User talk:Freakshownerd: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Freakshownerd (talk | contribs)
2,904 edits
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 498: Line 498:
::::::::::::Identifying that those labeled AIDS denialists (which is clearly perjorative terminology to begin with) are skeptical of the HIV-AIDS connection does not cast doubt on anything. It merely identifies the core of their objection which might be misunderstood by readers unfamiliar with the very loaded terminology being used, in some cases by POV pushers who resort to distortions and misinformation as you have clearly done on the Johnson article. Why haven't you restored the disputed tag? And why are you allowing innaccuracies you introduced to remain even after it's been pointed out to you that they are not supported by the citations provided? [[User:Freakshownerd|Freakshownerd]] ([[User talk:Freakshownerd#top|talk]]) 19:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
::::::::::::Identifying that those labeled AIDS denialists (which is clearly perjorative terminology to begin with) are skeptical of the HIV-AIDS connection does not cast doubt on anything. It merely identifies the core of their objection which might be misunderstood by readers unfamiliar with the very loaded terminology being used, in some cases by POV pushers who resort to distortions and misinformation as you have clearly done on the Johnson article. Why haven't you restored the disputed tag? And why are you allowing innaccuracies you introduced to remain even after it's been pointed out to you that they are not supported by the citations provided? [[User:Freakshownerd|Freakshownerd]] ([[User talk:Freakshownerd#top|talk]]) 19:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Out...OK, what I'm gathering from this is that you, personally, consider the term AIDS denialist to be pejorative. That's fine. The problem is that your views (and mine) don't matter. It's what the reliable sources say that matters; it's the consensus of Wikipedians that matters. The reliable sources use the term denialist, and discussions have led to consensus on the matter. Have you found these discussions? Would you like a link to them? [[User:Keepcalmandcarryon|Keepcalmandcarryon]] ([[User talk:Keepcalmandcarryon|talk]]) 19:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Out...OK, what I'm gathering from this is that you, personally, consider the term AIDS denialist to be pejorative. That's fine. The problem is that your views (and mine) don't matter. It's what the reliable sources say that matters; it's the consensus of Wikipedians that matters. The reliable sources use the term denialist, and discussions have led to consensus on the matter. Have you found these discussions? Would you like a link to them? [[User:Keepcalmandcarryon|Keepcalmandcarryon]] ([[User talk:Keepcalmandcarryon|talk]]) 19:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
:Once again you resort to despicable lies and distortions. The sources clearly note the connection between the AIDS denialist terminology and the phrase [[Holocaust denial]]. That you would suggest that the descriptor is not pejorative is utterly dishonest. You've also ignored my questions regarding your ongoing BLP violations, so it's clear you are not willing to engage in respectful discussion and seek only to disrupt the encyclopedia building efforts of good faith contributors. Please do no post here again other than to provide me with required notifications. [[User:Freakshownerd|Freakshownerd]] ([[User talk:Freakshownerd#top|talk]]) 19:48, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:50, 27 July 2010

Common Language Deletion

The article is not scheduled for deletion, rather it is scheduled for movement to the Wiktionary site, as the article you have submitted appears to be more of a dictionary definition. If you plan to expand the article, you may remove the {{Copy to Wiktionary}} tag and place {{underconstruction}}. --ANowlin: talk 22:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Shouldn't there be an article on Wickedpedia about moral compass?

Proposed deletion of Floor (legislative)

The article Floor (legislative) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOT - Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and I can't see this as being an encyclopaedic topic.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Claritas (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Freakshownerd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Cgingold (talk) 14:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 14:15, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Floor (legislative)

The article Floor (legislative) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per WP:NOT - Wikipedia is not a dictionary.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Claritas (talk) 17:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )

