User talk:Stesmo

Thanks

Stemso,

Thank you for the advice about linking. I am new to Wikipedia but eager to learn. I will keep that in mind in the future.

-ANPari — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anpari91 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Edits to A.W. Eager page

Hello, I edited the page for A.W. Eager because his first name has been spelled incorrectly on the Wiki page. This is an extremely common error and one that has been perpetuated over time given an initial published misspelling. Mr. Eager is my great-great grandfather and I have multiple sources that will validate his true name which is not Abraham but Abram. My intent is to try and right this wrong. I am also an architectural curator and house his professional and personal papers here at the Huntington Library in California. Please see the attached link pointing to the Eager Papers which identifies the work of he and his son, Wesley Waugh, which we have here in the collection.

http://catalog.huntington.org/search~S0?/dEager%2C+A.+W.+--+Archives./deager+a+w+archives/-3%2C-1%2C0%2CB/frameset&FF=deager+a+w+archives&1%2C1%2C

The other edit I made was for the incorrect identification of Walter Raymond (his name was not Raymond Walter). Another change that needs to be made is for his collaboration with Myron Hunt on the Frank Wilson House. This is incorrect. He worked with Sumner Hunt on this project. He never worked with Myron Hunt.

I tried to make all of these edits but they were retracted soon thereafter.

Many thanks, Erinwchase (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by my Talk page, Erinwchase. I reverted your changes as they looked like vandalism at the time. Your edits, removing characters from inside of double brackets, instead of taking readers to your GGGrandfather's page would take them to a non-existent page.

• [[Abram Wesley Eager]] breaks the link... There's no article at Abram Wesley Eager.
• [[Abraham Wesley Eager]] results in a working link to Abraham Wesley Eager
• [[Abraham Wesley Eager|Abram Wesley Eager]] results in a working link to the same page, but with a new displayed name Abram Wesley Eager.

That's a technical part of how to change a link so you're not breaking it. However, before you go about changing all of the text in the links from Abraham to Abram, what name would he be known by and found by if someone was looking for more information on him? I assume that since the page is already created with Abraham, that he was known somewhere/somehow by that name. You might find WP:COMMONNAME pertinent, where it says "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources".

For discovery's sake, it may be worth keeping Abraham and adding a few words (with a third-party source backing the claim to allow other editors to verify) in the article that he went by Abram as well. If people looking for him are likely to look for Abram as well as Abraham, you can create a page that will redirect anyone looking for Abram to the current, existing Abraham page. Wikipedia:Redirect has more info. The last option would be renaming/moving the article to Abram. Since there are sources that use Abraham, you may have other editors who disagree with moving the article. Before trying to Move the article to a new name, I'd recommend starting a discussion on the Abraham Talk page, laying out your reliable, third-party, published sources to allow other editors to verify that he used Abram and not Abraham and that WP:COMMONNAME is met. Since there is no ownership of wikipedia articles, your changes can be disagreed with and possibly reverted. You my need to gain consensus in the Talk page for the article Move.

Regardless of which path you take, you may want to read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) as well as Wikipedia:Article titles. Additionally, be aware that you may be an editor with a Conflict of Interest (COI) as his GGGrandchild. As a family member, you may have knowledge about Abram that may not be published, so you may want to review one of the core content policies of Wikipedia: No Original Research. And, lastly, I'd recommend including why you're adding/removing content in Wikipedia in the Edit Summary for each edit.

Thanks again for stopping by. These are just my thoughts; The policy pages linked above would be the best place to look for detailed info on the how and why for Moving, article names, redirects, etc. Good luck! Stesmo (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits!

Hi Stesmo. Just wanted to say thanks for the edits regarding the external links in the Computer Security policy section. Still new to Wikipedia, and learning the ropes. Much appreciated! --JRPolicy (talk) 19:26, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

SFP

So I guess my confusion is, if there is a topic called recent events and I posted some recent events, they are not the right kind of recent events? What constitutes a recent event except for recent events?

Do they have to be less specific, such as, The students at SFP have taken trips overseas recently, such as London, South America, Greece, and Spain. (Is that what you are looking for? Endcyberbullying (talk) 22:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Endcyberbullying. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page! I reverted your edit because while it was nicely written and might be appropriate for a school newspaper, it did not appear to be something that should be added to an encyclopedia. Additionally, if you're adding content/claims, you should try to show that it's not original research by adding Reliable, third-party, published sources to allow other Wikipedia editors to verify the information. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 22:25, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

So if there was a newspaper article about a school event that's okay, but if there is no article then it can't be published? I still don't understand the value of having a category called "Recent Events" if you can only publish what is in the newspaper. There are many events that define a learning institution that don't end up in the newspaper. Otherwise it would only be bad news and an occasional sporting event. Some of these events would be reported in a school newsletter or a newspaper and are important to understand the nature of the school. Endcyberbullying (talk) 00:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC) I added a sports article about soccer, is that something that is okay?

You're right, Endcyberbullying, that there are a lot of events that never make it to the news. However, Wikipedia discourages including that information, as it's impossible to verify if it's true or not. WP:OR has more information on Original Research and WP:Verify has more on being able to verify claims/content.

Your paragraph about the game is nicely written and includes a reference to a third-party source. Nicely done! Good luck and I hope you stick with editing on Wikipedia, even if the occasional edit gets reverted or changed along the way. Stesmo (talk) 00:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll comment here since I just undid that addition. Just because something can be referenced to a reliable source does not mean it should be included. We don't need to include trivia that is of no interest to people who are not from the school, such as individual game results. Take a look at WP:WPSCH/AG to see what normally goes ina school article. Meters (talk) 01:00, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at the page and helping me understand this process!Endcyberbullying (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello this is Daniel Mcfly I am having a hard time inserting images in Klarion the witch boy's Google page can you help me?

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Stesmo, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 05:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Stars! IRC Link

The Wiki rule you linked to says "generally" and is not a hard rule. The stars! IRC and Autohost are the ONLY sources for Stars! anymore. It's been the official IRC for almost 20 years, and is the single best place to find anything related to Stars!. It was on the wiki for over 10 years and attracted many new people looking for information about the game. Can we please get this allowed?

Congratulations

	The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
	Congratulations, Stesmo! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Widr (talk) 05:32, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

bobby fischer religion

bobby fischer never offically converted the is true that he joined the worldwide church of god but left in 1977 and he never convert offically he just didnt describe himself as jewish.you have no reason to undo it. (unsigned, left by 5.29.235.194 (talk)

Hello, 5.29.235.194. You've added a claim without any reliable, third-party published sources to allow for verification by other editors, especially as that claim seems to contradict sourced content in the very same paragraph. Stesmo (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Complaint

Why did you delete my update to WeChat, which is about the registration to a new account. The old one is not accurate and is without citation. Yqyezi (talk) 20:12, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by my Talk page to discuss this, Yqyezi. You are correct that the previous text lacked a citation and you added a cite pointing to the WeChat FAQ. As explained in the edit summary, I deleted that text because Wikipedia isn't a HowTo/FAQ site. If a reader would like to sign up with WeChat, they can visit the WeChat site to figure out how they should do that. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 20:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, but our point is to correct the former wrong information about how to register WeChat.Yqyezi (talk) 20:36, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Yqyezi. You did correct the information. And, included a citation, which is great! Please don't be discouraged from editing Wikipedia due to this removal. When I saw your correction, I realized that the HowTo/FAQ content of before or after correction wasn't encyclopedic and removed the information. The removal had nothing to do with the quality of your edit or the citation. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 22:07, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	I appreciate your efforts in cleaning up and organizing the former Gernatt Family of Companies article. It's a shame that it appears our efforts were not ultimately fruitful. Thanks again for your time, efforts, and expertise, Daniellagreen (talk) (cont) 00:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited College, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constituent. 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) 10:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Modifications to Joe Griffin (psychologist) page

Hi Stesmo. I am new to Wikipedia and wondered if you could help me understand some remarks you left on this page, specifically:

"Among other things he is credited with proposing [[Expectation fulfilment theory of dreaming|why we evolved to dream]] and uncovering the connection between dreaming and depression.{{citation needed|reason=Needs reliable, third-party sources to allow for verification - Not from Griffin, HGI or Press Releases - in order to keep this claim in the article.|date=November 2014}}"

I take it this means I cannot simply cite Griffin's dream book. What would fit the bill here? A review of the Dream book? Thanks MIDaffin (talk) 13:21, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, MIDaffin! Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. The best source would be a "reliable, third-party, published source with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" that credits him with the claims in that statement. A book from an unrelated author with knowledge of the field or an article from a major newspaper or a that backs up the claim he uncovered the connection between dreaming and depression and he is the inventor/creator/discoverer, etc. would be best, of course. His books can absolutely be used to cite claims in the article, but it's better that self-sourced content be a cite for "grew up in a small town named Mayberry" or "became a salesman in 1979" type facts and not "founded the town of Mayberry" or "is the best salesman in the entire world" type of claims. It might be worth taking a look at WP:Reliable Sources for more info, especially the Biography, User Generated Content and Self-sourced sections.

Do note, that since this is a Biography of a Living Person, there are additional rules. Specifically:

"Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion."

Thanks again for stopping by. Good luck, Stesmo (talk) 18:18, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Why did you delete Travelport's updates

Stesmo, I would appriciate it if you would not delete the updated content. I thought it better to add a few bullet points rather than 400 airlines, 600,000 hotels, 35,000 car rental locations, 55 cruises and so on. The numbers are true and accurate for our company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travelport1234 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Travelport1234. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion and your the text of your edits were promotional. Additionally, as you are editing on behalf of Travelport, you may want to check out the conflict of interest policies. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 23:37, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Stesmo editing: Brian Babin Wiki

I know you are part of the vandalism unit here at wiki but before you correct what you think is vandal aim you need to look at the talk discussion notes on Brian Babin Talk.

Thank you very much for acting in a very professional manner and helping contribute to a great page and person. Im dealing with an unethical editor who keeps posting libel about a person on the person's wiki page who apparently has a clear political agenda and to harm the subject wiki.

