User talk:Bearian/ArchivesJulyAug2009
Wow, good rescue work. Print sources are always helpful. Go ahead and point out the rescue job to the other people that !voted there, and if they change to keep I'll withdraw it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Bearian, this is the first time I've ever seen you get passionate about an article. :) Are you Finnish? Have a good weekend. I saw your improvement on Rumaki also, and that they were followed up by the addition of a photo. We're hitting on all cylinders! ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Interesting. I had never heard of rumaki before seeing it here, let alone eaten it. It seems very unusual to me, as part of the whole Tiki/ Polynesian food tradition that I don't see around much, and I like unusual foods. I take it you like flaming volcano drinks as well? If your Finnish in-laws can whip up some glorified rice, I'd like to have a photograph for that article... Uff-da. Or maybe those are just elements with the Swedish and Norwegian Scandahooligans?
- Take care. I've enjoyed our discussion, and I think sisu is the kind of unusual and interesting article that illustrates Wikipedia at its best. I love stuff that mixes disciplines: culture, linguistics, history, immigration etc. etc. Beats the plethora of historical events and random biographies any day of the week. ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:54, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
One more proposal at the village pump
hi bearian,
One more proposal at the village pump [1]. I'm afraid this one might not get a fair shake from non-lawyers, so I'm hoping you'll take a look at it and give it an assessment. Thanks.
PS this isn't spam -- you rescued one of the first articles I created from AfD, and I still haven't forgotten it :) Agradman appreciates civility/makes occasional mistakes 05:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: Safford
Thanks! :) I don't understand the DYK reference, though? - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 21:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009
Hello,
I am giving you this as a courtesy copy because you were among those who supported the deletion of this article. It is the text I sent to the Admin who deleted the article.
Cheers
Hello,
I was very interested in the fact that this article was deleted, well astounded might be the correct word. I read with interest the deletion log and I understand that the article has very little chance of passing. However I must assert that this does not mean that it is below the threshold of notability. I did a little research to see exactly how notable this bill is.
I went to http://stats.grok.se/ to look up how often this article was viewed:
- Jan 2009 - 577 views
- Feb 2009 - 4487 views
- Mar 2009 - 3016 views
- Apr 2009 - 2321 views
- May 2009 - 6826 views
- total - 17227 views
Even after it was deleted, in June, the deletion page was viewed 92 times.
To be fair, however, I ran view statistics for 10 random articles to see if the Blair Holt article received more views. Of the 10 I looked up, only two got more hits. This is hardly enough for a true statistical comparison, but it would indicate that the article was getting more hits than the majority of Wikipedia articles. This seems to indicate notability.
Next I went to Google to see how many Web hits I would get if I looked it up. For Blair Holt bill, I get 1,120,000 hits. I went to Google News and discovered there have been thousands of news stories on the bill as well.
As a final note, I was at the Utah State Republican convention where it was brought up and discussed by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, which indicates that despite the fact that there is only one sponsor, the bill is receiving considerable buzz in congress.
The bill is notable for another reason. It delegates powers reserved for the congress in the Constitution (the right to make laws) to one person, namely the Attorney General.
Given all this, I can only conclude that the article, and the bill are indeed notable enough to merit inclusion in Wikipedia.
Thanks for your consideration,
J appleseed2 (talk) 16:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm glad I was able to save the article. :) TheLeftorium 21:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Airplaneman (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Gertrude Baines
Regarding your below edit:
+ *On 5 November 2008, Gertrude Baines, aged 114 years 213 days, became the oldest person of African descent.[1]
Gertrude Baines became the oldest living African American following the death of Arbella Perkins Ewing of Dallas, Texas on March 22, 2008.
Ms. Baines became the oldest voter on November 5, 2008.Ryoung122 18:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Wiki-Conference New York Update: 3 weeks to go
For those of you who signed up early, Wiki-Conference New York has been confirmed for the weekend of July 25-26 at New York University, and we have Jimmy Wales signed on as a keynote speaker.
