Jump to content

User talk:MatthewVanitas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Misterhear (talk | contribs) at 00:04, 27 February 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

For undated/unsigned posts not archived, see User talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive 23a.

Template:Archive box collapsible


11:48:14, 19 November 2016 review of submission by Chrismacrae


Quarter Bilion Girls - this was launched at un at smae time as wikipedia launched herstory - there is no difference of process in building what herstiory or quarterbilliongirls represent- why do you favor insuders when the whole point of this unlaunch was to enourage wider contributions to wikipedia

09:00:26, 24 November 2016 review of submission by 223.31.55.162


Review

thank you for the info Matthew:)

13:25:01, 3 January 2017 review of submission by 5.208.166.241



I added the refrences and footnotes with my best and inline citation. please advise best regards

Thanks for ....

Praising my articles on the Northern Ireland Troubles especially the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downpatrick_bombing_1990 article & the formatting tips. And I do plan on adding more in the future I also plan on tidying some of my previous ones up a little bit. Thanks again

17:07:46, 5 January 2017 review of submission by Shams pasargad 2000



Dear Matthew Vanitas

I made the changes with my best and hope my article is ok now, please advise best regards

18:25:55, 7 January 2017 review of submission by Shams pasargad 2000



Dear Matthew Vanitas I posted the required footnotes and inline citation, i hope it helps. I would like that my article move to main page, please help and advise Regards

Speedy deletion nomination of Musketeer chess

A tag has been placed on Musketeer chess requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

11:21:31, 6 February 2017 review of submission by Brinley Jones


Dear Matthew, as the draft article:Sheikh Mubarak Abdulla Al-Mubarak Al-Sabah was declined for submission I have inserted the cite references requested kindly review changes made. Have resubmitted the article. Many thanks Brinley Jones

04:09:29, 10 February 2017 review of submission by Lijopc


HI

I was creating a wiki page of our church as our church was mentioned in a main wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocese_of_Madhya_Kerala_of_the_Church_of_South_India

This is the main page of CSI church Central Kerala Diocese and we (Holy Trinity CSI Church, Brisbane) is the only church in Australia, under central kerala diocese. I believe as per our Bishop's request all churches mentioned in the above link, is creating their respective church details in Wiki. Some people are already did for example CSI church Singapore. I have been trying this for last couple of days and someone always delete it. So I request you to add our page

18:12:40, 26 February 2017 review of submission by Leomessi1994


I edited the articel named "Gjorgj Kushi" just as requested. I hope you accept it.

16:05:06, 24 October 2017 review of submission by Wilandrewson


Hi there, apologies for taking so long to do anything about this, but we're now working on developing the page. I have question about what counts as an authoritative source. When I clicked on the Find sources: "Regional Democracy" – link in the Submission declined message I found that our source is the fifth ranked google result (for me at least) for the term 'Regional democracy'. The source is the Oxford University politics blog, which is probably one of the most prestigious forums for discussion of new political ideas in the UK. We're proposing that 'regional democracy' in the sense that it is described on the Oxford University politics blog is a new political idea, and should have a wikipedia page as such.

Alok Babu R aka

Hello,

I had submitted my article for review on last Dec.

I know the waiting list is long , but I was wondering roughly how long it might take. The reason I ask is the current draft was waiting for review from more than 10 days ago. Any pointers? Below is my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alok_Babu_R_aka_(ALL_OK)


Thanks and kind regards...

kiranpz

Not a "Joke"

After further reading about Molossia, I was interested to find out how Molossia was able to win in the Micro Nation wars and what specific equipment they had or have. It took me 2 hours on February 9th to do the research. Many might find this as a joke because it is a weak army from a self-proclaimed micro nation in the U.S.

