User talk:DMacks/Archive 13

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I found your reversion of the bad edits by Musictalk from last October, and restored your then-contribution with some further edits. Musictalk has been equally disruptive on James Judd's page. I don't know if we can do anything about Musictalk, since as you noted, that person is a terrible editor on wikipedia. Thanks for reading, DJRafe (talk) 00:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

• Musictalk (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Thanks for keeping an eye on those articles. I gave him a level4 warning. He's been at this a looong time and has already had user-talk warning and there are your comments on article-talk about it too. He's had lots of chances to choose to participate in consensus-building or discussion relating to his edits. Let me know if he...chooses a different path. DMacks (talk) 10:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello. You have a new message at Skier Dude's talk page.

93.45.238.23 (talk) 14:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC) dear DMack, I would to know what is the problem with the url that I add: [[1]]

best regard

F — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.45.238.23 (talk) 14:07, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I tried it from various browsers. Sometimes I got a linkfarm/domain-squatter, other times I got a host-not-found nameserver error. Maybe there is a typo in the URL or a mistake in the syntax you used for making a link? Or maybe there was a transient server problem on that site or something? Go to the page as you edited it and let me know what happens when you click on the link. DMacks (talk) 14:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

yes, thank you: there is a syntax error, I made a mistake. the right link is: http://www.globolocal.net/eng/index_eng.html can I re-edit this? 93.45.238.23 (talk) 15:07, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks interesting! Yes, feel free to add. However, please describe what it actually is as relevent to users ("a globe that displays...") rather than its generic topic (obviously it's a "project about globe", otherwise it wouldn't be on the globe page). DMacks (talk) 20:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I have added over a half a dozen links and citations over the past few days, and while I did find a couple of them missing, I don't know which you removed or objected to. I have tens of thousands of pages of written material on the net, and thousands of people read them every month (not all read all of them) :0) Some of "my" pages do contain ads for products (adsense, and other ad networks), but that in itself hardly makes my content "spam" as you have characterized it. Please enlighten me. Winfotech (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

(

conflict of interest.Jasper Deng (talk)

06:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Someone else had removed your zquiet link on

WP:RS are certainly fine. DMacks (talk

) 13:39, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi can you keep an eye on the page. A new user keeps removing content, image, cats and keeps adding irrelevant stuff to the article for no reasons. They keep doing the same inspite of multiple warnings and never looks like responding to any of my messages. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 09:04, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Watchlisted. There's a level4 warning on the user's talk-page, so if the behavior continues, easy enough to justify a block. DMacks (talk) 17:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Also please have a look at the edits made by

this article even after many warnings. They must probably be the IP fan of the subject who was doing the same before the article was protected a few months ago. In the meanwhile, the user started attacking other pages like Simran and Sneha. Now they have made a comeback as a registered user and keeps doing the same thing in this article too. They never look like listening/responding to any of the explanations. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)}

14:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Blocked 48 hours. DMacks (talk) 18:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

• context

Thanks. It's disappointing when you realize you are next to 3RR and probably the only editor who watches a page. tedder (talk) 00:36, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. There are so many dusty corners on WP! DMacks (talk) 00:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Please go through my second post about this article under my previous topic "Taapsee Pannu" —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah sorry, missed that followup of yours. DMacks (talk) 18:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

The user is back again with same kind of edits. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 06:33, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Blocked 2 weeks. DMacks (talk) 16:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

It is reported that majority of the story of the TV series Startling by Each Step is faithful to the novel, but its different ending if you read a section on the bottom. I never read the book, so I'm not sure how faithful the TV show is. I seen some of the episodes online, but not fully grapse yet, and waiting to get the DVD set once I gets my tax returns. I've made a request on Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, hopefully that they can help trim down the summary.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 22:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello DMacks, I have come to ask for your help with something. Last week, you had moved back the page of "Agent Vinod (film)" to "Agent Vinod (2012 film)". However, the same user has gone back and reverted it back to the previous version. If you woule be so kind as to move it back I would really appreciate it. Lastly, there is an anonymous IP who is vandalising Karisma Kapoor's page. Are you able to protect the page for a period of time? -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk 19:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Someone else took care of reverting the Agent Vinod move. That's good, helps establish that it's not just me against him. I also requested that another admin (yet more eyes) prevent future renamings. The latest sets of edits on Karisma Kapoor appear to be just formatting and sectioning changes? Obviously bad for him to be edit-warring it (against you and at least one other editor) and I just left him a warning about that problem, but not vandalism. I'll watchlist it and protect if the problem continues. DMacks (talk) 21:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. As for now, I'm going to leave Karisma Kapoor's article the way it is. However, there is another anonymous IP address who is adding unsourced material to

Talaash. I have issused a warning to him/her. If you can, please keep an eye on it. Thanks -- Bollywood Dreamz ^talk

21:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Protected for a while, and I'll watch it. The edit-summary about taking it to the talk-page is a good one. DMacks (talk) 22:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear DMacks,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at [email protected] (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at [email protected]. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 05:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

