User talk:Arbor to SJ/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Please stop editing the early history of Hollywood. I am the grandson of HJ Whitley and was told by him about the early history of the town. Many books contain misinformation. I have personal journals and business records that substantiate what I have written. Most of the books published in the last 10 years are using a book published by a Dr. Palmer in the 1930's. In the front of that book it is noted that much of the information may be incorrect and it is regarding the early history of Hollywood. Dr. Palmer lived in Hollywood but not in the early years. HJ Whitley came to California in the early 1880s. He is buried in the Hollywood Forever Cemetery and on his grave-site it states "The Father of Hollywood." He was given the title while he was alive and it is recorded in the L A Times, New York Times, Hollywood Citizen and many more. Thanks for your help in this matter. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia not a blog spot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whithj (talk • contribs) 05:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I received a "final warning" for distruptive edits on a particular website. I would like to know why I was given that warning? Could you please elaborate on this further?

Here is the warning I received!!!

"This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:54, 5 April 2010 (UTC)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scratchdesign (talk • contribs)

I'm declining your RFPP on 1994 because the activity level hasn't been terribly high. However, if it continues at the same level (3+ vandals per day), I'll protect it after perhaps ~5 more days of that level. It just isn't an immediate issue. Sound good? tedder (talk) 05:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I think the Sanford debate will never end, lol. I have 3 sources that are still discussing Mark Sanford in conjunction to 2012 that are less than 6 months old, but JerzeyKydd is still insisting that discussion for him has ceased for 6 months. The sources I added are less than 6 months. I agreed to take down Ensign because no one is talking him in conjunction 2012, but why are people still talking about Sanford in conjunction 2012? I was wondering if maybe you wanted to add your feedback to this discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Republican_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2012. Thanks. --Diamond Dave (talk) 22:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I see you removed Category:American sex offenders from the article South Park Mexican. Care to explain? Sephiroth storm (talk) 13:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It's redundant with the Category:Convicted American child molesters, which is a subcategory. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 21:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, fellow Hip Hop WikiProject members!

This message is being sent out to let all listed members of the project know to re-add your name to the members list, as all current names on the list have been erased in order to find out who is still active on the project. WikiGuy86 (talk) 03:26, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I do not follow you. I semi-protected the Before I Self Destruct article as per your protection request at WP:RFPP. The duration I selected, six weeks, was arbitrary but followed the escalating trend of the previous protection (five days, two weeks, a month). — Kralizec! (talk) 05:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Well six weeks from tonight leads all the way to New Year's Day 2010. Just an observation of the facts, if it's any clearer. Doesn't RFPP say that the protecting admin has the sole discretion on protection time limits? Nonetheless you still did the right thing. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

BTW, if I ever forget to actually put protection on a page, please drop by my talk page to bug me. Often if I'm on my laptop I'll do that sort of thing- in fact, I messed up two protections today. tedder (talk) 07:05, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I noticed you doing some good/useful work on Roman Polanski ... and took a moment to scan your userpage (and be momentarily confused by what you were doing with Conservapedia lol) ... and just quickly add up that you are one of those people who make the (human) machine run. Just a quick salute to thank you for what you do ... (and if I'm wrong and you are actually an evil robot, I will reluctantly change my mind ... but be amazed that an evil robot could do such good work ^^) ... Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving! (no response necessary) Proofreader77 (talk) 03:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Could you please explain why you removed my addition to Time Dilation ie: "This form of Time Dilation has been proven experimentally," when other articles in Wikipedia claim that it has been proven ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.244.196.62 (talk) 08:29, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I think I may have put this in the wrong spot, whups, I'll put it in the article... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.244.196.62 (talk) 08:57, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello. I've unenthusiastically reverted your good-faith deletion of material from the grossly bloated Talk:Brazil. I comment on this here. Beyond my comment there: My gut feeling is to remove about 90% of pages such as that one, but doing anything like it would risk complaints, arguably to a degree justifiable complaints, of attempted censorship. -- Hoary (talk) 05:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Ptc logo.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:15, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I suppose there must be some way of stating it that will please all. Though I'm mindful that we don't need too much detail in the article about the band. The band's website calls the band "one of twelve scatter-style marching bands in the country" and then goes on to explain further what that means [1]. Perhaps something like "Half-time shows are focused on comedy rather than marching." or "As a scatter-style band, half-time shows consist of comedy segments rathen than actual marching." Or perhaps closer to my edit summary: "'Precision' is used here ironically; the band is a scatter-style band that runs wildly between formations rather than actually marching." ?- Nunh-huh 04:47, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