Thanks, UltraTank.MD — Preceding unsigned comment added by UltraTank.MD (talk • contribs) 15:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello UltraTank.MD there is a specific Wikia (unrelated to Wikipedia) for Micronation articles, you may want to post your work there since it uses the same coding as Wikipedia so you should be able to just copy-paste it.
The reason I have labeled your draft as a "joke" is because it treats what is essentially a personal prank or (at best) a "performance art piece" as an actual war. While micronations that have received significant media or academic coverage can indeed qualify for articles, we don't play along with their game/fantasy of pretending everything is Big and Serious when it involves like literally one person and a bar buddy of his declaring a "war". MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:05:26, 14 February 2018 review of submission by Motormoto


Hi, I am requesting for a review of my article titled Pius Lasisi Jimoh because all the issues you raised in respect of sourcing, referencing, and footnote citing have been resolved. I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks. Motormoto (talk) 10:05, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wednesday, February 14, 2018 review request of submission by Saranch Sajeevan

please review Draft:Parham_Ramezani , can these references can be treated as a legitimate source to approve the article, https://fashion.hellomagazine.com/fashion-news/201707257023/jenson-button-dogs-jewellery-launch/, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jenson-button-and-his-kerb-appeal-b5ffjpwng Saranch Sajeevan 11:18, 14 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saranch (talk • contribs)

Hello Saranch, you don't need to convince me, you need to add your additional sources to the article, and click Resubmit when you think you have improved the article enough. You don't have to read the whole policy, but you may find it useful to skim WP:Notability (companies) to see what the benchmark it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:22, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matthew (Remix Awards)

Nice to meet you. I am the admin/owner of the page "Remix Awards", I see that my page was declined by you and I was wondering if I could get some help? You said "Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia" - BUT I don't see it anywhere submitted by anyone els? Where can I find that?

Can you please tell me what I'm doing wrong? I really appreciate your help :)

Tim Bello — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimBello (talk • contribs) 15:27, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MatthewVanitas. It looks like there were two drafts on the go at the same time rather than a draft and a mainspace page. I've histmerged them as they were by the same user and asked them to resubmit. Not sure if you want to review it again as you did the original or let someone else grab it. Amortias (T)(C) 17:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello TimBello, you had two separate versions, one as "Remix awards" and one as "Remix Awards", which has caused this confusion. It's important to not copy-paste content, but just keep all your drafting for the topic on one page.
Your draft is all in one place now, and is in line for review by the next available reviewer.
I do want to correct one misapprehension: nobody is the "owner" of a Wikipedia page. You're the contributor of the draft, and the main contributor on the page, but you have no ownership nor exclusive control of the page neither now nor once it publishes. It's just important to recognize that everyone is equally allowed to change any page, so long as they are being neutral, citing their sources, and generally following editing policy. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:37, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sinking of the Canadian ship Mayflower...

Hi Matthew,

I improved the article as you suggested but I wasn't sure what you meant when you wrote "google books" upon assessing it. Nevertheless, I found a book on it called The Sinking of the Mayflower written by Stephen Weir. Here's the link

https://books.google.ca/books/about/The_Sinking_of_the_Mayflower.html?id=RVUyMQAACAAJ&redir_esc=y

Does this suffice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albliu28 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Albliu28, I found that book as well and have already added it to the Further Reading section.
I see you've added two more links, though a geocaching site is really not an authority on maritime history. When I suggested you check GoogleBooks, I mean go to that site and see what mentions of this shipwreck you can find there, find sources that support an existing fact you claim, or that offer a new fact you can add to the article, and cite that source. Note you can instantly turn any GoogleBooks URL into a full footnote using http://reftag.appspot.com
Your topic meets Notability, so it will publish, I'm just helping walk you through the process to get it up to snuff to publish. No slam on your effort, it takes a few tries to figure these things out. Just replace your two casual sources with more serious news, or history book, sources and we should be good to publish. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:21, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an example of the kind of thing you can cite; click the blue link in the title to see the book on gBooks:
  • Robbins Elliott (8 August 1988). Ontario Book of Days. Dundurn. pp. 140–. ISBN 978-1-55488-342-4. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Also, I found an interesting YouTube video where some scuba divers went underwater to visit the shipwreck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bLirIyLpvg

