User talk:Mike Rosoft/archive11

Previous - Next

I viewed those pages and saw how originally it was viewed as promotional. I tried to recreate it about the history which I don't believe it is promotional at all. I found the page for drugstore.com and used that as the basis of my creation. Can you please explain how the FSAstore.com page I added and the drugstore.com page is different? All you did was delete a page without doing any research.

M shoi 90 (talk) 19:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Rosoft, please understand me. I'm trying very, very hard to be

I had seen you had proposed it for deletion. I have nominated the article for deletion and you can have your opinion here.

All the best SilverWolf7 (talk) 04:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, I couldn't figure out what your edit was changing, so I overwrote it with mine (it was a major edit for me). I am now done editing, so feel free to change anything you'd like. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 17:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I was fixing a link to Triad (sociology); I see you had fixed it yourself, too. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand why the edit warring. I have put precisely the view of buddhism concerning god. In buddhism there is no supreme deva ruler acting as creator. in that we agree.

But saying early buddhism explicitly reject a natural metaphysical divinity carries no sense. The dharma (universal natural law) aspect of buddhism has a metaphysical aspect and is a constant source of devotion. Also,if the nibbana exists and has a source in the dharma, again we have a more metaphysical aspect of divinity.

And lets not forget the concept of dhammakaya present even in early buddhist texts. for example,the controversial aganna sutra states that:

"The Buddha then advises Vasettha that whoever has strong, deep rooted, and established belief in the Tathagatha, he can declare that he is the child of Bhagavan, born from the mouth of Dhamma, created from Dhamma, and the heir of Dhamma. Because the titles of the Tathagatha are: The Body of Dhamma, The Body of Brahma, the Manifestation of Dhamma, and the Manifestation of Brahma"

Im certain that if we dig more of the pali sutras we are going to find mores of such descryptions. You may argue that the aganna sutta is just a joke,but this view is not unanymous and many monks take it seriously. Thereby,saying buddhism "explicitly" rejects divinity and avoids to endorse any metaphysical view seems forced.

the buddha discarded the view of a divine being acting as creator. But the dhamma is divinized since early buddhism. Fixed entities such as an unchanging self-soul are also denied,but not spiritual metaphysics.Also, if buddha avoided all views concerning the universe,there would not be talks concerning karma and rebirth.

Important to note the rejection of divine beings (devas) as masters of the universe do not amount as rejection of all the characteristics attributed to related to divity. Also,the article seems to be sectarian concerning mahayana and theravada beliefs, pointing the mahayana faith as something semi-apocryphal. 201.9.168.24 (talk) 18:13, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are showing no respect to the people of Islamic faith by putting the pictures of Islamic scholars on the public page, please write me back an explanation of why you reverted that last change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.132.250.13 (talk) 30 May 2012

This would appear to be user talk:Majilis Jim1138 (talk) 18:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK so I see you or your bot has reverted all my changes made to the Ancient Hawaii article. Unless you are Hawaiian or an anthropologist in this area of study would you mind reverting the changes back? The article is horrible in it's original state. Aside from reading like it was written by an 8th grader it's full of un-cited BS, unprofessional grammar, and missing actual useful information. Mahalo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.8.201.128 (talk • contribs)

Dear Mike, I am so sorry that our page was viewed as a promotional site. However, this page is not one of promotion but a page of a communication evolution. Just in the way QR Codes became a way for people to communicate messages, FYIcodes are the same but better, they allow 'any user' with 'any telephone' a way to access and spread their messages. This is along the lines of what a QR code partially offers and we are only trying to document the evolution of a new technology. I did not have enough time to fill in the gaps and the sources to meet your requirements. Please respectfully reinstate so that we may have the opportunity to speak accurately on the behalf of a new historical communication technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawnrenee14 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of

Saw you deleted one of my works in progress. Are you a bot or a real person? Gizmo.AT (talk) 05:34, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He is a real person. I advise trying harder to get his attention; it is surprising that he deleted an article in progress.--Jackson Peebles (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, can you un-salt