Thanks again, Wikiblanks (talk) 00:48, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Wikiblanks. While patrolling for vandalism, I found you had removed paragraphs of sourced content (blanking) with the un-subtle name of Wikiblanks. Sure seemed like Vandalism. Turns out, it wasn't vandalism, rather it was removing sourced content because you disagreed with it. After verifying the sources included reliable sources, I'd have still reverted your removal as the discussion on the talk page appeared to still be looking for consensus. You were Bold, you were Reverted and it is still time for Discussion WP:BRD. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page... Stesmo (talk) 03:18, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Stop removing comments which are accurate just to protect nokias reputation

I commented how nokia 206 bakes in all sorts garbage into its firmware but this was removed for no proper reason. One wonders if stesmo vested interests are? I sadly own one of these pieces of junk so i have the evidence in my pocket and havnt just made it up nokia need naming and shaming for this kind of mediocrity as a refund is not possibl as it has been DELIBERATELY made crap ie a dirty trick on the customer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.171.220 (talk) 21:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Front Porch Step

Good day Stesmo. I understand that you've deleted my edit due to it not being constructive. The page I edited was at a comedic jibe at a well-known creep in the Pop Punk scene who chats to underage and repeatedly makes false claims about mental illnesses that he has, in order for him to gain sympathy in the Pop Punk community, do not defend a grown man who thinks it's right to chat inappropriately to underage girls and who fakes mental illnesses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasta Penguin (talk • contribs) 16:32, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

sword swallower

I added myself to the list of known sword swallowers. You told me it wasn't relevant. Please explain. Will Rotten. I am working on my own page at this time. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WillRotten (talk • contribs) 19:27, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, WillRotten. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. I removed your edit because it appeared to be vandalism (in this case, akin to someone spray painting their name on a wall). As you may actually be a sword swallower, a little note on adding links to other Wikipedia articles...

To add a link to a Wikipedia article, but display something different than the link, you should place a pipe between the article name and the displayed text, like this: [[Will Rotten (performer)|Will Rotten]]. This will then show the Will Rotten part without the (performer) part, while still linking to the correct page. Secondly, there should be a Wikipedia article to be linked to at Will Rotten (performer). Without an article at that link, it will be a WP:Redlink. Which is fine if "a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable."

Before you create an article about yourself, you may want to read the articles Am I allowed to edit articles about myself or my organization? and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Good luck in your sword swallowing, Stesmo (talk) 20:25, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Hatch Act article

Thank you for your note. I edited the submission because it was overwhelmed with references that, while quite useful to researchers, were distracting to ordinary readers. I am in awe of your knowledge but for me an unbiased analysis, which I thought was somewhat lacking in your offering, is more important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.85.237 (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, 96.233.85.237. Thanks for stopping by. The edit you're referring to is this one [1], correct? The references are there to meet one of the core content policies of Wikipedia: Verifiability. This allows any reader or editor to see where the information/claims presented in an article come from and verify it is true. It's so important that controversial claims without a reference can be (and often are) removed from Wikipedia. Stesmo (talk) 21:50, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

David Rades

I am David Rades and I am deleted my wiki page. Thank u. Do not change my information please thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.219.69.244 (talk) 19:32, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, 207.219.69.244/David. Blanking a page (removing all content) is not how a page is deleted. As this is a biography about a living person (BLP), you may want to visit WP:BLPDELETE. If you'd like to know more about how Wikipedia deletes articles, you may wish to visit Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Good luck, Stesmo (talk) 19:43, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Florida Lottery Edit

Hi Stesmo!

Thanks for your input regarding my edit of the Florida Lottery page (re: a news story that broke recently in the Orlando Sentinel that I added). I'm confused as to why you edited it and what it means that it appeared to be a "test"?

Looking forward to being a contributor to the great project that is Wikipedia.

Thanks for your input!

Hi, Mguevarra1980. This is the edit you're referring to: [[2]]. I reverted your edit while patrolling for vandalism because it appeared to be a test edit / mistake. As I said in the edit summary: Reverted good faith edits by Mguevarra1980: Reverting claim with an odd source. I'm pretty sure a gossip blogger discussing Taylor Swift's romances aren't a good cite for a lottery issue.. You probably just included the wrong source, as the website included in your edit as a source was to a perezhilton.com article about Taylor Swift and Matt Healy dating. I looked at the perezhilton article, but didn't see anything about the Florida Lottery. :D

Please don't let this revert discourage you from continuing to improving Wikipedia or adding back the claim with a reliable source that talks about the Florida Lottery. Oh, and to add a signature to your Talk comments, just type ~~~~ at the end of your edit. Like this: Good luck! Stesmo (talk) 20:33, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Pedro Lucena Costa

Hello, I've added again the Alcatel-Lucent Velocix CDN but now without a link. Thanks for the info

Rebel Wilson

Hi, I noticed you removed the {{twitter}} template from Rebel Wilson. Per WP:ELOFFICIAL as well as the first line of WP:ELNO the link is acceptable so I replaced it. Also on Template:twitter it says to use the template only when there is no link on the article subject's official page, and since we have no EL here to an official page, the link is appropriate. Please discuss on the article talk page if you still think we should remove the link. Thanks. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  (User:Wtwilson3)  — 18:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Wtwilson3. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. I was under the impression that Rebel Wilson controlled the YouTube channel also linked in EL, making the Twitter link superfluous. But, looking at the YouTube channel and its 1 uploaded video from 2010, that link is probably better suited for removal. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 19:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

<3

Frenguins (talk) 20:26, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Major Applewhite

FYI, Major Applewhite has NOT been hired as the University of Houston Football teams offensive coordinator. He MIGHT be in the future but he does not have the job right now. This is per an inteview of the UH new Head Coach Tom Herman I saw in person today.

(And yea...I was having a little fun with somebody that posted the wiki page saying he was the new OC....sorry)

Mark Daniels' page edits

Stesmo, I am contacting you about the edits that you keep removing from the file Mark Daniels. This information is factual and should be included in the page. You should read what this guy has done for the U.S. Government and NATO countries. Please leave the edits as it is relevant should be publically known. Thanks. P.Parker 22.12.2014 76.110.223.96 (talk) 14:03, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, 76.110.223.96. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. I've reverted your changes because primarily, you 1) you didn't include any reliable sources to allow for editors to verify what you're saying is true and secondarily, 2) some of what you're and is not written in with a neutral point of view / is promotional (Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion). I've included some links here so you see what Wikipedia policies are. Sometimes, you'll see a "Citation Needed" in a Wikipedia article where people are requesting those reliable sources, but this is a Biography of a Living Person WP:BLP and there is a higher standard to be met. Specifically, WP:BLPSOURCES states: "Wikipedia's sourcing policy, Verifiability, says that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not meeting this standard may be removed. This policy extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable, and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism. When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources."

In short, if you continue adding unsourced or poorly sourced information (from blogs, press releases, etc. and not (reliable, third-party, published sources), it will continue to be removed from this Biography. As Daniels has been important to NATO and the US gov't, there should be plenty of press on him to support the claims you are adding here. I look forward to reading more about him. Thanks again for stopping by... Stesmo (talk) 17:40, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Stesmo, there are "Third Party" articles and page should not be deleted, here are some quick links to reliable sources that have done stories or reported news on Mark Daniels: Links referring to Mark Daniels of AeroGroup, Vince Neil, Las Vegas Outlaws

http://www.aero-news.net/annticker.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=244d8e00-9ce8-448f-8c44-e0a28a60048a http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/florida-firm-plans-to-buy-dutch-f-16bs-for-training-159719/ http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article823.html http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20020719/NEWS/207190406 http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article2908.html http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article1004.html http://www.lasvegassun.com/vegasdeluxe/2014/oct/02/motley-crew-frontman-vince-neil-talks-plans-his-la/ http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/complete/185554-1.html?redirected=1 http://www.antimusic.com/news/14/September/03Motley_Crues_Vince_Neil_Scores_Football_Team_For_Las_Vegas.shtml http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/business-press/new-arena-football-team-looks-community http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/vince-neils-rockstar-sports-group-awarded-expansion-team-in-las-vegas-by-arena-football-league/ http://www.hardradio.com/hr3.html?http://www.hardradio.com/2014news/news09031402.php3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.223.96 (talk) 20:54, 26 December 2014 (UTC) Thanks P. Parker 26 December 2014 76.110.223.96 (talk) 21:02, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the links, 76.110.223.96/P.Parker. The Wikipedia article we're discussing is about Daniels. But, almost all of the links you are providing here are articles about Aerogroup or Vince Neil and his business partners buying minor sports teams. These aren't significant coverage. These articles mention Daniels (sometimes only just that), but hey aren't really about Daniels.

From WP:BASIC: "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."

The good news for the Daniels article is that this isn't about just my opinion. The Articles for Deletion (AfD) discussions are open to any editor to comment. You have a say in this process as well. Editors will give their inputs and a week or so after the AfD opened, an administrator will review it and see if the editors have reached a consensus. At that point, the article will be relisted for more voices, deleted or kept. Good luck, Stesmo (talk) 22:02, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Reverting good faith edits

Hi Stesmo. It seems to me that when reverting good faith edits like this one, you should give a reason, to explain to both the editor you reverted and to other editors your reason for reverting - which in this case I'm guessing was WP:N. What do you think? Λυδαcιτγ 07:40, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Audacity. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. I agree that the reason should be given when doing a revert. In this case, the reason (Non-notable entry in a list WP:NLIST) was given to the editor on their talk page at User_talk:66.17.185.11. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 17:19, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Oops, I missed that. Sorry for the unnecessary message. Cheers! Λυδαcιτγ 08:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

		The Bronze STiki Barnstar of Merit
		Congratulations, Stesmo! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:36, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Aeromedman

I guess I need clarification on what constitutes advertisement. I used a researched-based article that used a particular branded item, which was mentioned in the article. The comment was removed by you. So, evidenced-based research is considered advertisement? If so, wiki would be full of advertisements. I found similar articles from Coke, Nintendo, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeromedman (talk • contribs) 21:17, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Aeromedman. Are you referring to this Dec. 18th promotional revert or this Dec. 18th promotional revert? It seems your edits are all about adding a particular manufacturer's information to Wikipedia with promotional tone and linking to that manufacturer. It would appear that you are involved in some way with that company and are trying to promote that company. For information on Wikipedia's policies on promotion, you may want to read this page: Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. In the cases for these edits, I mentioned in the edit summary: "Reverting promotional edit with promotional external link. Please add back with a less promotional tone and without the links to the company." In both cases, you included a link in the body of the article, which falls afoul of WP:EL and bolstered the impression that this was a promotional edit by someone connected to the company.

