Archives

1

After years of avoiding the task, I've set up an archive page for older discussions (180 threads from 2008 through 2012) at:

User talk:Arxiloxos/Archive 1

--Arxiloxos (talk) 18:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxiloxos. I wanted to drop you a note with a similar message as the ones I've left SummerPhD and a couple editors from the Proactiv AfD. I'll be helping Guthy-Renker make contributions to the Talk page with a potential conflict of interest and wanted to introduce myself. My approach to COI is to offer contributed content for consideration on the Talk page, while leaving editorial decisions up to those that serve the reader's best interest. My hope is if you have a bit more patience left in you, you might be willing to spend a bit of time vetting my work and collaborating with us on the Talk page. I will aspire to demonstrate exceptional integrity and quality of work to make it worth your time to help us. Cheers. CorporateM (Talk) 18:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted my post within 8 minutes! You must have been waiting patiently by your laptop. Coincidence, huh? Nobody else knew he stepped down just hours before the post. I am convinced you are being payed for your "service". I have also noticed that, in the past, you have deleted everything about Carmine Blaine Marcello. Do not be surprised if you are investigated for this. Have a nice day. Bridge70002 (talk) 22:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're a loony Basket _Feudalist 09:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on New Orleans crime family. Also, getting a stalker account named after you is almost a badge of honour! bobrayner (talk) 01:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. As you were one of the participants at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken John, I thought I should let you know that I have relisted the article at AfD after a discussion on my talk page. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken John (2nd nomination) if you are interested in commenting. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 01:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to disagree with you, but my informations are true, Francois Holland is realy dead 92.147.149.16 (talk) 01:56, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

While i'm here I thought i'd tell you that I suggested that that attack account Bridge made have its username changed by a Bureaucrat, kind of a 'Collateral damage' stopper. If you have a comment on this i'd suggest it be left in the reply to me on my talk page. MIVP - (Can I Help?) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 10:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I was unaware that Wikipedia's definition of "alumnus" varied from the standard meaning of the word. Are there also Wikipedia guidelines suggestion how to mention that these additional people listed did not graduate? It's a tad misleading to assert that the person is an alumnus while they simply attended for a certain amount of time and that could be confusing for readers. Best, Spencer^T♦C 06:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I just reacquainted myself with a dictionary. ([1]) Spencer^T♦C 06:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Most schools with which I have close connections (and all of the ones I attended myself) call you an alumnus whether you graduated or not. (If for no other reason than because your donations are welcome whether or not you got the sheepskin!) As you may have noted, in my restored listing for Kid Cudi I mentioned that he didn't graduate, in part to anticipate the concern you express, in part to explain why I didn't include a class year. Regards, --Arxiloxos (talk) 06:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• ==== — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.50.247.156 (talk) 00:11, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the one who's doing it. Smartie2thaMaxXx is the one who is doing it not me! Supermariokart64 (talk) 00:08, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Look I'm sorry man. I just wanted him to just leave it the way it was, but I didn't mean to go all crazy and edit war over and over and over with him I didn't mean to do that. All I can say right now is, that I'm sorry for causing all this. And I won't do it again I promise. Supermariokart64 (talk) 00:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Boudreaux's Butt Paste is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boudreaux's Butt Paste until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:15, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being a vandal fighter.--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 19:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxilos,

Thanks for the great job on cleaning up the Monroe H. Freedman article. It looks to be much more in line with WP standards. I added the Proposed Deletion because the article was written as self promotion. It looks a whole lot better now. I'll contribute to it later if I see something that can be added or shored up with citations/references.

Have a nice day.

Chad595 (talk) 01:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding undoing my call for deletion:

I see, and understand, that there is a "longstanding practice" of maintaining separate pages for schools and ISDs. I personally think this makes no sense for a school district with only one school, but if that's longstanding practice, I'll respect that.

However, there are still issues of inaccuracy and redundancy on these pages. The Milford Independent School District contains the following: "Milford ISD is consolidated into one large building"... If the ISD is "consolidated into" the high school, then how are they in any way separate? This should probably represent that "Milford ISD currently contains one high school, Milford High School"; I'm not going to make those edits, though.

If this is supposed to be one article about the school district and another about the school itself, then some things should go on one page or the other. For example, typically sports programs are delineated by school, not by school district; it would be more proper to list the sports programs on the high school's page, and not have the (nearly redundant, but slightly different) list of sports programs offered at the school on the ISD's page.

I'd like to improve some of the school/ISD pages, starting with this one, for consistency. However, it'd be good to know what kind of consistency is "allowed" first, so I'm asking.