I saw your post on ANI. Um, my involvement in this situation this far has included my urging that he be unblocked twice, which is exactly what happened. In that light, I do not understand what it is that you are criticizing me for. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are an Arbcom member, yet you have done nothing to actually fix the situation. The damage from the blocks was already done, and Richard now has at least 4 entries in his block log because of the abusive admin actions that came on top of his being harassed and harangued, including by socks, with mass deletion nominations, threats, and censorship even of his ability to protest. The fact that you don't see a problem in this situation is proof positive that you are a major part of the problem. Or do you think being aware of abuse and supporting the victim's being unblocked after the fact is enough? Freakshownerd (talk) 16:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The whole situation is being reviewed by multiple administrators per the ANI thread. If not resolved there, it should go to some reasonable form of dispute resolution. As for the blocks, I was not aware that anyone was thinking of blocking until the blocks were already in place and I commented that I thought both were unwarranted, which was the opinion of other admins as well and the blocks were lifted. Since time only runs forward rather than backward, I had no way of undoing the blocks before they occurred. And that suggestion that a process be created for expunging unjustified blocks from block logs has been made from time to time, but never attained consensus to be implemented, so I do not understand what you are suggesting I should do regarding this aspect of the matter.
Please also note that arbitrators have no special authority beyond other administrators, except when they are actually either dealing with arbitration cases, or perhaps in dealing with situations where they are privy to confidential or sensitive information not known to other admins. It is highly frowned upon for arbitrators to wander around the wiki throwing our weight around and demanding that situations be resolved as we dictate by dint of our arbitrator positions, and in fact even my having opined as an administrator that these were questionable blocks would be disfavored by some. If you believe that I should have been more pro-active in trying to resolve this dispute because I am an arbitrator, I could consider changing my future behavior accordingly, but I fear that would meet with major objections from many of your fellow editors. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You make a lot of good excuses for your failure to properly address a problematic situation and your refusal to help get it fixed. Freakshownerd (talk) 16:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mario's Cafe

A tag has been placed on Mario's Cafe, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Template:Do not delete Codf1977 (talk) 09:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Marios

See User:Freakshownerd/Mario's Cafe. Nyttend (talk) 16:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, being a world's record holder isn't a guarantee of notability. Getting coverage for being the world's record holder may make someone notable (although possibly not), so it's ultimately a matter of passing the general notability guideline. Nyttend (talk) 16:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of San Francisco Creamery

The article San Francisco Creamery has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Creamery.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Herostratus (talk) 15:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I move a page? I don't see any button at the top despite the instructions. But I think my account should be autoconfirmed by now? Freakshownerd (talk) 00:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

change in lead to Gaza flotilla raid

Hi Freakshow,

Your recent change of the first paragraph of the lead repeats wording that is later in the same paragraph. The wording is also not fantastic. I recommend you undo the change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_flotilla_raid&diff=366122755&oldid=366121247

Zuchinni one (talk) 02:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to fix it up in follow-up edits, but I understand that it may be reverted entirely. It seems to me that the article's lede (an introduction to the subject) should provide context to the novice reader. As it was written I didn't think it was clear under what circumstances the convoy was sent or why it was disrupted. That's what I was trying to clarify. Thank you kindly for your courteous message. Freakshownerd (talk) 02:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I could see trimming the "imposed to put pressure on Hamas and keep weapons out" if that's overly simplistic and redundant to the link regarding th blockade that's there, but I do think it's helpful to note the general circumstances ie. that there was a blockade and that the convoy was seeking to land good in spite of it, right at the outset. Freakshownerd (talk) 02:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding, since it seems to be OK with you I will remove the "imposed to put pressure on Hamas" bit. You are correct that it is important information, but the lead has been a subject of much frustration due to lots of well meaning people adding to it for context, balance etc ...

