User talk:Canuckle

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic.

Welcome!

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

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! 

On 30 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert Giffard de Moncel, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 22:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching all those bad-faith AfD noms on articles I've worked on. I'm logging on less these days, but was curious about all the edits to these particular articles on my watchlist. I'd have thought my lower level of activity would have lowered the likelihood of vandalism, bad faith, etc.! Cheers, Agent 86 08:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your work so far on this article. Bearian 16:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the sources! TAnthony 15:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your positive contributions to Fighting in ice hockey. We could use you at WikiProject Ice Hockey! One thing - I'm not too keen on the Bertuzzi image in the article. It is copyrighted with no fair use rationale. Normally we like FA's to have only free images; if we must have a fair use image, we need a solid rationale for the image. --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 18:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I look forward to seeing your contributions at WP:HOCKEY. And by the way, Bertuzzi's a goon. :) --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 21:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Chain Barnstar of Recognition
		For making a difference! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3-5 others with 500+ edits but no barnstar. Pseudoanonymous 19:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. I added it back. Since we aren't drawing any conclusions from it, maybe it won't be an issue. We are only summarizing its contents. No problem on the Harvard references. I had to learn them myself recently because it seems the style in place for serious FA-class articles. --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 20:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Barnstar - it is in fact my first. I wish I had some place to stash some, but there hasn't been any need to think of a secret cache yet! matt91486 20:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me, too. I'm passing the Barnstar on, as well, as instructed. Regards,Shawn in Montreal 02:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help on Christina Lake, British Columbia and for reverting that bit about the black (visible minority) sandtraps. That was sure a new one to me :).CindyBo^talk 07:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied to your comment on my talk page; in short, however, I don't think I'm in breach of WP:COI (or, more importantly, WP:NPOV). (But thanks for the reminder that neutrality is so important!) JTBurman 01:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Murray Baron Dan Maloney British Columbia Patriot Party Color commentator British Columbia provincial highway 18 Brantt Myhres Harry Cameron John Andrew Mara Bloc British Columbia Party Pacific Coast Hockey League Garth Butcher Sicamous, British Columbia Billy Burch Ken Morrow McLeod Lake, British Columbia Sean Brown Paul Reinhart Blair MacDonald Mika Noronen

Cleanup Admiral Duncan pub Analytic philosophy Gaston Bachelard Merge Europoort Ortega (Castlevania) Walter Bernhard Add Sources Captain (ice hockey) Czech and Slovak Orthodox Church Kirk Maltby Wikify Gordie Howe hat trick Tsleil-Waututh First Nation Escrow Expand Communist Party of British Columbia Wilf Paiement Peachland, British Columbia

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 15:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver=1, Calgary=0. Good work. Now it's back to being mediocre instead of gawdawful. bobanny 15:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Garth Butcher, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks. --PFHLai 14:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Edits from BC Legislature Raid entry

While Tieleman may be opinionated, he has quoted directly from the judges decision of June 4, 2007. I felt his detailed entry was the best and needed to be added in order to update the page. It has become very stale.

Please help me in improving my entry. I do not want to be part of some ongoing attack by sockpuppets where people have vested interests with this case.

