User talk:Orangemike

Society of Composers & Lyricists

Have I improved this article Society of Composers & Lyricists enough to get all those tags removed? Thanks! Bsteph1 (talk) 21:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Re "Conflict of Interests"

Hi Orange Mike... there is no conflict of interests with regard to my updating the Wikipedia article about the actor Nico Mirallegro. I edit his article because of an interest in him and his acting career. I am not a member of his family and I am not a crew member of any of the UK film companies which are making forthcoming films in which he appears. I am however, fortunate enough to be able to sometimes contact him through direct message on twitter. He is following me on twitter out of interest in my drawings of him.

I understand that Wikipedia must be updated without any biased viewpoints, so I write from a purely factual standpoint and try to provide links and references wherever possible. My last edit was to remove a duplicated mention of his appearance as a gay character in Moving On.

I also recently asked for help in the matter of trying to upload an image of him without incurring copyright issues. It would be nice to be able to add an image of Nico Mirallegro to his article, but I would like to understand the correct way to go about it rather than have another image deleted. I hope you can help.

Kind regards, Pinkyandrexa (talk) 20:36, 9 August 2010 (UTC).

COI question re: USO of NC

Hi OM! I see you've also been taking a look at United Service Organization of North Carolina. I noticed you had warned the author about COI, and was curious as to why (I'm not arguing - it's more curiosity. I'm a fairly newish admin and COI and spam are two areas outside my usual areas). Was it the nature of the edits (I got a wee bit annoyed when the multipleissues tag I'd added got blown away... I see you've added similar tags, so I'm less annoyed than I was earlier...) or was it something about the editor? Thanks in advance, TFOWR 14:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

It's the s.p.a. nature of his edits, and the tone of his posts and his article, that led me to suspect a COI. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks. Incidentally, I don't know if you'll recognise me (I changed my username a while back), but you welcomed me back when I first registered ;-) Still here, still going strong, no longer got the sab-kitty on my userpage sadly...! TFOWR 15:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry, I remember, I remember... --Orange Mike | Talk 15:56, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced lists of former employees of television stations

Hello Michael, I took note a few minutes ago of an enthusiastic "pass" you made through an article I have on my watch list, Wingham, Ontario, removing those list entries from a section devoted to "notable" locals that have no pre-existing articles in the encyclopedia to substantiate them. In a similar vein; over the past month or so I have been attempting to clean up a fair number of U.S. and Canadian television station list entries containing alleged "notable former employees", that not only have no pre-existing articles to back them up; they have no sourcing associated with them whatsoever. At present, I have approximately eighty such articles on my watch list and have been systematically removing all unreferenced entries that do not have a reference or a pre-existing article. For the most part, other editors have been supportive of my endeavours; notable exceptions include a stable of sock puppets being run by an editor squatting on Chicago area station articles that has been subsequently "dealt with". One more recent occurrence, is centred on a couple of New Orleans area station articles, where; after I had taken the time to reduce the lists to only those entries supported by pre-existing articles; another editor deemed it necessary to restore all the material, without even the benefit of an explanatory edit summary.[1] It's interesting to take note that when they performed that edit; they also simultaneously re-added completely unreferenced material that few would doubt was potentially highly libellous; see "Mike Longman" entry. Could you perhaps have a look at this particular "case" and maybe offer your personal opinion on my attempts to "pare down" these lists of former employees in these station articles in general? Thank you for your time. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 19:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

User 75.139.111.29

I don't know if you read the user talk page of 75.139.111.29. If you have, do you have any opinion as to the warnings given to the user after the Sandbox accident?