Cheers! Zuchinni one (talk) 03:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I comment

To whom was this addressed? --John (talk) 18:00, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Matthew Hoh

A tag has been placed on Matthew Hoh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You created an article with not content other than {{Delrev}}. What is anyone supposed to make of that? Please do not remove speedy deletion notices. If you would like to contest the speedy deletion, place the {{hangon}} tag on the article and explain in the talk page why you think the article should not be deleted. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "Featherlite Coaches"

A page you created, Featherlite Coaches, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how it is important or significant, and thus why it should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for companies in particular.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Jusdafax 17:14, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. [1] ╟─TreasuryTag►quaestor─╢ 17:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • How do I move a page? I don't see any button at the top despite the instructions. But I think my account should be autoconfirmed by now? Freakshownerd (talk) 00:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • How do I add things to my watchlist? For instance Featherlite needs to be disambiguated and the article that's there moved.

Refactoring talk pages

This edit: I understand the sentiment (WP:NOTAFORUM etc) but it's generally best not to totally remove other editors' comments.

I'd suggesting "collapsing" off-topic threads, with {{hat|reason=[[WP:NOTAFORUM]]}} and {{hab}}, for example:

WP:NOTAFORUM
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

This is off-topic, but...

This way editors can't argue that they've been censored, and they're gently nudged towards policy.

Cheers, TFOWR 16:40, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. That sounds reasonable. I will try to remember to collapse those type of comments in future. Thanks for the suggestion. Freakshownerd (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scot BLP

Your edits to this biography of a lving person seem a bit POV, please don't add similar content without discussion on the talkpage, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 17:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be specific? That article has been plagued by vandalism and the addition of innaccurate information. I've done my best to make sure it stays clean. Freakshownerd (talk) 22:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Rachel Sussman

A tag has been placed on Rachel Sussman requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Mr. Vernon (talk) 05:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Speedy deletion nomination of Mario's Cafe Bar

A tag has been placed on Mario's Cafe Bar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Template:Do not delete Codf1977 (talk) 19:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moving articles

Which article do you want moved? Let me know and I can try and help, or show you how. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 22:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer! I wanted to move User:Freakshownerd/Sandbox to Rachel Sussman and also User:Freakshownerd/Mario's Cafe to Mario's Cafe Bar, but I couldn't figure out how so I cut and pasted. Preserving the full history (even though there wasn't much there) would have been better. Anyone who contributed should be credited. Freakshownerd (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK - look at the bottom of each page. See the link that says "Move this page"? Click on that, and it will give you a form that allows the move. It will turn the sandbox page into a redirect, but you can tag that for deletion. Make sense? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any link at the bottom of the page or anywhere else that says "move this page". Freakshownerd (talk) 12:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Odd. It shows up for me. What skin are you using? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:28, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. I guess I will just have to ask when I need something moved. Care to volunteer for this assignment? :) Freakshownerd (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another admin mentioned an older version of the interface and I hit the "take me back" tab. Low and behold I can now move sutff and easily add things to my watchlist. Hallelujah. Whoever is in charge of these "updates" really needs a good talking to. Freakshownerd (talk) 17:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Freakshownerd. You have new messages at Codf1977's talk page.
Message added 22:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Freakshownerd. You have new messages at Codf1977's talk page.
Message added 22:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Freakshownerd. You have new messages at Codf1977's talk page.
Message added 10:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]


References

Rachel Sussman

I have moved your sandbox into this article to merge the history and for good measure undeleted the revisions that were deleted earlier so everything you have done on her should all be in the same place. Spartaz Humbug! 16:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Per a discussion with IronGargoyle I figured out a way to change my interface to an older version and I am now able to move pages. So that should help a lot. Thanks. Freakshownerd (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Iowa School for the Deaf

A tag has been placed on Iowa School for the Deaf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — Timneu22 · talk 18:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New articles

Excellent article on Iowa School for the Deaf and on Long. I like the articles that aren't available anywhere else and have to be put together a few facts at a time. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Richard. I appreciate your help with the article. Finding the puzzle pieces and putting them together is indeed a pleasure. Take care. Freakshownerd (talk) 18:10, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Selsko meso

A tag has been placed on Selsko meso requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. --moreno oso (talk) 04:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Mario's Cafe Bar

I have nominated Mario's Cafe Bar, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario's Cafe Bar. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Codf1977 (talk) 13:58, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Reading

Hi,

May I recommend that you take a few moments to read the following WP Pages

You may wish to pay particular attention to the "however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism" section in the last one. I always know when some one feels they are on shaky ground cause they pull out the Vandal card like some over zealous World Cup referee.