What about the article Caster Semenya is written in South African English? Or were you actually saying that it should or will be done that way? What would that entail? Are there any spellings or something that would need to be changed? Chrisrus (talk) 23:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:National_varieties_of_English#Strong_national_ties_to_a_topic. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 23:20, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

So you mean it IS in SAE, or it should be? Chrisrus (talk) 23:54, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes it should; let's grammar-check that article and other articles to conform to the manual of style provision re: National Varieties of English. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 00:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

OK. Is it easy to do? Chrisrus (talk) 01:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes. For some starting points, check out these articles:

• American and British English differences
• List of South African English regionalisms
• Australian English vocabulary

Andrewlp1991 (talk) 02:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll check'm out. But meanwhile, umm..., until we finish and can confidently say that the article is, in fact, written in SAEng, shouldn't we remove the box that says that is so? I mean, we don't want to say that it's true until it's true. And then, later, when we finish and it is true, we can put it back in? Or...could you change the text on the box so that it says "should be" instead of "is"?Chrisrus (talk) 02:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding "changing the text": that's in a template; I can't really touch that. Meanwhile, I read over the Semenya article, and to the best of my knowledge it does follow SAE. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 02:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Should we get a South African to check it? Chrisrus (talk) 05:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Sure why not? Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:52, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know any. You said something about a spell-check? It wouldn't find vocabulary choice differences, but it might help. Chrisrus (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Right, British English does not demand it. Some UK dictionaries favor "-ize", some favor "-ise", some have a mix. There's no basis for altering the article's well-established style on this matter. DocKino (talk) 00:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Lady Gaga discography#Other appearance concerning the appropriateness of including Lady Gaga's credits as songwriter on tracks performed by other vocalists. As you have previously weighed in on the "discogrophy" vs. "songography" question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies/style, I would like to invite you to contribute your opinion to the debate. --Peter Farago (talk) 08:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

None of my edits are "disruptive." Lil' Kim was NEVER in the film "Superhero Movie", that was merely a rumor. She was, however, in a 1997 documentary, "Gangstresses." Both of these edits I made are 100% correct and factual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.236.202.221 (talk) 03:06, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, your urgent response would be appreciated.

1.) i replaced lil kim's current photo with a non copyrighted photo taken with my own camera. Why was this removed? i have all rights to this photo

2.) i also updated her official website links. http://www.lilkimzone.net IS her official fansite. i do not understand why you allowed the myspace site to be up but not lilkimzone.net we are her only fansite on the internet and have been around for 10 years! It is not an affiliate or spam link.

Please let me know what is going on. I do not understand your actions. thank you

AbbaC (talk) 05:57, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Responses

1. We can't really be sure if you really did take that photo. The metadata doesn't give camera info.
2. Regarding fansites, see WP:ELNO. Also, the official sites field is NOT for fansites!!

Andrewlp1991 (talk) 06:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Andrew with all due respect:

1.) I can provide you with other photos that were taken on that same day with Kim with the same personal camera, it is with my camera, you can search wireimage gettyimages all the image sites you will not find that photo there. what other documentation can i provide?

2.) The WP:ELNO says "most fansites" are not allowed....we at LilKimZone are authorities on Lil Kim, acknowledged by Lil Kim herself and have been her only website for over 10 years!. We are not "most" fansites we are in a different league. That link you provided also says that one should avoid "Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace and Facebook)" so why is it that her myspace page (which is indeed a myspace site, not an "official" site and is indeed run by fans)is acceptable but lilkimzone.net is unacceptable? Please have dialogue with me as to why this is so...if lilkimzone.net is not allowed to be up there then the myspace should not be allowed to be up there either.