My thanks for your speedy reply to my query about the above word. I have followed your links and learnt much about the meanings of the word BUT (I'm ashamed to admit) I still cannot find a connection between BOMA and ANACONDA. Any further guidance would be much appreciated as I detest "loose ends" and cannot consider the crossword finished until I can accept there is a link between the two words! My thanks for any more help you can give -J. Mumvonston (talk) 03:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	I award you this barnstar for your continued efforts against vandalism in Tamil and Telugu film related articles. —Vensatry (Ping me) 14:55, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

• Snip not appropriate really sorry*Dimentox (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Dimentox (talk)

I again recommend you read

WP:CIVIL so you don't get kicked out of this community even before anyone cares what you might write. DMacks (talk

) 08:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Working on the article dood. Gonna take some time to Gather the info and links so you dont delete that also. But next edit on that page i will come prepared. And yes it will have valid refs Dimentox (talk)

Great! Once there is a viable article, it is definitely appropriate to have a bluelink to it. DMacks (talk) 08:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

So get this my FANS not me got together and created a nice page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJ_Dimentox which BAMN was deleted before any links to the genera could be added. There are quite a few bands that i know of including the steampunk articles/genera which i started off in that are less notable than I am. I am all over the web, all over second life, well known in opensource communities etc. Laughable try to follow the rules and still get slapped. Maybe the hardstyle peeps of the UK dont want us US citizens and artists around their block. sigh. Dimentox (talk) 01:23, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I am starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Ravidassia. I would like to get help from people who are interested. You may sign up for the project on the [[2]]. McKinseies (talk) 13:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Eventually... eventually I got around to fixing most of the supercomputer article, after our conversation last July. The section on software is still out of date, and I need to fix that next month, but I wrote a separate architecture article that fixed the hardware issue, and rewrtoe the computer cluster article as a basis fr that, just FYI. History2007 (talk) 21:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply here. Much appreciated. --HappyCamper 07:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't get why a boy band that has just debuted on mainstream TV in South Korea falls foul of the notability guidelines - which resulted in

It sure sounds like they might some day, maybe soon be notable themselves, but having one debut or being associated with some other band are not sufficient for notability. See

5Dolls is actually a good contrast. That article has multiple citations from independent sources highlighting various controversies, success of their releases, and similar commentary about them a group itself (rather than merely it being associated with some other notable group). Until this group itself is sufficiently notable for its own article, it can certainly be mentioned in its parent-group article (it's common for topics that are not independently worthy of their own articles to be merged into articles on larger topics that are notable). DMacks (talk

) 17:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

James — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesstatham (talk • contribs) 12:08, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't say "some other is better", merely that yours is bad. These aren't my area of expertise, so I'm not looking more closely than at the rapid-fire pattern of your edits and their own problem under the

WP:COI so you don't wind up having your edit privileges revoked. DMacks (talk

) 21:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I am not very big into the computer world and i made an iphone app which is a huge accomplishment for me and i would really appreciate if you leave that page not deleted because i want to spread the word about it and I thought Wiki would be a good way to start. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swimming978 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

While you may (rightly!) feel proud of your accomplishment, it doesn't really have any relevance or significance to anyone in the world at large. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free webhost or place to brag, see your name in lights, or self-promote. The minimum standard to have an article here is

independent reliable sources. So if and when your app gets featured in mainstream media, it might be a viable topic here. It's also extremely rude to take over an existing article on one topic and make it your own about a different topic. It's a big website, each separate topic with the same name would go on its own page so readers can find the actual and specific idea they want rather than lots of unrelated stuff together. DMacks (talk

) 02:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Shapiro reaction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Basic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello there! I'm (rarely lately, but am planning to return for active editing sometime soon) working on fluorine. Got three questions and you were recommended for me as a man who "know[s] a lot or hard-core chemistry." So it'd be neat if you could help me.

1. HF/SbF₅. While I already know there is probably no "H[SbF₆] with naked protons," I wanna make it sure. Made a short look over the Net; says no protons can exist in solids, but probably in gases. What would you say? Could there be a high vacuum geasous "H[SbF₆] with naked protons"? (also, for me actually, could it be even more acidic if we use AuF₅ instead? just give an opinion) (I have an impression on the topic, but more words could be useful)
2. Low melting point. Does it have anything to do with the partial second bonds found in Cl₂, Br₂, and I₂, but not F₂?
3. I can't understand why BiF₅ is polymeric rather than molecular. (I understand the rationale for BeF₂...is it something similar (opposite)?) It could be neat to explain that in a few words.

It could also very neat if you colud provide any sources, but if not, any help would still be very appreciated. (Have also personal interest on each of the three, so...please explain whatever you can) :) Thanks a lot, in advance--

Great questions! Fluorine chemistry isn't my area, but I can certainly ramble on about it from first-principles or others' work:)