• Done. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you very much:) I have since created the article.
    talk 15:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Would you mind explaining to me why you deleted these two articles? Yes Jermboytold2 was a sock (which was a shame, cause I actually appreciated him creating pages for my signs so I didn't have to), but all the road signs (except one or two) were made by myself, and they are sourced on their description pages, so your deletion summary saying "completely unreferenced" is not actually true. Fry1989 ^eh? 00:51, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Looks like this time, the road signs themselves are legitimate. However, the articles are unreferenced and little more than galleries of road signs; they would have been more suited to Wikimedia Commons. (If you are interested in them, I can recover them into your user space as drafts.)
  The user in question has had a history of creating articles about road signs containing signs from different countries - at best, without verifying that they actually exist in the other countries and have identical design; at worst, as straightforward hoaxes. (Plus joke pages about non-existent countries like Hotsapore and Rafid.) For this reason, I do not see him as trustworthy. (See User talk:Santapo.)
  As User:Jermboytold, he created a couple of unsourced articles about rod signs; I asked him to pick one, I'd recover it as a draft into user space, and then he'd be able to work on it and provide references. He responded by vandalizing The Land Before Time (adding non-existent countries), and (after I blocked him) returning as User:Jermboytold2. This time, I deleted his contributions and blocked him as a sockpuppet with prejudice. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:39, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the sock problem, and wish this user hadn't resorted to that. I created a road sign article myself some time ago for Zimbabwe, but since then my work on making road signs that we do not have on the project has went from minor hobby to a full-fledged job, and when the user created the pages, it was a time saver for me. I understand now why you deleted them, and I can create them in the future properly and with sources and links, I just wished to know why you deleted them. Fry1989 ^eh? 06:00, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually if you don't mind you can delete the user space pages you made for me now, I have created the Botswana and South Africa road sign articles now with proper references. Thanks. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Administrator Rosoft!
Thank you for your kindness in visiting my talk page today, and clarifying how I could correctly apply categories. My request is very small, and may be completely ignored, or at most, be your very lowest priority. Could you tell me where I was mis-applying categorization syntax? It would help me to learn. But if you have too many other things to do, just ignore this, and accept my thanks for taking the time to visit and help me! --FeralOink (talk) 23:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings to you, Administrator Rosoft! I'm back! NOW I understand what that pertained to! Thank you so much for clearing up the "vague"-ly anomalous addition of a user page as a category in a Wikiproject. I didn't know what to do about it at the time, and completely forgot about the matter between April and late June. You handled it with finesse, from what I could piece together. I am appreciative.

I have a new request (you were so helpful once already ;o) Background: I read an article yesterday, in Scientific American, about a website which is propagating misinformation about non-mainstream (to put it mildly) paleontology. This wasn't one of those fluffy SciAm articles, but rather, more like the sort they used to write back in the 1980's. As evidence of the insidiousness and pernicious effect of the situation, there was an example given, of how one of the fabricated "creatures" even has an entry here, in Wikipedia. And sure enough, it does. The WP article references a Royal Society publication, but without any link. I dug for the source somewhere online, finally found it, and confirmed that there was no such reference to this creature, nor the "scientist" (I think he was fabricated too) in the Royal Society proceedings. In fact, that citation is associated instead with completely different published work done by people with PhD's who work for the Museum of Natural History in New York City, about 20 years ago.

Unfortunately, the fabricated creature was entered in at least one of those online biological taxonomy databases (I noticed that too). I have the URL etc. I don't know that it was done with any ill-intent. Obviously, I am rather horrified that the taxonomic record of evolution that has been so painstakingly created is being undermined by a single flakey website. But that is not our concern here, and I am not a bioinformatics person, nor a taxonomist. What IS our concern, I believe, is the fabricated creature (as I am referring to it) article, here on Wikipedia. Of course, I could just be BOLD, and delete the thing, but it has a lot of visibility at the moment, and I wanted to get some input from someone such as yourself first. I can provide URLs and quotes from sources as corroboration, but I don't want to just deposit the mass here on your talk page without some prior notice. Or should I just be quiet and not rock the boat? The article in Wikipedia is not the cause of the larger problem. It is merely one consequence of the huge popularity of the website that was the subject of the SciAm article. --FeralOink (talk) 02:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, for your help regarding page notice.But i really do not know how to add this notice on my talk page.Can you tell me the course of how to add this page notice in my talk page,so that when any user edit my talk page those notice could appear. once again Thanks 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS^ϟ 17:25, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't this block a bit hasty? I know it was clearly spam, but it was only one single edit. I don't believe one edit to be warrant for an indef. Cloud you please take another look? Regards. Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 23:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you posted a response, but then reverted it? Something wrong? Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 22:48, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Content issues belong on the article's talk page NOT on user's talk pages. Your post on my page could appear to be an ill-disguised threat. If its content has substance, post it on the article talk page. So, please quote me the court verdict that uses the word "terrorist". And post it on the article talk page, NOT here and NOT on my talk page! Meowy 20:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Why did you delete this page when it has relevant information and more to be added, and it had been contested for with in space of 1 minute you deleted it i don't thats fair at all. Osbaldwickparish (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I semi-protected and blocked them all - it's from a school. Ref/del'd the edit with someone else's phone number.