As a general rule, the "yeah, but another article on Wikipedia breaks the rules" doesn't usually mean you should. In fact, as a Wikipedia editor, you absolutely can fix articles not related to your company / field. In fact, Wikipedia would rather you stayed away from subjects that you may have a Conflict of Interest. If you see external links in the body of other articles, please remove them and mention WP:EL. If you see someone add promotional content that does not fit with neutral point of view or WP:PROMOTION policies, you can remove them, mention it on the talk page or add the appropriate maintenance template requesting another editor take a look at the page to fix the problems. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 04:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Tenderloins edit

I added Tell Em Steve Dave to Q's profile because it is a popular podcast that he is a host of. Not sure why you felt the need to remove it. (unsigned by Iamcrazyjoe)

Hi, Iamcrazyjoe. You're absolutely correct. Sorry about that. Please feel free to add that back to the article. Stesmo (talk) 17:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

ted cotrell

show me where anything i said was factually wrong. he sided with the dirty late hits of ed reed among other in 2012 and now with suh. you either are a fan of the lions a family member of cottrell's or you want to wager on this weeks game. i will continue to post the facts. he was a god awful coordinator who thank god never had the opportunity to fully ruin an nfl teamas a head coach. wikipedia is about accuracy not about being nice. sheiker 2000 Sheiker2000 (talk) 03:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC) sheiker 2000Sheiker2000 (talk) 03:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Sheiker2000. Wikipedia's Core content policies are Neutral point of view, Verifiability and No original research. Nothing you wrote met that. At best, it was commentary. It appeared to be vandalism/test edit. This is not reddit, your local paper's letter to the editor page or a website comments section. Include reliable sources, encyclopedic / neutral language and resubmit. There are many sites out there dedicated to fan ranting and Wikipedia isn't one of them. Good luck, Stesmo (talk) 17:36, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit on G.R.L. page

Yes, hi, no the edit that was made before me has been undone and redone over and over again, and I was trying to restore the G.R.L. page back to the way it was. This was not a mistake. This was because someone kept on adding songs not sung by this artist onto their singles, and those didn't belong there. I forgot to add the summary, and sorry for the confusion. I'll try to remember next time. Bbfan23 (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

what is your problem?

i have included the sources i have used in describing ted cottrell's recent past in siding with players as reported by ESPN's Ed weder and FOX sports Jay Glazer. if you want you can go to their respective websites and find the information yourself. are you a lions fan who has money on this weeks game? are you a friend or family member of ted cottrell's? are you not in favor of having factual data including that which may be unpleasant in wikipedia?

continued threats to my person and well being on wikipedia will not be taken lightly. your escalation of bullying will no longer be tolerated and i must inform you this is not an avenue which you should pursue. have a blessed day :-). --Sheiker2000 (talk) 10:09, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Are vicious anti-Russia attacks OK?

In one article, Wikipedia helps to highlight crude attempts at undermining Russia - and goes as far as calling Putin a "Fucker". Honestly, is this what you consider to be constructive comments? (Unsigned by 89.240.211.82)

Hi, 89.240.211.82. I removed your edit during a vandalism patrol because it appeared to be vandalism. After your note here, I visited the Do not buy Russian goods! article and the Talk:Do_not_buy_Russian_goods! page. I see there is already a discussion on the doll's teeth and the image with graffiti and that you've started another conversation. I'm sure you'll find your answers in the Talk page. Thanks for visiting my Talk page. To sign your Talk comments, leave ~~~~ at the end, like this: Stesmo (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Astrophysics

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Astrophysics. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Page protection

I semi-protected your User page in order to stop the frequent vandalism. However, you can let me know if you would rather leave it unprotected. Regards– Gilliam (talk) 23:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Gilliam... I had my nose buried in STiki and hadn't even noticed the vandalism yet. Nice catch! I'm fine with it protected or unprotected. Thanks again, Stesmo (talk) 00:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Oops

Sorry about that edit, I was trying to revert the nonsense "Abracadabra" edit made by USER:Mr1centper1cent and must have fudged it. besieged^talk 02:12, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Besieged... It's all good. I was kinda stumped what exactly had happened there when I saw the edit, but figured it was in response to the vandalism earlier. Thanks for stopping by, Stesmo (talk) 06:52, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Gneiss correction

please read the conversation in the talk page of gneiss[3]. Punk4orchrist (talk) 18:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by my Talk page, Punk4orchrist. I've looked at that Talk page and I'm not seeing consensus that doubt should be cast on the dating/dates. It looks like that conversation is still in-progress. Thanks for pointing out that what I saw wasn't vandalism. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Your welcome. I put the article back to how I had it, by the way. Punk4orchrist (talk) 18:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Ink Master

Just chill tx.... Give the guys a chance to review it. This guy seems like a nice guy and all. I am sure he will look it over in time...

Stes I will check back tomorrow

L — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanonymoustx (talk • contribs) 20:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC) OK L.... GUESS THAT MEANS WE PLAY BALL

WE ARE ANONYMOUS WE ARE LEGION WE DO NOT FORGIVE WE DO NOT FORGET

WELL, YOU KNOW THE REST

Stesmo (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:24, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

In response to none published article.... The pitched video is published and copyrighted from 09

So what is the issue? You don't care to read correct information but are eager to take it down? The video is published...

This is just garbage... I have no time to argue about correctness... Do as you do and we will do as we will do.

Expect us — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanonymoustx (talk • contribs) 20:20, 7 January 2015 (UTC) ~~~~ Hello Stesmo I AM ANONTEXASGUY, WHAT MORE INFORMATION DO YOU NEED TO BE PROVIDED WITH? HAVE YOU OR YOUR ADMINS OR WHAT NOT IN THIS VAST PAGE OF SCRIPTS AND CONFUSION NEED? YOU HAVE A COPYRIGHT VIDEO YOU HAVE CONTRACTS, YOU HAVE A COPYRIGHT WRITERS GUILD NUMBER... OR DID YOU HAPPEN TO LOOK AT THE RELIABLE SOURCES GIVEN YOU CLAIM WERE NOT GIVEN? THIS ARE OFFICIAL DOCS ARE THE NOT? SO WE ASK WHY DO YOU CENSOR. ANONTEXASGUY [[User:anontexasguy|Stesmo]] ([[User talk:anontexasguy#top|talk]]) Reliable source is in the contracts along with the wga copyright www.lobosdesigns.com/showcontracts along with the pitch video seen here www.lobosdesigns.com/pitch.html Was in process of uploading pdf contracts all documentation is acquired. If you need more from us ask. I ask please to redo the edit. You may email US at L@anonymousnorthtexas.org. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanonymoustx (talk • contribs)

Hi, Lanonymoustx. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Please read Wikipedia's Reliable Sources page for what makes a source 'reliable'. Generally, your own website is not considered a reliable source. Feel free to add information back to that page after you've found and included reliable, published third-party sources to allow for readers and other editors to verify your info. Please sign your Talk entries with ~~~~, like this: Stesmo (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

My apologies I have not used wiki before was just asked to by associates to note this matter. I can see the need for so many admins when the page is so constructable As for the website it is not mine... It is a collective members. The website only holds the contracts that prove the creation agreement along with the pitch video... Its not the site but the documentation there of. What do you need? Do we need to upload the pdfs and the pilot? I am not sure how much more accurate you want... Would you like emails and archives from the way back? We see other docs here that are far from accurate and are posted... So I find this amusing..

Would accredited affidavits help?

Did any of the admins even look at the docs given? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanonymoustx (talk • contribs) 19:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe I will have more come talk to you...

Expect us — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanonymoustx (talk • contribs) 19:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Lanonymoustx, thanks for visiting and posting your comments in the correct spot. A few misconceptions to clear up:

1. I'm not one of the thousand or so administrators here. I'm one of the countless horde of editors, like you.
2. I'm not particularly interested in the subject of Ink Master and won't be reading emails or docs.
3. Wikipedia is not about making or breaking news; it is about consolidating information published elsewhere.

Wikipedia has three principal Core Content Policies, Neutral Point-of-View, Verifiability and No Original Research (more info. Your edit violated at least two of those. To keep your edits from being removed, I'd recommend including sources that aren't from you guys and instead are newspaper or magazine articles, published books, etc. For more info on sources, visit Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. If there aren't published, reliable sources independent from you or your associates, then the information shouldn't be in Wikipedia for now. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 20:05, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

HI Stesmo

The point of leaving my suggestion was to alert to the untrue biases present in the San Jose High Academy Webpage : specifically the lines where it says (only to lose...) and "the bone never comes home" Those are offensive and blatantly false, likely posted by someone with a holding grugde. Thenks you for youze timez stesmooo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.254.221.251 (talk) 22:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by, 143.254.221.251. You have a good point. I just checked the article and saw someone has since removed the lines (without adding additional commentary). Stesmo (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Manhattan

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Manhattan. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Pit

Thank you, Stesmo,

If you ever looked at the title of the first level (or chapter, whatever you want to call it), it's title is The Return of Palutena, not The Return of Pit. I'm pretty sure of this, as I have the game.

Respectfully, 146.115.69.152 (talk) 18:11, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for visiting my Talk page, 146.115.69.152. I reverted your edit because your edit appeared to be vandalism. As you've explained it, it may not be. Please feel free to make the edit again. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 19:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the Kota Ibushi page

I appreciate that, at first glance, my addition of the words "GAY World Anal Championship" to a page looks like simple and perhaps lazy vandalism. But, in fact, the match referred to in that article was for that title, and can be seen on youtube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivX7Ru51gqY . My intention was to revert the change made by 184.70.207.70 on January 5th, 2015, where the name of the title was clumsily removed, without erasing the later additions made to the accomplishments section of the page. I noted that similar edits and revisions to the name of the championship had been made in the past, so I feel that it's reasonable to preserve the page as it was. 68.196.169.156 (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Cornersss

Thanks. Im still learning and appreciate the help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cornersss (talk • contribs) 21:14, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

AMERICAN THEATER (WWII)

the reason i had edited that page on the AMERICAN THEATER (WWII) was that any operation in Alaska and Greenland by definition of the boundaries of the American Theater.

The eastern boundary is from the North Pole, south along the 75th meridian west longitude to the 77th parallel north latitude, then southeast through Davis Strait to the intersection of the 40th parallel north latitude, then southeast to the intersection of the 40th parallel north latitude, then southeast to the intersection of the Equator and the 20th meridian west longitude, then along the 20th meridian west longitude to the South Pole.

  This would have made Greenland an operational area in the European-African-Middle Eastern Theater.

The western boundary is from the North Pole, south along the 141st meridian west longitude to the east boundary of Alaska, then south and southeast along the Alaska boundary to the Pacific Ocean, then southeast to the intersection of the Equator and the 100th meridian west longitude, then along the 100th meridian west longitude to the South Pole.

  This would have made Alaska an operational area in Asiatic-Pacific Theater.

  Also FYI Newfoundland was not part of Canada until after WW2, effective time, unknown.