• Your questions are reasonable ones. I looked at the website for the Milford ISD and I can see where you're coming from--all the grades are in one building, the website treats all the grades together and doesn't have much content that's applicable only to the high school grades. In theory, our article about the high school would give the enrollment numbers and other info only for the upper grades, but I didn't see those separated numbers on the website. There is some different info in the high school article, however--the 2 state championships and 2 runners-up are important stuff for a Texas high school. I suppose it's possible that in this case, where there's only one K-12 school in the district, that the high school article might be merged into the school district article. That's not the same thing as deleting it, because it preserves the edit histories of both articles (making it easier for editors to combine the two articles in a collaborative way), maintains the name of the high school as a redirect to the district article, and doesn't break the links from other articles to both of these (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Milford_High_School_%28Texas%29 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Milford_Independent_School_District). But if that happened here, I wouldn't be surprised to see someone re-create the high school article, given our general presumption about the notability of high schools. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Me again you again we meet again huh? heh heh. Okay it's pretty clear i'm a flat out failure with deletion so I might just leave it alone before I wind up with a block. Comments / suggestions please? MIVP - (Can I Help?) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 12:46, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A new article, Steven Blane, has been created per the discussion on the AFD page. Would you like to review your comment on the matter? Thank you, Yoninah (talk) 10:58, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You'll notice that I deleted it as R2, implausible redirect. "Woolrich, Pennsylvania" is a title for a community, not for a company; we do not redirect names of company towns to the companies. You're free to write a new article about the place, of course, and note that I'm not claiming that it's nonexistent or something like that. Nyttend (talk) 12:56, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for putting it together; I've slightly expanded it and added it to the county template. Nyttend (talk) 17:39, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bob Rupe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Rupe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Apteva (talk) 01:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxiloxos, I noticed that you were recently taking a look at the NFLPA Game article. I'm actually working on behalf of the NFLPA to make some updates to related Wikipedia articles (proposing and discussing changes only) and they've asked me to look into the one for the NFLPA Game. And you're right, the article certainly is inaccurate. I've posted a summary of what I think has happened to it over at WikiProject:NFL. If you'd like to take a look, and weigh in about how to handle the situation, I'd certainly appreciate it! Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 15:20, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, so sorry about the header! I can't believe I spaced on that. And thanks for the great comment at WP:NFL. I'll follow up there a bit later today. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I appreciate your raising this, especially since I hadn't gotten around to taking any corrective action on my own. I put a note on the article talk page, in case anyone is watching there. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By saying that Cheerleading in the United Kingdom is offered as a sport, it is greatly implied that it is a sport. In your source that calls it a sport, is titled "Schools axe real sport in the Craze for Cheerleading". This also implies that cheerleading is not a "real sport." It also states the primary purpose of cheerleading to not be competition, but being to egg on sports team. In nearly every definition of sport, this violates a key concept. This therefore states that even by Wikipedia's own definition of a sport that it is not a sport. IN addition, your source cannot be viewed in its entirety by the majority of people, giving only partial info to many. Your bad-faith edits on the page are vandalism and need to be stopped.69.118.168.2 (talk) 02:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read my reply to your comment....William 22:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether if Stu Klitenic should be deleted or not. The conversation will be held at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stu Klitenic until a consensus is held and everyone is welcome to join the conversation. However, do not remove the AfD message on the top of the page. Ashbeckjonathan 03:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey there, Arxiloxos. Looks like you're on vacation still, but when for when you return: I’ve now followed up on our previous discussion of the NFLPA Collegiate Bowl article at WP:NFL. I’ve also prepared a draft for an NFLPA Collegiate Bowl article and uploaded it to my userspace; you can view it here. Let me know when you’re around and able to participate in vetting this article and continuing to sort things out, I’d certainly appreciate you weighing in over at Talk:NFLPA Game. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 13:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for following up! No worries about the delay. Following the advice of yourself and the other editor commenting, I have updated the "Texas vs The Nation" draft; mind taking a look now? WWB Too (Talk · COI) 13:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again Arxiloxos, I was just wondering if you thought you might have time to take a look at the NFLPA Game article issues again. I've updated my draft Texas vs The Nation stub with the results from past games, so I think both that and the NFLPA Collegiate bowl draft are ready to go, but let me know if you have any other feedback. (N.B., I've asked Dale Arnett the same.) Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 18:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has been  Done. 17:24, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Binders full of women (3rd nomination) Trackinfo (talk) 07:41, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good job with the sourcing on Pella (company). However, of the three sources you added, only one is significant (Forbes), the other two are local coverage and what seems to be a business directory profile. Getting close to surviving AFD, but not quite yet.

This started when I answered an OTRS query from a PR firm representing another company, basically asking why does Pella get an article when they don't. My answer was that the existence of other articles that fail to meet WP:CORP is not a valid reason to include more such articles, and, seeing the abysmal quality of the sourcing in Pella (company), I prodded it. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:54, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sources you provided at the AfD for California Supreme Court Judge Jackson Temple. You'll be glad to know I have used them to expand the article. --MelanieN (talk) 00:33, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Football club attendances (2006) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Football club attendances (2006) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 15:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Before you accuse the next person of systematic bias, as you did for me on Grace Inez Crawford, maybe ask yourself whether the claims in the article would be accepted for an article about a current living person. The claim is that she promoted and protected the artistic legacy of her husband, was editor of Art and Industry and later published her memoirs. On top of the tremendous amount of name-dropping in the article and the fact it was clearly written to promote the Bryn Mawr College Library collection, I didn't see a particular reason to keep the article. I refute any accusations of bias. Sionk (talk) 19:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My concerns about systemic bias are directed at biases that are inherent in the structure of Wikipedia and of our conventional methods of looking for sources, not directed at any particular editor. In this case, especially since the name of the article is different from the name she used for much of her work, the first results of an internet search using the name of the article are minimal, and it's understandable that one might think there's nothing there. So how do Wikipedia's systemic biases affect this article? (i) The subject is old and is more likely to have coverage off the internet; (ii) it relates to areas of human endeavor (like costuming and crafts) that don't get covered very well here; and (iii) it's an article about a early-20th-century woman who is potentially marginalized as a mere supporter of her notable husband, rather than as a partner and notable independent actor; but a minimal amount of Googling reveals that she has work collected at the V&A [2] as well as mentions in a variety of literature, and that should send up flags that the topic may be worthy of saving. Also, I can't go along with the thought that contributions to Wikipedia relating to a distinguished university's academic archive should be equated with and discounted as commercial "promotion". This is not some local band or home remedy maker engaged in self-promotion for profit. I can't imagine how wiping this material out of Wikipedia would improve the state of human knowledge on the subject. Why wouldn't we at least explore a merger to her husband's article, rather than deletion? Above all, I don't think the nearly-invisible WP:PROD process should be used to try to make this kind of material disappear, rather than taking steps to preserve it or to seek input from others in a way that leaves a record for future editors to see. Some of the other editors who pay attention to the proposed deletion pages have recently suggested doing away with PROD altogether. I don't go that far and I think that PROD has many uses. But an article like this one, about a historical figure who's received attention from legitimate academic sources, and where there are various indicia of significance in areas where systemic bias tends to exist on Wikipedia, is not what it should be used for. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. As you say, probably the PROD method was the wrong one in this case. I'm still not sure what the claim of notability is, based on what is said in the article. But I have no vendetta against Crawford so probably won't pursue this further. Sionk (talk) 22:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly see what you're saying now. I jumped the gun a little out of frustration with so many two sentence "articles". I have removed the tag for Reneau and also found some resources through the statewide newspapers and expanded the article. I'll work on the other articles you referenced next. Okheric (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you participated in the above AFD, as per the close I have opened up a proper merge discussion at Talk:Dragon Ball and you are welcome to participate.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:19, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. Does this one look notable to you? It's only claim to fame seems to be that Vince Lombardi attended church there. (Its inclusion in the Packers Heritage Trail is solely because of that.) Aside from the single cite to a newspaper article, I've found no other independent coverage of the church. 71.139.152.220 (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that a 100+ year old local landmark church like this can sustain an article. I wouldn't dismiss the Lombardi connection, either, since it's discussed in multiple news articles [3][4] and books. Of course my opinion is certainly not the last word on the subject. Best,--Arxiloxos (talk) 20:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-It gets frustrating on Wikipedia. For example I made improvements on the St. Willebrod Catholic Church which did not satisfied an IP/anon editor. I strongly feel IP/anon editors should be required to get an account and they should be prohibited from commenting on deleted articles, notable issues, reporting registered editors for offences like violating the 3RR rule, etc. And then I took the time to add the WP Wisconsin template to new categories only to find out some of the categories were created by a banned editor-sockpuppet and we are getting too many categories as it is. There are times I think about retirement. I know of one registered editor who retired in part due to the IP/anon editors and this registered editor was reported by an IP/anon for violating the 3RR rule. I think of retiring from Wikipedia but as of right now I can't. Thanks-RFD (talk) 12:32, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Arxiloxos,