Hi Mike. Please note and feel free to contribute this discussion on the Unidentified Flying Objects talk page. I intend to eventually remove the reference to the ET Hypothesis from the intro to the article. A UFO is a report. The ET Hypothesis is a theory to explain the reports. The ETH is not important to UFOs on a definitional level. And as skeptics everywhere agree, the conflation of the word UFO with the concept of alien spaceships is illogical and a huge step that is not justified. Therefore we should not start an encyclopedia article on UFOs by making that same association! Clotten (talk) 18:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Consider 3-hr protection--seems to be a school. Thank you. Mindy Dirt (talk) 18:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that

I am not interested in the two parties using my talk page as a vehicle for their dispute. Please take it either to the article talk pages (

Mike, I'm investigating this as part of an in-depth checkuser case. I'm going to let the protection expire, but would be grateful if you didn't hand out any blocks without dropping me a note - is that OK? The Cavalry (Message me) 20:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea to move to a more complete article. Added the MedInst template to moved page. Could the

I'm writing to you in complain of a deleted article. A couple of hours ago you deleted the newly created page Plexonic, which as you claimed is of no indication of importance` even when there are dozens of pages like that one, which are kept "alive". Please, Sir if there are no other reasons let me re-create the article. Thank you in Advance ! --Narek75archives 19:10, 20 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Narek75 (talk • contribs)

• The article indeed failed to assert the company's notability or significance (generalities like that they have made "32 successful games" don't count). It cited no third-party references (coverage in
  blocked from editing.)

  If you know about another article that is promotional in nature and/or fails to assert its subject's notability, please tell me; I will nominate it for deletion as well. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 21:37, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply

  ]

Looks like you need to salt the talkpage too. diff

talk) 08:46, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Dear Sir, Please do not delete the page PitBull Johnny Kidd before it gets started. This is a legitimate person with a legitimate history. Please let's obtain the full article before you judge. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnM69 (talk • contribs) 22:14, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It isn't me who initially deleted the article
  reliable third-party sources is the primary notability criterion.) I have only deleted the page, because you kept adding categories to it even after it has been deleted; an article that only contains a category has no point. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 23:25, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply
  ]

See OCCullens' response at my talk page. I've given him a warning that he's going to have to work really really hard to find solid sources, implying that it won't happen. Nyttend (talk) 23:12, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Special:Contributions/71.191.9.45, an obvious sock of EthelMermanknows, who Paul Barlow and I can only believe is a HenryVIIIyes. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "St James' Church Briercliffe". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!

EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 15:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're thinking of bringing him to AN/I or taking any other administrative action against him, the case will be bolstered by this edit summary [1] and this blanking of a page [2]. Qworty (talk) 20:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Qworty, sorry for removing content from your page. I guess I started to edit before page was fully loaded. I tried to rewrite sorry message on your page. But still I can't. Don't know why. That's why I am writing it here Himesh84 14:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

• I'm not Himesh. Do you see me writing like Himesh? SinhaYugaya (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I recently found that you take some bias action. You have frozen the

Also you have biasly keep two strictures for identical,competitive reports LLRC and UNSG's report claiming it is under wikipedia policy. I repeatedly asked what was the policy but you never answered.

Also you saying

As a administrator you should keep the reputation at least of the Administrator role. Himesh84 14:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mike. If the reverts of this article aren't stopping, the matter should be brought to a noticeboard. The new reverts might be considered to be a failure of Himesh84 to follow the pattern of negotiation recommended in this ANI thread. Some options would be: a new ANI, a formal RFC, or asking some admins who were part of the earlier negotiations such as User:Richwales for their opinion. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I am currently writing a request at dispute resolution noticeboard. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to this dispute resolution request ? You closed it saying you will reopen after Himesh84 get unblocked. Can you please reopen it ?