American_Campaign_Medal European_African_Middle_East_Campaign_Medal Asiatic_Pacific_Campaign_Medal Philrayearl (talk) 21:48, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Phillip R Earles

if you look at American Campaign Medal; Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal; and European African Middle East Campaign Medal at Wikipedia you will find that Alaska was in the Asiatic-Pacific Theater and Greenland was in the EAME Theater not the American Theater. Philrayearl (talk) 22:52, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Phillip R Earles

Thanks for stopping by my Talk page, Philrayearl. I noticed your removal of content at American Theater (World War II) while patrolling for vandalism. When I looked to see the reason for the removal in the Edit Summary, I didn't see anything listed there. That definitely made it look more like a schoolkid with too much time on their hands deleting stuff. But, giving you the benefit of the doubt, I asked for a reason and you seemed to have pretty good one. Please feel free to make the edits again, preferably with a sentence or two in the Edit Summary about why you are deleting content. If you want to discuss it further or lay everything out as you did here, the article's Talk page would be the best spot for that. If you are reverted by another editor, definitely head to the article Talk page and discuss your reasoning there and try to gain WP:Consensus for the content removal. Good luck, Stesmo (talk) 23:29, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

the use of actions in Alaska and Greenland in the American Theater (WW2) is wrong. The boundaries of the American Theater; Asiatic-Pacific Theater; and European, African Middle Eastern Theater are all described in the American Campaign Medal, Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal, and European African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal at Wikipedia. Also ref: Center For Military History, U.S. Army Philrayearl (talk) 03:16, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Philrayearl. This seems like something better suited for the Talk page of that article or the article itself and not my Talk page. My interest in your edits were purely if they were vandalism or not. You've satisfied me that they weren't. Good luck, Stesmo (talk) 06:24, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Economic growth

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Economic growth. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Greedhf

Might I ask why it was removed? EK can stand for "Exploit Kit", was it due to the link I posted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greedhf (talk • contribs) 20:40, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Greedhf. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. That is the reason I reverted your edit. It contained an external link in the body of the article WP:EL. Just removing the link wouldn't have helped, as that page is a disambiguation page, which should only entries that have valid links to Wikipedia articles. Feel free to add back Exploit Kit with a link that points to a Wikipedia article about exploit kits. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 22:28, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Gary Oldman

Hi there.

I have been Gary Oldman's manager and business partner for nearly 30 years. Often, quite often, things on the web about famous people are wrong. Sometimes they are even damaging. Gary Oldman is no exception. And Wiki is a place that is riddled with misinformation at times. Much of the misinformation is not sourced, and on the occasion that it is sourced, often then it is wrong information to begin with. Sometimes these things are professional. For example, Gary was not in the film The Thin Red Line--never was, and never was going to be in it. However, on the internet it is a sworn truth that he was in it and cut from it! Sometimes the things are personal--there is a lot about Gary out there that is simply wrong about his personal life.

So occasionally we correct these things so the right thing is out there. Sometimes after we make the correction, others with no knowledge whatsoever remove the truthful correction and return the inaccurate information.

About recent personal things with Gary--he and Alex separated over a year ago; when they met in late 2007, she was a waitress at a place he frequented.

There in fact is much more on the Oldman wiki page that needs correction, but frankly, after making many corrections only to have them changed to wrong stuff, one just gives up as it is a losing war.

Perhaps you might care to help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.129.124.95 (talk) 23:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 142.129.124.95. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. If you see unsourced, contentious information on a Biography of a Living Person (WP:BLP), it can be immediately removed, whether the information is good, bad or neutral. See WP:BLP for more information. If you want to add information about Gary Oldman (or his wives/ex-wives), you'll probably want to include a reliable, third-party source so the information remains. The source, when I saw your edit, for his latest wife did not say "waitress", instead it discusses her singing career. Additionally, while Oldman apparently worked in a sports shop when younger, I'm sure you wouldn't expect someone to remove "actor" and replace it with "sports store sales clerk" in his article. I imagine Wikipedia would be a much different place if all of the actors were described by their non-actor jobs instead of what they're known for.

Something you'll need to consider is your Conflict of Interest (COI)/self-promotion conflict in editing Gary Oldman's article. As his business partner and manager, you should probably not be doing a lot of editing in that article before you read, understand and follow the COI policies. Good luck, Stesmo (talk) 00:21, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Mark Pryor

Hello, I made the edit on Mark Pryor's page because no one had included the result of the most recent election under the section of the article titled "2014 election". Although someone had included the numbers from the voting results under "electoral history" these results were not mentioned in the area above. Indeed it looked almost like it might have looked before the election. So I simply added the numbers in. Also I do believe it was accurate to call Pryor's defeat a landslide as he lost 56% to 39%. As for citations, I was merely putting in the voting percentages and as stated above they are included in the "electoral history" segment, so maybe that could count as proof? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:a000:e6c5:7400:15cd:7024:66f2:c9fc (talk • contribs)

Hi, 2606:a000:e6c5:7400:15cd:7024:66f2:c9fc. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. You provided facts and a claim in your edit in the biography of Mark Pryor (election results and "It was the worst defeat for an incumbent Senator on election night"). There is an expectation that editors will include reliable, third-party sources to back up claims, allowing other editors and readers to verify for themselves. In an article that isn't a biography of a living person WP:BLP, you may see "Citation Needed", but in BLPs, the standard is much higher. Contentions info/claims added to a BLP should be removed immediately without reliable sources. Absolutely feel free to add the information with citation showing where you got the information. To sign your Talk comments, just add four ~'s, like this: Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 19:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Wassermelone89

Hi Stesmo, you reverted my changes to hospitality service. I think I was changing a blur of words into something resembling a sentence, apparently STiki didn't see that. Do not think what I did was anywhere near vandalism. Wassermelone89 (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Wassermelone89, thanks for stopping by my Talk page. You are right. While I don't think your edit did much to dispel confusion as to what that link pointed to, it isn't a clear case of vandalism. Upon reviewing the Hospitality article, I did notice that there were external links other editors added into the body of the article. I removed those list entries, as they were external links in the body of the article WP:EL and did not point to an existing Wikipedia article. If a page is created for those removed entries, hopefully someone will add back that entry. Because of WP:EL, I also edited your addition to a hitchhiking article, where you added external links to the body of the article. I converted one to an existing Wikipedia article (Hitchwiki?). Thanks again, Stesmo (talk) 22:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

You're right about hitchwiki, sorry and thanks! Wassermelone89 (talk) 23:24, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Shannon Sharpe

Your facts are not accurate. Michelle Bundy is a verified stalker by the Atlanta Police. She is not the mother of Shannon Sharpe's child. Where are you finding these alleged 10 previous cases? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iambigperm (talk • contribs)

Hi, Iambigperm/2601:0:8600:1378:619E:2682:D775:69C8. I'm not finding anything, own any of those facts or adding anything to that article. I'm reverting your promotional edits that were replacing unflattering, sourced comments. I know nothing of Shannon Sharpe, but I do know that your edits are not following neutral point of view and Conflict of Interest policies (you've mentioned you work with/for Shannon Sharpe). Stesmo (talk) 04:10, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Why was the Public Domain Thred Link removed?

Hi, I originally created this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_embroidery_software

Recently, you removed the link to the Thred source code which was Public domain. Yet, you left the link to the Thred source code ported with winelib. I'm pretty sure you did this by accident as the link to the Thred source code has been there before the article was initially approved. The links were added to clarify that there are two different versions of the source code and the intent was purely academic. Thred is no longer developed and as such does not constitute advertising. The source code was released by the original author so that it would be freely available to others.

As far as eliminating the External link list at the bottom, it appears that is likely the best solution as I noticed that others were using the page for advertising purposes.

Red team316 (talk) 22:53, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Red team316. Nice job on the extensive table and article! I removed the external links in the EL section because they didn't meet WP:EL. As you noticed, it had essentially become a place for companies to drop their advertising / spam. In the body of the article, I removed references that seemed more like promotional links and less like sources for the text. The source's link for winelib was to a site where the GNU license is mentioned (bottom of page). While the winelib isn't a third-party source, the information seemed non-controversial enough that it works as a source. The Public Domain cite wasn't to a website or magazine/news article showing it was Public Domain, but instead to a zip file that needed to be downloaded. It wasn't a "winelib rules, public domain droolz!" bias. :D Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Shannon Sharpe's personal life

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_Sharpe With the case dismissed, the DENVER POST reports an acquaintance of Bundy claims she was “infatuated” with the CBS commentator and recently moved to Atlanta “to be close to Shannon Sharpe’s house.” While another said, “everyone knows this (the charges that led to the restraining order) is a lie.” Troy Holocker of Denver told the Post: “My first reaction was: ‘Oh, my God, this woman is trying to put the screws to this guy.’ Everyone knows this is a lie. This is what the woman went out to do. To hear this woman drag his name through the mud made me mad.“ Thayne Davis of Roxborough, Colo., told the Post: “She’s been infatuated with Shannon Sharpe for years to the point I think she was kind of stalking him. She moved to Georgia to be closer to him. She has some insane idea in her head that he’s going to be in a relationship with her.” More from the Post on Davis and Bundy: Davis and his wife recently allowed Bundy and her daughter to live in their Roxborough home for a few months. However, Davis said Bundy had overstayed her welcome at their home and was ordered to leave in late-June. “We had to get the police to escort her out,” Davis said. “She was fabricating stories against me too.” Davis said Bundy had lived in Denver for several years, including a stretch when she worked for a television station. Bundy met Sharpe, Davis said, during a time when she was granted media credentials to the Broncos’ games and locker room at designated interview times. Davis said he occasionally accompanied Bundy as a photographer. Bundy lived in New York for about five years, Davis said, then returned this year to the Denver area before recently moving to the Atlanta area. “She sold everything she had, bought an RV and moved out to be close to Shannon Sharpe’s house,” Davis said. The Post did not make clear what Bundy’s relationship was to Davis or Holocker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iambigperm (talk • contribs) 02:10, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Nokia N72

Hello, Stesmo I just wanted to clear that I didn't removed any content from Nokia N72. I just added some video related content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarang Rajvanshi (talk • contribs) 14:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Tarang Rajvanshi. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. I would not have reverted [your edit] if it was only the addition of the details about a video player. I reverted your edit because you removed the infobox for no apparent (or stated) reason. Please note that trademark symbols should not be included in Wikipedia per MOS:TMRULES. Feel free to add back your information (without the trademark symbol) to that article. And, if you have a good reason and are willing to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's Talk page, you can remove the Infobox, too. A note: Please add your comments on my Talk page to the bottom of the section and sign with four ~'s. If starting a new section, click New Section at the top of the Talk page or add one manually at the bottom of the page. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 17:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Zach Weinersmith

You just deleted an edit I made of the residence of Zach Weinersmith. So the guy directly telling me that he has just moved to Houston isn't considered a reliable source here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobinHanson (talk • contribs) 22:56, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, RobinHanson. As stupid as the policy sounds, that's correct. Now, if he mentioned it in an interview or a reporter/author wrote it and it was published/aired by a reliable source, then it could be added to Wikipedia. Essentially, any editor or reader should be able to review the sources to verify for themselves. And, biographies have a higher standard for requiring sources than articles about companies, etc. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Stevie Ray Vaughan edit revert

Hi there -

Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! It's appreciated.