P.S. First thought I recived when I viewed your photo was, "I should send this guy a crate of Florida Organges." LOL =D -- ℐℴℯℓ ℳ. ℂℌAT ✐ 21:52, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Kindly take a look at this

Dear OrangeMike, I'll be grateful if you could handle this from here on. Mick Mulvaney is a client of Erin Febel (confirmed via linked twitter feeds), who is editing the page. A warning has been left on her talk page. Similarly, IP 67.197.214.253 belongs to a company (confirmed via WhoIs) which is a large donor to Mick Mulvaney. That IP too has been warned User talk:67.197.214.253. I'd prefer handing this over to you here on. Thanks and kind regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 06:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the message left on my talk page. With respect to the IP, the WhoIs traces it to Comporium Communications, one of the past donors to Mick Mulvaney's campaign.^{[http://www.heraldonline.com/2008/04/19/499752/state-senate-foes-raking-in-big.html]} As the news is of two years ago, I did not know how to proceed except leave a warning note on the user's talk page with a note to CoI guideline. In Erinfebel's case, there is also an Erin Febel on twitter whose twitter messages talk about spending time at Mulvany's campaign headquarters, or joining his campaign etc. That is where I left it and came to you as I didn't want to do a wrong jump of conclusions. Warm regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 17:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

TB (talkback, not tuberculosis)

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

- Dank (push to talk) 14:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, NetHope page

Thanks for adding the disclaimer at the top of the NetHope sandbox page. Can you move it to the NetHope page also now? Kris1490 (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2010 (UTC) Kris1490 (talk) 17:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help Kris1490 (talk) 18:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

false accusation of sockpuppetry

After the false accusation issued] by User:Squash Racket (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orangemike&diff=373091375&oldid=373080014#Squash_Racket), you placed the sockpuppetry tag on my user page.

I request CheckUser intervention to prove that I am innocent, or otherwise please eliminate that tag.

Thank you in advance!

Daccono —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daccono (talk • contribs) 14:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocking TSC Public Affairs

Hi. While I understand (and support) WP's prohibition on promotional usernames and conflict-of-interest edits, I wonder whether immediately blocking TSC Public Affairs was the right move. If TSC had merely updated the number of people on the various lists and added proper citations, we might well have seen that as useful and appropriate. Even the notes about political support were a useful, if clearly self-serving, addition. As for the username itself, I see that as welcome transparency, not something to be immediately shut down. Certainly, whoever created "TSC Public Affairs" is free to operate under a different name, one that will give no hint of his or her ties to the government agency. Finally, I suspect TSC Public Affairs is a relative newcomer to WP, if only because a more experienced editor would have known that uncited additions to an article on a controversial subject would draw fire.

I think the right approach here would be not to summarily block TSC Public Affairs, but to offer counsel about WP policy, especially conflict-of-interest and citation guildelines. Further misbehavior can always be tracked and punished. PRRfan (talk) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I favor a strict zero tolerance policy on this kind of PR edits, and the spamming in this case was so shamelessly self-serving that I felt no qualms. "Public affairs" offices, by their very nature, tend to be staffed by the kind of people who have trouble comprehending the idea of actual neutral point of view, and treat any indulgence as a license to commit pressagentry and spindoctoring on their masters' behalf. By contrast, for a case where I've been helping the COI editor off-line and she is cleaning up her act, see User talk:Jcsee. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:59, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:WithdrawnVTJS/Idscoveri

Sorry about that - I recreated the article in user space to be improved there, after I deleted it in article space. I obviously failed to keep tabs on it and support dleting it now. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:44, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

COI

I marked the talk page of User:Humber Marketing & Communications as potential COI and his/her only edited article Humber College similarly. Looks a lot more blatant than User:Greenbankliverpool whom you quite rightly took action against a few minutes ago. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

the Chemung County Historical Society

the references have now been listed. it is not a conflict of interest, the society exists, it has members and there was not an article pertaining to the society already on Wikipedia, also i am not part of this organization nor am i trying to promote it. it is a non-profit organization, they run the Chemung valley museum and booth library (also non-profit). i just noticed what is and what is not acceptable for sources. the sources i listed are not deemed acceptable by Wikipedia-however these sources are all that exists for information pertaining to the Chemung County Historical Society, prior to reviewing them i could not have produced the article in question-no other sources exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchs.1836 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

If there are no reliable sources, then it can be argued that the Society is simply not notable enough to have an article in this encyclopedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

this is true, however an argument has more than one side. this subject is notable because it has refurbished a building on the national register of historical places, accreditation from the American association for museums and other various awards, and runs an archive that citizens can use for research and a museum that is open to the public.