Thanks,

Peskytruth - the truth never lies —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peskytruth (talk • contribs) 06:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You think I don't know about 3RR? I find it highly insulting to be warned about something I am well aware of and have been blocked for. Alyeska 01:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added quite a few quotes to Saskatchewan for the wikiquote article. While searching google, found your reference to Saskatchewan in Popular Culture. Thanks. SriMesh | talk 01:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article British Columbia electoral reform referendum, 2009, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Rachel Marsden, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Marsden (4th nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Best, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 06:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:EiA Cover.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:21, 12 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 14:21, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On May 13, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Royal Columbian Hospital, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's Skookum1, using IP contact as I'm officially semi-boycotting Wikipedia though there's a couple of articles I'm keeping watch over, the Ledge raids one being one. As you can see I amended the template a bit; if Berardino's put back in it's as Special Prosecutor, not as "judiciary" but then all lawyers connected to the case should be listed. And please be aware the Erik Bornmann, or those around him, have interfered with this article in the past and also with his bio, and there are indications someone from Mark Marissen's cadre has also been active. I've recused myself from it, for reasons of conscience, because I'm an ardent blogger about this case and have found it difficult to deal with BC politics articles while still observing COI/AUTO (the "other side", for their part, doesn't care about such niceties and has at times been downright proprietary). Note on the talkpage I said that the matters of the sale of BC Rail should be a separate article, and the trial itself and all preliminaries should be in a separate HMTQ v. Basi, Virk, Basi. I've never had the energy, or because of all the mindless admin template/category fussing never had the time, to focus on this article and give it the importance it needs. It was drastically out of date a year ago; now even moreso and the publication ban complicates things....I don't have the time, or the stomach, to expand it or maintain the NPOV watch...please keep your eyes open for tampering, and be mindful if someone is trying to portray this or that person or fact in a principal, or downplayed or otherwise prejudicial light. I hope people in neighbouring US states may take interest in helping write it, because freedom of speech and freedom of information being restricted it one thing this case is explicitly about.142.68.82.172 (talk) 19:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Mr. Vernon (talk) 06:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Mr. Vernon (talk) 15:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hi canuckle, skookum1 here posting via iPhone. I became aware of this afd because I frequent tieleman's blog. Suffice to say he is bemused by it. There are hundreds if not thousands of bios of writers, journalists, politicians etc which are very obscure yet still notable. Vanity pieces with press kit language all over them go unedited - and undeleted - by the hundreds, just within Canada. To me the persistent targeting of this article for deletion is not innocent in the slightest, and belies tieleman's importance in contemporary political journalism in BC. Mark marissen's nobody brother has an article for pity's sake, with fewer cotes and much less relevance, just as one example. Thanks for fighting the Afd - and the aggressive speedy delete which preceded it. I note dr.Vernon now wants to relist this, persistent in wanting no mention of this journalist and I have to wonder why it's so important to dr Vernon. He has not similarly targeted, for example, the many processed-cheese bios of cabinet members and the proliferating corporate brochures. I have been condemned for challenging the wanton removal of info from the 2010 olympics articles as censorship, even though that's clearly what it is. It's a big reason I'm not around here any more. So no doubt I will be accused of "personal attack" here for questioning dr vernon's motives and political affiliations. Is he familiar enough with BC politics, even, to know who or what is notable? And if he's not, why is he so ardent in wanting this bio deleted? I can't help but be suspicious - nor can Tieleman, given the mysterious deletion (apparently a hacking) of the antiHST Facebook group a while back. Experience has demonstrated to me that p.r. Agencies and others with POV agendas have fully infiltrated wikipedia and learned the game of guidelines and wiki speak and pretended neutrality. It's a big problem and not easily provable or solvable. Dr Vernon may just be a well meaning nobody with no involvement in or connection to BC politics. But the spuriousness and persistence of these deletion attempts suggest otherwise, especially in light of the hundreds of other BC bios which go unchallenged and um-soaped. My iphone's spellchecker may have provided some even more entertaining typos than usual. The afd is over or I might have returned to comment in it. Buy please watch out for more stuff like this. Wiki-manipulation by governments and or firms is only going to increase; word in the backrooms is there are ar least three members if the BC govr's public affairs bureau assigned to monitor and massage wikipedia . . . 24.114.234.28 (talk) 17:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. User:Calmer Waters (talk) 16:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC) Calmer Waters 19:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On June 22, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Timeline of BC Legislature Raids, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of North Piddle at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article North Piddle, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the flash of light accompanying an earthquake in 1896 was attributed by some residents of North Piddle, Worcestershire, to a large meteor? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