In regards to my commit, I went in to fix a formatting error, but I have the Chrome 'Cloud to Butt' extension installed (normally humorous) and it unintentionally changed the instance of cloud in the text box. I'll have to watch out for that in the future. Thanks for catching that! :)

Sam Cawthorn

Hey there,

Not sure if this is a wiki issue, but the link on the Sam Cawthorn page for bemotivated.com.au points to someone's online Nike shop. I think everything else is fine, otherwise. Thanks for all your great work. 220.244.174.112 (talk) 11:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)Darrell220.244.174.112 (talk) 11:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 220.244.174.112. Thanks for letting me know about the bemotivated site. It looks like most of the links in the external links section were dead or unnecessary, as well. Thanks again, Stesmo (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Liliane Bettencourt

Can you please look at what you're reverting to? It's the same site, just an older page. If the site is not a WP:RS the entire sentence should be removed. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:30, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, NeilN. I did look at what I was reverting. I reverted a ton of spam this morning from that user and reviewed each before doing so. While the link may be useful as a reference, it is an external link, which shouldn't be placed in the body of an article. This page was different than a lot of the spam, in that it actually replaced existing text and wasn't just slapped in the lead paragraph without consideration of appropriateness. I've reverted my 2nd revert and converted the external link to a reference. Sound good? Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 21:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. Your last edit summary got cut off and I wasn't looking as carefully as I should have been so I missed the ref suggestion. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:43, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Drastic Edit to Edexcel article

Your recent edit to the Pearson Edexcel article removed lots of valuable information. I'm quite tempted to revert it as the page used to be an in-depth article on the exam board but now consists of a couple of paragraphs. Why did you make these changes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnxsmith (talk • contribs) 21:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Johnxsmith. Thanks for stopping by my talk page. The edits you're referring to are these, correct? The short answer is: the overwhelming majority of page didn't meet Wikipedia's Core Content Policies.

The long answer: The first edit removed external links in the body of the article, which runs afoul of WP:EL. The second edit's edit summary is: Removed unsourced promotional content. Removed duplicate info. Tightened language. Requested reliable sources (not from Pearson, Edexcel or press releases) to keep claims in article. I feel that I explained my edits well in that summary. I removed the promotional content (see Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion), the promotional external links (WP:EL), the unsourced claims WP:Verifiability, and various tightening (removing duplicate info, padding, etc.). And, I requested reliable, third-party published source (not from Pearson, Edexcel or press releases) for the remaining claims. If those Citation Needed requests go unanswered, they'll be removed, as well.

There is exactly one reference in that article that doesn't point to Edexcel.com (points to a Maltese domain, which may still be under Edexcel's control/input). That reference isn't a reliable, third-party published source. In fact, due to the lack of reliable sources in the current article, I'm not even sure the subject of this article meets WP:Notability standards, either.

Please feel free to add back Edexcel content as long as it isn't promotional, doesn't contain external links in the body of the article, aren't trivial and are reliable sourced (not from Edexcel, related company or press release). This article could use some help, especially in showing it's Notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Thanks again for stopping by. Stesmo (talk) 22:23, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, many thanks for your feedback. :)

Johnxsmith (talk) 09:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Beepi article

Hello. Thanks for reviewing the Beepi article. I am a tech journalist and have become very fascinated by this company's innovations. It's one of those hyper-growth companies that went from nowhere to $200 million valuation in less than a year. So I spent some time giving them a reworked page with much more information.

Anyway, perhaps I went too far in explaining the background of the company. That said, the key innovation being reported by the tech and business press is how the marketplace works and why it is different than online classified listings. So I restored that language, but in a more neutral tone. I left references and a longer explanation on the Talk page for the article.

I also restored the reference to the company accepting BitCoin to pay for cars. That's not a frivilous detail. Many stories about this decision have appeared in the tech press because it is perhaps the largest consumer transaction now possible with the digital currency. I included references and more discussion on the Talk page of the article.

New stories are appearing about this company very frequently. I have just noticed a story in Wired magazine that I have yet to cite. Indications are that it will become an important company.

Thanks BC1278 (talk) 20:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC)BC1278

Hi, BC1278. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page.

Thanks for restoring some of the services information to Beepi. I was just typing out in the Talk page about how my edit removed too much and didn't include enough about the products/services when I saw you added back some of that. I've tightened the language up some more and made sure Bitcoin info was included. While I don't believe most folks outside of the bitcoin world would find it that interesting or notable, it is an interesting detail for now. At some point, if Bitcoin continues to be accepted by businesses (up to ~50,000 via Bitpay) it may be as trivial as saying "Beepi accepts credit cards".

Do note that Wikipedia is more about what has already happened than about how awesome a company might be in the future. I look forward to the reliable sources that will talk about how many cars they've sold, how profitable they are/aren't, about when they've gone public, etc.

As to the 'marketplace'. Are you talking about the peer-to-peer marketplace? If so, that info seems more like a separate article and doesn't have a place in Beepi other than in the See Also or a "Beepi is a peer-to-peer marketplace" sentence.

I'd like to mention something to you about editing Wikipedia. If you're going to use the same reference more than once, please use Ref Name= as seen in Help:Citations_quick_reference. You can define the name for the first use (<ref Name="blah">example.com</ref>) and then just use <ref name="blah" /> for the other footnotes. This will keep the references section from filling up with dozens of the same link, as it did in Beepi. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 20:38, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Beepi change

Thanks for your additional edits. I made one change, which I explained on the Beepi Talk page also. I changed the word "middleman" to "peer-to-peer marketplace" because it is much more technically accurate. Middleman suggests an entity that possibly takes possession of the goods, as some middlemen do. Beep is a marketplace because it provides the venue or platform for the sale, via its software, but is never an actual party to the sale. This is a really important economic, legal and practical difference.

As per your suggestion, I may go back and find info on their current sales, growth etc. I think I read it somewhere but will have to go back and find it.

Thanks for the style note. I was wondering how to do that. BC1278 (talk) 20:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)BC1278

Hey, BC1278... Yes, but the reader may know what a middleman is, but "peer-to-peer marketplace" seems more like marketing talk / buzzword. What does that mean? How does a Wikipedia reader figure out what that means? It's not notable enough to be a Wikipedia article...

Middle man, in the sense of Intermediary, does have a known meaning here. I'm open to another word, like intermediary , but "peer-to-peer marketplace" doesn't seem like an accessible phrase that defines what Beepi does. Beepi definitely is an intermediary, though, as it "is a third party that offers intermediation services between two trading parties. The intermediary acts as a conduit for goods or services offered by a supplier to a consumer. Typically the intermediary offers some added value to the transaction that may not be possible by direct trading." Stesmo (talk) 21:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Peer to Peer Marketplace in Beepi

Hi. I've changed it to just marketplace for the time being. A marketplace is means there is a large volume of good and services available for sale in one place, often without a range of intermediaries between the buyer and seller. An intermediary or middleman means there are layers between the buyer and the seller, when in fact the specific business model of Beepi and similar companies like Uber Technologies, Airbnb, LendingTree, and many other newcomers is disintermediation. In other words, to quote from the Disintermediation entry "the removal of intermediaries in a supply chain, or "cutting out the middlemen". Instead of going through traditional distribution channels, which had some type of intermediate (such as a distributor, wholesaler, broker, or agent), companies may now deal with every customer directly, for example via the Internet. One important factor is a drop in the cost of servicing customers directly.""

Peer-to-peer is actually a technical term from computer science that is now being widely applied to a whole series of hugely disruptive new business models that furthers disintermediation by cutting out even more layers. Peer-to-peer renting exploded because of Airbnb. As Peer-to-peer renting explains "Peer-to-peer renting services and Platforms are usually online marketplaces connecting individuals and enabling rental transactions between them. Peer-to-peer marketplaces are an evolution from the traditional Business-to-business marketplaces (also referred as B2B), and Business-to-consumer marketplaces (also referred as B2C)."

We also have huge new marketplaces in Peer-to-peer lending, Peer to peer investing, peer-to-peer banking, [[ and Peer-to-peer carsharing in the form of Uber. Tech entrepreneurs have been going market to market (hotels, taxis, car sales, banking) and figuring out how to apply Disintermediation. In aggregate, some refer to all the explosions of peer-to-peer activity as the sharing economy.

So I hope you'll see I've chosen my words carefully to represent a specific and highly notable kind of economic and technology activity. BC1278 (talk) 15:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)BC1278

Thanks, BC1278. I understand both the terms peer-to-peer and marketplace, as well as the general trend of "disruption". My point is that 1) it's a marketing term / buzzword and 2) readers may not know what it is. And, notice what your "marketplaces" list of articles in the third paragraph is lacking... "peer-to-peer marketplace".

Specifically, Beepi is an intermediary and not a marketplace. It's not replacing some distribution channel, as used cars don't really have one. The model it's trying to shove its way into is between the posting of cars on craigslist (requiring no distribution channel and no third party being involved in the transaction other than for posting the ad) and used-car dealerships (where the original car owner has sold the car to a third party (dealership) and the third party is now trying to clear its inventory and sell it, perhaps having to offer guarantees and warranties). Beepi does not just accept an ad, it also guarantees the quality of the goods (inspection), arranges for delivery, accepts payment, offers a guarantee of sale, etc. In fact, if the car doesn't sell, Beepi buys the car that's for sale and is now the used-car dealer trying to clear its inventory. Yay for disruption?

Unlike any of the examples used (car-sharing and lending/investing/banking), the used-car selling already had a peer-to-peer element for decades via classifieds/Craigslist, local physical bulletin boards, online bulletin boards / forums / message boards and even a sign in the window of the car. For that market, Beepi is actually introducing layers between the buyer and the seller. Layers I'm sure folks are willing to pay for, but it's not removing them.

I understand it's very exciting and cool, especially if you're in Silicon Valley and/or have a piece of that pie, but Wikipedia doesn't really do exciting. And, the risk being run here of trying to breathlessly brand this with a marketing buzzword is that it makes it harder for the non-techie/non-Silicon Valley readers to understand what the subject is. If there isn't an article there for a reader who isn't sure what a peer-to-peer marketplace is, then a less cool term or phrase should be used so people interested in learning about Beepi can learn about Beepi. Stesmo (talk) 17:59, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

@Stesmo: A Marketplace is simply, to quote Wikipedia, "A place where buying and selling occurs." Beepi is a marketplace, in both standard language and formal economic terms. Except in unusual circumstances, it does not take possession of the cars. It provides a place where buyers and sellers can exchange goods for capital and provides them with services to assure that the transaction is transparent and honest, just like a stockmarket. As the Market maker, it sets the rules for the transaction and attempts to make it as smooth or friction-less as possible. Just like the New York Stock Exchange, in unusual circumstances, where there isn't a match between a buyer and seller, it will step in on one side of a transaction as a Market maker to assure market liquidity.