there are other articles on this site that use sources similar to mine (things that they published), i wish to know why there articles have not been moderated---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhode_Island_Historical_Society

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunswick_Historical_Society

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Antiquarian_Society

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newport_Historical_Society

if my article is not notable enough for wikipedia, then why does it seem that these are. i know that you are one person and can only review so many articles but these links have been on wikipedia for quite some time-there are four pages, for some reason only two will show up, the two unlisted are the brunswick historical society, and the newport historical society. i am not attempting to suggest the deletion of other articles, i just do not feel that it is right that my article is removed when these articles and articles such as this exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silly_Bandz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchs.1836 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC) — Cchs.1836 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

1. I did not propose the deletion of that article; some other editor did. Please actually read my contributions to the discussion, which include adding a "rescue" tag to the article itself!

2. It is not your article; it is an article you started and have worked on. Nobody "owns" an article in Wikipedia.

3. "Look at these other articles!" is not an argument for the retention of any particular article, though it may be an argument for the deletion of the other one(s).

4. Silly Bandz are much better known in modern America than this historical society. You and I may not find them notable, but many children, retailers and merchandisers do; thus, you and I must deal with it. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

ok sorry i did not know you didnt post for deletion, im still learning the basic features of this site, i started the article as a project for a museum im working for to get community service hours. i know that i dont own the article, but my comment included multiple articles and i didnt want any confusion by saying -the- article, as for the "Look at these other articles!" thing, i didnt know that existed, hmmm, not knowing something exists is what started all this, i dont have an account so prior to the article in question, the only thing i have edited are typos. as for the silly bands thing, i just threw that in for a bit of humor, to say- im not mad or anything, but this took me a while to make and i wrote a three page paper on summer vacation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.238.203.201 (talk) 11:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Business Plot

Your edit tag stated "the spelling in here would embarass a clever 11th-grader"; the correct spelling is "embarrass". In the future please aid the project by correcting spelling errors instead of merely adding a clean-up tag while trying to be witty.--76.17.147.126 (talk) 02:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The misspelling was a clumsy efffort at humor; the tag was because I didn't have time to fix the whole thing at that point (I've finally gotten my watchlist down below 10,000 articles again). --Orange Mike | Talk 17:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Starship Troopers

I agree with your position to keep the segment in, keep up the good work.Wowaconia (talk) 02:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Help Please

Hi User:Orangemike,

I was communicating with User:Tnxman307, and he encouraged me to talk to you. I saw that you recently made positive changes to the New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company page. I know I have several things that have to be changed as noted in the information box above the article. Do you have any specific suggestions, other than wikify? I am new to the Wikipedia world; and am trying to edit the article as closely as I can within the Wikipedia guidelines. However, I still seem to be having trouble with understanding specifics that needed to be changed. Also, I thought the notability of the company was proven in the provided references. I appreciate your help. Thanks, 12.26.42.10 (talk) 19:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Herrod

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Christopher Herrod. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Herrod

Without any verification that he was a state senator, there was a question of whether the person is notable. Active Banana ( bananaphone

User:LINKELS Josy‎

Hey OrangeMike, I was thinking about talking to you about LINKELS Josy‎, looking through his history and Contribs I think this user does not speak English at all and is using something like Google translator to translate everything he contributes, French seems to be his native tongue. I posted on the content board not sure where else to post asking what should be done about most of his contributions since they all seem to be about the same person with no references or not coherent. Is our only option to go to each page and individually undo each of his edits over the past year? - Mcmatter (talk|contrib) 15:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

He seems to be self-advertising; so yeah, I'd say we're gonna have to despam every article he's been inserting himself into. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok sounds good, I didn't want to be too bold over a language barrier, thank you for your quick reply - Mcmatter (talk|contrib) 15:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Back in October, he seems to have machine-translated the entire Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple page as of that moment into French, and substituted the machine translation for the then-current text! --Orange Mike | Talk 15:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Nice that was obviously caught earlier, he has previous warnings on his talk page he translated but I couldn't recover them when I added the nowikis to his page, to make the newer ones appear properly. Whats the standard practice to deal with a user like this? This is the first time I ran into a non-english delinquent on en.wikipedia. - Mcmatter (talk|contrib) 15:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Request for assistance