Codf1977 (talk) 14:11, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation

Hi. Please can you read my comment here and then retract your (I'll assume incorrect) accusation. ╟─TreasuryTag►estoppel─╢ 15:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please can you remove your accusation against me as soon as possible? ╟─TreasuryTag►most serene─╢ 07:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Legal threat?. Thank you. CIreland (talk) 15:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Rick Scott (businessman)

I just saw you had posted a request for others to weigh in on the Rick Scott article, asking whether it should be moved to simply Rick Scott. I definitely agree. Out of 4 weighing in, there is a pretty strong consensus of 3 of us who believe it should be moved. You gave clear reasons why that we agreed with, and the only person who said no did not give any reason, but did say maybe it should be in a month or two. I would move it myself now, but I want to be extra careful because I do have a financial relationship to Rick Scott and I want to see the article improved, but I don't want to edit out of turn. But I would like to encourage you to make the move. The current setup actually makes no sense. Thanks, Thirteenth Florida (talk) 20:02, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Scott and Iran

Hi there, Freakshownerd. Just a few minutes ago, I proposed to delete the section "Other corporate involvements" on the Rick Scott Wikipedia page, which I see you have recently worked on. (Also, regarding my comment on this page just above, someone else has already taken care of it.) I have done some research to get to the bottom of the situation, and posted what I found on the Talk page (see here). The upshot is that Iran apparently stole the software, so it's simply unfair to imply that Scott was in any way involved with Iran's censorship. If you agree with the points made, I'd like to request that you remove it, because while I could do so based on its negligible sourcing, I also do have a WP:COI relationship (noted above, of course) with Scott and do not wish to make any edits without consensus. If you do agree, please make that change. If you don't disagree, I'll be WP:BOLD and remove it myself, assuming there are no objections. Thanks. Thirteenth Florida (talk) 07:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add that bit originally and I have no objection to it being removed. It's a tenuous connection at best and I don't think it's worthy of inclusion or notable. Freakshownerd (talk) 18:21, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I know you didn't add it, just that you had worked on it. So I am going to remove it now. Thanks. (Edit: Never mind, I see you already did! Thanks again.) Thirteenth Florida (talk) 21:36, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Ray's Hell Burger

I have nominated Ray's Hell Burger, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ray's Hell Burger. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. City of Destruction (The Celestial City) 23:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.washingtonian.com/restaurantreviews/1906.html

July 2010

Thank you for your recent contributions, such as ‎Withlacoochee River Park. Getting started creating new articles on Wikipedia can be tricky, and you might like to try creating a draft version first, which you can then ask for feedback on if necessary, without the risk of speedy deletion. Do make sure you also read help available to you, including Your First Article and the Tutorial. You might also like to try the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version. Thank you. Marcus Qwertyus (signs his posts) 04:01, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bill McCollum

I feel silly. You are quite right - the gay adoption case was tainted when the testifying minister got caught with the rent boy. When the title was changed from "sex" to "adoption," the only thing I could think of was that someone was alleging the preacher tried to adopt the boy. Cheers! Blue Rasberry 03:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It will be interesting to see how much media coverage that case gets as campaigning continues and the elections near. I wasn't aware of it until seeing it covered here, but it certainly raises some interesting issues. I suspect Scott will win the Republican nomination, but we'll see what happens. Freakshownerd (talk) 22:19, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cypress Creek Preserve

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Cypress Creek Preserve, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/recreation/areas/cypresscreek.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lake Townsen Regional Park

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Lake Townsen Regional Park, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.hernandocounty.us/parks_rec/Parks/Park_detail.asp?Key=13. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:19, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Lake Townsen Regional Park