Here is a partial list of news publications that have described Beepi as a "market" or "marketplace":

-the Wall Street Journal http://www.wsj.com/articles/beepi-raises-60-million-to-sell-used-cars-to-smartphone-generation-1412738102/ -Wired http://www.wired.com/2015/02/beepi/ -MIT Technology Review Spanish Edition http://www.technologyreview.es/tr35argentinayuruguay/profile.aspx?trid=1524 -Techcrunch http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/06/beepi-60m/ -Re/code (created by WSJ senior business reporters Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberger) http://recode.net/2014/04/15/beepi-could-be-the-car-buying-site-weve-been-waiting-for/

That should suffice. Wikipedia favors the evidence provided by independent, verifiable sources WP:Verifiability All these sources refer to Beepi as a marketplace or market. I can find no source that refer to it as an intermediary - and I looked carefully. So in the end, my analysis and yours are less important than what the verifiable sources say.

When I get a chance, I will write an entry for peer-to-peer marketplaces or redirect that entry to Social peer-to-peer processes because as the peer-to-peer renting listing states, all these other new categories are forms of peer-to-peer marketplaces. Rent-a-room and share-a-ride were and are also both popular electronic and physical bulletin board entries, (just like buy a car), and yet Airbnb and Uber are considered among the most significant disintermediaries of the last decade because they removed middlemen from the housing and taxi industries, respectively. As with Beepi, these services provide a platform for buyers and sellers to conduct a transaction - they do not actually buy or sell the good and service, themselves (except rarely, to make the market.) Beepi is disintermediating used car dealers (actually, it's a complex eco-system of wholesalers and retailers, but I don't have the citations at hand, so I won't try to document that here. Suffice to say there are several mark ups, resulting in cars being sold substantially more expensively than peer-to-peer.)

Its model is identical to all these other disintermediation plays in the peer-to-peer economy. FYI, as you raised it, I'm in New York, not Silicon Valley. I've been writing about economics and markets for 25 years, although I am not claiming my expertise matters. I'm just citing the sources. BC1278 (talk) 00:18, 14 February 2015 (UTC)BC1278

Congratulations

		The Silver STiki Barnstar of Merit
		Congratulations, Stesmo! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 10,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Widr (talk) 05:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about the improper link

Hi, Stesmo, I had fixed a bad external link for Cape Gazette on another page and thought this was the same situation. It won't happen again. If I can persuade our management into creating a valid Wikipedia page for our newspaper, may I use that internal link in List of Delaware Newspapers? Thanks, Teresa :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teresar WV (talk • contribs) 18:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome, Teresar WV! Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. I have good news and bad news. Good news: You absolutely can use the internal link (aka Wikilink) to the article about your newspaper in that list and elsewhere in Wikipedia where ever the paper is referenced. The bad news: You and your paper shouldn't be doing much other than simple edits (like linking to an existing article) if your edit concerns your newspaper. Please take a look at the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. All is not lost, though... You can still request an article be written about your paper... See I think my organization deserves an article on Wikipedia but none exists. What can I do?. Please don't take this as a "don't edit Wikipedia", though. Please continue to edit, just with caution around areas you may have WP:COI. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 19:32, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

John Kunich

Please advise what sources are considered not reliable. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aew2145 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Aew2145, thanks for stopping by my Talk page. You can check out the Biographies of Living People sources WP:BLPSOURCES and at WP:SOURCE. A rule of thumb is: except for really basic information (where someone is born, company headquarters, etc.), sources should be reliable, third-party and published. A press release, blog post, author bio, etc. aren't going to work for most claims. If there's a problem with finding reliable, secondary sources, Kunich may not be a "Notable" enough subject for a Wikipedia article.

"A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Notability_(people)

Thanks for stopping by... Stesmo (talk) 23:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Marian Anderson Edits

Hi. This IP is the Free Library Of Philadelphia. There is little I can do to control edits. I'm sorry if someone was messing with one of your pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.98.224.98 (talk) 20:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 38.98.224.98. Thanks for letting me know. It happens... If it gets pretty bad, an administrator might place a temporary editing block for folks on the IP for those who aren't using an account if it gets out of hand. Stesmo (talk) 20:13, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi

I have edit the link because it is broken and it is relevant to the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piyushj2005 (talk • contribs) 21:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Edit request for Sophie Hunter page

Hunter has notable family members and should be included in her infobox. Please do help me in adding the family parameter. :) You can just copy-paste the one I made. Just replace the parentheses with brackets for linking. All references are in the family section of her page already. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!

|family= ((Michael Gow (British Army officer)|Michael James Gow GCB))(maternal grandfather)
((J. E. B. Seely, 1st Baron Mottistone)) (maternal great-great-grandfather)
((Timothy Carlton)) (father-in-law)
((Wanda Ventham)) (mother-in-law)

58.140.17.253 (talk) 01:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 58.140.17.253. I see someone else took care of this for you. Stesmo (talk) 22:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Edit to monster.com

Hi, Stesmo, the reason I deleted those entries from monster.com page was because I noticed that of the 1560+ words in that page, 960+, or approximately 62%, was negative. Some sentences are also repeated. Is "trafficated" even a word? Yet it is mentioned twice. On the whole, that page is sloppy.

The page is also outdated. May the following sentence be added after "in January 2013, ranks Monster.com third behind Indeed.com and a close second to Careerbuilder.com": "As of February 2015, the most popular job websites are Indeed, Monster.com and Glassdoor."

I have a lot of respect for Wikipedia and would not want to think that it is in the pay of some competitors of Monster, out to launch a smear campaign on the poor company. Does Wikipedia have a policy against malicious attack on entities? Lizzydarcy2008 (talk) 01:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Lizzydarcy2008. Do you work for Monster.com, an affiliated company, a PR/Promotional company or are otherwise affiliated with Monster.com? Your edits and comments here give the impression that you have a conflict of interest and that you should not be making edits in respect to Monster.com on Wikipedia except in the Talk pages. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion.

If you are not affiliated with Monster.com... Wikipedia strives for a neutral point of view, but that doesn't mean that positive or negative claims, if backed with reliable sources, can't be included. While I agree that article needs work, removing anything that isn't glowing about the company is not the way to go about it. The issue I had was with the PR whitewashing and not fixing grammatical errors or updating stats. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 22:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Stesmo, Thanks for the pointer about external links. I did check whether the entry I inserted had an internal link, but it didn't. So I wasn't sure if I should leave it without any links or go ahead and add the external link. Thanks for correcting my mistake. I'll keep this in mind the next time.--Naray81 (talk) 15:41, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Naray81. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. In general, if there isn't a Wikipedia article about a subject, it shouldn't be added to a list. If you think that something really should be in that list, there isn't an article on it *and* the subject is WP:Notable, then you may want to create an article (or make a request for the article to be written). Then, you can add a link to that article on that list. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 22:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Links to non-English Wikipedia entries

Some of the companies listed in Fabrice Grinda have Wikipedia entries in other languages. French, Portuguese, etc. These include very notable (and large) companies in Brazil, France, etc. that warrant a Wikipedia entry only in their home market. But I think they pass the notability requirement for inclusion on a list of investments. Is there a way [[]] to link to entries on foreign language versions of Wikipedia? Am I correct that if they are notable in a foreign language version of Wikipedia they should be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BC1278 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey, BC1278. Yes, use [[:lang:Article]] or [[:lang:Article|Other Text]] , an example for pointing to the Spanish Mont Blanc article: es:Mont Blanc or Mont Blanc. Oh, and to sign your talk comments, use four tildes (~~~~), like this: Stesmo (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Why Did You Remove the Links form That article

Hey i just check the article "Amit Agarwal" now and find out that you have removed many links. I think that those links are necessary .please add those again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagar Basak (talk • contribs) 02:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Sagar Basak. I removed those links because they did not meet WP:EL. Please read through that link for more information. Also, please read Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion and WP:SPAMLINKS for more information on why you should not be adding links to your own websites as you did in WhatsApp. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 02:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your edits to Byron Udell and Accuquote that no-one else could be bothered to do. —George8211 / T 18:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Resume Edit

Hi Stesmo,

I edited the resume page today and don't understand why you removed the citation. Please explain.

Chefnewman (talk) 19:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Chefnewman. It was less of a reliable, third-party published source and more like Spam. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 19:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Navigation box to nowhere

As I have stated, red links are good. It you believe that some of those are not notable, then they can be removed with that comment. Or, redirects can be crated to another article that talks about them. However there is not justification for simply deleting a red link because it is a red link! Vegaswikian (talk) 17:57, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Vegaswikian. Thanks for stopping by. You'll notice that I hadn't removed the redlinks from the Pinnacle article for this reason. From that very guideline you linked to:

"Red links generally are not included in either See also sections or in navigational boxes, nor linked to through templates such as {{Main}} or {{Further}}, since these navigation aids are intended to help readers find existing articles. An exception is red links in navboxes where the red-linked articles are part of a series or a whole set, e.g. a navbox listing successive elections, referenda, presidents, sports league seasons, and the like."

As a casinos belonging to one company don't meet the "successive" criteria above, I'm sure you can agree now that the navbox redlinks should be removed while retaining the redlinks in the Pinnacle article to help folks understand those articles need to be created (if they meet WP:NOTABLE). Thanks for stopping by my Talk page and continuing the discussion. Stesmo (talk) 19:07, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Your own quote supports the inclusion of the redlinks. This navbox is an example of a "whole set", comparable to a list of presidents. Red links are obviously problematic in a navbox with an ill-defined set of topics such as {{philosophy topics}}, but they are perfectly sensible for a navbox that circumscribes a finite set of notable topics (and all the Pinnacle properties, with the possible exception of the Horseshu, are indeed notable). Toohool (talk) 06:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Toohool. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. The quote absolutely does not show that 8 redlinks for casinos belonging to Pinnacle should be included. It clearly references successive sets. You'd not want to have a navbox of all pingpong championships in the 1960s and leave out a redlink'd 1961, as an example. Adding redlinks for 8 casinos out of 24 for Pinnacle doesn't fit the criteria. Mayhaps if they were named Pinnacle First, Pinnacle Second, Pinnacle Third, etc. and the 2nd one was a redlink...