I saw that you expressed your view about keeping the Channel One Cup (football). I thought maybe you might be interesting in taking part in discussions regarding another page:

• United Tournament

Best regards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.26.247.147 (talk) 10:35, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:15, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I had a bit of a snag with the edit filter which actually limited the number of emails I could send out. I just became in charge of it a few hours ago and the edit filter throttle me to a mere 9 send outs despite waiting for a long time. The issue is apparently resolved so I will be doing the rest tonight. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you apply? I didn't see your name on the list. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:25, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Questia/Approved Round 3, Re-Apply, #5 (submitted 20:49, 30 August 2013). Thanks. --Arxiloxos (talk) 01:51, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. Interesting, the Round 3 said it was done before I got assigned, but I only see your name once in the master list. Ah. I see now, you added your name to a list that was already collapsed and sent out.[5] I'll re-add you and send it out for the end of "Round 4" you should have it within the hour. Okay? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:00, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sent. Check your mail. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:22, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I forgot about that rule, which obviously still applies even though the article is significantly different from the one that was deleted (which I didn't even know about till I started doing the prod). I can't speedy it as it is, so I think I'll just leave it. Deb (talk) 15:49, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• That article still needs some cleaning up, but it has at least a few real sources now (including a substantive Billboard article as well as some magazine profiles), so I suspect he might be notable at this point. Thanks for the note. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:54, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For your defense of Lowly Worm from vandalism and many other articles that you defended. gidonb (talk) 18:11, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2014_January_2#Sydney_Uni_Lions.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 02:22, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Arxiloxos: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 14:21, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply] Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Hello, Arxiloxos. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 19:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Not sure if you got pinged or not. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 19:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Arxiloxos. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Stay More: The World of Donald Harington, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Enough of a difference from the deleted version that it should go back to AfD, I will restore the PROD though. Thank you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware simply being judged by one person as "not uncontroversial" was a reason to not allow an article to undergo WP:PROD. You didn't bother to address the concern that I listed, but it cannot be helped now. I've begun AFDs.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As it states at WP:Proposed deletion:

"Proposed deletion (PROD) is a way to suggest an article for uncontroversial deletion. It is a shortcut to the normal deletion review process (AfD), and a fallback for deletion proposals that do not meet the strict criteria for speedy deletion. PROD must only be used if no opposition is to be expected."

We have a bunch of similar lists and there's strong arguments that cop killings are overwhelmingly likely to be notable events. I don't think WP:MEMORIAL applies here, and the editing history of this and similar lists suggests that others agree. So prod is simply not the appropriate way to test the issue. --Arxiloxos (talk) 22:37, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well I didn't expect opposition. And most of these pages have barely any history to them. It doesn't seem to be a topic we should cover.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:42, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I support keeping the museum article, but as you know this article was a copyright violation before being nominated to AFD, so it needs to be started over. If you can do a complete rewrite that removes the entire violation, it would be appreciated. Secret ^account 17:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, i guess i did mistake while editing the page. in the page some links were dead. I was trying to remove dead links and trying to add new information just. I am newly here. Thanks for tip. I will try to be more careful next time.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenCross1982 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arxiloxos concerning your deletions - could you help me, Hi Arxiloxos - I made some additions to Fania Records, Larry Harlow, and Fania All-Stars - this is Chino Rodriguez - I have been the representative of most of the Fania All-stars since 1993 and I wanted to update some of the information - such as that Larry Harlow is also known as el Judio Maravilloso (the Marvalous Jew) and that he is "The" recording Producer of the Fania All-stars and that he also is the band leader of the smaller offshoot of the super band "Fania All-Stars" called the Latin Legends of Fania, also that this March 18 2014, ASCAP will be giving the Vanguard Award in NYC to the Fania All-stars... and I also placed Links - maybe I did not word it correctly - so this is why I created an account and reached out to you for help. I hope you can give me a hand... my email is ChinoLMB@Gmail.com please get intouch... I also hope that I did this correct - sorry I'm a novice at this.... Chino ChinoLMB (talk) 22:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I got a couple of comments about my Judi Dench edit, so please refer to the comment (and ongoing discussion?) on my talk page. Guinness2702 (talk) 11:29, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is just to say thanks a lot for improving my article in Wikipedia. Cheers! Ashishlohorung (talk) 12:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Arxiloxos, Many apologies for the inadvertent edits on the Ivanpah article - the Electric->Atomic conversions were the result of a novelty browser extension gone awry, and certainly not intentional! The rest of my edit, however, was intentional, and I believe were constructive and improved the article. Are the mistaken changes were the only part you (justifiably!) took issue with? If so, I'd like to restore the edits I intended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spellcheck (talk • contribs) 00:10, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I finally got around to taking another look at the Ivanpah page. Most of the changes I had intended to make (a random misplaced period, de-editorialising) were already done, so I just added a few references. The diff algorithm went a little haywire, but here's the link to my changes. Thanks for your vigilance, and for the article - it was an interesting read. --The Human Spellchecker (talk) 17:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The text change I submitted for the Aaron Kromer page was deleted because it lacked a reference...I wrote/edited the copy which will also appear in the 2014 Chicago Bears media guide and it reflects the most accurate, up-to-date bio on coach Kromer. Am I not able to provide an accurate bio to this site? It can't be be referenced as the guide won't be sent to the printer until July. I guess it would also be relevant to tell you I work for the Bears and am responsible for the information and editing of the guide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.116.30.64 (talk) 03:05, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please remove this, which you filed on August 2, 2013 as it was immediately resolved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.35.169 (talk) 05:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I didn't post that tag, another editor did[6]; I made an edit to address the problem and asked for input on the NPOV noticeboard (which is now archived). --Arxiloxos (talk) 05:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxiloxos, just want to thanks a lot for improving significantly to my article Ian Thorpe Aquatic and Fitness Centre. Cheers! Ashish Lohorung (talk) 05:31, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki links are certainly something I considered; however Google Translation of several samples fails to confirm that those articles are any more developed. Now, as you say, N criteria differ across projects - I know for a fact that pl wiki, for example, is more inclusive. For that reason, however, existence of other language versions is not a major indication of notability, particularly not after one Google Translates the target entry (a la OTHERCRAPEXISTS). Now, I am totally open to individual deprods; if you think I made an error and some of the prodded articles are in fact notable, please deprod them and list your rationale on the user page. Please, however, don't deprod them simply due to the interwiki existence, if you think that another language article makes specific claims of notability that our article is missing, please explain those in detail on the talk, just like one would have to do during a proper AFD. Still, I am totally for saving any of those articles that can be saved - but I doubt that many can be; vast majorities are nothing but stub resumes of people who clearly fail WP:BIO.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:17, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxiloxos. I work directly with Rodney Carrington, and he no longer resides in Bixby, OK, however, since this is a recent change, there are no reference articles online. Plus, the reference that you have listed is a broken link: Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).http://www.tulsaworld.com/entertainment/spot/article.aspx?articleID=20080808_282_D1_spancl185554 which is another reason I removed it. Please advise if I can adjust this again. Thanks Pubplus (talk) 19:36, 25 March 2014 (UTC)pubplus[reply]