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Lake Townsen Regional Park, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.hernandocounty.us/parks_rec/Parks/Park_detail.asp?Key=13, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Lake Townsen Regional Park saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Acather96 (talk) 18:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mathew Hoh refs

http://www.rferl.org/content/US_Seeks_New_Balance_In_Afghan_Intelligence/1930910.html

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/10/27/afghanistan

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8565517.stm

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Columns/16-Dec-2009/We-have-the-time/1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8565517.stm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/01/matthew-hoh-interviewed-b_n_341553.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/rizkhan/2010/02/201028910504706.html

http://www.ridenhour.org/recipients_03h.shtml


Susan Gaddy liberal Democrat and lawyer http://free-times.com/index.php?cat=1992209084141467&act=post&pid=11861006100935349



Speedy deletion nomination of F Project

A tag has been placed on F Project requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Prestonmag (talk) 22:53, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restoring that article so it can properly be considered at the Deletion Review by admin and commoner editors alike. Freakshownerd (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous articles deleted speedily that need reviewing

Here: [2] Freakshownerd (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, this is not an appropriate use of another user's editing history...following someone around and checking all of their deletion nominations...as it verges on wiki-stalking. You may wish to reconsider how you're going about this. Tarc (talk) 15:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That is exactly what a contribution history is for. I've come across a series of bad deletion decisions and I'm seeking to have them rectified. In fact I even asked for suggestions on how to proceed at the DRV where I put up a few of them. If you have suggestions you're welcome to offer them. Judging from your misguided input at DRV and the Ray's Hell Burger deletion discussion it appears you may have your own problem with stalking and disruption. Only a fool would vote to delete those two subjects even after their notability has been well establisehd by substantial coverage in reliable sources. Freakshownerd (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, that is not what it is for; doing as you are doing now is failing to assume good faith on the part of Codf1977. He is not vandalizing or disrupting, especially seeing how an admin agreed with his nominations and actually deleted the articles. DRV is to review the closing admin's actions, not the nominator's. As for you and your Ray's Burger jab...no, you over-estimate yourself. I regularly participate in many, many XfD and DRV discussions, and my weighing in both here and in this are wholly unconnected to you. Tarc (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't impugned anyone's good faith. I'm simply trying to improve the encyclopedia. Again, if you have suggestions on the best approach to fixing a long series of bad deletion decisions then let me know. Otherwise, don't bug me. Freakshownerd (talk) 15:50, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jasmine Records

A tag has been placed on Jasmine Records requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 23:14, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

F Project Deletion Appeal

For what reason was the F Project page first deleted? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 00:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Laziness. :) Freakshownerd (talk) 15:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On whose part? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 18:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please add _Categories_ to your new articles.

Greetings, I notice you've added quite a few new articles that do not have Categories. Please ensure that your articles have clear, precise categories at the end, otherwise they are dumped into WP:UNCAT and hard to access. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

You have new messages (last change).

—fetch·comms 21:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Improper deletions

Here: [3].; Backlinks also need to be restored.

Celtic Heartbeat Records Obvious merge candidate with sources at Google Books

Fox ex. http://books.google.com/books?id=iQ4EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA48&dq=Celtic+Heartbeat+Records&hl=en&ei=5vM9TI_IMsH98Abw5cGRBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Celtic%20Heartbeat%20Records&f=false

Urban Dubz Records (does not appear to be notable)

Hardleaders several sources indicating notability [4]

Hokey Pokey Records several sources indicate notability [5] (History needs to be restored) "This collection from Hokey Pokey Records in England holds a mirror to Thompson's recent three-disc retrospective, showing the brilliance and the deceptive fragility of Thompson's songs." Option, Issues 54-58 1994

Silkheart Records strong indications of notability [6]

Vacuous Pop Recordings (does not appear to be notable)

Victory Garden Records (does not appear to be notable)

Phantasm Records [7] (lots of backlinks need restoring)

Zone 6 Records (does not appear to be notable)

Pigeon Hole Records [8]

Akarma Records [9] [10] [11] (numerous backlinks need restoring)

Blues Matters! Records (numerous backlinks need restoring) should at least be Blues Matters if affiliated

The RISC Group deleted at AfD. Hard to find sources since name shared with other meanings of name. (may not be notable. Seems to be mostly a store now?)