Not sure if I should include this, but at least it is video evidence that something happened. Albliu28 (talk) 23:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While it's cool footage, since it's not from a formal source it's not something we would normally include. You can glance at the explanation at WP:Reliable sources if you like, but basically we prioritize sources that are fact-checked and verified by editors, peer review, etc. It's not that we're accusing amateurs of being dishonest or saying it's not real footage, it's just that the simplest thing for our readers is to use the most fact-checked sources, and there are plenty of newspaper articles and several mentions in books which document that this wreck occurred. I realize it takes some time to digest all these deadlines, but you're on the right track! MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:35, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Edwin George Lutz

I believe you have created the wiki article on Lutz. A new bio website (launched 1/17/2018) has been created on him at eglutz.com. I am the author of that website and would like to make sure that the wiki article gets updated. What is the best way for me to proceed? Thank you for your guidance. Splat21 (talk) 18:33, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article status

Hello, I wanted to ask you what I could do to get The Passing of Shah Jahan (Tagore) into good article status .I noticed it was rated as start class, and wanted to see what I could do to improve it. I had wrote this article in reference to the After the Deluge article which was a featured article. On a side note, thank you for taking the time to review my submitted articles. Thanks, BreadBuddy (talk) 19:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

page for Justin L. Lurie

Justin L. Lurie is a United States Congressional Candidate (US House of Representatives). NOT a state-level candidate as noted from your rejection.

This district represents 721,000 people in the greater and downtown Houston region.

The wording on how to describe the position is similar to other wikipedia pages for both members of Congress and Congressional candidates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Patterson80 (talk • contribs) 04:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Michael Patterson80, my bust, I misunderstood what echelon he was at. You may want to add "in the United States Congress" to the first sentence to clarify that, or however it is phrased in other US Congress-level articles. I looked up the rules on candidates, and the standard is that sitting US Congresspeople automatically meet Notability, but candidates fall under "general notability guidelines":
  • Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article".
So, I compared your sources against the GNG, and I have my concerns that I'll post at the top of your draft (so other reviewers can follow the discussion). MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Opinion needed: IAYG Article for Deletion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_Association_of_Young_Geographers — Preceding unsigned comment added by RainWizard29422 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Gordon Graham concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Gordon Graham, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still new and could use some advice

@MatthewVanitas: Message text. SamuRussell (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC) SamuRussell[reply]

Hi Matthew, I am new here and am trying to get the hang of things. You suggested I ping you (I am not sure if this is it) regarding my draft page "Draft:St. Dominic Catholic Church (Washington, DC)".

I saw that the page has a note saying "An editor has indicated that this is a promising draft and requests that it not be speedy-deleted as WP:G13 and instead be nominated at WP:MFD." Does this mean the page will likely be deleted in 7 days? I plan on adding more to it soon, and I have a ton of sources to pull from, but I wanted to get something up and begin developing it from there.

Thank you for any advice you can give.

Sincerely, User:SamuRussell|SamuRussell


Hello SamuRussell, "promising draft" does not at all mean your draft is in danger of deletion anytime soon. What it means is, if you were to abandon the draft for like six months or so, and someone doing cleanup of old drafts was going to delete it, I'm asking them to quick it back into the queue (even if you yourself aren't still around editing) since it's a useful and viable topic. That template only really matters if you leave the draft completely idle for months and months. So no worries at all.
If you have a lot of sources, you can afford to be selective and pick the best ones! Again, note that you should not cite the church itself for anything other than totally non-controversial facts (location, year opened, etc), whereas any "claim to fame" should be sourced to an outside and expert observer.
And yes, "ping" is just another term for "contact", and writing me directly on my Talk page is the best way to do it. Not to get to deep into the weeds, but if there's ever a discussion on your own Talk page and you want to make sure the outside poster doesn't miss your reply, you can do like I did here on this page to alert you that you are being discussed: {{u|SamuRussell}}
As a minor sidenote, when you mention a page, make sure to put the double "[[" around it to make a link, like so Draft:St. Dominic Catholic Church (Washington, DC) so I can go to it just by clicking.
Nice work so far, keep it up! Remember the golden rule: only claim what you can clearly and properly source! MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:32, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks MatthewVanitas. I was confused by the way that was worded. By the way, I have added a few more sources and have more on the way. SamuRussell