hello. Thanks for proofing my edit. In hindsight, you are right that the references cited did not state a January date. It was part of their position as per the NRA Transcript and cited in another source,Globe and Mail. Looks like they called on Congress to place guards in the schools in January but yes is questionable whether their task group would complete whatever their work is within the next fortnight. I'm okay with leaving your current revision as is. Canuckle (talk) 22:16, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. And thanks! When I saw that, I was a bit baffled that they thought they would complete such a massive undertaking in the next 9 days! It just didn't seem right to me. Especially given that for the next 2 weeks, people will be preoccupied with the Holidays, etc. So, I checked the refs, just to be sure. And, as you say, the January date was not listed in those refs. Thanks again! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sick, don't have the energy/focus to deal with this. You were the last editor to work on this article before the SPA came along, would you mind fixing this?Skookum1 (talk) 13:25, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Done | link. Canuckle (talk) 16:49, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mount Tzouhalem, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that leaving Mount Tzouhalem in search of a 15th wife led to the killing of the mountain's namesake? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mount Tzouhalem. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for creating the new article Lucy Islands, and for expanding Wikipedia's coverage of geography-related topics. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:38, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 8 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lucy Islands, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a storm on Lucy Island (pictured) unearthed 5,500-year-old remains of a woman whose DNA has been directly linked to a modern-day descendent, a Tsimshian woman living near Prince Rupert? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lucy Islands. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually I never thought to do that. I'm not sure who to ask. Bk ^{Read Talk} 07:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the Dorothy Kostrzewa article is listed for possible deletion, in case you want to take part in the discussion. Bk ^{Read Talk} 17:03, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Portland Hotel Society, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Insite, North America's first legal supervised injection site for drug users, was opened by the Portland Hotel Society in Vancouver, Canada, in 2003? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Portland Hotel Society. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thanks for your help Victuallers (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would you help me edit the page Nancy Drew (TV series) Arkinspace (talk) 17:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Add sources 40th Parliament of British Columbia Sooke Jenny Kwan Vancouver Island New Westminster Garfield Cleanup Gary Coons Conservatism in Canada Eveready Battery Company Expand British Columbia Indian Airlines Flight 814 British Columbia Coast Unencyclopaedic Supervised injection site Somaly Mam School District 36 Surrey

Wikify Professional degrees of public health Richmond Christian School Walden University (Minnesota) Orphan Narima dela Cruz Japanese Bug Fights Flag of Richmond, British Columbia Merge Foreign relations of Canada Waterloo – St. Jacobs Railway Waterloo Central Railway Stub Interior Health McMath Secondary School Kürdəxanı Peter Fassbender School District 37 Delta Harry Bloy

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your upload of File:CopperIsland.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:12, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I revdel'd the unsourced stuff that you reverted on Peter Fassbender's article. For the record, I also included your reverting edit in that — you didn't strictly do anything wrong, but since you did directly call attention to the nature of the allegations in your edit summary, I felt it best to disappear that one too just to be safe. Bearcat (talk) 22:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am very concerned about the nature and style of editing provided by some members of this 'free' editorial board. I have noted that many of the edits are negatively slanted against Ms. Shin. I question the neutrality of the editors of her wiki page. in particular, you and Shimmer. I would like to know your political affiliation, if any. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alleongto (talk • contribs) 23:24, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

under wiki ban rules, you are kindly reminded to maintain neutral point of view in editorializing, removing data to provide a fair and unbiased perspective of a living person. otherwise fair libel charges. Continued libellious negative slant in your editing will be met with a legal charge and ban from wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alleongto (talk • contribs) 23:39, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hilarious. Am known for neutral edits that resolve POV conflicts between other editors, including on Jane Shin. Canuckle (talk) 00:26, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted below earlier on User talk:Alleongto. Copying here in case you pay more attention to other users' Talk pages and to ensure that anyone seeing this page will get a balanced portrayal of the edit dispute.

Assume Good Faith + No Legal Threats

I suggested that if you have questions or concerns about the content of Jane Shin that you raise them (respectfully) on the article's Talk page Talk:Jane Shin so that editors could discuss how to best improve the article. Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia. If you are a sincere contributor, you should follow that advice rather than repeatedly accuse other editors of negative or partisan biases for rather routine edits.

Assuming good faith WP:GOODFAITH is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia.

Your threats of legal action are also against Wikipedia policy: Wikipedia:LEGAL. This could lead to you being blocked from editing. Also, since your allegations are false and unsupported, your accusations of libellous behaviour is actually slanderous themselves.

You may disagree with neutral and critical editing but you should not confuse those with partisan, negative or libellous edits. Her bio was a meagre 2 sentences until I authored the content that described Jane Shin as a medical doctor, her being 1st Korean-Canadian BC MLA, her childhood illness, a direct quote of her legislature speech about her parents. It is nonsensical for you to describe those as negative and libellous. Canuckle (talk) 02:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A living person has a right to fairness in the representation of the material facts without bias to author or editor otherwise, the defamatory nature of the words or expression is liable to damage the work or reputation of that individual. For these reasons, common law of Canada, the US and other western nations allow for damages that arise from editorial misconduct and publishing and dissemination of libellious or defamatory works. I cite this not as a threat but as a remedy with a cease and desist to injurious use of language. In particular, I name that in many instances of Jane Shin's biography, some editors have only used negatively perceived events or framed events such as campaign 'spending' to be a negative. Rather had this been fairly portrayed with multiple parties outraise and outspend each other to compete for communications and votes, the perception that this comment would have been neutral would be the outcome. Instead, many of the facts have been reframed in a negative light. I refer to the Wiki Standards of NPOV again in both intent and as an entire body of conduct. Not per-fact, but in gestalt as an entirety of the intent of NPOV.