O.T. Recordings doesn't appear notable

Noise Records (UK) Should probably go to AfD.

Liquid Asset (label) Discog: [12] Difficult to serach for sources because of name

Kalophone Records (appear to be pretty obscure German label that released LPs)

Levelsound

Blues Matters! Records (numerous backlinks need restoring) should at least be Blues Matters if affiliated. As seems obvious from this edit [13]. (and backlinks need to be restored)

The RISC Group deleted at AfD. Hard to find sources since name shared with other meanings of name. (may not be notable. Seems to be mostly a store now?)

O.T. Recordings doesn't appear notable

Removals from List of electronic music record labels, List of record labels: I–Q and List of record labels: 0-9 also need reviewing.

Already preserved: Nitto Records (AfD deemed unserious), Silvertone Records (1930), Isadora Records, Silkheart Records, Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Trust, Voiceprint Records

Removals from List of electronic music record labels, List of record labels: I–Q and List of record labels: 0-9 also need reviewing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMG_International,_N.V. ](although a BMG subunit)

Mass unhelpful taggings also unconstructive.


up to 07:34, 6 July 2010

Sippy hole

"Sippy hole called the Sippy hole? According to local legend, a driver in the early days of Swamp Buggy racing named Sippy Morris (a name he was given because he hailed from Mississippi) was known to just about always get stuck in the track's signature depression." http://www.swampbuggy.com/swamp-buggy-track.html

User:Freakshownerd/Sippy hole

http://books.google.com/books?id=pWvSXSDHqFUC&pg=PA124&dq=sippy+hole&hl=en&ei=5eIjTLyrJ8T68AaE_Lm0BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=sippy%20hole&f=false page 124

watering hole

rope swing


Copyright Violation

I've left a message at Talk:Cypress Creek Preserve exp laing why I removed the material and why it is inappropriate. -- Whpq (talk) 16:39, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Celtic Heartbeat Records

Since you challenged the the deletion of Celtic Heartbeat Records I have restored it. Can you please add some more text to the article, as it is so minimal at the moment that it is not worth merging. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:54, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and merged it, and added a referenced bit. I suspect it may be independently notable, but at least it has a home again. Thanks for your assistance. Much appreciated. Freakshownerd (talk) 03:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

You have new messages (last change).

—fetch·comms 21:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Debrahlee Lorenzana

Expansion needed

User:Freakshownerd/Reelin' in the Years Productions [15]

Copy-edits

Please specify which information needs to be copy-edit.-Smile1234smile (talk) 15:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the article. Hence the tag. Note also that Tvoz made a similar observation in his edit summary. Freakshownerd (talk) 15:47, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Philip E. Johnson

Thank you for your interest in this article. I have begun a discussion at the Fringe Theories noticeboard. It may be of interest to note that, according to WP:FRINGE, a fringe theory should be balanced by accurate, verifiable information, even if sources for such information do not directly address the subject of the article him/her/itself. This is not a BLP violation; rather, it is a mechanism to prevent Wikipedia being overrun with promotional fringe material without the perspective of "mainstream" views. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 14:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of David Drake (chef)

A tag has been placed on David Drake (chef) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Gobbleswoggler (talk) 16:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3190/is_n26_v28/ai_16073552/

Three revert rule

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Phillip E. Johnson. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 17:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the 3RR noticeboard, as you're now up to six reverts. Thank you. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 18:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you, for your helpful edits, to the article Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant. I had considered merging those 2 subsections, so that was a welcome copyedit. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 05:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cirt. It's always a pleasant surprise to get a kind note. A section on the menu (or maybe food and wine?) might be nice. I think more trimming and tightening might be good, but maybe it's best to wait for the clamoring to die down a bit. Good luck and thanks again for your consideration. Freakshownerd (talk) 14:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Duesberg