Adding further Information to make a Biography Valid

Dear Matthew:

As a more experienced user, I'm hoping that you can give me some advice. This article cites news and books, including the New York Times and volumes of the National Academies Press. However, there is still a banner requesting:

"Please help to establish notability by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond its mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Find sources: "Benjamin Bauer" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR"

I've asked Shure for help finding more resources, but not much from that time is available online, and my local library doesn't have much in the way of engineering texts.

Any suggestions for how to improve this article further?

Thank you and cheers! S — Preceding unsigned comment added by Segifford (talk • contribs) 16:41, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Segifford, your draft seems to meet Notability fine for now. If you're using materials from Shure itself, make sure you don't stray too deep into WP:Primary sources; you need to cite books/newspapers/etc that your reader could actually track down themselves (even if not online). So for example if Shure has press clippings from old newspapers you can certainly cite those, but what you don't want to cite is, for example, some fact from Bauer's personnel file that's only held at Shure HQ and not publicly available.
That said, if you're in touch with Shure and you're on good terms with them, one thing that could be interesting is if they have any old employee photos of him. Not to get too deep into the weeds, but do note that to use a Shure-owned photo, they would have to release it under Creative Commons. There is no such thing as "the company says I can use it, but just on the Wikipedia article". If they have a photo, and are willing to release it under Creative Commons (meaning they retain attribution but other people are allowed to put it in books, newspapers, art, or whatever freely so long as they credit it to Shure), then you "file an WP:OTRS ticket" and send Shure a form which they sign-off on saying "we are the owners of this photo and release it under Creative Commons". But that's just if you really find the idea of a photo engaging, no obligation at all, just throwing that out there.
Nice work, hope you'll stick around! MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Akisho

 Done the move + cleaned a rdir; there's still some minor cleanup stuff in there, it appears, but I'm assuming you might be dealing with it. :P --slakr\ talk / 00:41, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/N R Pavan Kumar

Delete that title. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikindiagk (talk • contribs) 18:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

05:53:23, 23 February 2018 review of submission by Autorox


Hi Matthew, thanks for reviewing the previous article. I am doing the wikipedia article for the first time and your comments help me go the right way. Thanks. We are a startup that's trying to reach out to the world and tell them more about us. I have tried to add verifications by way of news articles that cover the company. Will be interested to hear your comments for improvements. Thanks again

Autorox (talk) 05:53, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Autorox, you appear to not understand what we do here. We are absolutely not a place to "reach out to the world" or "build your brand". We are not LinkedIn or Facebook. If you've come here to advertise your company, you are likely to be dissatisfied. You do understand that, should you get an article about Autorox published, that the company will have no exclusive control over it? So if anything bad happens with the company, people will highlight that in your article and the company will remove it. Just giving you a heads-up. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes offcourse, I would like to write on the topic as soon as possible. By the way thanks for your appreciation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usmanghani.iet (talk • contribs) 12:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

11:09:42, 24 February 2018 review of submission by Standardwikis


Standardwikis (talk) 11:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Standardwikis I'm not familiar with what to do re blacklisted titles, so I suggest you for advice at WP:Teahouse for how to address that. MatthewVanitas (talk) 11:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jalaludin Surkh Posh