The discussion is in here

We don't need to start it from zero. Lets directly reopen the same discussion and continue where Himesh was blocked — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.245.165.57 (talk) 12:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• User:Himesh84 seems to have left Wikipedia, and the dispute doesn't appear to be ongoing. For that matter, I didn't close the request. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:48, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hrodna is a city in Belarus, and in my opinion transliteration must be from Belarusian into English. And "Hrodna" is found on all modern maps in English and German speaking countries. best regards, Zasvab — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zasvab (talk • contribs)

I'm sure you didn't mean to do that....--Jasper Deng (talk) 09:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You just blocked User:SineBot... Legoktm (talk) 09:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Oops, sorry. I need to be more careful with the "block" button. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 09:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You know what... My friend Matthew Walls is very unappreciative of you deleting his wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egyilm (talk • contribs) 19:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AmericaTowne should not be deleted. The page is factual. AmericaTowne® is a trademark registered with the United States Office of Patents and Trademarks. This is a fact. The article does not promote but simply describe what AmericaTowne® is, what, where, and why it exist.

There is no promotion going on simply factual. If there is an objection concerning the link in the article - the link can be removed. However, the link is directly to the USA Patent Office that proves and verifies the content of the article. Strongly suggest the article remain as is in its factual and non promotional state.

Blac80 (talk) 17:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page you deleted recently has been re-created already, would you like to delete the user page/the article? It's frankly a little confusing for a reviewer like me (and probably others). Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 11:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• As I see it, the page is a valid stub; it has been moved to user space - I just deleted the redirect. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have translated this using google and a German dictionary from your Deutsche wikipedia. I'm not sure if you can just make a page that redirects to the original German, or want the translation. SO I shall leave it here for the moment.Happy Hols!Valleyspring (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.. Why do you think my article is promotional? It is a well-known method of laser-assisted liposuction used worldwide. I was very careful to be objective (not to include any promotion, such as benefits, etc).. Thanks --BiH (talk) 10:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I noticed that you speedied the article after I had remove the tag and AFDed it instead. Normally I am the last person to advocate a lengthy AfD for these types of articles, but in this case a Google search does turn up a surprising amount of info including a fairly professional looking CD cover at [3], so I'm not really certain this is a case for CSD as this person may actually be notable in Pakistan. Travelbird (talk) 11:03, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do you believe that there is enough difference between the version of UFC 155 that was deleted on Nov 11 and the version you just recreated to warrant overriding an AFD? Look at the version of Nov. 11 and compare it to this one. Essentially no difference.—Kww(talk) 15:16, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I want to have my talk page which is linked ti Dilazak1. Why this page shows up? Moreover, if you are really a Wiki Administrator, Please give few minutes to this page. I f you find it according to Wiki standards, Please remove those annoying tags.

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dilazak1 (talk • contribs)

The fictious micronation of Ostnam which you deleted 30 minutes ago has a page again. Could you delete again -- I'd consider a salt on the page if that's possible. Thanks! -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 19:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another admin deleted it and blocked the editor. Thanks! -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mike Rosoft (A worthy Wiki Editor)
I respect your last edit of Dilazak Page and I have not changed that. Recent change is by one Moarrikh. I have tried to engage with him for discussion many a times but his replies are arrogant, abusive and reflective of pre-determined racial & biased approach. Even his recent reply on Dilazak1 is an example to that, wherein, he has called me ‘Dilajacki’. Gangs of young Indo-Pak living in UK and other countries actually use these words to abuse each other. Indians will call Pakistanis as ‘Pakis’ and Pakistanis will call Indians as ‘Black Indians’. The same approach has been displayed by Mr. Moarrikh a number of times. His IP indicates his location from ‘Leeds – UK’. I will keep reverting his edits but that is turning into an edit war. Please help me because he is disgracing a community time and again. I request that he should be either warned or blocked from doing so.