There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session. Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up here for on-wiki notification. All are invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Clarence Thomas
Please weigh in on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Clarence_Thomas#Gerber
At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas#Supreme_Court_nomination_and_confirmation , a non-notable conservative law professor's blog post is being used to call Jeffrey Toobin a "liberal critic." Yet the conservatives on the page refuse even to admit that Gerber is a conservative. My feeling is that Gerber's labels for impartial journalists shouldn't be included (nor really should his Findlaw blog post at all). RafaelRGarcia (talk) 23:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Dodd and Ferrylodge are abusing the Edit Warring Board with this highly inaccurate report: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:RafaelRGarcia_reported_by_User:Simon_Dodd_.28Result:_.29
- Is there any recourse? RafaelRGarcia (talk) 05:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- Your recourse is to reply there (as you have done), and wait for a verdict.Ferrylodge (talk) 05:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry that I didn't respond sooner to your message. I was away and just back. You did a good job. Mrs. Wolpoff (talk) 19:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Bearian. You declined another user's A2 speedy here so I didn't want to delete it anyway, but as far as I can see from Wikipedia:Pages_needing_translation_into_English#Perpustakaan_Alam_dan_Tamadun_Melayu this does already exist at the relevant foreign-language Wikipedia so would be a valid A2 candidate. Am I missing something, or are you? :-) Thanks ~ mazca talk 20:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
User name issue
I can contribute pictures to Commons and Wikipedia to articles without any pictures but only if the pictures have a proper author copyright note on the image page: "Author: Antofaya Expeditions". A copyright note like "Author: niceUser456" will not do. If this is not acceptable under Wikipedia/Commons policy please let me know. I will stop submissions and slack for deletion what was so far contributed. Then I will ask you to delete/block my account. Thank you. Antofaya Expeditions (talk) 17:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: Aro (person)
Hi. It's not a bother, but I'm a bit puzzled... I was under the impression that any person who was the last person executed in their country was inherently notable. See for example Douglas Hamlet (last person executed in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines), Mustapha Danso (last person executed in the Gambia), Wilfred Hawker (last person executed in Suriname), Michael Manning (carter) (last person executed in Ireland), or any of a number of others. Also, could you clarify why you've tagged the article with a query on its neutrality, and with a tag on inappropriate tone or style? As far as I can tell, the style is concise, factual and perfectly neutral. Thanks. Aridd (talk) 09:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your note and your courtesy. I quite agree, it was clearly copyvio -- User:DGG wouldn't make a mistake about anything like that. I got to the article before it was tagged as copyvio and deleted a huge amount of what was essentially self-promotion; perhaps they'll do better if they decide to post again. Accounting4Taste:talk 01:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
WP:NODRAMA reminder
Thanks for signing up for the Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Wikipedia stands to benefit from the improvements in the article space as a result of this campaign. This is a double reminder. First, the campaign begins on July 18, 2009 at 00:00 (UTC). Second, please remember to log any articles you have worked on during the campaign at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/Log. Thanks again for your participation! --Jayron32.talk.say no to drama 21:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Removal of PROD from Surya Experience
Hello Bearian, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Surya Experience has been removed. It was removed by Rostik80 with the following edit summary 'no edit summary'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Rostik80 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 15:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)
New York state elections
I'm glad somebody likes my articles. I always wondered if anybody reads all that stuff... Thank you. Kraxler (talk) 22:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Habeas Corpus Act 1862
I would, if such information existed. It isn't like the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 or similar - there aren't any guides on background, or how it applies, and so on. It was a marginally important act in the 1860s that is only two clauses long, and the only proper coverage given is brief mentions in works on Habeas Corpus in general. There is an article on JSTOR which dedicates a few paragraphs, but unfortunately I can't seem to get to it - JSTOR is all snafud at the moment. Ironholds (talk) 21:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'll try to - I've got a few acts up there before, so this one might be possible. No chance you have JSTOR access? Ironholds (talk) 21:02, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Removal of PROD from Albany strength
Hello Bearian, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Albany strength has been removed. It was removed by Tblaney6591 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Tblaney6591 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 22:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)
Gillibrand
I'm not sure on this edit [2] because the two bits do seem to contradict each other. I agree it needs to be stated more plainly, but saying she is an advocate for soemthing when she's recently voted against it seems weird to me. I haven't followed the edit history so I don't know what version was tehre first or the evolution. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
- Interesting. I haven't followed her career closely, but I think there was a backlash against her after here quick rise to power? I guess toes were stepped on or some felt that it wasn't her "turn"? New York politics is an interesting beast. Then there was that Kennedy thing too which I didn't understand why all of a sudden everyone turned on her. Was she making a play for the Senate seat Gillibrand ultimately got? I have trouble keeping track of these things. I believe one of my old friends also campaigned for Gillibrand. Has she staked out a postion on the Health Care reform bills? Interesting times. Anyway, I tried to tweak the content as best I could based on the sources that were there. I left out any suggestion that she changed her position but tried clarify that her 100% NRA rating was as a house member (since there do seem to be indications that her position may have moderated and she voted against the senate bill which is not well sourced as far as what the bill was or what her position was but oh well).