Can you please tell me what’s wrong with my part on Jalaludin Surkh Posh’ descendents as I do know what I typed was all true. And the other descendents have as much evidence as mine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.86.30 (talk) 12:34, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 86.27.86.30, the problem is that absolutely nothing is cited to a source. You telling me it's true doesn't make it so, you need to clearly show where this information is coming from. Further, there's no indication that these descendants matter to a reader who is here to learn about Jalaludin Surkh Posh. Unless a specific descendant of his has done something famous, and we have an article about them, why does that matter to the reader? It would appear to me that all that it does is allow people to feel important. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Allow people to feel important your arguement is weak I don’t feel important because of this also I do have evidence I will get it soon, also my ancestors were well known in the Punjab region so tell me this what type of evidence do I need. Also for many people these people are important and are well known in Punjab region I guess you don’t even live in Punjab so don’t know anything really about the famous people there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragon819010 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder, please be sure to sign your posts by clicking the "sign" button at the top of your editing screen, or typing ~~~~
Hello Dragon819010. What kind of sourcing? Please see WP:Reliable sources. And again, I fail to see how a list of his descendants is important unless one of them did something famous. And honestly even then, where else on Wikipedia do we list even a famous person's ancestors for 500 years? It seems to be very much a method of community self-promotion and not actually a matter of academic interest. MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:51, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All right then tell me what type of evidence I need as my family has family tree which is around 500 years old written in Paris also Muzaffar Ali Shah had around 30000 murids all across Pakistan but obviously the number has significantly decreased because most of them died, and my family also do melas and are well known in Dipalpur.

see above message, sign your posts
Dragon819010, did you look at WP:Reliable sources? MatthewVanitas (talk) 12:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also if you think I’m not doing this because of academic interests you are very wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragon819010 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon819010 If you want to help improve the article, it would be very welcome, but content must be cited or it is worse than useless.
The page *really* needs better coverage of what Bukhari actually *did*. It says almost nothing about his career, but spends a massive amount of time going on about his descendants. The purpose of Wikipedia is not to help people argue their Syed claims, so for a reader wanting to actually learn about Bukhari the page is in poor shape. That is why I am helping clean it up, which involves removing uncited materials. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:07, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why don’t you add more information then delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragon819010 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

YET AGAIN, PLEASE SIGN YOUR POSTS!!!!
Dragon819010 I'm following Wikipedia procedure, it's up to me whether I add or delete. And again, uncited material makes the article worse, not better, so removing it improves the article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t used a Wikipedia account in around 2 to 3 years so I have forgotten many things especially how to sign. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragon819010 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon819010 I explained how to sign in my second reply to you, so please don't forget it, because it delays me replying to you since the SineBot has to follow you around and sign things for you. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:22, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reminder, please be sure to sign your posts by clicking the "sign" button at the top of your editing screen, or typing ~~~~

You've No Idea What You're Talking About

I contacted the Wiki Help Desk and their response was 100% opposite yours. I find it amazing how negative your response was, but having seen YOUR PAGE, yea, I get it. LOL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.88.20.83 (talk) 08:23, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

118.88.20.83, which article are you talking about? Can you link me to the "help desk" discussion that cleared something up? Without more context, I have no idea what dispute you're even talking about. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:40, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly have a COI, MatthewVanitas and I have properly reported you to Wikipedia as prejudicial and biased. If you think this is over, you didn't bother to Google me. I am the wrong one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NannetteKnowsMen (talk • contribs) 09:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello NannetteKnowsMen, did you also post the "118.88.20.83" message above? If so, I see you have two article drafts you're working on, one of which I've turned down for absolutely 100% correct reasons per Wikipedia policy.
You accuse me of having CoI: can you elaborate at all? How am I financially or personally tied to the success or failure of your therapeutic method? That's what CoI means, that I have some "dog in the fight". You can't just say "COI because I'm angry you declined my (improperly sourced) draft".
Next, it's common courtesy on Wikipedia to post a link to the accused if you file a complaint against them. Both so I can offer my side, but also so, if I am incorrect, that I can see what I did wrong. You telling me "you were wrong and somebody else told me I was right" doesn't really affect me unless you actually link me to the discussion. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are a COI to Wikipedia

Wrong, you are 100% a COI here on Wikipedia, and you should not be a reviewer, as you are clearly very biased and unqualified in your rush to judgement. Furthermore, I had my lawyer look at your comments to me, and she will be contacting Wikipedia Legal Department. I was notified when I submitted that there were over 2,000 pages seeking reviews long before mine, and that it could take two months for a response, but you just couldn't wait to rush to shut me down. I have nothing more to say to you. Unlike other Wiki employees, you are combative, rude, judgmental, biased and you have an agenda.