1. The Fluoroantimonic acid article has refs regarding the bonding between the H and the SbF₆. In particular, the linked ref of Mike Klein's work has some good information--see the links at the end of that article for the original journal article refs, which presumably have lots of details of the bonding. The gold case is interesting...googling around, there are various notes that gold has a higher affinity for fluorine than antimony does. I came across this powerpoint presentation[3] that gives a greater gas-phase acidity (lower ∆G_acid) than the Sb case, but I can't find that specific one in the refs (but I only have full-text access to some of them). doi:10.1021/ja0000753 is an interesting computational study of various superacids, including various effects of complexing with fluorine, sulfonate, and carborane. But I still don't really know what a true "naked proton" would be...it doesn't seem likely that HX would 100% ionize even in the gas phase. To my mind (and therefore probably wrong in detail), there would be some simple electrostatic attraction even if it's weak and not "to a specific atom in the anionic cluster" (think "particle of dust on amorphous static-charged balloon" rather than "spoke in one of many specific holes in TinkerToy"). On the other hand, the coordination is obviously very weak, and even if to specific atoms, seems unlikely to have multiple ones aggregate together, so there would be a weakly bound and highly exposed H on the surface. The neat thing about gas phase is that there is no solvent, so if something really is really acidic (by definiton, H⁺ comes off easily) and the conditions are highly dilute, those together suggest to me that the H must be free-floating a bit. But high-vacuum H+ seems pretty common--isn't that what a cyclotron does? I'm not sure anyone considers that a source of "acid", but it's an interesting analogy:)
2. I'm not sure what anomaly you're seeing. Here is an extract from
   List of elements
   , where mp increases in a fairly regular pattern.

Sym	Element	Melt K	Boil K	J / g K	Neg
F	Fluorine	53.63	85.03	0.824	3.98
Cl	Chlorine	172.31	239.11	0.479	3.16
Br	Bromine	266.05	332.0	0.474	2.96
I	Iodine	386.65	457.4	0.214	2.66

3. The structure of Bismuth pentafluoride seems in keeping with other MF₅ cases. Bismuth has a high affinity for fluorine, so why not have the F from one complete the octahedral cluster around another? The Uranium pentafluoride article linked from the bismuth one notes that the monomeric form of the uranium one is known in gas-phase, and its geometry definitely has a "hole" in the square base rather than a more equally dispersed trigonal–bipyramidal arrangement. Getting more than "four bonds" to a low-Z element is hard but getting tetrahedral geometry is easy (a la the octet rule and similar ideas), whereas "exceeding the octet" on transition-metals and beyond is easy. F in general seems to form bridging intereactions easily (HF is not just a weak acid, but it's polymeric).

DMacks (talk) 12:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You just made points 1 and 3 (though the UF5 article doesn't even mention the word "gas") clear for me (wonder now how to integrate them into the article, but will some time, having sources and some similar stuff), So I have a common understanding. The second point, I (think that I) could've served it better... let me try to serve once again, better phrased. When I was checking out the Russian Wiki article on the subject (am a Russian, live in Russia, etc), I found this statement: "Fluorine has an abnormally low melting point. This is to the lack of d-subshells in fluorine, which prevents it from forming sesquialteral bond, unlike the other halogens (multiciplity of bonds about 1.1)." This amazed me. By the point, I had already known that the melting point depends on what happens between molecules, not in them. Then I got the source given there. It confirmed that Cl₂ has a bonding order of 1.12, but not that it affects melting point. So... did I make it clear now? Can you tell me?

Again, thanks for the first and the third points--

talk

) 09:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I noticed on one of the topics, you've deleted correct information. Why? Josh Krajcik's Birthday was correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crystaldreamsy2k (talk • contribs) 16:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Josh Krajcik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

As I stated in the edit-summary when I deleted it, "birthdate has been changed and neither previous nor new are supported by refs, therefore removing

WP:V policy". Need a specific footnote or similar reference supporting that it is "correct". DMacks (talk

) 17:05, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I knew the information because his mother used to be my teacher and I know Josh(went to school with him). His mom is on my facebook friends list and she was the one that announced it being his birthday. I asked his close friends if they wanted to put it in(because they was the one that wrote up the wikipedia entry) and they told me to go ahead and do it so I did. That's how I knew when his birthday was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crystaldreamsy2k (talk • contribs) 18:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, "someone told me privately" fails to meet the

verification policy. I don't see it on his homepage (the "Bio" section gives his age in years but who knows when that was actually written or if they keep it updated there) and I don't see it on his facebook public "info" page. DMacks (talk

) 18:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I understand what your getting at, Just wanted to let you know how I knew it was true and not false. Also to let you know, on his website that Sony is running for the Bio. Funk is not outside of Columbus. It's outside of Wooster where he grew up. Funk and Wooster is about 3 hours away from Columbus. Sony needs to correct that too. Just figure I'd give you the info for you to keep in mind when your updating and verifying, just trying to help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crystaldreamsy2k (talk • contribs) 18:58, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for following up with the additional information! Please do fix anything that is verifiably true. Just put:

 <ref>some pointer to specific webpage or print source</ref>

after statements to help others double-check or learn more about it. DMacks (talk) 20:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

My edit was correct but you are right ... my summary was badly worded. I had just woken up and I was in too much of a hurry. The Clausius-Clapeyron equation as written in the article solves for the normal boiling point of a liquid given a boiling point (T_O) of that liquid at some pressure (P_O) other than 1 atm.