• Thank you. I found a recent newspaper article that mentioned that he still lives in Tulsa, and I used that (and some other added sources) to update the page. See [7]. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:20, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:54, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

do u not see the justin bieber shirt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadshonen (talk • contribs) 15:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I have responded here. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

she's the groupie princess she wants to frick frack him ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadshonen (talk • contribs) 16:38, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

who else is in the edit war tell em to fight me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadshonen (talk • contribs) 21:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

You removed the PROD for Saint Lawrence Academy (Santa Clara) on the count of "this school is clearly notable under longstanding consensus about high schools". What exactly is the "longstanding consensus about high schools"? --Mr. Mario (talk) 01:16, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Verified high schools are generally deemed notable and kept: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Education, Wikipedia:Notability (high schools). There may be some room to argue when it comes to the very smallest unaccredited private schools, but even there the likelihood of notability is substantial; see the current discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oakhill Christian School. A school like Saint Lawrence Academy (Santa Clara) is far above any notability threshhold that would be enforced around here. --Arxiloxos (talk) 02:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, thanks for the response! --Mr. Mario (talk) 02:36, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you've taken down the PROD notice, I've nominated the article for deletion. My rationale can be found on the article's talk page, in reply to your comment there. Once a PROD notice comes down, it cannot be put back up, although the reason asserted for taking it down is, in my view, dubious. Be that as it may, please consider participating in this AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Talmadge_L._Heflin. I imagine you'd want to oppose it. David in DC (talk) 15:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For all your work, but especially most recently at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talmadge L. Heflin. Bearian (talk) 21:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxiloxos

Im looking for some clarification as to why the sources listed have made the article noteable. I can agree that the sources do confirm that the article in question does indeed exist but I am usure how they improve its standard as being noteable. Several of the sources are considered as unreliable sources from my understanding of the term. Any clarification you can provide would be helpful. Amortias (T)(C) 21:59, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sources I added are all reliable sources as used. The film been the subject of substantial coverage in reliable sources both before and after its premiere. It's notable. And it is certainly not appropriate for WP:PROD. --Arxiloxos (talk) 22:37, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Return to Zero (film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Best Actress in a Movie or Miniseries]] at the [[4th Critics' Choice Television Awards]] (to be awarded on June 19, 2014.<ref>[http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/05/28/critics-choice-television-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Found 'em. No doubt these Naked Vengeance reviews are available on microfilm at a major library for any who do not want to pay to view the Variety archives online. Good call.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What church was it?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:35, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be the home of the First Church of Christ, Scientist, which now has the smaller, modern building on the other side of Rexford. I've added a source.--Arxiloxos (talk) 16:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. That modern building across the street looks awful. Do you know when the former church/synagogue building was built and by whom?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've always assumed it was built for the Christian Scientists, but I don't know for sure and I haven't found a source. The FWP/WPA book has no building date. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, who the original architect was, and what year it was built. That would be good to know. Feel free to create/expand more BH-related pages btw, and let me know if you do.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you live in LA County, are you able to take some pictures of Nessah and other places in BH please? I usually summer in BH, but not this year. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 03:00, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ronn Torossian: Same editor battling on American Business Awards page is political editing on this page. Review wld be appreciated. Milseyes (talk) 09:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Books & Bytes recipients: The Wikipedia Library has been expanding rapidly and we need some help! We currently have 10 signups for free account access open and several more in the works... In order to help with those signups, distribute access codes, and manage accounts we'll need 2-3 more Account Coordinators.

It takes about an hour to get up and running and then only takes a couple hours per week, flexible depending upon your schedule and routine. If you're interested in helping out, please drop a note in the next week at my talk page or shoot me an email at: jorlowitzgmail.com. Thanks and cheers, Jake Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Stub Barnstar
		Thanks for your work in expanding and adding sources to Four Seasons Resort Maui NorthAmerica1000 14:48, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place about whether Madison Blue Spring State Park is suitable to include in Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madison Blue Spring State Park. Blackbombchu (talk) 21:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You have received preliminary approval for access to Credo. Please fill out this short form so that your access can be processed. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If their are source put them in the article, even if they are in spanish. NickGibson3900 - Talk - Sign my Guestbook 05:05, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Thanks for providing the refs and improvements on Ronald O. Loveridge. – S. Rich (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great additions to Stanford–USC football rivalry. Sorry about causing the edit conflict; your edit to that section was much better! I have more to add later. Thanks! --Esprqii (talk) 17:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I think our mutual efforts have very quickly improved this page significantly. Thanks. --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:33, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing out souces at the AFD. Inspired by your WP:BEFORE I did some work on the Sunset Limousine article, taking the 230 characters (39 words) stub that was nominated and expanding it to a 2534 characters (413 words) C-class article... a 10x expansion. Care to help devise a decent DYK? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 00:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm.... Well, the thing that caught my attention about this, when I spotted it on the prod list, was the personnel: I didn't particularly remember it, but I figured that it was very likely to have had some press coverage, given that it was directed by Python fellow-traveler Terry Hughes and starred John Ritter (still doing Three's Company at the time) and the lovely Susan Dey (albeit a few years before L. A. Law made her adult career). When I read the reviews, their general theme seemed to be, "this would be run of the mill except that John Ritter is a comic genius" and I was left with a distinct sense of melancholy, being reminded again of what a shame it was to lose a guy like that to an undiagnosed heart ailment. Not sure how any of that works its way into a DYK, though. I'll ponder it. --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. What could be sourcable is something like "Did you know... that for his starring role in the 1983 TV movie Sunset Limousine, the talents of actor John Ritter made it worth watching?" Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 00:58, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While coverage does exist at [8], [9], [10], [11], and [12], I'm not sure there is enough to expand the article beyond a stub without risking potential plagiarism. Per WP:NSONGS, a track must have significant coverage outside of album reviews from multiple reliable secondary sources AND there must be enough to expand the article beyond a stub (lists not counting). In addition to only having one source, the article was (and still is) a stub. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The message is not meant for me, but I'm frankly appalled that someone who edits music pages don't know that "It Don't Mean a Thing" is a very well-known song. None of the reasons stated do not apply to this page, a simple check in Google books would show numerous books that mentioned the song - [13] (that is what is meant by significant coverage), and being a stub is not a reason to redirect (that is the point of having a stub, so that someone who has the time and inclination can expand it). Now SNUGGUMS has left others with a problem of having to fix his edits because he removed links in over 100 pages (without stopping to think that a song that has so many links must be a significant song), something needs to be done if he continues to do something like this. Hzh (talk) 10:10, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to say that I've undone the five that were on my watchlist---but over 100?! Rothorpe (talk) 13:13, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The mass link removal was unwarranted even if someone thought the article should be redirected to another place. That's the point of having redirects. Anyway, in a paperless encyclopedia that has room for detailed articles about songs like "Friday", to be lacking an an article about this Grammy Hall of Fame classic, what Richard Corliss called a "jazz anthem" and "a lesson in Afro-musicianship for the pop audience", would just be embarrassing. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As creator, I was appalled to see the redirect. This is one of the most recognizable songs of the 20th century, and a song intrinsically associated with the history of jazz music, African-American cultural history, and the swing era. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 23:52, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Sorry I am not so experience as you in editing. I did edits for Irene Caesar, and hope you like them. (sophiedookh). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophiedookh (talk • contribs) 07:20, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I noticed the tag you put on the page and did some digging around. It looks like the editor who expanded the article used a recent book (possibly Tom Nolan, Artie Shaw, King of the Clarinet: His Life and Times (W. W. Norton, New York, 2011). I only have preview access to it through Google Books, but considering the edits he possibly used this to include all the information. Unfortunately, it appears that he did not include any citations. Normally that would be a BLP issue, but as the individual has passed away, that doesn't apply. I left a message on the editor's page as it seems valid information that was added as opposed to removing it. Right course of action? (Karst (talk)