In other instances, the rules of inclusion for her wiki page have been reversed by the editor. In one instance the editor says, 'disregard this copy because it is fluffery and dismissed (volunteer work cited by BC Legislative Assembly website), while on the otherh and, the same editor uses that site and inserts directly from the same webpage (diseases in childhood). it appears that this editor does not take kindly to having his own work and rules contradicted.

I encourage a mutual cooperation to provide fair coverage and editorialization for a wiki page of a real and living person--a human being. It is within my right to editorialize for fairness and NPOV coverage and to remind the editors of the remedies, legal and within wikipedia of the approaches to be used to resolve conflict.

I have been in touch with Wikipedia's administrator and they suggest resolution through multiple editors after any issues with a 3'rd reversion rule.

I wish to work with you in providing editorial quality and importantly fairness. It is important for you to possibly speak to Jane Shin, first hand and have direct knowledge rather than rely on some accurate and some inaccurate reporting which continue to promote false facts. It is the responsibility this editor to do direct research for reliability and validity of information for which he is editing.

I thank you for your quality editing and point out to the errors in which the distinguished editor can improve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alleongto (talk • contribs) 15:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your concern and pointing out COI.

I am not paid by Jane Shin to edit this page, it is done voluntarily. There is no conflict of interest. My edits have been clear to fairly represent Jane Shin in the material presented by press, correction of inaccuracies in press and subsequent editing by editors who have not contacted the source for information. Reporters may or may have incorrectly reported on specific facts. I have also counted the positive, neutral and negative portrayals in press and this Wikipedia page. It appears that some press are not required to abide by any NPOV guidelines. However, on Wiki, I maintain that in counting the negative vs positive comments, there were substantially more negative items previously reported and republished than positive comments, including, for example, volunteer work.

My task is to provide a realignment to neutrality by adding as many positive facts that had been available to media and editors to ensure fair representation of Ms. Shin. I do this as a Canadian Citizen and BC resident, voluntarily.Alleongto (talk) 19:10, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I will copy your response to your talk page as your learnings about how to best contribute to wikipedia and your COI response are much more pertinent to your own page than mine. I also request that you post future responses on your talk page so as to not crowd my page with content. Given your past comments supporting accuracy and avoiding defamation, I hope you agree that continuing to post unsupported allegations of bias on my page is not appropriate. Canuckle (talk) 00:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!
I moved the 'Arvind Gupta (UBC)' BLP to 'Arvind Gupta (academic)'. My rationale is that he won't be the UBC president forever. I was going to put 'Computer scientist', but you had academic in his infobox, so I went with that. You can of course change it if you have any problem with it. --220 of ^Borg 08:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Vincent Covello has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged for notability for two years. Only sources is a brief mention.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. CorporateM (Talk) 15:28, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vincent Covello 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/Vincent Covello 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. CorporateM (Talk) 15:10, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Vincent Covello requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://centerforriskcommunication.org/risk-communication-consultants/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. EricEnfermero (Talk) 01:53, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 04:29, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian, eh? Alaskamau5 (talk) 21:27, 5 July 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) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As par your suggestion that deletion thread is not for personal discussion - here I am! Just wanted to thank you for your utmost patience, straight-forwardness, real and constructive suggestions, as well as the changes you have made to the page. Will look to add credible references in the next few days, based on the examples you have provided of doing so.

If it is not too much trouble, may I possibly follow up on your talk page in order to make sure everything remains unbiased? If not, thanks so much for the help you have already provided!