My summary should have read: "The NORMAL boiling point of a liquid is lower for liquids with higher boiling points at vapor pressures other than 1 atm." ... or "The NORMAL boiling point of a liquid is lower for liquids that are more volatile". Which do you think is better? mbeychok (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, all makes sense now. Thanks for clarification. DMacks (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

DC Meetup #28: March 10 at Capitol City Brewery
DC Wikipedia meetup #28 is on Saturday, March 10, 2012, from 7pm on at Capitol City Brewery in downtown DC. (11th & H St NW). Join us for an evening of socializing, chatting about Wikipedia, discussing Wikimedia DC activities and the latest preparations for Wikimania 2012. (RSVP + details)

Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list

You're invited: Smithsonian Institution Women in Science Edit-a-Thon!

Who should come? You should. Really.
	She Blinded Me with Science: Smithsonian Women in Science Edit-a-Thon will be held on Friday, March 30, 2012 at the Smithsonian Archives in Washington, D.C. This edit-a-thon will focus on improving and writing Wikipedia content about women from the Smithsonian who contributed to the sciences. It will be followed by a happy hour meetup! We look forward to seeing you there!

I saw you had done some work on heavily-used gadgets. We're trying to start a library for gadget authors to use. Please check it out and post any questions or comments there. -- ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 02:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Can I ask an opinion? what do you think about these discussions?I think they must be closed but I'm new on wiki, you may contact an administrator for the discussions? Thanks

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustinianum_College
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marianum_College

So, Cormeo, you now try it this way? Removing AfD-templates and falsifying statements that the AfD-was closed as keep? You have a good sense of humour!

_talk

20:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

You are judged on your behavior, which is poor, you are obviously heavily involved in the topics themselves for which you are canvassing to try to avoid normal work queues? No wonder you got blocked. DMacks (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry to be a pain, but I was notified just now that you were responsible for the deletion of the "Museum Mouth" article started yesterday afternoon and was wondering if you had any possible way of restoring it? I promise it was factual and was directly related to the importance of the band! The people who were working on making it a quality article are just new to posting and editing on Wikipedia, that's all. Given more than- what... six hours? -I'm sure that it could be something valid. Please, I'm like begging you to bring it back if that's even possible. I already miss it!

-Karl Kuehn(Lazyboneskuehn (talk) 04:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC))

• Museum Mouth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Despite how factual and extensive the article could become and no matter important to the band and its fans it may be, I looked around and could not find that the band is

notable itself. Maybe someday they'll make it and merit a page, but I'm not seeing any evidence of that (charted hits, critical commentary in multiple published sources, etc.) at this time. Are there some such notable aspects that I was simply unable to find? DMacks (talk

) 06:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

• http://www.punknews.org/review/10909
• http://www.punknews.org/review/9298
• http://whenyoumotoraway.blogspot.com/2012/02/review-museum-mouth-sexy-but-not-happy.html
• http://exclaim.ca/Reviews/Punk/museum_mouth-is
• http://wae.blogs.starnewsonline.com/23099/album-review-museum-mouths-sexy-but-not-happy/
• http://www.verbicidemagazine.com/2012/02/20/museum-mouth-sexy-but-not-happy/
• http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=1903762
• http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/2012/01/24/some-stuffs-museum-mouth-new-albins-2012/
• http://www.zaptownmag.com/2012/02/museum-mouth-sexy-but-not-happy-self-released
• http://exclaim.ca/Reviews/Punk/Museum_Mouth-Tears_In_My_Beer
• http://reviewsic.com/2010/06/29/museum-mouth-tears-in-my-beer/
• http://thepunksite.com/reviews.php?page=album/e_n/museummouth_tearsinmybeer
• http://picassoblueyo.blogspot.com/2010/05/museum-mouth-tears-in-my-beer.html
• http://www.ihatethesoundofguitars.com/content/lists/weekly/2010-week-14/ http://punkmusic.about.com/b/2010/09/29/download-museum-mouths-entire-discography-for-free.htm *http://www.soundaslanguage.com/2010/03/02/media-museum-mouth/

And here are web versions of printed media showing coverage of the band:

• http://performermag.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/1203-web.pdf (top of pg. 43)
• http://wae.blogs.starnewsonline.com/12739/southport-band-museum-mouth-makes-auspicious-debut-with-tears-in-my-beer/
• http://ghettoblastermagazine.com/2010/stomping-grounds-museum-mouth-southport-north-carolina/

There's also a half page feature spotlighting the band and it's accomplishments in issue 26 of Ghettoblaster Magazine. You can request a pdf of this issue here: http://ghettoblastermagazine.com/in-print/ Both full length albums have reviews in print issues of the national publication The Big Takeover, which you can pick up at your nearest Barnes & Noble.

A number of magazines, websites, and podcasts also feature extensive interviews with members of the band where they do more than "talk about themselves." Here are a few of those:

• http://reviewsic.com/2010/06/29/museum-mouth-tears-in-my-beer/
• http://mycarandmyguitar.com/2011/09/14/interview-swthrtmuseum-mouth/
• http://itsredrover.tumblr.com/post/1075777202/new-museum-mouth-interview
• http://www.oldmanandbittergirl.com/interviews/tag/museum-mouth/
• http://www.shufflemag.com/museum-mouth-talks-new-line-up-new-lp/
• http://www.shufflemag.com/museum-mouth-kings-of-the-beach/

Although the band has self released all of their music without the help of a record label the album "Sexy But Not Happy" is available for purchase from the iTunes store (http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/sexy-but-not-happy/id499084986) and is available for live streaming from the online radio service Spotify.