• Thanks very much. Your edits strike me as a highly useful addition to the article. Bblegacy's additions to the page seemed constructive to me, as they did to you, and I agree with your response. Wikipedia articles are works in progress and Artie Shaw is already in better shape than many; eventually, those inline citations will be filled in. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for expanding Temple Emanuel (Beverly Hills, California). If you are able to add more referenced info, we may be able to suggest it for "Did you know." Unfortunately I am not in BH right now and can't take a picture, which would look great in the infobox!Zigzig20s (talk) 20:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your sensible comment here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 Chick-fil-A Kickoff Game. If you want to propose a "redirect" outcome in each of these AfDs, based on your comments, I would gladly support it. Regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 07:04, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I’d just like ask for your opinion on the recent edits by Special:Contributions/77.70.93.195 to this article. I personally think that most of the world agrees on Russian involvement in Eastern Ukraine and also in the case of the Malaysian Airlines Flight 17. It’s rather extraordinary that edits of this magnitude come from an IP address. -- Apanuggpak (talk) 13:39, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• My view: we report what reliable sources say. Do a substantial portion of the Finnish (or other) sources reference Flight 17 and comment that this was another incident believed to be connected to pro-Russian elements? If so, our summary of public reaction should also mention that. We can work on the wording--maybe it should add "involving or believed to involve the Soviet Union and Russia (or pro-Russian elements)". --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi and thank you for the reply. I think Finnish media in connection with Flight 17 is not the significant issue… or what’s at stake; but I like your wording and would support it, if you wanted to use it. -- Apanuggpak (talk) 01:37, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arxiloxos. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:50, 11 October 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:50, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on referencing Del Pezzo Restaurant; I was about to give it a try, but you got there first. DGG ( talk ) 00:33, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The search results indicate that there's more, hiding behind paywalls and snippets, so if you have the inclination you might want to give it another look. Best, --Arxiloxos (talk) 01:42, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shabbos App is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shabbos App (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)#Bullpen_catchers Alex (talk) 06:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		Silk Purse Award
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Silk Purse Award in appreciation for your improvements to the Galway Film Fleadh article in the face of its nominator apparently misunderstanding WP:BEFORE and WP:NRVE. Thank you for stepping up. I am proud of you. Schmidt, Michael Q. 22:27, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • English signup
  • Deutsch signup
• Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
• Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
• British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
• Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
• Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
• JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Hello, Arxiloxos,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether it should be deleted. Your comments are welcome.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE9A:860:DD6B:693A:ACF:B874 (talk) 18:46, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your help on Gun Buster. I have added a significant number of references. Hopefully these will save it! Cheers Gillyweed (talk) 10:22, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

why you delete my added content? It was accurate and true you knucklehead — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seahawkkilla (talk • contribs) 00:52, 13 December 2014

For the record, I didn't delete, I restored it. The reason the previous editor deleted it was because it didn't have a reliable source, which is mandatory for such serious content pursuant to Wikipedia policy regarding biographies of living persons. --Arxiloxos (talk) 01:29, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• Elsevier - science and medicine journals and books
• Royal Society of Chemistry - chemistry journals
• Pelican Books - ebook monographs
• Public Catalogue Foundation- art books

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

		Happy New Year !!!
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and aHappy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - MQS

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You previously voted, opined, commented, or otherwise took part, at Template talk:Succession box#RfC. Please see a related discussion at Template talk:Infobox officeholder#RfC Congressmen's tenures in infobox. Kraxler (talk) 15:20, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxiloxos. Wanted to cc you on this message I left with Stalwart. You've both made reasonable arguments for keep, and I'm now 50/50 on withdrawing my AfD. That said, please read the note I left with Stalwart; I'd appreciate your input. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk

Hey I was able to find one more source. I notice that the sources you found should push it over notability requirements per WP:BAND plus with the prior AfD as keep I was hoping you would reconsider. :) Valoem ^{talk contrib} 03:51, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've just listed some additional sources on the bottom of the AfD let me know what you think. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 02:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for tracking down the article about that photo of Muhammed Ali and Malcolm X. I enjoyed reading about the photographer and seeing other examples of his work. I hope that the conversation may have cheered up Malik a bit. Thanks again. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:33, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for tweaking the T.A.M.I. Show info! I think it is a worthwhile inclusion. THX1136 (talk) 15:11, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on AFD.

Samuel J. Howard (talk) 20:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks-the thing is the page creator has been making some odd pages (and is now doing vandalisim on pages with putting up prods) someone did ask why I didn't do a speedy and I said it was because I felt that he could be notable still. Wgolf (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:53, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

welcome-check out the creator of the articles edits right now!Wgolf (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Military history of Buddhist Americans#Requested move 2 April 2015. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:57, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding a lead section. Autarch (talk) 23:32, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Arxiloxos,

You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Newspapers.com through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:

• Please make sure that you can still log in to your Newspapers.com account. If you are having trouble let me know.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. Also, keep in mind that part of Newspapers.com is open access via the clipping function. Clippings allow you to identify particular articles, extract them from the original full sheet newspaper, and share them through unique URLs. Wikipedia users who click on a clipping link in your citation list will be able to access that particular article, and the full page of the paper if they come from the clipping, without needing to subscribe to Newspapers.com. For more information about how to use clippings, see http://www.newspapers.com/basics/#h-clips .
• Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you,