Now, if these casinos are notable, I'm sure someone will create pages for them any day now and *then* they can be added to the navbox and the navbox template added to those articles. And at that point we can all be happy with that navbox template. But, until then that navbox should not include 8 redlinks. Stesmo (talk) 06:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

You are reading the word "successive" as applying to the whole list of "elections, referenda, presidents, sports league seasons", where I believe it only applies to "elections". Otherwise, the words "or a whole set" have no meaning in this sentence. I don't think your view is unreasonable, but you have made your change, it has been reverted by 3 different editors, and you should not keep re-applying it without gaining some consensus. You may want to brush up on WP:BRD. And if you have doubts about the notability of these casinos, you can say so, and I can explain in great detail how I know that they are all notable. Toohool (talk) 07:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Toohool. This isn't a matter of "well, I think that the contributions of General Smith should be emphasized more than those of General Jones in the article". This is a matter "this doesn't meet Wikipedia guidelines". Removing redlinks from a navbox is more mild, than bold in this case. On the matter of their notability, if the casinos have notability, an article will be written about them. I have zero problem with articles being written about these casinos if they meet WP:NOTABILITY or not written about them. I really don't have a dog in this fight... I am neither against or for Pinnacle or their properties. I have no idea if the casinos are notable or not. However, a template whose sole purpose is to guide readers to articles (in this case about Pinnacle's properties) should link to actual articles and not redlinks. That's where I'm coming from on this. It would work out perfectly if someone wrote up 8 great articles and added those no-longer-redlinks back to the Pinnacle navbox. Everyone wins, including the readers. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 07:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

You have your interpretation of the guideline and others have a different interpretation. If you want to make your changes, get consensus. Toohool (talk) 08:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Fullpower Technologies

Do we need to do anything about the large number of SPAs on this article? —George8211 / T 18:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey, George8211. They appear to be sockpuppets of a PR firm / in-house marketing of Fullpower. I've been thinking about submitting them to SPI for their edits on Philippe Kahn, Fullpower Technologies and Manufacture Modules Technologies (MMT). I just need to get up the energy to grab all the diffs and submit. Current SPA is at least improving the article by removing press releases cites and replacing with published articles.Stesmo (talk) 19:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Diffs: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], and Noahjohn's nine (as of now) edits: [24].

Just to overload you, here's a diff of Philippe Kahn, and also Noahjohn's contribs. —George8211 / T 19:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

FYI, in the history of the Fullpower Technologies article, everything from Noahjohn's edit (at 19:11 UTC today, removing 1 byte) upwards hasn't been included in my list. —George8211 / T 19:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, George8211. I've opened a SPI at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/NoahJohn.

Folding editor

I see that you removed the link (on 23 Feb 20015 at 18:02) which I re-added (it had been there for a couple of years already), pointing potential Winf32 users to my download site. There is no other download site for winf32. Your rationale for this was that "Reverting promotional external link masquerading as a cite". If this were so then wouldn't any url to any possible free download site fall into this category, like emacs (if it's that free) or whatever? I have nothing else to promote here than winf32, it's free, there's no hidden expensenses after downloading, and in my blog I take no AD-words or any ads from it. I have zero income from it and so it will be. Finally I have no wish to promote my own blog in the Wikipedia context. On the contrary:

• If you can suggest a site where winf32 could be placed that you could accept on behalf ow Wikipedia, please tell me and I would copy them over.

If not, Wikipedia users are left with the odd search engines to try to find the download site.

But there was no "masquarding" going on here. If you still say that there is a masquerading in the strictest sense, then I'd say it wasn't meant to.

I apologise if the url has caused any trouble to Wikipedia's users or principles. Please advice! Øyvind Teig (talk) 14:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Aclassifier. The reference wasn't to a reliable, third-party published source in an attempt to allow for verification of claims or statements. Which puts it more in the External Links category and less in the citation/reference category. In addition, it appears to be promoting a product (even if that product is free). Other companies may have met the WP:Notability guidelines and have a Wikipedia article and a link to their website. I'd also remove any of those company's links that point to their download site or blog instead of their regular, official website unless it was used as a valid citation.

I'd like to assure you that I am sure you have placed that link in an attempt to do the right thing, but I don't think Wikipedia is the place for promoting Winf32. I wish you good luck on finding the right place to promote your product. Stesmo (talk) 18:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Stesmo. I remember I was uncertain when I first put the url there and might have commented on my doubts (but I can't find when I did that the first time, it might have been in the Code folding page). As long as my intentention isn't doubted I am fine too! (The "masquerading" word kicked me on my leg! Maybe another reason text would have saved us this thread). I do agree that Wikipedia isn't the place to promote anything, really.Øyvind Teig (talk) 11:35, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Why did you remove my LAMAR HS LCT post?

Why did you do that? Your argument is invalid if you read the original post. I will make it neutral, but what you told me is total BS. why didn't you take down the post currently up that DOWNtalks it?

Decaffe6996 (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)decaffe6996 3-4-15

Hello, Decaffe6996. I removed your edit because it was promotional. I wasn't editing that page, I was reviewing edits made recently. While your edit was promotional, you are absolutely right that the paragraph there has unsourced content that should be removed. I recommend you remove the contentious content that doesn't have a reliable, third-party published source and enter an Edit Summary stating why you are removing that content. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 00:03, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Eleanor Clitheroe

Hi,

Thanks for correcting my mistakes - it was from my ipad, and the editing was not going well.

I was trying to change that Eleanor "is" the Executive Director to "was" the Executive Director. She left that position in 2013.

The organization is trying to contact all sites that have her listed as ED to clean up that information, so that they are current and correct.

Mrscplus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrscplus (talk • contribs) 16:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

No problem, Mrscplus. I reverted your edit not for changing "is" to "was", but because you seemed to have accidentally removed part of other text, breaking a link to a Wikipedia article. Stesmo (talk) 18:32, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

You removed scholarly sources?

Hey Stesmo,

I am quite confused about why you thought the content you removed was promotional. It was informative.

I did my due diligence to look up scholarly sources and less well-known sources when editing information on subjects with which I'm familiar and I'm assuming that Wikipedia appreciates reliable but informative content. That is all I was attempting to provide. My purpose was to bring reliable and informative content to Wikipedia, though I do appreciate that you mediate rubbish content off Wiki.

Thanks and I'm curious how in the future I can write posts where they won't be considered promotional, since that is not my goal.

All the best, kgadams93 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kgadams93 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Kgadams93. Which edit? I reverted edits that contained promotional links / references for a beekeeping site from a couple articles and the promotional paragraph about content writing that seemed to be to promote the refspam in the center of that paragraph. None of the edits were reverted for your use of "Crane, E. E. (2013). The world history of beekeeping and honey hunting. Routledge, 341." references or the like. For information on using reliable, third-party published references, you can refer to WP:SOURCES. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 21:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Stesmo,

I read the WP:SOURCES link and it states "Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest." None of my sources should have been considered questionable sources, therefore, since the content on the sites is accurate and reliable. In the future, I am not allowed to reference to less well-known sources? I don't think the book "Crane, E. E. (2013). The world history of beekeeping and honey hunting. Routledge, 341" is very popular if that's the case... Thanks for the clarification :)

All the best, kgadams93 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kgadams93 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015

Please refrain from making constructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Alsatian cuisine. Your recent edit appears to constitute Self-righteousness and has been reverted. Thank you. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:13, March 10, 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahrecht (talk • contribs)

Thanks but you jumped the gun

Thanks for your concern regarding my post on the JOBS Act. Finding a reference for the source is fairly trivial and calling my edits vandalism is somewhat insulting. Obviously, you are just doing what you think is good work. However, I have a username and will add the reference later. If you want to add it, be my guest, but please don't subtract from human knowledge. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.96.128.11 (talk) 22:50, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, 184.96.128.11. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Add your edit back with your source from your IP or your account, either is fine. If you can't be bothered with sourcing it, then it shouldn't be added. No one has called your edits vandalism, just unsourced. Stesmo (talk) 02:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Invitation

Thank you for using VisualEditor and sharing your ideas with the developers.

Hello, Stesmo,

The Editing team is asking very experienced editors like you for your help with VisualEditor. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Five Branches University

Dear Stesmo,

Thank you for your recent activity on the Five Branches University page.

I am an independent researcher who hoped to update the page. As I updated the page, I ensured to the best of my ability that I maintained a neutral tone. Furthermore, when I updated the page, I tried my best to base all content on facts derived from news articles. Only when I wrote descriptions of the programs did I reference the University's website. Previously, the page lacked description of the University's programs and background. Recently, I noticed that you reverted the changes I made on the page. From your page, I understand that you have a dedication to accuracy and Wikipedia's standards. Therefore, I be so appreciative if you could please let me know the specific reasons why you reversed the changes (perhaps the specific sections/words/implications) and kindly advise on how I can improve the page.

Thank you again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amethyst.sapphire (talk • contribs) 20:36, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by my talk page, Amethyst.sapphire. Also, thank you for using third-party, published sources for part of the article. When I reverted the changes, the things that stood out and made me revert the edits were 1) the copy-pasted content from the school's website (which was enough to revert the changes) and 2) unsourced promotional claims like "widely recognized as one of the leading..." If the article had not included the copy-pasted content, I would have just removed the promotional line here or there or included a Citation Needed request in the text. I probably would not have reverted the edits.

For the first issue, please use your own words in the future. Also, do remember that this is an encyclopedia and isn't an advertisement or the school's website: we don't need to include trivial information about the classes or school.

For the second item, such promotional claims (like "widely recognized", first in the nation, etc.), these appear to be promotional, especially as they lack reliable, third-party published sources. If the school is "widely recognized", there should be an abundance of third-party coverage for this as fits the concept of widely recognized :) (though you wouldn't need to include all of them, of course).

Removal or sourcing for the promotional claims and the removal or reduction of the Degree Programs to non-trivial content in your own words (not copy-pasted from their site) and that would be a great improvement for the article.

As a technical point, I saw you were including the same reference three times (not a problem), but were listing the reference in full each time. You can define the first use with a name and then use the name for subsequent usage, like this: 1st time: <ref name="Grows100">http://www.example.com</ref> 2nd time: <ref name="Grows100" /> . If you're using the Visual Editor, enter the first reference as usual and then click Cite | Reuse and select the citation from that list. Stesmo (talk) 05:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Southern Dewberry blackberry mishap.