- I see some edits are being made that aren't in my opinion 100% appropriate there, but given the demoralizing level of confrontation on some other pages I'm trying to improve I'm bowing out. :) Sorry. Fair's fair and I think they should be reverted and discussed, but I'm in enough trouble without being the one to deal with this particular issue. I suspect there may be some legitimacy to the points being made, whether Gilibrand is moderating some of her positions to appeal to a more liberal constituency now that she's a Senator and not just representing an area of Upstate New York, but I do think they can be made in a more neutral way. Anyway, I guess I just wanted to explain myself as I excuse myself form dealing with it. There's no shortage of left leaning politicos here so I'm sure someone will "take care of it." Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Removal of PROD from Howard House (Seattle)
Hello Bearian, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Howard House (Seattle) has been removed. It was removed by ThaddeusB with the following edit summary '(contest prod - subject is a notable art gallary with substantial RS coverage (see: http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Howard+House%22+seattle&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&hl=en&scoring=a) - will cleanup & source article ASAP)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with ThaddeusB before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)
LGBT issues
Hi, there are some issues with naming of some LGBT articles and categories, specifically using the term 'issues'. I am proposing that we replace 'issues' with 'matters' for article titles, and 'topics' for categories, where the article/category is currently 'LGBT issues and/in ...' or '... and LGBT issues', ditto for articles/categories that have the acronym lone 'LGBT and ...' or '... and LGBT'. Benjiboi suggested running this past you first for feedback on doing this with categories. Mish (talk) 23:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Bearian,
I've turned my user page (Agradman talk/contribs) into a solicitation for this new task force. I'm going to post it on the talk pages of all the members of WP:LAW; before I do, I'm wondering if you'll take a look and provide feedback/critiques.
Also, I've made some related comments at WP:LAW and WP:SCOTUS. The conversations have gotten a bit lengthy, but you might just want to take a peek.
Most importantly, I think we're almost at the point where we need to create a "WikiBlueBook task force" or some other centralized community for developing citation standards and coordinating them among all the child projects of WP:LAW. Agradman talk/contribs 05:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- PS here it is!!!
WP:Hornbook -- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum
Hi Bearian/ArchivesJulyAug2009,
I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in United States legal articles to take a look at WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".
Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.
- Each casebook will have a subpage.
- Over the course of a semester, each subpage will shift its focus to track the unfolding curriculum(s) for classes using that casebook around the country.
- It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or {{anchors}} in Wikipedia (example).
- Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.
- I'm encouraging law students around the country to create local chapters of the club I'm starting at my own law school, "Student WP:Hornbook Editors". Using WP:Hornbook as our headquarters, we're hoping to create a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join.
What you can do now:
- 1. Add WP:Hornbook to your watchlist, {{User Hornbook}} to your userpage, and ~~~~ to Wikipedia:Hornbook/participants.
- 2. If you're a law student,
- Email http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Hornbook to your classmates, and tell them to do the same.
- Contact me directly via talk page or email about coordinating a chapter of "Student WP:Hornbook Editors" at your own school.
- (You don't have to start the club, or even be involved in it; just help direct me to someone who might.)
- 3. Introduce yourself to me. Law editors on Wikipedia are a scarce commodity. Do knock on my talk page if there's an article you'd like help on.