The band is also an ensemble of two or more independently notable musicians as Karl Kuehn is the primary force behind active band "SWTHRT" and Kory Urban is the main person backing the musical project "Mourning Is For Suckers."

SWTHRT press:

• http://wae.blogs.starnewsonline.com/16888/swthrt-–-“compact-disc”-cd-review/
• http://performermag.com/2011/06/01/record-review-swthrt/ (this review was also featured in the June 2011 print issue of Performer Magazine)
• http://www.punknews.org/review/10512
• http://positivexposure.com/post/15134571338/swthrtcd

Mourning Is For Suckers press:

• http://whyimgoingtobefamous.blogspot.com/2010/05/we-cant-be-everything-we-wanted-to-be.html

Museum Mouth plan to release a number of music videos within the next few months as well as a 7" this June, and another full length slated for a late 2012/early 2013 release. So this article is guaranteed to grow and prove it's importance if the above links haven't already done so. Thank you for your consideration. (Lazyboneskuehn (talk) 23:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC))

Looks like a good start. I revived the page (and the talkpage where you also appear to have posted some notes about these sources). Please add some content to the article soon, noting some of this coverage and details that help meet the

WP:BAND standard. DMacks (talk

) 17:33, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, {{tchem| without the  tags is not causing my browser (Firefox 3.6.28 with a bunch of add-ons on Windows 2000) to render the formulae properly. It does render correctly in Chrome. I'm too security-conscious to even launch IE. St John Chrysostom ^Δόξα_{τω ^Θεώ} 17:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a portability issue with that template. I copied the above to Template talk:Chem#Subscripts not working. I haven't launched IE in years either:) DMacks (talk) 15:08, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Happened to see that you marked the Collabera page as blatant advertising. The comment actually mentioned the fact that everything seemed very "buzzwordy". Could you please clarify what you mean exactly and how you would like to see the page rewritten?

Almost every single line on the page has been cited with a source so I find it quite difficult to see how this could be construed as blatant advertising. Would be happy to reword things if you let me know what you feel is inappropriate. Strata82 (talk) 09:18, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Collabera (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

What is a "solution"? "Solutions provider" is a meaningless phrase commonly used in corporate websites and PR whitepapers--it's obviously difficult for a

person related to the business to write neutral direct prose. More than half of the article is "look how great this company is" list of awards. Based on what I read here, I can't even figure out what actual products or services this company has--that's the major content an encyclopedia article about a company needs to have. DMacks (talk

) 15:14, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Augustus Sinclair also appears to be similar (it's the same IPs warring, easy to find:) I'll add them both. DMacks (talk

) 14:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

There is a discussion which concerns you at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Deleted Birther soapboxing. SpinningSpark 19:34, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon, 1-3 June. Registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, then please register by May 1st and mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, teaching, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Volunteer Development Coordinator 21:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Plase do not remove cited facts from wikipedia and call it vandalism or something. Thanks. 15:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)15:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)15:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)15:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)15:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)GODhack (talk)

I called it exactly what it is: content that is not supported by the cite you used to support it, and

WP:MEDRS. DMacks (talk

) 17:29, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Can you stop vandalizing my corrections of the Bioinitiative page, please? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TopGarbageCollector (talk • contribs) 10:23, 9 April 2012 (UTC) >>You first. No seriously, your edits were a decrease in the balance of the summary of the content.

The original page was an obvious 'hatchet job', presumably written by an industry lobbyist. I added facts and a reference to create some balance and to anchor it in reality.

>>Whether you meant to or not (see how I'm

I have found the quality of editors on Wikipedia to be fairly abysmal, that's true. Fortunately, though, there are some writers here with integrity and some understanding of how to present information fairly and honestly.

>>Even if the result of a debate is known, the fact that there was a debate and that there was another valid concern raised (though disproven in your opinion) it is not valid to hide the historical fact. DMacks (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

>>The "concern" raised by the Health Council of the Netherlands is obviously *not* valid. The BioInitiative Report is a comprehensive review containing virtually every scientific paper in this field. The authors - like anyone with some basic scientific understanding and common sense - concluded that, given that there are many hundreds of papers showing health affects at levels of EMF way below the official levels - the official levels in many countries are too high. If you had bothered to look at the report you would know this.

The comments by the Health Council of the Netherlands are entirely worthless. Again, if you had bothered to *read* their five page report you would realise this. A five page hatchet job which attempts to undermine a 610 scientific review should not be given equal prominence in the debate - or, at the very least, should come with a health warning.

You are either a) an industry lobbyist or b) extraordinarily naive. Science which shows the dangers of EMF is rigorously attacked by the telecommunications industry, much as medical studies on the effects of tobacco are attacked by the tobacco industry. Any reasonably responsible person would consider this dynamic when presenting evidence.