Thank you for catching my mistake. I meant to create a new page for Rubus trivialis, not to rewrite the page for Rubus argutus. I'm still new to editing things. I want to become better at it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sshannon7 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Sshannon7. Not a problem. Good luck on your journey to become a better Wikipedia editor... I'm still working on that goal myself. Stesmo (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Scarlet Monahan

starting to write up artist, scarlet Monahan. she is well known artist, globally exhibited and known for her cutting satire against the British gov and support of the disabled poor and vulnerable through satirical imagery. please advise I have info about her, exhibitions, publications etc. many believe her to be a true surrealist and the artist of modern society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iconicartlover (talk • contribs) 14:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Iconicartlover. The good news is that since she is a well known artist, it will be easy to find reliable, third-party sources to use as citations for the article! If she fits Wikipedia's definition of "notable", particularly the Wikipedia:Artist's criteria, you're ready to go. I haven't created an article before, but Wikipedia:Your first article seems to be a good place to start. After you've created the article, then add a link to her page at Satirists / artists articles as appropriate. Good luck! Stesmo (talk) 16:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Stesmo, I will check out that link its a big help and add all back links to the page, and satire page. Iconicartlover (talk) 20:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

question on list of Pharma companies

Stemo I see you removed the link to the free database biodirecta with more than 2700 Pharma companies. Why do you think that it is not useful for that to be in the list of Pharma companies page? I am aware of hundreds of students and professors who are in need of such database for free to know what companies are in their countries. Shall I distill content from biodirecta into Wikipedia to make it acceptable for you? I hope this message reaches you. I am still learning how to post and comment. But I am willing to learn. Just let me know how we can make people benefit from this free source of Pharma companies list... Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fgmartinelli (talk • contribs)

Hi, Fgmartinelli. First, that is a list of Pharma companies that meet Wikipedia's notability standards (which means most of them have a Wikipedia article) and isn't a linkfarm to other websites that have lists of Pharma companies. Secondly, if you wish to promote your site or "make people benefit from this free source of Pharma companies" this is not the place for it. Here are a couple links on Wikipedia's policies: External Links, plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Thanks for stopping by my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear Stesmo.sorry for the late reply but I was not notified of your reply. Thanks for your time anyway. I think I understand better what you mean now. Would it be interesting to report on what medicine or disease most of the companies work? We can provide for example X companies research disease a, y companies research disease b and provide link to the related disease page on Wikipedi, having biodirecta only as reference. I still think it would be a big loss of information for people who visit a page called list of Pharma companies not be allowed to know about the existence of other online lists outside Wikipedia. That is what most of the reader expect: or get a list inside wiki or get part of list (notable as you say) and reference to offline source to complement that. It would be a missed service by Wikipedia to make it look like such list do not exist. Because that is what most of students and professors in the sector look for when the actually visit this Wikipedia page... Do you see my point? Can you suggest me a way in which such useful (and free) reference could be provided? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fgmartinelli (talk • contribs) 07:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Fgmartinelli. I'd recommend you read through External Links, plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. I don't believe Wikipedia will be the best place for you to promote your website. Stesmo (talk) 16:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

WebmasterMiller

Hi! Why adding link 'DJ Java Decompiler new download site' - (wich is a link to a commercial project) - is NOT spam, while online tool is spam? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WebmasterMiller (talk • contribs) 19:05, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, WebmasterMiller. That is some serious boldness. I remove a bunch of spammy links (including yours and the one you refer to), which you then put back and then ask me why one of the links you put back is allowed. I removed the "new download site" link as well as yours because they don't meet WP:EL. Stesmo (talk) 19:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Horological Smartwatch

You removed paragraph about Horological Smartwatch. Instead of removing, if you feel it is not neutral, please rewrite:

2015, Frederique Constant introduces the Horological Smartwatch, characterised by the fact that it is based around a dial rather than a screen. Powered by MotionX of Fullpower Technologies, the watches connect to an app on Android or iOS phone, allowing to track activity, measure sleep cycles, and get reminders to be more active if sitting too long. Activity and sleep quality can be seen on a secondary analog dial on the watch face itself.

Please check relevance Horological Smartwatch, there have been numerous articles written about this new product category.

Please reinstate on relevant pages. Thank you, Pcstas (talk) 21:01, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Pcstas. The edits you refer to are the edits added by the Swiss IP User 212.43.136.16 with very obvious COI. This will look familiar to other edits like the ones here https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Manufacture_Modules_Technologies_(MMT)&diff=prev&oldid=652800711 as well as the other or any of the other edits involving MMT / FullPower (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Noahjohn/Archive. I've become far more informed as to Fullpower/MMT/MotionX and the Horological Smartwatch than I had really wanted to be thanks to these PR accounts and edits. Rest assured, they'll be back in a couple days to add another paragraph about MotionX and FullPower to each of these articles (and probably a couple more articles). Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Wow... I just read your page and realized that you are the founder of Frédérique Constant and owners of Alpina. I had no idea. Then, while I've got your attention: Please tell your PR folks to stop it. Thanks! Stesmo (talk) 21:21, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Stesmo, we do not have PR folks writing to Wikipedia pages. I wrote about the Horological Smartwatch, and frankly don't you think there is enough notoriety on this new product category I have been working on for two years? If 15+ TV stations found it interesting to interview me in Basel, don't you think that a short entry on Wikipedia is appropriate? If you are reasonable, please reinstate on Frederique Constant, Peter Stas and MMT. Re-write if you feel necessary, I am always looking for best solution. Pcstas (talk) 07:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Moreover, you should be aware that original text has been published on reputable sources like Bloomberg, Forbes, etc etc. Please do not question the notoriety nor that we want to inform Wikipedia readers on a new product category and what it means. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcstas (talk • contribs) 07:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Pcstas. I'm sure that when you added this to articles about yourself and your comapny, you just forgot to log in with your account. I'd recommend making any further edits from your account and not from an IP so other editors are not thinking you're actively sock puppeting. Again, I'm sure it was an oversight. Also, please review Am I allowed to edit articles about myself or my organization? and Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion before editing articles about your companies or yourself. I'd recommend posting your paragraph to the Talk pages of the Frédérique Constant article asking for an uninvolved editor to add it. I don't feel that paragraph needs to be added to MMT (duplicate info) or your personal article (it was created by your companies, not Peter Stas, correct?).

I have made no claims to the notability or lack of notability of the information. My issue was the information was cut-and-pasted between articles, without much regard to existing material, much as previous PR/COI editors have done previously on MMT/Fullpower. An edit to an article doesn't need to meet WP:Notable to be added to existing, appropriate articles (see WP:NNC). On the positive, your paragraph is nicely sourced and not over-the-top in promotional language. If it hadn't been cut-and-pasted into MMT (where most of the information already existed, including the reference), it might have gone unnoticed. Good luck with your new watch. Stesmo (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, I did not login initially. After 10 days at Baselworld, tired and I did not make updates on Wikipedia for some time, needed to find back password also. When I write something on Wikipedia, I always try to avoid COI as much as possible and take only prior published texts. You can see from my IP (same for pcstas) that I have nothing to do with this 'Sock Pupating' you refer to, I don't even know what it is. So, where from here now? You already wrote that paragraph was nicely sourced. I would like to ask that you UNDO it on Frédérique Constant and Peter Stas. Yes, I initiated the project, created with R&D team prototypes, and found Fullpower as partner for firmware, apps and cloud. Thank you, Pcstas (talk) 20:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Pcstas. I'd recommend posting your paragraph to the Talk pages of the Frédérique Constant article asking for an uninvolved editor to add it, as per WP:BFAQ#EDIT. After reviewing Am I allowed to edit articles about myself or my organization? and Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion, of course. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 20:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Stesmo, you have removed, why don't you undo your removal? We have discussed and you agreed it was decently written. 212.43.136.16 (talk) 08:45, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I save you the trouble and have undone my entry on Frederique_Constant. Please do not remove again. Thank you, Pcstas (talk) 08:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Skrill - External Links

Hi! Care to elaborate why do you believe that WP:EL applies to iTunes and Google Play app links you have removed from EL of Skrill? Those are official apps and, in my opinion, those links offer a lot of value to visitors. The same as such links do for PayPal and IMDB. Enivid (talk) 20:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Enivid. The links do not advance the encyclopedic understanding of Skrill (WP:ELYES #3). Add in WP:ELPOINTS ELPoints #3 and the spirit of #4 (The official website (already linked) directs you to the download sites). Thanks for stopping by my Talk page, Enivid. Stesmo (talk) 21:18, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and I've also removed the app download links from PayPal and IMDB, Enivid. Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 21:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

OK, sounds fair. Thanks for explaining! Enivid (talk) 07:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Why did you remove notable article about ShixxNOTE program which is on Wikipedia for more than 5 years

Yesterday you removed almost everything in article about ShixxNOTE program. Can you please put it back. You are third person who tried to delete article about great ShixxNOTE program which is sticky notes program and LAN messenger in one. Why did you do that ? I proove that article is notable, second article is there for more than 6 years. 2 times I have troubles like this one with other Wikipedia admins and I always proove that article is not PR. Not just me, also other Wikipedia admins agreed that article should be there. I am an author of ShixxNOTE program and I put article on Wikipedia which is now crippled by you. I saw your reasons but did you try program did you see how it works ?! It is not about program it is about messaging with desktop sticky notes program. So be polite and put text back or I will write to several Wiki admins who are I think admins more than you and know what is notable and what is PR.

Kind regards,

Ozren Sirola ShixxNOTE program author Sirola (talk) 08:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Sirola. WP:Notability applies to if the article should be on Wikipedia. As I did not nominate this article for deletion, it has no bearing here. You're referring to [this edit], where I left the edit summary of "Removed trivial and promotional content. Removed unsourced content. Add unsourced, encyclopedic claims back only if written without puffery and with reliable, third-party published sources (not from shixxnote, PR, etc.))". On a second edit, I added the edit summary "Previous edit also removed external links in body of article and pruned EL section to meet WP:EL".

So, let's start with the uncontroversial edits: I removed external links from the body of the article and pruned links from the EL section. Links in the body of the article are not permitted and most of the links in the EL section didn't meet WP:EL. Additionally, I removed the known problems/solution section, as Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal. WP:HOWTO also is the reason for the removal of a good chunk of the Features section. "Program takes note-taking to a new level by adding powerful sharing capabilities to the process and allows you to turn...", as an example, was removed because it is WP:Puffery or promotional language. After removing the external links, the promotional/puffery and the HowTo, that left a paragraph in Features that was essentially a duplicate of the Lead paragraph.

Please review Am I allowed to edit articles about myself or my organization? and Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Stesmo (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Quick question for Stesmo

Hey Stesmo, Thanks for the clean-ups and message on the Alex Skolnick page. I have a question - can you tell me what is the best way to link Skolnick's official book website and new album website which are ELs within the main body? Isn't it necessary to show that some information is from there? That's why I thought they should be placed as references. Let me know. Also, I had to update the addition of his latest album, which you reverted back, so I'll have to go ahead once more and at least re-add that. i.e. add his 2014 release of Planetary Coalition after the 2012 Dark Roots under discography.

Thanks. Adam Zimberg (talk) 02:13, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

P.S...Just thought about it when I read your msg. again after sending you the above msg. True - his official page does have the ELs to his book and new project, so it's not necessary here perhaps - however for authenticity - is it still needed to add them as references? Don't know.

Thanks in advance. - Adam Zimberg (talk) 02:11, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

P.P.S. But then again, on reviewing Wikipedia's external links guidelines in detail, it states: "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject,[4] one should generally avoid providing external links ...." So since those links are to the Geek to Guitar Hero book's Official page and Planetary Coalition's Official page, shouldn't they be included? The links were there for a long time without any issues earlier. He seems to have separate official pages for the projects - his site, his bands, his book and his world music project.Adam Zimberg (talk) 02:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)