3.) another fan has told me that they tried to edit her involvement in "superhero movie" and that you keep putting it back in....despite what IMDB has listed, Kim is not and has never been a part of that movie! IMDB is not 100% accurate, how can we prove to you that this is misinformation??

AbbaC (talk) 20:31, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Some facts: I visited the site and can't find any evidence that a "recognized authority" (as the guideline on Wikipedia says) wrote that Lilkimzone website. Second, her MySpace page is NOT run by fans, but rather her management! In fact, a lot of musicians use MySpace as their official homepage at times. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 20:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Andrew

1.) regarding lilkimzone.net what kind of evidence are you looking for?

2.) regarding her myspace what evidence do you have that her site is run by her management? i know for a fact that her myspace is fan run, which is why the majority of pictures that are on there is from lilkimzone.net. if it were run by her management dont you think it would have more personalized content? her management approves of lilkimzone. if you do not believe me you can go to her manager's twitter page and it lists LilKimZone as her TOP 40.

3.) can you please address the situation with her default photo and the superhero movie. thank you

AbbaC (talk) 05:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

An editor complained about WP:CENSORship on the talk page of Hugo Chavez. This appeared to be deleted by you with no reason given. The deletion appeared to confirm the original editor's complaint about censorship. While comments may diverge from article improvement and may be deleted for that reason, I don't believe this was the case here. In the future, please give a reason for deleting (or adding for that matter) material to text or discussion. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 21:34, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Stop editing her birth year to 1979. Birth records are public record, and it's on file that she was born in 1978. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.108.159 (talk) 22:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, her birthdate is September 6, 1978. She says it in a song enttiled "I Don't Need Nobody" and her birth records and police records says she was born in 1978. Stop changing it to a false year (1979). Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marvinrashad (talk • contribs) 02:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Is this the discussion? I don't really think the article needs locked up for this issue, one year or the other is not a big issue, I did say at the BLPN that I would personally go with the cite and the song, do you have a problem with this solution? Off2riorob (talk) 20:03, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Although this is not the place normally to discuss this issue I'll be happy to do so now. I just want to know what WP:BLP and WP:RS allow to be cited for info like birth year. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 20:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

If we have two differing positions, we can look for consensus or the strongest citations or insert both, I have seen all of these options implemented. As for reliable sources, the subject themselves is to be considered a good source of info about them selves, I thought the supplement citation a bit weak originally but let me go have another look. Off2riorob (talk) 20:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

• Personally I don't find this entertainment citation very strong, I have seen discussions saying the smoking gun is reliable for things like this and added to the song from the subject I am in favor of that date until addition information may come along. Off2riorob (talk) 20:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

The article should be locked and only allowed to be edited by certain people, like me and Marvinrashad. but in all actuality, in the past there was "age dispute" part of her article, and both ages were listed. I think we should go back to that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.108.159 (talk) 01:23, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The revert you made on the Slash & Friends article was that of an IP hopping vandal who seems to have a problem with the line "Singer Axl Rose is the only original Guns N' Roses member absent from the Slash & Friends line-up." I already issued a 4im for unexplained content deletion after the my 4th revert but they keep coming back under different IP's regardless (no doubt that the addresses are dynamic) but still this continuous IP hopping and reverting vicious circle is giving me a headache... Jeffrey Mall (talk • Happy New Year) - 21:17, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Would you please stop removing the neutrality tag on the Rifqa article? It's there for a good reason, the article is unbalanced as hell and its main contributor has refused any kinds of reasonable edits. It also still includes blatant falsehoods. And the disputes were never resolved, as required by Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.49.74.13 (talk) 17:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