Frankly, when people's lives are at stake, as they obviously are in this case, childish trolling is unwelcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TopGarbageCollector (talk • contribs) 20:28, 9 April 2012‎ (UTC)

Anyone who would trust an online website that anyone can edit as their primary source of health information is a fool. I see you have already been warned about your repeated and gross inability to interact

WP:CIVILly here, so there's no reason to bother continuing this discussion. DMacks (talk

) 01:26, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello, DMacks. You have new messages at [[User talk:<Tttumul>|User talk:<Tttumul>]].
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tttumul (talk) 18:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

If you have edits which add to the substance of the article and which are backed up by citations then fine. However, I don't appreciate your vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TopGarbageCollector (talk • contribs) 20:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey there :). You're being contacted because you're an edit filter manager, At the moment, we're developing

For this to work, we need people to write and maintain filters. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look at the discussion here and the attached docs, and comment and contribute! Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Please join us for a Wikimedia DC Meetup & Dinner on Saturday, May 5. This will be a great opportunity to meet other Wikimedians from the DC area, discuss upcoming Wikimedia DC activities and events, and have fun over dinner and drinks. All ages are welcome! Kirill [talk] 03:58, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey DMacks, looking back, I see you didn't get a shirt, even though they were around back then and you should have received one. :( Well, in regards to what you said here, some 4 1/2 years later here is the shirt you should have had at the time of your adminship! :D Acalamari 10:31, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thans for reviewing my Brexpiprazole page! Just one note: I would *love* to use secondary sources, but unfortunately there are none at the moment. Hopefully, when the clinical trials are over, there will be more information. Jmdault (talk) 13:50, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It's been a week after I put the proposal to delete Exact mass at

) 03:14, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

		The Pharmacology Barnstar
		For your excellent work on the science behind various drugs. Jakebarrington (talk) 14:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

hi,,,, Despite of many warnings,

11:30, 1 May 2012 (UTC).

You're invited: Smithsonian Institution Archives Edit-a-thon!

Please join us for the second Sarah (talk ) 21:42, 7 May 2012 (UTC) Note: You received this message because you were listed here. If you no longer wish to receive messages of this nature, please remove yourself from that list.

Dullah

I asked my Saudi students. They confirm the beasts have such a thing. Imagine that. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 11:29, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for checking around! I found and added a source to the article and commented on the talk-page. According to that source, your students might be missing a detail. DMacks (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I am confused as the article; Aspartame Controversy seemed very weighted towards the industry that makes the material in question, I merely had added "To make a more balanced decision, one may also refer to the movie; "Sweet Poison" released in 2004 which has many interviews with medical doctors, biochemists, and other experts as well as victims of the Aspartame symptoms." I wonder if you could make some pointers as to how that could have been made more neutral as I was looking for some added alternate views rather than simple seeming waving away any concerns that may have been in the article when I found it. The film does have interviews with PhD holders in medicine, biochemistry, one in psychology, it does have discussions with people supposedly suffering symptoms. It seems the article pretty much accepts one side while dismissing others. As a first time poster, I could use the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenzabi (talk • contribs) 09:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

One of the unusual aspects of

undue weight to one side of a controversy that may be less mainstream than another. This particular article does discuss the controversy and the various positions (each with citations to their supporting sources), but then is completely justified in accepting one side more than another because of the overwhelming disparity in the quality and quantity of support for that side. DMacks (talk

) 15:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Why was my page Iron aluminide deleted for copyright infringement? What was wrong with it? 1waffle1 (talk) 19:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

It was deleted for copyright infringement because it did appear to be copyright infringement and copyright infringement is absolutely forbidden on wikipedia. You read the note about that posted to your talkpage--it had links for more information about the related wikipedia site policies. DMacks (talk) 19:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Now so not edit pawan kalyan's page as the info u provided is very very very less..do not edit further so take this barnstar!!!! Lalith10 (talk) 06:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I remember your help before on disruptive edits to the Matthias Bamert and James Judd pages, and I need your help again on the page for Pablo Heras-Casado, where the same thing has been occurring. A disruptive editor named Lafufra has been continually making terrible versions of that page, and it's the only page that person has ever edited. I've reverted it back, but I don't know whom to contact regarding patrolling and dealing with that wikipedian. Please feel free to let me know if I should direct attention on that elsewhere. I realise that this particular page most likely would not fall under your purview, but I couldn't think of anyone else to ask. Apologies for intruding on your time, and thanks for reading, DJRafe (talk) 23:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I see you have fixed it for now; I'll watchlist it for a bit and see what happens. Please give a warning (copyvio, NPOV, whatever problem(s) you think apply) to the editor. That way if/when the problem re-occurs, I (or another admin) can more easily block and/or revert-and-pageprotect more quickly without others complaining about someone not allowing

WP:AGF for a new editor. DMacks (talk

) 00:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, the disruptive editors on the Pablo Heras-Casado page have been at it again for a while. I've only gotten back to reverting the page, with a few new edits, just now. It's now two editors, Lafufra and Ffurones, where in both cases, the PH-C page is the only one each has ever edited. Based on that, I'm convinced that they are the same disruptive editor, even though that is only circumstantial evidence. I didn't think to put a note like NPOV or to contact an editor, per your last message, as I'm obviously still not fully literate enough on wikipedia to know where best to go on these matters. I figured that you have more weight than me. Frankly, both of those disruptive editors need to be banned, which I'm sure won't stop them from trying again. Thanks for reading, DJRafe (talk) 22:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I think there might be some misunderstandings about the

I've also commented on the talkpage. The userpage I created last night was an error. I support the deletion of the redirect. Eshlare (talk) 20:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll be spending time relaxing with friends in Real Life, whatever that is, so will probably not be wikipedia'ing much for the next few days. DMacks (talk) 02:30, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

DMacks is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon.

