupta 21:15, 4 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Debolina Sengupta (talk • contribs)

Request for mediation accepted

The request for mediation concerning Restoring Honor rally, to which you were are a party, has been accepted. Please watchlist the case page (which is where the mediation will take place). For guidance on accepted cases, refer to this resource. A mediator should be assigned to this dispute within two weeks. If you have any queries, please contact a Committee member or the mediation mailing list.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK 19:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Message delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.