My apologies and thank you for cleaning up innapropriate text added in my name. Looks like I need a stronger password (I did not insert the innapropriate language). Chrishibbard7 (talk) 19:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I reverted a vulgar edit by an IP user. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 20:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Whew. I just started using the "watch" feature; incorrectly assumed it only notified me when MY edits were reverted. never mind & good catch:)

Talk:Slash_&_Friends#History_.26_Recording. Thanks, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 00:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for making a report about Hondopost (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. However, your report has been removed due to the username not violating policy, or not being blatant enough for a block. Please remember you should only post infringements on this page if they are so serious that the user needs to be blocked immediately. Others should be discussed with the user in question first, for example using the {{Uw-username}} template. A request for comment can be filed if the user disagrees that their name is against the username policy, or has continued to edit after you have expressed your concern. Thank you. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 16:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, please see Talk:D12 so we can try to work out the issue of why the reverts keep going back and forth. Please share your opinion! –ArmadniGeneral (talk • contribs) 05:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Maybe I should rephrase the Hugh Laurie bit, but the book does list people "exceptionally interested" in the practice (Tom Sizemore is another.) I said "rumor" because this is the only time I've come into contact with this information. I probably would have avoided using the word if I could find something somewhere else that would contradict or confirm the claim. Is there a better wording to use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.146.147.215 (talk) 23:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, regarding your recent revision of the Iron Maiden page, there are interviews online saying that the new album will not be released till 2011. I did not do the revision you reverted (I did an earlier one which restored it to 2010 to revert vandalism) and I havent had the time to properly correct it and add a citation (Nicko McBrain interviews) - and I seem to keep screwing up something I am doing in creating references/citations... so I was planning on leaving it to someone else.

So... if it gets re-reverted to 2011, maybe you or someone can find the interview and cite/reference it so I dont butcher the page trying to. :-)

Best,

Robert

RobertMfromLI | User Talk STP2: Producer/Gaffer/Webmaster 00:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Andrewlp1991. It appears that you are currently involved in a content dispute at Bone Thugs-n-Harmony. It would also appear that you are using your rollback tool to revert some of the edits of the user that you are having this dispute with. Please understand that rollback is only to be used for clear cases of vandalism, and that any other use (especially in content disputes) will result in it being revoked (which I know you already know). Please consider this a friendly reminder as well as a warning. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 08:19, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I edited the criticism section which you reverted. I think it was poorly structured before and lacking both content and clear writing. I fixed the structure problem and started working on the second two. I'm going to undo your reverts, since I think the section still needs work but was heading in a better direction. If you are going to revert a constructive edit I'd rather you at least mention a reason. Write back here or on my talk page, or at the article if you prefer. Thanks 71.224.206.164 (talk) 17:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

As an FYI, he logged out and is now continuing his disruptiveness under 69.124.5.226 (talk · contribs). Reported to AIV though don't know if they will block for that or not. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 22:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I see u edited this article in the past. Would u mind commenting on an issue at the talk page? Dan56 (talk) 10:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Very nice work on cleaning up that lump of an article. We have a way to go but at least we know where we're going. Padillah (talk) 16:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Some IP blanked the article back in August and I had to undo said IP's edits just to put that article back to shape. I think someone restored the text albeit without the citations. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 19:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello Andrew, I was wondering if you could possibly give your input on a debate being held on the Talk:Aftermath Entertainment page? --HELLØ ŦHERE 01:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Greetings Andrew. Could you please explain your removal of the reference to the collaboration with Faithless. Alhtough I didn't have the album title and year to hand, reverting the entry makes it no less true. If anything, it would allow others to add in the required detail at a later stage.