Coming back on-line, will take a day or two to catch up... DMacks (talk) 00:12, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello DMacks, I noticed you deleted the article I reposted yesterday on a band called fartbarf. Can you site reasons why? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.192.89 (talk) 14:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I deleted the following article:

• Fartbarf (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

For the reasons I stated in the deletion log: it was a copyright violation and it was a recreation of a page that had already been deleted after discussion. The first of those two is a fatal, immediate, and completely non-negotiable flaw. The second may be subject to judgment, but given the content's promotional tone (a third potential deletion cause) and lack of substantial and cited resolution for the problems noted in the first deletion-discussion, the call would have been easy to make on those latter two grounds as well. DMacks (talk) 15:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello DMacks, I am writing to enquire about your deletion of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jeb_Sprague&action=edit&redlink=1 If you look at this website http://monthlyreview.org/press/books/pb3003/ you will see that this individual is the author of a large book on Haiti that has been endorsed by the former first lady of Haiti, two of the most well known authors on academic books on Haiti, one well known globalization scholar, and the lead judge on the most famous human rights trial in Haiti. The website for the book also explains how the author was able to gain thousands of declassified documents from the U.S. government in researching the book. As I cited on the talk page, this "person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field." Mrpub12 —Preceding undated comment added 19:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Seems good enough to avoid speedy. Note that none of these claims were present in the article (it's the editor's job to make the article stand itself with supporting refs, not just leave a ref for others to read). Might be a good idea to convert this into an article about the book, since that's the focus of what's actually citedly notable here. I've undeleted it to allow improvement to become a viable article. DMacks (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, made some updates. see what you think: Mrpub12 I am going to make some edits on other writers for Monthly Review Press. —Preceding undated comment added 23:36, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks great! Thanks for contributing. DMacks (talk) 03:16, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I respect your deletion, but request that it be re-added. It is most certainly performed the same, but I may have not explained it well. You find YouTube videos of the variation being performed by searching for "rising shotgun". It's the same game, just with added marijuana smoke inhalation. I've seen and performed it first-hand in my younger years of drug use. It's the same process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.22.176.205 (talk) 23:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, we really need

reliable sources, not youtube and anecdotal reports. Otherwise that article, as with many of similar genres, quickly becomes a pile of rumors and "here's something I heard or saw once" unencyclopediac material. DMacks (talk

) 03:13, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Corporal29 (talk) 04:22, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Please see

WP:BAND. DMacks (talk

) 04:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

A smock-frock or smock can also be considered a frock. Reference paragraph 4 under the subtitle 'Development'. Where the smock-frock's origin comes into question as to whether the smock-frock originated from the smock, the shirt or underdress of the medieval period, or from the frock, an overgarment of equally ancient origin. The edit i made, that a smock-frock, is a smock, or a frock, is relevant. I will be reposting this edit and thank you to leave it be. Best -littlebsteel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlebsteel (talk • contribs) 05:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Littlebsteel, I too have been reverting your edits because you have been contributing information relating to smock-frocks at unrelated pages like Rock music and MDMA. Please note the warnings left on your talk page. The edits you are making to the Smock-frock article itself may be relevant, but I would revert them anyways because they are stylistically confusing. Rinkle gorge (talk) 05:17, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

"Can be considered" or is a predecessor is a far cry from stating it as an actual synonym for this specific variant, which is what your edit is stating. DMacks (talk) 05:31, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page Alo Telekom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alotelekom (talk • contribs) 12:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

As the deletion-log message says, it was "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion". There was also a note with more information and links placed on your user talkpage. DMacks (talk) 14:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, DMacks,

Thanks for taking the time to comment and propose edits to the Sweet Revenge Liqueur entry. I also appreciate your rush-job last night in helping to fix my dumb mistake with the initial move of the Entry!

I am a newbie to Wikipedia, but am by no means a newbie to this subject matter or to journalism, as it is my career for decades.

Going forward, could I invite you to take the time to Talk and collaborate with me, with respect to your queries about my article entries? I am hoping to learn the Wikipedia ropes quickly, and would appreciate your input and mentoring. I am sure you are in demand as your contributor history looks huge, but I really will be grateful for any help and advice.

I want to respond to your concerns, and will need to pivot back and forth from your comments in the article and this entry on your Talk page. I'm sure there's a shortcut for that, too, but I haven't yet found it!

SHOT v. SHOOTER A shooter is not the same thing as a shot. A shooter can be, and often is, a concoction of more than one ingredient, often much less less lethal in terms of alcohol content, but often more. It is kind of like shooting up and not really knowing the concentration of the street drug you're shooting. A shot is like what we do with tequila, lime and salt. Bang it back in one go. A short pour of one thing. It is often high proof, but you know what you're getting into if you're smart. That's how this pink stuff is being marketed and popularly consumed. So although I appreciate your desire to tighten the text and "simplify", I'd prefer to take the necessary space to be precise. I have reasons to be precise, and if you'd like me to drill in deeper to explain it in more detail, I will.