Regards
I have referred the matter for arbitration at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Statement Dilazak1 07:29, 22 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dilazak1 (talk • contribs)

Hi Mike Rosoft, May I know why you "reDeleted"

• I had deleted the article as a re-creation after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grammarly. After reviewing it further, I have restored it; I'll probably start a second deletion debate to decide its fate. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 14:17, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, and to convince you that an AfD would not be necessary, please look at these links:

° I Don't Tolerate Poor Grammar — published by Forbes

° Grammarly — reviewed (and worn an award) by

TopTenReviews

° Celebrate the National Day On Writing by Posting #WhatIWrite Messages on Twitter — (please look at "Our Collaborators:" down that page) — published by The New York Times, a collaborator

° Cool tool — published by The Hindu Group

° English again in New Year’s resolution? — published by The Korea Times

° Polish Up Your Writing with Grammarly — published by McMaster University, a licensee

° Grammarly Pilot Project: Your How to Guide. — published by University of Saskatchewan, a licensee

° Try 'Grammarly' for help with your writing — published by University of Queensland, a licensee

° Grammarly@edu — published by

KDU University College

, a licensee

° Grammarly@EDU — published by Henderson State University, a licensee

° Grammarly — published by DeVry University, a licensee

° Grammarly formerly Sentenceworks — (please, click on the title, "Grammarly formerly Sentenceworks" to the left of that page) — published by

Walden University

, a licensee

Thank you again. —JOHNMOORofMOORLAND (talk) 15:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So you salted the above title? They just created it again at

This page was deleted by you because of an "implausible redirect". I really don't see how two people with a heart in between them can mean anything but love. It would be much appreciated if you could give me a factual answer. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greedav (talk • contribs) 19:47, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It's extremely unlikely that somebody would enter "💑" to the search bar and mean to find the article love. If anything, it could be redirected to the article/secion about the appropriate Unicode plane. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• However, there are many of these symbols that redirect to their respective pages, for example 💏 will redirect to "Kiss", 💎 redirects to "gemstone", and 🐢 redirects to "Turtle". If 💑 cannot redirect to love, then the other symbols should have their redirects removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greedav (talk • contribs) 21:35, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You keep removing the timestamps for Stephen Hunt, despite being told that they were right. See almost any other footballer's wiki page. One is supposed to add the time & date they update the appearances. This is common practise. As I said one either states a time or states "correct as of match played on [date]" I suggest you do some research before twice undoing perfectly good edits. Again, check the pages of other professional footballers, timestamps are there for a reason and it is incorrect to purely have a date. Pippin0490Talk 17:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Db-hoax has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:34, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Rosoft, For some reason I hit a key that saved the article far before I was finished as to go back and post more cites or references. This is my first attempt at an article so I may have gone overboard with dialogue. I didn't know or understand about wipkipedia referencing itself so I will change that. I will attempt creating this again while altering my approach. I understand why it was deleted and will try again hopefully with a more acceptable layout.

Respectfully,

--Veronicavalladares (talk) 07:07, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've tried to improve the Asperity page so that the tags are no longer there, but have encountered the individual that seems to be trying to turn the page into an attack page through Synthesis. Would you mind helping here? Regardless whether or not my edits stay, it would be nice to see this page on my watchlist cleaned up a bit if possible. Jeremy112233 (talk) 23:36, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted my page when I was creating and editing it?

I have paraphrased it now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagendrapsingh (talk • contribs) 18:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Given where he went, and that he evidently had trouble with Civility there in November [4], do you think it would be appropriate to pass this along to an admin on Spanish Wilipedia?

I'm cross-posting this with Jpgordon since you were the two who have handled the editor's blow up.

Thanks,

- J Greb (talk) 21:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

what happend to my "pigcess" article. It is a new word in invented; it that wrong? it wasnt a violation of wikipeda was it? Cant people invent words and phrases? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielgharvey2013 (talk • contribs) 07:34, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Exactly. You can't use Wikipedia to "invent words and phrases"; Wikipedia is not
  WP:NFT for more information. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 07:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Apologies for the accidental revert of your revert. I was actually trying to remove the same vandalism that you removed, but your "Huggle" edit beat my "Popups" which then got confused, possibly because of my very slow internet connection. Best wishes. Dbfirs 18:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mike. Thanks for blocking, but could to modify for "not edit talk page"? See this and this. Greetings,