The use of the term AIDS denialism is well established and the subject of considerable consensus (see the history at AIDS denialism, Duesberg and related articles. May I suggest that you avoid viewing our disagreements over Phillip E. Johnson as the pretext to edit warring on other fringe-related subjects? Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 19:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The term AIDS denialism is right there in the opening sentence. It appears, as usual, that you either don't know what you're talking about or are purposefully distorting reality for some ulterior motive. Either way, I can only ask that you cease your abuse and disruption. Freakshownerd (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have modified "AIDS denialism", the accepted term for this fringe movement, with "so-called"; you have also added the term "HIV skeptics". Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 19:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I restored he term HIV skeptics in parentheses (after you removed it) as a point of clarification. Not everyone knows what AIDS denialism is. Also, while people within the movement were and are known as AIDS delialists, which seems to be quite pejorative, distinguishing that they don't identify themselves that way is probably helpful. Again, the nomenclature AIDS denialism is noted right at the onset so it's not clear to me what you are objecting to other than continuing to try and pick a fight. Your misrepresentations of what's in the sources is being discussed at the BLP/N and I'm hoping you'll restore the dispute tag as I suggested to you on your talk page so readers realize that the Johnson page is in contention. It's unfortunate that you've chosen to make this personal and to cast false aspersions on me, but you have only to look in the mirror to realize that dishonest smears are corrupting no matter what our perspective and beliefs. Freakshownerd (talk) 19:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
When making changes to an article that has existed in its current version, more or less, for multiple years, it's the prerogative of the changing editor to propose controversial changes on the talk page. If you have read the talk history for Peter Duesberg or for any related article, you understand that the nomenclature issue has been contentious in the past and that extensive discussions have led to the current consensus, namely, that AIDS denialism is the accepted term in the scientific community and thus for Wikipedia. You are not the first person to object, nor will you be the last, but you will need substantial additional support to make the changes you desire. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 19:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I have not removed the terminology, I have only added clarification so it's meaning is not misunderstood. Clarifications are useful, while distortions, lies and misrepresentations like those you've undertaken at the Philip E. Johnson article are not. Freakshownerd (talk) 19:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Clarifications that serve to cast doubt on the accepted terminology are not clarifications at all; they're a means to promote a fringe POV. As for making this personal, I don't recall calling you a liar, a grotesque distorter of reality, a slanderer, dishonest, or any of the various things you've attributed to me. May I kindly suggest that you stop the name-calling while you're ahead? Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 19:32, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Identifying that those labeled AIDS denialists (which is clearly perjorative terminology to begin with) are skeptical of the HIV-AIDS connection does not cast doubt on anything. It merely identifies the core of their objection which might be misunderstood by readers unfamiliar with the very loaded terminology being used, in some cases by POV pushers who resort to distortions and misinformation as you have clearly done on the Johnson article. Why haven't you restored the disputed tag? And why are you allowing innaccuracies you introduced to remain even after it's been pointed out to you that they are not supported by the citations provided? Freakshownerd (talk) 19:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Out...OK, what I'm gathering from this is that you, personally, consider the term AIDS denialist to be pejorative. That's fine. The problem is that your views (and mine) don't matter. It's what the reliable sources say that matters; it's the consensus of Wikipedians that matters. The reliable sources use the term denialist, and discussions have led to consensus on the matter. Have you found these discussions? Would you like a link to them? Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once again you resort to despicable lies and distortions. The sources clearly note the connection between the AIDS denialist terminology and the phrase Holocaust denial. That you would suggest that the descriptor is not pejorative is utterly dishonest. You've also ignored my questions regarding your ongoing BLP violations, so it's clear you are not willing to engage in respectful discussion and seek only to disrupt the encyclopedia building efforts of good faith contributors. Please do no post here again other than to provide me with required notifications. Freakshownerd (talk) 19:48, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Freakshownerd&oldid=375787496"