Wiki's Legal Department will be asked to review YOU in this matter. Doubtless, I am far from the first person to complain about your tactics, but I will be the last. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NannetteKnowsMen (talk • contribs) 09:41, 25 February 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Hello NannetteKnowsMen, legal threats are completely prohibited on Wikipedia; please see WP:No legal threats. I have reported your threat to ANI, since it is completely inappropriate: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Legal_threats_from_NannetteKnowsMen
Further, I'm really trying to be a good sport, I've asked you to clarify my alleged COI, I've asked you to link me to the Help Desk that said "100% the opposite" of what I said, I've asked you to post a link to whatever page you "reported me" at. You haven't provided any of those things, and continue making accusations without any explanation. If you don't communicate clearly and pleasantly with me, there's really not anything I can do to help you. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:53, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I reported you First

Your behavior falls under HARRASMENT and DISCRIMINATION and I reported you to Wikipedia FIRST. Now, I am reporting you for HARASSMENT. You are 100% full of it, and my only recourse against your rude and harassing behavior, was to report you. Lastly, YOU started this in your first rude email to me, and YOU ARE 100% A COI and you should NOT be a reviewer. PERIOD. Which is exactly what LEGAL WILL SEE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.88.20.83 (talk) 10:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 118.88.20.83/NannetteKnowsMen (please stay logged-in if you're conversing, it's confusing to have posts from both your account and you IP), can you please provide me a link to the page where I've been reported, as I did for you? Your Contributions (both account and IP) don't seem to show it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 10:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am BUSY and I am DONE WITH YOU

I, and my legal counsel, have sent emails with links to all these threads, to Wikipedia.

Your first contact with me was 100% agenda-based, and you are not qualified to review the context of what I have submitted. You are far to over-emotional to even be a representative of Wikipedia. You are biased, rude, unprofessional, discriminatory, and you have been harassing me since I made it 100% clear that I was done speaking with you.

Your fake 'Review' of my page, The Agony Element(TM) was just that---FAKE.

Unlike the other Reviewers with whom I have had contact with on Wikipedia, your 'Review' of my page was sarcastic, rude and biased, leading me to believe that the Psychological Context I discovered, has hit a nerve, and therefore, you needed to personally attacked me.

I am finished responding to you, and I will leave this matter to people who can see exactly what you have done here.

You are not someone who should be working in the Public Sector.

Nannette LaRee Hernandez — Preceding unsigned comment added by NannetteKnowsMen (talk • contribs) 10:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fish project submissions (25/26 febuary 2018)

Hi Matthew! Yes, these pages coming in are all for a class project in our Marine Biology class. Unfortunately, our teacher does not have a talk page, and this is the first year we are doing this project. However, I work very closely with the teacher and the TF on this project, and I would be more than happy to relay whatever reoccurring format errors to the professor and TFs to improve our submissions for this year, and next years submissions! thank you so much for the comment, I really appreciate it!

-Sadie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sademari (talk • contribs) 15:45, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Class project Fish/ Marine species articles

Hi Matthew. Yes, these articles are for a marine biology course at BU. Our professor (Dr. Randi Rotjan) may have a talk page, but I am not sure exactly how to locate it as I am new to Wikipedia. Sorry that I am not able to be of more help to you! -Emlayland 2/26/2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emlayland (talk • contribs) 15:53, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review on my article CREW NEWS 2K, but Can i ask you what I should do next time to get it submitted as an article thanks!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MatthewVanitas&oldid=827829886"