DISCUSSION OF LIQUEUR v. LIQUOR We have had an extensive conversation among a couple of other Wikipedia veterans, especially Ryan Vesey, who has been a fantastic mentor, on this notion of including text about the distinction between Liqueur and Liquor. I understand those who feel it may be overkill, but there are reasons I would prefer to keep this on the page, rather than buried in links. Specifically, this product is marketed to people who I suspect do not know the difference, and would want to know. I hope to be as informative as possible.

Additionally, we did want to include a brief nod to the differences, and confusion, in nomenclature between US and international readers/viewers of this information. i.e. Spirit v. liquor; cordial = liqueur in US, etc. My view is that it provides a deeper layer of understanding and is relevant to the entry's subject.

SHOT POUR When we are discussing a product that is marketed as a "shot beverage", it seemed relevant, not superfluous, to underscore what a "shot" beverage is, and that the alcohol content of a shot-pour can vary wildly, and why. To my thinking, it is quite relevant to an entry about a liqueur that is marketed as a shots drink.

ALCOHOL EQUIVALENCE The reference in the discussion of variability of alcohol content in shot beverages is very much relevant and I would be disappointed to lose it, particularly, again with reference to a product that is marketed in this manner. This is relevant information that I would prefer not to "simplify" away.

I am totally thick-skinned and accustomed to smart editing. But I don't want to pare this so far to the bone that the piece looks like we're shilling for the manufacturer, particularly when we're discussing alcohol. I'd prefer to include sufficient but not extraneous information so that the viewer -- whether that be a journalist, spirits critic, shopkeeper, teenager or parent of a teenager will hit Print and come away with a concise introduction to this product that remains neutral -- or journalistically informative.

I hope these comments are useful to you, DMacks, and I would appreciate your collaborative response or recommendations. As I've mentioned to Ryan et al, I want to fast-track my learning here, because my intention is to generate more content for Wikipedia, particularly in my areas of expertise, and I welcome any help.

Sebastian Lake (talk) 01:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I certainly welcome collaboration and helping out new editors. As far as usage, I often keep a few WP pages open in separate tabs in my browser (sometimes even the same page in multiple tabs, scrolled to separate parts! or virtual screens), then I can control-tab quickly among them. Or else I have separate windows open and can see two pages at once (but means I have to keep them a bit narrow so they fit:).

Our

WP:REDIRECT to the shooter article. But that actual article does also mention that the drink in the shot-glass could be single-ingredient. I guess nobody has thought of enough to say to make it an actual viable separate article? Maybe it should be refocused on (and retitled accordingly) all sorts of shot drinks, social aspects of doing shots, etc? But for now I added a note to that page to help emphasize the definition of "shot" as possibly being only a single ingredient (otherwise it does seem contradictory to say "single ingredient shot--look at the 2+ ingredient article"). But even more, it also seems clear enough just to link to shot glass

, so no harm in omitting the shooter-article link entirely.

One of the problems with trying to write extensively but not look like corporate advertising is that sometimes there just isn't much to say on a topic. This product is really new and not widely reported in

independent sources. As more information becomes available (initial reception, popularity, critical reviews from experts, etc), it can certainly grow without sounding like a PR piece because it would give a voice to those outside views. DMacks (talk

) 06:52, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I forget to put the ref, thank you for advising. I'll do it ASAP. --Blacki4 (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For revoking talk page for User_talk:200.107.149.82. Regards, Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 20:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, DMacks, in case you didn't notice, I acknowledged responsibility for my part in the edit war. Getting carried away is no excuse; I should know better. In any event, coincidentally with your fully protecting the article, the IP and I have reached an agreement on the article content - in large part, due to the IP's work. At this point, you could lift the protection, or I could make an edit request, or we could just wait until the protection expires on its own (only two days). There's actually no hurry to edit the article, which only reinforces how silly the war was, but I feel a bit guilty about the whole thing. I'll go whatever route you believe is appropriate. Thanks. Sheepishly.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:19, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for following up and accepting your part of the responsibility. I've lifted the protection, so you can work on the page again (remembering as usual our standards). DMacks (talk) 02:05, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't see the content in the article indicated, or in the other related articles: they talk about devices, this talks about the computer programs for analyzing the data. A merge might well be possible, particularly with the other article you have marked for deletion, Meter data analytics. I agree with you it is a low quality article, but deletion isn't the way to improve it. (I've removed the prod there also). I don't know how much work you are prepared to put into this topic, of course, & nobody is obliged to improve articles. DGG ( talk ) 20:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, DMacks. You have new messages at [[User talk:--Calu2000 (talk) 15:36, 16 June 2012 (UTC)|User talk:--Calu2000 (talk) 15:36, 16 June 2012 (UTC)]].
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Would you block User:Silas Kanyabigega BUHAKE? This is a new sockpuppet of User:KANYABIGEGA Silas. Thanks, SwisterTwister talk 19:58, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done DMacks (talk) 20:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I tagged the sock. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 16:10, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. DMacks (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Harami8036 (talk · contribs), you were correct to block him a few days ago. It is one of those online streaming of sports events spamming accounts that I see from time to time. Usually it is some pay-per-view event they are spamming. They kept spamming after you unblocked them, so I blocked them. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 16:09, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah "nice". Thanks for killing it. DMacks (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)