For reference, the track was Why Go on the 2005 album Forever Faithless: Greatest Hits. Mjruttenberg (talk) 14:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC) Mike

at ANI, my apologies. ZooPro 11:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Just a quick question on the reason for the change of the protection level for Kangaroo?, doesnt bother me if its semi or permenant either way both are good, just curious as to what vandalism is being refered to for the full protect?. Cheers ZooPro 08:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually now i am very interested as to why you attempted to change a protection to which you have no ability to do, You are not an admin?? Explain ZooPro 08:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

at ANI. ZooPro 11:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ZooPro 08:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I would like to know why you consider the information on webofdeception not to be compliant. Is it really less reliable or less biased than articles such as the "Radical Right's Asian Pitbull?" The fact that Jesse Malkin changed his name and those of his children the week after Malkin's address and phone number were splashed all over the internet is as relevant as the hoopla over Rachael Ray's scarf and Graeme Frost. Additionally, everything on that website can be verified through court and voting records, as well as newspaper records(order of notice by publication).

If you can prove to me that the information I added to the wikipedia page is not "really" compliant, then I will back off. Otherwise, I would appreciate it if you restored the entry to the article. Jdmem (talk) 00:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)jdmem

Hi Andrew, I was wondering if I could possibly get your help again. I'm sorry to have to bother you like this. There's an editor who continuously vandalizes the Soulja Boy Tell'em page and has been warned several times, in multiple ways, yet continues. I'm afraid I will end up breaking 3RR and possible get blocked myself. If you could help in some way, that'd be great. If not, thank you anyway. Have a great day and happy editing. --HELLØ ŦHERE 19:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if you could show me what is wrong with the the edit you rolled back here [2]. Cheers, Jonomacdrones _(talk) 22:16, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

template:infobox musical artist specifies the format of labels to be "label 1, label 2, label 3", just like that. No extra info like years. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 02:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure you were just RC patrolling, but this is true and cited down in the history section. Still, it's not terribly important for the lede. tedder (talk) 05:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Climatic Research Unit hacking incident, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- TS 19:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it is necessary to keep a separate page for J. Patrick Bedell, rather than summarizing him in one line on the Pentagon page. Yes, it is quite slim right now, but as events unfold I expect his biography to become quite long. Toitoine (talk) 07:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought to write you since your name was associated with Sucker Free's photo. The logo got revamped. You can grab the new one at http://www.mtv.com/onair/sucker_free/2010/281x211_2.jpg and replace the old one. I am not sure how to do this!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.124.196.28 (talk) 14:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

As u have edited this article b4, would u add to this discussion over the album's genre(s)? Dan56 (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I see you are in the process of changing semi-protection templates to BLP semi-protection templates, but I noticed that for the field |expiry=, you put in yes, which will make the lock (when you hover your mouse over it) say, "This article is semi-protected until Error invalid time to prevent libelous additions." Instead, you have to put in the date the protection will expire. Since this would dramatically slow down the process, may I suggest that you do not add the |expiry field at all? It looks no different that way and the Error message is gone. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Oops, sorry I didn't realize that. I did these changes to categorize these articles properly in "category:wikipedia temporarily semi-protected biographies of living people" or its counterpart for indef ones. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

It's alright, and I'm glad to see that you're doing this tedious/time-consuming task. I'm sure it wouldn't get done if it wasn't for you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:00, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

With this edit, you changed the semi-protection tag to say something about 'libelous additions' when you hover the mouse over it. In fact, the article is semi-protected to keep IPs from violating our copyright policy. Maybe this is an argument for changing the hover text, since all we know for sure is 'It's a BLP that has been semi-protected.' EdJohnston (talk) 23:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	I, Eagles247, hereby give Andrewlp1991 this Working Man's Barnstar for his hard work with semi-protection templates. Thanks! Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:36, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi. It's customary in the UK to refer to places as "city/town, county, constituent country" so you are removing important information in some of these edits. The county is important to distinguish places with the same name, e.g. Newtown. Cheers. Rodhullandemu 21:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering what the reason was for you to revert it back to the old track lists? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scootnasty (talk • contribs) 00:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

On Tha Carter III article, we do acknowledge the revision to "Pussy Monster" in a footnote. The original album did not include that track. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 00:14, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I changed it so the we acknowledge that "Pussy Monster" replaced "Playing With Fire".(talk)