Wikipedia Library Newspapers.com account coordinator HazelAB (talk) 13:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Try this for book urls, might save time :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, I hadn't seen that before, will try it out. --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:15, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones of these are notable and should be kept?♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:Arxiloxos for helping.MarkHerson (talk) 16:50, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

I have reverted your latest edit to Born Rich (film) because you reverted an edit intended to remove non factual or poorly cited statements within the article. I have also noticed a pattern of Wikihounding any edit I make to the article as well as other past editors of the article that have any difference of opinion than yours. I ask that rather than edit warring and wikihounding to have your way that you please explain why you're not trying to revert citations to statements that clearly do not reflect the facts in the citation nor have a NPOV about the film itself. Thank you. JS18WlKlPEDlA (talk) 00:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• See User_talk:Shibbolethink#Focusing_on_Luke_Weil_in_Born_Rich. Arxiloxos, feel free to remove this thread from your talk page. Drmies (talk) 18:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
• When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks!
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is it acceptable to have signed letters by the sports organization as a creditable reference? The letters would not be publish on any particular website, but could provide copies to Wiki Your thought would be greatly appreciated. Also any other suggestions to get the advertisement flagged removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.58.30.178 (talk) 19:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Private letters like that probably wouldn't qualify as a reliable source, especially given our strict rules about information relating to living persons. My own opinion is that listing patient names in doctor biographies is inappropriate except to the extent a particular patient's experience has become a subject of independent news reports or medical journals. Also in my opinion, the article (especially the "Medical career" section) needs to be rewritten in neutral language with appropriate citations from independent reliable sources--in other words, the article should read like a neutrally-written biographical article rather than a resume. Please note that I'm just one editor; Wikipedia operates by WP:CONSENSUS and other editors may have different views. You may want to ask for input at an appropriate message board such as Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. Thank you for your inquiries. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:34, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input and direction. much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.227.174.114 (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 19:31, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Expressing my admiration for the heavy lifting you did sourcing this small College.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
• When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of National Names 2000 10:46, 12 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]

It can and certainly should be spoken of in other places, but it has the notability for a separate article. WP:GNG for production is met, and with filming completed WP:NFF (paragraph 3) is met despite the weak arguments and pleading of Donmike10. We even have a source available telling us release is to be September 2015. Thanks, Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 03:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I suppose my coverage argument for this soon-to-release film is too similar to the one you made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Detective Willy. Sorry, Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 09:33, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Periods are ALWAYS INSIDE of the quotation marks. AuraSphere999999 (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)AuraSphere999999[reply]

No, as I have already explained on your user talk page, Wikipedia uses logical quotation. Wikipedia rules are determined by consensus and there is a very long record of consensus in favor of this. --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WRONG! In America, periods and commas and ALWAYS INSIDE of the quotation marks, even in fragments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AuraSphere999999 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it says unless you improve (which you made no attempt) or give reasons for objecting the proposal (which you did not), it can stay. But, it has been redirected now, because it's not notable. Thank you. Goodbye.  — Calvin999 16:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's incorrect; there are no such requirements under WP:PROD. I've explained in more detail on your talk page. --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the CNN source over on the RS board. That was perfect. SW3 5DL (talk) 02:44, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You removed my Cheviet Hills about Leroy Prinz. I visited him at his house there in 1980 not long before he died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobby Jim (talk • contribs) 01:35, 17 July 2015‎

Hello, I'm Arxiloxos. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Ted Rall seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. (1) Rall has denied wrongdoing in the Times matter, so stating in WIkipedia's voice that he made false statements, and failing to include Rall's position, violates BLP and NPOV; and (2) Project 21 calls itself as "The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives" so deleting the fact that it is a conservative group is unwarranted. The LA Times dispute may be appropriate for inclusion in the article, but only if discussed in a way that meets Wikipedia policies. Arxiloxos (talk) 14:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No. If you are going to give lectures on how Wikipedia works then you need to exhibit some understanding on how it works. If you did not like my edits to the Ted Rall article then you should have edited the work instead of completely removing the notable information. Rall lied about getting thrown against a wall by a LAPD officer while getting ticketed for jaywalking and the LAPD provided a tape of the incident and the tape has been reviewed by the LA Times. The Times concluded that Rall lied about the incident and the Times has removed him as one their cartoonists. Now, you might not like what happened. You might not like how I presented it. That is fine that is your prerogative. However, you do not have the prerogative to remove notable information from the article. The fact that he was removed as a cartoonist is a notable incident. That is a fact and you should not have removed that information. Also Project 21 was falsely described in the article as an organization that is a conservative organization that some black people or something to that effect. That description borders on racism itself. I am going to re-insert the notable information. You can edit it as you see fit but whitewashing the article is really not an option.--ML (talk) 16:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh by the way, if we are going to have a grown up conversation about the problems with the Ted Rall article then this discussion should be on the Ted Rall talk page, not here on your talk page and not on my talk page, but at the Ted Rall talk page. You need to learn the difference between this pages. Your comments were misplaced from the get go.--ML (talk) 16:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Margaret Sanger shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Additionally your edit on Margaret Sanger represents reverts of at least three completely separate edits on a sanctioned page with a 1RR in place. Please be more careful that you do not throw out legitimate edits with vandalism. If you believe that either the edits by User:Robin Lionheart, User:Schwarzschild Point, or the IP editor do not belong on the page please select one set to remove. This page is 1RR for a reason. Chrononem ☎ 22:31, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made one edit to the page, which I explained on the talk page (and I note that you have not responded there). I have no intention of edit warring. Per WP:3R: "An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert." Moreover the reverted edits in question were related to one another, and the only one that did not contribute to the NPOV problem was necessary only to ameliorate one of the other POV edits. I am unaware of any rule that makes a single edit count as multiple reverts: if you are aware of such a rule, please cite it. --Arxiloxos (talk) 23:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--Arxiloxos (talk) 02:37, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

		Wikiclaus greetings
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you the happiest of Wikipedia Wikiclaus' good cheer. This message is intended to celebrate the holiday season, promote WikiCheer, and to hopefully make your day just a little bit better, for Wikiclaus encourages we all spread smiles, fellowship, and seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings and the happiest of holiday spirits from Wikiclaus !

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

• Better late than never...North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:54, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Access date in a citation should be the date you have consulted the online source and verified that it has the content needed to source the article you are editing. I'm puzzled by your adding two refs with "access date" 2013 to the The Manchester Gazette article. One of them seems to be a dead link. I wonder where you found them? PamD 07:34, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Apologies and thanks for the reminder. After all these years of editing, citation templates can still be frustrating. I had found the MEN article via Google, but then discovered that it was already mentioned both at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manchester Gazette (website) and (with citations) at Manchester City Council, the latter also referencing the later-changed logo. I independently checked both sources (finding the second one at archive.org) but then forgot to update the citations. Ooof. At least so far, I have not removed the prod, given the deletion result of the prior AfD, although technically speaking, WP:PRODNOM says this should go back to AfD. ---Arxiloxos (talk) 15:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your work on this page. The redirect was a much better solution to my deletion proposal. Much appreciated. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 04:11, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I have no clue what's going on with the edits on that page, but it's obvious that someone has an axe to grind and they should probably do it in real life, not Wikipedia. Thank you and have a great week! Yuchitown (talk) 06:09, 16 March 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Regarding this [14]; thanks for catching it but I wish you would have specifically referenced the edit you mentioned rather than using a vague template. It was a result of using the Drumpfinator plugin on Chrome (www.donaldjdrumpf.com, produced by Last Week Tonight / John Oliver) and I didn't realize that it was affecting editing as the intent of my edit was to roll back some bad verbiage and POV insertions.