(i am posting this request on your page and on one other admins, i hope thats not forum shopping, as im not asking you to "vote" on the afd) I have noted your work at various locations, you seem like a smart, level headed person. Could you look at Gabriel Cousens, an article with some potentially libelous content which is being disputed for its reliability. article has an afd going, with at least 2 issues: notability of course, and a request from the subject for deletion of the article as a repository for libelous content. I "voted" to keep (based only on my interpretation of my searches), but that was before Mr. Cousens weighed in. I dont know procedure for that request, and subject is not so obviously notable that we cant consider it. I will support consensus, but would also like to know what happens next. I have not edited the article, preferring someone else not so involved to look at it, but my inclination is to immediately remove the controversial content, and delete the record of it-but im not 100% certain this is right.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Brandeis article

Hey Mike, Earlier in the summer as you recall we had this correspondence:

If this is true, please find a reliable source. Amazon is notoriously a venue for spamming, vanity insertions, and general mishegoss. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC) We need an impartial third party, such as a book or magazine article; not a Brandeis U. source. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's that third party: http://aldf.org/article.php?id=1441 (see the blurb at the bottom). I don't want this to seem like an editing war... do you want to revert your reversion? Thanks!Goingforthetruth (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, it's not an edit war; but that little squib at the bottom of the article is a fairly weak source. I'd think a claim like that ought to be easier to back up. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit filter false positives

I was wondering, is this a template: "Yet another bogus report by a thwarted and incompetent vandal." I'm not sure if you type that, or if it's a template. Endofskull (talk) 00:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Nope, just my own words, cut and pasted. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, alright. Thanks! Endofskull (talk) 01:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Please fix your plagiarism of SignPost article about plagiarism for a law project against plagiarism.

The copied part, written by User:TomasBat, User:HaeB, User:Ottre, User:Amorymeltzer, and User:Tony1 in the 2010-05-19t04:39:46z version in the SignPost article:

Vargas Aignasse presented a law project to increase sanctions against those who commit plagiarism. But in the project proposal, to define plagiarism, he copied 331 words from the Spanish Wikipedia article on the topic (es:plagio), without any kind of attribution. The copy-pasted text even includes square brackets from the (only partially removed) footnotes in the Wikipedia article.

It wasn't the first time that Aignasse copied text from Wikipedia into law proposals. In a proposal to prohibit barra bravas from travelling to South Africa for the World Cup, he copied 314 words from the corresponding article.

A week later the Deputy admitted in an interview with Clarín that he copied the text from Wikipedia, and that he had done it before. Nevertheless, he argued that he had no obligation to cite the source, which could be considered ironic given the fact that the Deputy's law proposal seeks, precisely, to punish those who don't cite sources.

The incident was

which you copied to Gerónimo Vargas Aignasse 2 days later on 2010-05-21t15:37:56z:

Vargas Aignasse presented a law project to increase sanctions against those who commit plagiarism. But in the project proposal, to define plagiarism, he copied 331 words from the Spanish Wikipedia article on the topic (es:plagio), without any kind of attribution. The copy-pasted text even includes square brackets from the (only partially removed) footnotes in the Wikipedia article.

It wasn't the first time that Aignasse copied text from Wikipedia into law proposals. In a proposal to prohibit barra bravas from travelling to South Africa for the World Cup, he copied 314 words from the corresponding article.

A week later the Deputy admitted in an interview with Clarín that he copied the text from Wikipedia, and that he had done it before. Nevertheless, he argued that he had no obligation to cite the source, which could be considered ironic given the fact that the Deputy's law proposal seeks, precisely, to punish those who don't cite sources.

The incident was

Please see Wikipedia:Plagiarism on how to fix it.

The license used on Wikipedia, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, also requires attribution. -- Jeandré, 2010-08-25t17:49z