Warmest regards,

Carly Carlyt28 (talk) 23:28, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, that does look very much like promotional/COI editing. I've put a week of semi-protection on the article to put a lid on things for now — I'd like to have kept it to "autoconfirmed", but unfortunately Goldwing's already past that level, so it wouldn't stop him. I'll try to keep an eye on it after the week is up as well, but do let me know if something happens that I don't notice. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 05:15, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on ElectraMeccanica, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 19:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The luger's death and discussion about the track are a WP:COATRACK. It's only tangentially associated with Furlong and so should be kept to discussions about the track and the athlete. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:03, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• WRONG. Was a notable portion of the Olympic game that he managed and he was involved in the pre-accident decisions about infrastructure changes and the crisis communications and later publicly travelling to the deceased athletes' home country. Canuckle (talk) 23:12, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Let's say I'm wrong. I certainly recall the event. It certainly makes sense to add it at Whistler Sliding Centre because it happened there. It could be added at Luge at the 2010 Winter Olympics as that was the specific event at which it occurred. It should certainly be discussed at Nodar Kumaritashvili because he is the primary subject of the event. It should be included at 2010 Winter Olympics because again, it was a part of the event. Furlong simply represented the games and spoke on behalf of the games. He was not directly responsible. His comment is not about him, which is what the article is supposed to reflect. So I'm sorry you think I'm wrong about this, but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about when it comes to the concept of COATRACK. This is a textbook example of COATRACK. However, feel free to raise it on the talk page, open an RfC about it or even discuss at WP:RSN or some other body. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And rewording it so that you make it seem like it has something to do with Furlong doesn't change the fact that it's unrelated to Furlong. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw that a few days ago you had to remove someone else's critical content about the luger death. So that may have influenced your perception on my restoring last year content. As (sport administrator) is in his title, the person's performance for administration and crisis management of international events is actually related to the bio subject. So long as treated with neutrality, accuracy and sources, etc. Canuckle (talk) 00:56, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on John Furlong (sports administrator), but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You just don't get it. Now it's a warning situation and next edit warring. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:06, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• • STOP VANDALIZING GORLITZ!!!!!! I added references with reliable sources to improve the accuracy & clarity of the article, and even did a minor shift of previous content by chronology BUT you removed them all ?????? You just don't get it and should respect an experienced contributor by doing a Talk before doing such crazy edit warring. Canuckle (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for restoring some or all of the edits Canuckle (talk) 00:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Nodar Kumaritashvili to John Furlong (sports administrator) (your addition has since been removed). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. If you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:22, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to John Furlong (sports administrator), without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. In short if you don't know what something is for, don't touch it as you did here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:52, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add defamatory content, as you did at John Furlong (sports administrator). Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• • What? If I improved the article so as to reduce libel potentials, and included accurate, neutral, reliable-sourced information about other potential issues, then i should be thanked not threatened with blockage -- especially given past thanks by wiki editors for my frequent correction of Vandalism and contributions on other articles and bios with controversies such as mass shooting massacres, rape/murder crime lawsuits, Supreme Court lawsuits, terrorist airplane bombing, politician bios, etc, etc. Canuckle (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In short, you wouldn't know a COATRACK if it hit you. I have added an RfC on the topic. Leave your unrelated content out until the RfC concludes as at least one editor has stated it does not belong. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:11, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it seems you don't fully know what a COATRACK is. FIne to have an RFC on the topic. VEry surprising that you ignored the reliable sources on the added details that addressed your previous questions about the CEO's relevance to infrastructure and crisis management. Canuckle (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent additions to the John Furlong page. Please note that your recent changes have been reverted because they are not in a final form; they include some editorializing on your part and questions on the page, to other editors. This is not appropriate. There's some great information there, but your work shouldn't be added in draft quality. Please properly edit your work for brevity, grammar and neutrality. If this is not your strong suit, ask for help in Talk. We have noted some edit wars between you and other users. Please take a breath, and refrain from this behavior. Please keep your explanations of edits clear and refrain from personal attacks. Sportsupdater2016 (talk) 23:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I was writing content on a Word page to later post on the Talk page to hear others' perceptions and also to get other contributors to start collaborative discussions on the Talk page. Sadly, i had to suddenly test posting a short draft to see if all the time and effort was going to be lost because of terrible sudden reverts and edit wars. So I could see if additional fine or good content would be attacked right away. And it was.
• Some of your typo and grammar corrections are worth keeping even when i have to restore most of my reverted content. Please see Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary if you wish to continue contributing to wiki.

Canuckle (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos, seems like a well researched and written article, from my brief look through. -- Zanimum (talk) 22:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Canuckle. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Business in Vancouver, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Winged Blades ^Godric 10:26, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have a justification for this redirect?

Yes DDD DDD~enwiki had added an AFD tag to the article, but they did so incorrectly, and that previous AFD was closed as keep. So, that AFD wasn't your justification, was it? Geo Swan (talk) 23:05, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't an interogation, you need to relax and stop being so aggressive against everyone you disagree with. You are once voice and need to listen and attempt to look at things from a difference perspective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.100.58.76 (talk • contribs)

An article you recently created, Electra Meccanica, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. scope_creep^Talk 13:06, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]