i made a change in the IS infinite Stratos episode. you seem to have changed it back. but the info is faulty as it is now. it says the character Tabane is the reason, only one guy can move a IS, but she does say in the end, she does not know, why it moves. through from that it says atm now, on episode 12 review it makes it seem like she knows and is the reason behind it. and she does not comferm that she was the one that did the hacking either. though it says so in the review. i watched it a third time, to be sure i understood it right. if you want to check what i have said yourself, go to animefreak.tv and find episode 12 of IS infinite stratos, and go to 16:40 as the part in question starts there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.83.38.143 (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to create a wiki page to describe the ARRS GoldMiner search engine, which is offered by an international radiology society. I wanted to get a "stub" document in place quickly by using the About page from the site (of which I am the author). I'll alter the text so it doesn't copy the web site/ Could you please allow me to edit the page? Thanks.Cekahn (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I wanted to tag it for speedy delete but I couldn't find a criteria that satisfied it. Like there is nothing that allowed 'incoherent, blatant original research' to be a criteria. So for next time can I use common sense to tag these articles with the speedy delete template? Thanks for your guidance Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 23:28, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, I'm a volunteer at

--FCom T 65 (talk) 20:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and interest, --FCom T 65 (talk) 20:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And

I edited a couple of video captions on Peranema (but neglected to log in, first). I notice that you've just reverted them. Was this because the reference to a particular YouTube channel (not mine, incidentally!) might be regarded as "promotional"? If so, it's not a problem...I just wanted clarification. Deuterostome (talk) 20:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the reverts. Deuterostome (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Randykitty (talk) 18:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Opening_comments_by_24.0.133.234 You have been added as a potentially interested party. I hope that you can give this some of your attention-ty24.0.133.234 (talk) 23:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see a empty article,

• Done. You could have simply marked it for
  speedy deletion. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• It now looks perfect. --Starship9000 (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a must in wikipedia ,same as

Thank you for deleting that page for me, i tried to delete it because when i made it, i couldn't make an infobox so I tried to delete it but didn't know how — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forestanimal10 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks but the infobox has Becky G's and will.i.Am's parts mixed up or something and it says the song is buy will.i.am only, and how did u get the infobox to be an infobox, everytime i try it always just says the info at the top of the page but doesn't have a box — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forestanimal10 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike! This is Ajayupai95... I requested the deletion of the page Sakthikulangara, an India Village... Yep I do agree that this article is the better one among the lot of other village articles... I should have attached other tags such as Stub or Orphan and its my mistake... Sorry and thank you for the heads up!!!:) Ajayupai95 (talk) 07:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have closed the AfD, per the nominator's comment above. Safiel (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

dear Mike , I just want to create my frend dream page but why you delete it ???? It just for fun ... if you don't want never mind ... don't see it ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by I dont have idea (talk • contribs)

Thanks for spotting that. Sorry for the trouble. Jodon1971 (talk) 19:28, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Please revert your edit Latvian partisans! See: User talk:Widr#March 2013. Dukurs (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is the best solution! Thank you! Dukurs (talk) 21:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon Duckworth is real! How dare you compare my hero who I worship at a shrine to a Sesame street character???? He is totally real and is a totally awesome baseball player. Not a character. Shame on you! BrandonDuckWorthRox (talk) 14:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity, how does the above article differ to the one that was previously deleted six months ago? Both articles were written by the same author and seem to contain the same self-referential sources. The expanded addition of a unsourced film role does not appear to be a substantial improvement on the old BLP. Funny ^Pika! 13:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I was under an impression that the old article was about a different person with the same name (the other article called him a businessman and a scientist, and made no mention of his roles). Looks like I was wrong. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why did you delete Royal Decree-Law and considered it a duplicate of Decree. Decrees and RD-Ls aren't the same, as I explained in the article. Can you un-delete it, please? Thank you. --Alejandroadan (talk) 18:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya! I did a general cleanup on the article for