Sadly, that got used by a bad-faith editor trying to get me blocked as well. So all around, a bad day. Please consider being specific with people rather than using Wikipedia's horrifically vague and wholly unhelpful templates next time. Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz (talk) 13:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arxiloxos: A recent edit you performed at AfD has been reverted. You may want to check it out. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:40, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Everything I added was objective and factual. I will ensure that an accurate objective description of Perry noble is represented. AO111AO111AO (talk) 21:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding material to the Baudouin Oosterlynck page & saving it from deletion! Much of my wiki-proficiency has dwindled over time and there were things I hadn't added that I should've; thank you for filling in the gaps. Knotrice (talk) 07:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have been updating it with factual information taken from biographies, awards, and policy positions found online. There was a lot of false and one-sided, non-factual information. If you would like to discuss with me further, please feel to reach out to me at travis50@swbell.net. Thank you, Travis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.61.10.66 (talk) 22:33, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since you claim that there's a "lot of sourcing available," I presume you found sources that satisfy the GNG. Would you disclose them, please? Ravenswing 04:41, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The list should add that list include the ethnic Jews, and the people of Jewish descent, most of the Nobel laureates who mentioned here were Irreligion, also there are several Nobel laureates who mentioned converted to Christianity, and there are at least 20 Nobel laureates here raised as Christians. The article should mention that. If you want to keep the Christians of Jewish descent, at least mention that the article consider the Jewish as ethnic group. And What is the standard which makes the Jew who converted to Christianity Jews here, and in other non-Jewish. Why in American Jews article refuse to consider the Jewish who convert or practice christianity as Jewish, and in the List of Jewish Nobel laureates they count as Jewish?.

I brought sources that there are at least 20 name in the list convert to Christianity or raised as Christians, In the case you have been questioning the information.--Mario-mardini (talk) 01:15, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for opening a discussion at Talk:List of Jewish Nobel laureates; I will add some comments at an appropriate time, and other editors are also likely to have comments. --Arxiloxos (talk) 02:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding, would appreciate to see your comment's. I still think if these names will not removed at least the article should be changed to Jewish descent (Since it is include at least 20 person raised as christians and other convert to Christianity). Have a nice day.--Mario-mardini (talk) 02:27, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello how are you?. It will it be a problem to added in the footnotes Note that the list includes the Irreligious Jewish, and Jewish who converts to Christianity, to clarify that the article does not deal with the term Jewish in religious category? or small note menion that figure were raised or convert to chrisitianity?

like this small note: of whom at least 20% were of Jews descent,^[a] Have a nice day.--Mario-mardini (talk) 22:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. 20:34, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. I didn't read your last Talk contribution nearly closely enough, though oddly, I made an edit that somewhat reflected your intelligent observations. I think a lot of the info you mentioned belongs in the article on old BS. The edit I made gives his story 3 or 4 sentences and covers what made him a big story. I think any more would be too much for a short article about a small place.

I don't know where the idea originated that a factoid in a city article's history section must be shown to have had a significant impact on the city's future, but I disagree vehemently. IF it's a major historical or newsworthy event that occurred in the city, I can't see excising it, period (and yes I know that Wikipedia's not a newssheet). I've seen nothing in any guidelines that would back this exclusionary policy. Regards Tapered (talk) 23:50, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the research and comments @ Pecos. Turns out, I was looking @ a different UT page. And fuhgedabout cookies and kittens. Tapered (talk) 06:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

19:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Arxiloxos. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments in relation to the deliberations here. Should a "keep" decision be the ultimate result, I hope that you will consider adding your research to the page. Many thanks again. Dreadarthur (talk) 21:11, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the time to waste arguing over this, as it's not a big deal. Blair is notable, of course, but he has his own extensive article. However I would also note Blair was a nonentity, a disturbed individual whose mendacity somehow escaped editorial and probably accounting oversight, but didn't do any real harm except deservedly to the paper's reputation, and except perhaps for the source with whom he had an understanding that their interview was off the record. There are a great many Times writers of substantial note, such as Sidney Shanberg, about whom there is very little info in the section. The info you've restored is more than twice what any other reporter has added to their name. It seems UNDUE, in particular because Judith Miller, writing at precisely the same time, isn't even listed at all. She contributed reams of transparent propaganda that had a great deal to do with the U.S. getting into an illegal invasion and occupation, which reverberates to this day. It cost trillions, cost the lives of over a million people, and created perhaps ten million refugees. She isn't even listed among the staff, though the clown who shared those bylines with her is there with exclusively positive identification. She also had to eventually resign of course. I knew what she wrote, when she wrote it, was specifically bunk, and I didn't have 1% of the resources that she did. I think if you want to keep his mention, you could shorten it, but it's entirely up to you. "I'm outta here." Activist (talk) 22:48, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• As far as I can tell, the function of List of The New York Times employees is simply to help readers identify and navigate to articles about individuals who worked for the Times, i.e., if you're notable (in the Wikipedia sense) and your notability relates in some way to your work for the Times, you should be on the list. The identifying material in a list like this should be concise and neutral: the place for more detailed summaries of what the sources say about them is the individual's article. You're right that Miller should also be on the list, and I've added her. And I moved Blair toward the bottom of that list, although eventually someone may decide to put it in alphabetical order. --Arxiloxos (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was once in alphabetical order, but later editors have just added to the bottom and inserted a couple in the middle. There are thousands of notable ex-Times reporters and editors - The Times didn't even reveal which editor it fired over the Shaun King situation. I wound up on the page by happenstance because of the situation with Raymond Bonner, on the 35th anniversary of his outstanding reporting on the El Mozote massacre, which earned him being shunned at the paper. He eventually resigned, won a Pulitzer, and much later went back to occasional Op-Eds, etc. I've added Harrison Salisbury. I tightened the text a little. I put Blair back in alpha order, and left the cite. It's the only cite on the page and I think is should be removed or moved to his article page if it doesn't exist there. Thanks for your response. Let me know what you think about it. Activist (talk) 11:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We allow very few notable cases, exceptions are only for people who are very closely tied to their disease such as Lou Gehrig in Lou Gehrig disease. See WP:MEDTRIVIA and WP:MEDMOS. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 17:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You edited the header to fix articles for deletion on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Software_Quality_Systems_AG. I can't tell what exactly you did or why, so that I might do it in the future if I ever have to. ChthonicOne (talk) 19:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• My change was a very small one: I simply changed your header from level 2 to level 3 so that it's on the same level as all the other AfDs found on pages that collect AfDs into groups for users to review, such as WP:Articles for deletion/Today. This was necessary because the page was displaying all of the AfDs underneath yours as subpages of your AfD. There are more substantial modifications that might be made as well, and it's possible that an admin or experienced AfD editor will be along in a while to implement them.