The mouse-over for {{pp-semi-blp}} states that it was added to help prevent libel. However, I added to this particular article to prevent vandalism unrelated to defamation. If there is a way to add a {{pp-semi-blp}} with a different rationale, please let me know. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey Andrew, I saw this edit and hadn't seen it before. What is the difference with it and a normal protection?---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 14:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

to perform an act of kindness? A new editor (a software developer) can't figure out why his/her new article disappeared ... and was re-directed. I gather you did it (w/an edit summary ... that the newbie could not understand). I've tried to give some guidance (that you may disagree with), but if you could drop in here, say hi to him/her, and explain it better than I did and welcome them ... that might be a nice thing. Many thanks for your consideration.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Category:American rappers by location, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — ξ^xplicit 19:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is I Can't Feel My Face. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Can't Feel My Face. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Terror Squad (record label)/version 2, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 20:19, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

I am unsure what this edit signified... - Jack Sebastian (talk) 04:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

It's to indicate that the page is indefinitely move-protected and categorizes the article into Category:Wikipedia indefinitely move-protected pages. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 04:19, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

This edit may interest you. — JPMcGrath (talk) 13:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Flo_Rida, please notify me the next time this occurs. I have given both accounts warnings. If this happens again, they will be blocked. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Why did you set the protection of Herbert Schildt to expire? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Herbert_Schildt&action=historysubmit&diff=367680991&oldid=367060069 For at least 5 years it has been continuously subject to vandalism from a loonie who has long ago been blocked from editing (User:Spinoza1111) but who continues to vandalise this and other pages on his agenda using IPs. Barsoomian (talk) 07:24, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Because the log says so. Feel free to request a change at WP:RFPP if you so please. By the way, including an expiration date in {{pp-semi-blp}} categorizes article into category:Wikipedia temporarily semi-protected biographies of living people.Andrewlp1991 (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

for your work with the semi-protection templates. :) Enigma^msg 21:34, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. I noted your edit to the Nirvana discography in the Singles section where you added the US Airplay charts. Your edits may have been reverted but I think the info could be added again, if you specify the source and give the positions for the other songs, so that a new column can be added to the table. Thanks, QuintusPetillius (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm hoping you're willing to take a look at and edit the Gregory R. Ball page, which has had verifiable, independently-sourced content blanked by unregistered users who share an IP Address with the subject's political opponents, and which has been locked for editing in this vandalized state. We have reached out to FisherQueen and OrangeMike in the hopes of a resolution, but have yet to receive one.

Specific changes that have been blanked or made inaccurate by vandals: On the sidebar, under Occupation, "Air Force Officer" has been blanked. Place of birth has been made inaccurate, and should be Pawling, New York. The introduction specifically blanks that he defeated a six-term incumbent in a Republican primary, that he ran a campaign on reform, and his current role in the Assembly as the Ranking Member on the Consumer Affairs and Protection Committee. His background (i.e., his qualifications for office) has been blanked almost entirely. The "Political Career" heading has also been significantly edited to focus on negatives and controversies, while ignoring the positive initiatives of the Assemblyman. Finally, "Electoral History" has been removed. I don't know of any other politician on Wikipedia whose election results are not published.

Please help us resolve these issues.GBallNY99 (talk) 15:13, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Note the recurring "us" in this account's posts. I've asked about this, and gotten no reply. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for this. An IP insists on moving this passage: and then, for some reason, seemingly unrelated IP's want this referenced sentence now removed without explanation. See my talk page for the first IP that moved the quote[3], but now two others want it deleted entirely[4][5]. It makes no sense, really - the page may need temporary semi-protection if it happens even one more time. Agree with me on that? Doc9871 (talk) 07:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

A recent edit of yours has removed the semi-protected template completely from Wiz Khalifa. I think your intent was to shrink the template and am asking you to make the template 'live' again, since the template is supposed to last until August 27th. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

PS - Sorry, my misunderstanding has been cleared up, I just didn't see the silver-lock icon. Shearonink (talk) 22:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

That's good and all, but Wikipedia does not take original research or unreliable sources, let alone a source that does not even mention her. Fixer23 (talk) 05:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)