Regards, Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 20:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Could you consider changing your decision for this AfD to either "Delete & Redirect" or "No Consensus, Delete & Redirect"? Though I did argue to redirect the article, I felt that overall, a good portion of the "Keeps" completely missed the point of BLP1E and failed to adequetly argue against it. For example:
- "Keep I wonder which wiki 'super' editor came up with this AFD. I suppose you are considering AFD because he this guy is 'not-notable' right? ;-) He who dies with the most deletes wins! This is exactly the kind of case that demonstrates the lunacy of the wikipedia AFD patrol. If you guys cant agree what makes a living person notable and create a written policy, then every single article in wikipedia about a living person can be considered for AFD. Clearly in this case daily top billing on google news and almost every other daily news outlet for more than a month is still not notable?" – I don't really consider that a valid Keep, as the majority of it is railing on Wikipedia policy and the last sentence just mentions hitting Google News daily, which does not address BLP.
- " Strong Keep Dr. Murray has emerged as a central figure in the Michael Jackson investigation. There are thousands upon thousands of news articles about him, and that has increased dramatically in the past few days as he becomes the main suspect in Michael Jackson's death. KEEP! Michaelh2001 (talk) 07:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)" – Same issue as the above vote; thousands of news articles means nothing if they are all about one event.
- "Keep - Keep it until the toxicology results are revealed, The investigators suspect some Elvis-Quality drug abuse relating to the death of Michael Jackson Darbacour (talk) 15:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)" – We don't keep BLPs because they might become notable in the future.
- "Comment I would have to agree and wait until the whole thing unfolds. Once his culpability is revealed one way or another, we could always simply merge. To delete it now would definitely be premature.--Hourick (talk) 03:19, 29 July 2009 (UTC)" – Again, we don't keep BLPs because they might become notable in the future.
- "Keep: Notability established. Evan1975 (talk) 01:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)" – Exactly the opposite of WP:JNN.
On the other hand, all the deletes/redirects had solid, reasonable arguments about enforcing BLP by not having an article solely because he is under investigation. To me, those arguments are way more solid and should have been given much more weight when closing. NW (Talk) 15:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Removal of PROD from Maryjo Adams Cochran
Hello Bearian, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Maryjo Adams Cochran has been removed. It was removed by Halliecochran with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Halliecochran before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 00:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)
Warning
This is the closing admin speaking. The clear consensus was to keep the article Conrad Murray . If you attempt to redirect it again, without discussing it first on the Talk:Conrad Murray page, or appealing it successfully to WP:DRV, then you shall be blocked for vandalism. Bearian (talk) 21:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- Please read WP:VAND and WP:AGF before accusing me of "vandalism." The official definition of vandalism is "any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." The page also specifically states that making bold edits is not vandalism. Nor did I violate the three-revert rule as you implied. I redirected the Conrad Murray page because, in my opinion, it violates WP:ONEEVENT and WP:BLP. The outcome of an AFD discussion does not mean that normal editorial processes are suspended, and redirecting or merging a page is a normal editorial action that does not require any administrator approval. According to your user page, you "teach law at Bryant & Stratton College." I certainly hope that you use more care and precision in said teaching than you did in your misguided accusation against me. *** Crotalus *** 13:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Thought you may have an interest in this one... Johnfos (talk) 07:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Hornbook project
Is this an encyclopedic purpose? DGG ( talk ) 23:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Dozulag
Hi. You just deleted and protected Dozulag - you might like to delete User:AppleFrogCarrotManWoo as well, which has the same nonsense on it. regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Re. Soverns' Law
Is WP:MADEUP a criterion for speedy deletion? I looked at WP:CSD and couldn't find something that matched, hence the AfD. Do let me know if this could've been handled differently. XXX antiuser 18:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Conrad Murray
Hi Bearian. On August 4, you closed the deletion discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conrad Murray with a result of keep. On August 19, however, the article was redirected to Death of Michael Jackson. Is that "allowed", given the result of the deletion discussion? I left a comment on Talk:Conrad Murray, but nobody's responded. Thanks! --Albany NY (talk) 03:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
New York
What's in season up there now? Apples? Berries are earlier are they not? ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:29, 27 August 2009 (UTC)