If you nominate other articles for deletion, you might want to make use of the "Twinkle" gadget, which makes the process relatively smooth. There's also the semi-automated gadget at WP:Articles for deletion#Creating an AfD, although this leaves more to be done by hand.

Thank you for spotting this article and bringing it to the attention of AfD; at first blush, at least, it seems that this topic may lack the notability required to warrant a Wikipedia article. We'll see if anyone comes up with reliable sources to suggest otherwise.--Arxiloxos (talk) 21:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'm an intern at a new job, and they have me researching automated software testing software, and it aggravates to me to end when I find one that people here are interested in, but gives absolutely no information in 10,000 words. I don't know that I'll be marking many articles for deletion, but this one seemed appropriate.

Also, initially it looked like you used a special equal sign to do that, which confused me. Upon looking at the page now I see that it was converted into a normal one. As far as apps, I probably won't be using one at work. ChthonicOne (talk) 21:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It has been a long time, but if I recall correctly, when you enable Twinkle by adding it to the "Gadgets" section of your user account's Preferences page, it simply adds the various Twinkle tools to your interface: no app or software gets downloaded to your computer, or anything like that, if that's your concern about using it at work. --Best, Arxiloxos (talk) 21:26, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the hand. You seem like a great contributor. Wikipedia should be the place for cultural heritage, and it's hard-work defending against the rubber-stampers. To you! Spencerk (talk) 15:10, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for stepping in and saving the article.--MainlyTwelve (talk) 14:36, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

• New and expanded research accounts
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017

• Library card
• User Group update
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: Combating misinformation, fake news, and censorship
• Bytes in brief

Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to let you know that an AfD you participated in is up for review here. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 20:29, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 24, August-September 2017

• User Group update
• Global branches update
  • Star Coordinator Award - last quarter's star coordinator: User:Csisc
• Wikimania Birds of a Feather session roundup
• Spotlight: Wiki Loves Archives
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Kiswahili and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	Hello Arxiloxos: You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. North America1000 09:28, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. The AfD was closed (that soon...) while I was writing my reply. I put it there anyways. I began on that article some months ago, and intended to expand it, look for more. Etc. But other stuff came in between and I forgot. It could well be improved. But perhaps you can explain, from where did that guy suddenly arrive, and why ? Personally, I'm not certain if such deletion proposals should be done by a(ny) person who is totally off-topic him/her-self. (Unless it's vandalism.) Cheers ! Boeing720 (talk) 22:13, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arxiloxos. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've withdrawn my del nom but could you add the link to that NYT article you mentioned to the article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:47, 5 December 2017 (UTC)'[reply]

It looks like Northamerica1000 already took care of that.[15] Thanks all around. -Arxiloxos (talk) 06:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 25, October – November 2017

• OAWiki & #1Lib1Ref
• User Group update
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: Research libraries and Wikimedia
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Korean and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

His notability has been challenged. He may well be notable but I'm questioning it. I'm perfectly happy to have him on the list if he is shown to be notable, but since he does not have an article and I have challenged his notability please either discuss it on the talk page, write an article about him, or provide sufficient sources to show that he qualifies for an article. The supplied source shows that he had all of 3 receptions and 2 kickoffs in his career, and that does not seem sufficient to show his notability to me. The football notability guideline suggests that he may be notable, but without an article we need "multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." Meters (talk) 05:56, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm a writer at Sports Illustrated hoping to get in touch with you for a story on the UCF football team. Could you find me on Twitter at @stephapstein? (I'm new to this so not sure I want to post my email address on what appears to be an open page, but happy to DM it to you so we can proceed.) Thank you! Stephaniesi (talk) 16:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018

• #1Lib1Ref
• User Group update
• Global branches update
• Spotlight: What can we glean from OCLC’s experience with library staff learning Wikipedia?
• Bytes in brief

Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018

• #1Lib1Ref
• New collections
  • Alexander Street (expansion)
  • Cambridge University Press (expansion)
• User Group
• Global branches update
  • Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
• Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have successfully updated the nomination and unbundled all irrelevant co-nominations, and instead put them as separate nominations. Can you please undo the procedural closure? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by InspectorMikeChin (talk • contribs) 06:08, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018

• #1Bib1Ref
• New partners
  • Rock's Backpages
  • Invaluable
  • Termsoup
• User Group update
• Global branches update
  • Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
• Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
• Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018

• New partners
  • Economic & Political Weekly–10 accounts
• Wikimania
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018

• Library Card translation
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref spreads to the Southern Hemisphere and beyond
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:42, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arxiloxos. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arxiloxos. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018

• OAWiki
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• New and expanded partners
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:40, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019

• Partnerships
• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. One or more of your pages have DEFAULTSORT conflicts: (search)

• User:Arxiloxos/Sandbox for drafts

Please either

• <nowiki> DEFAULTSORTs (if your page is a draft consisting of multiple subjects); or
• remove redundant DEFAULTSORTs (if your page is a draft with multiple DEFAULTSORTs); or
• remove all DEFAULTSORTs (if otherwise)

in the affected pages. Thank you. – Ase1este^t@lk_c0ntribs 09:48, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 35, July – August 2019

• Wikimania
• We're building something great, but..
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• A Wikibrarian's story
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Trasvina HUD June 2009.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019

• #1Lib1Ref January 2020
• #1Lib1Ref 2019 stories and learnings

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:20, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 
• 
• 

Happy New Year!

• 
  MMXX Lunar Calendar

Arxiloxos,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

---

   – 2020 is a leap year – news article.
   – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

– North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:47, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 37, November – December 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020

• New partnership
• Global roundup

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020

• Library Card Platform
• New partnerships
  • ProQuest
  • Springer Nature
  • BioOne
  • CEEOL
  • IWA Publishing
  • ICE Publishing
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:12, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020

• New partnerships
  • Al Manhal
  • Ancestry
  • RILM
• #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
• AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020

• New partnership: Taxmann
• WikiCite
• 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020

• New EBSCO collections now available
• 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
• Library Card input requested
• Libraries love Wikimedia, too!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021

• New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
• 1Lib1Ref
• Library Card

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021

• New Library Card designs
• 1Lib1Ref May

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]