Hi Mike Rosoft, I thought that the purpose of redirects was to help minimize confusion when people search for an article, which is why I created the redirect pages. David G. Haskell recently wrote a piece for the New York Times, and I noticed a huge coincidental spike in traffic for David Haskell, who is not the author of the NYT piece. I think that such similar names (ie "David Haskell" vs "David G. Haskell") make it especially important to have redirects, otherwise someone searching "david g haskel" might end up on the "David Haskell" page. Do you think that redirecting David G Haskell, David G. Haskel, and David G Haskel to David G. Haskell would be appropriate? Thanks, Lucien504 (talk) 17:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hello it seemed you deleted my page i was developing for our site that was with lot of effort..its a site in our country that we are proud of and its seems to me an iresponsible act of deleting our eforts on a personal point of view...it seems to us a little political act of u when it comes to names of persian people..i am waiting for your answer and wish it was just a mistake from you..i repeat its all about a new site of photography we are introducing to other nations and other people... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taghavi.mahyar (talk • contribs) 13:33, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Send me the copy of Royal Restrooms which you blantatly deleted to my email. [email protected] claim the sum to all human knowledge is on Wikipedia which is Utopian and you will never get there if you keep deleting pages that contain important information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexis1812w (talk • contribs) 04:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are planning to delete my page BlastHitsRadio. I am the legal owner of that name and I have got legal copyright within the United Kingdom for it. The radio station has been in my possession since it was created back in 2010.

That was also copyvio from [5]. It's actually Dar-e-Arqam - as om

If you would care to read any recent version of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual, you should find that one of the core diagnostic criteria for Asperger's Syndrome is no significant delay in language or cognitive ability along with average or above average I.Q. reference included. http://behavenet.com/aspergers-disorder . Cognition is a prime measure of intelligence which Martin Bryant clearly lacked across all fields of his development. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.190.206 (talk • contribs)

I and others find this user name to be very offensive. I changed my language to be very civil. Others have expressed the same view why delete my statements. How else may I express this sentiment to this USER--122.109.127.168 (talk) 06:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC) What is it to you???--122.109.127.168 (talk) 06:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

quote "Please, this is enough. If you can't make your point without being rude, better stay quiet. Personal attacks and incivility may be a ground for blocking on Wikipedia. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC) I have temporarily protected User talk:BigPimpinBrah from editing by unregistered users. Please, just drop it. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC) Saying that somebody's username "makes me sick and you look foolish" is not very civil, and in any case you don't have to repeat it three times. (And for the record, by using the slang term "pimping" the user does not mean that he's a pimp.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)"

--122.109.127.168 (talk) 12:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)WEll when I say that you are a "little bitch" I don`t mean you are a little female dog (or do I???) ref(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pimp#cite_ref-Figueroa_1-0)--122.109.127.168 (talk) 08:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So if I register the user-name MassiveFaggotHater or AllFaggotsMustBurn That`s cool In your book since, I could mean I have a massive hatred for, or want to burn all sticks and twigs. So that`s OK?? What about IPimpOutFaggotsForcefully e.g I like adorning twigs/sticks to increase there attractiveness for the purpose of selling them (with much perseverance) etc. ref(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pimp#cite_ref-SoMonstrous_3-0)--122.109.127.168 (talk) 12:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now your endorsing scientifically incorrect statements.

This User needs to see this he calls himself a chemist and does the same

Really why does this statment keep getting put back.

It makes Wikipedia look stupid I am really trying to be helpful here --122.109.127.168 (talk) 07:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quote "How about doing something useful like deleting that ridiculous statment in the cypenamine page that I keep trying (in vain) to fix. --122.109.127.168 (talk) 07:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC) I don't care how much you are right (or believe to be right); don't insult other users - just calmly explain to what point you believe them to be wrong. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 07:25, 5 May 2013 (UTC)" Quote "How about YOU making a coherent case for the statement (referenced to Journal of Labelled Compounds and Radiopharmaceuticals) being "nonsense", as you put it? - Mike Rosoft (talk) 07:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)"[reply]

OOOOHHHH With a big long Intellectually Terrifying and Superior name like "(referenced to Journal of Labelled Compounds and Radiopharmaceuticals)". How Could the quote be wrong Hey!! How dare I even question it, or possibly be right, in saying the "supposed" quote is wrong. What a stupid ignoramus I must be to challenge that.--122.109.127.168 (talk) 14:08, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I have, over and over, It can't be any simpler, I started a section in the talk page about it, its chem 101, if you read the sterochem section below it it explains why I am right (or it does not make sense), to a chemist (which I am) even with a minimal grasp of the subject it is obviously wrong (a incoherant statment).

  Show me the exact quote I bet you cant (its illogical). 

That is why I could not believe a "chemist!?" (Rifleman) put it back. Its like your asking me to justify why I think it is incorrect to say stop means go or black is white or the earth is the center of the solar system do I NEED TO REINVENT THE WHEEL or something to for you to believe in wheels.--122.109.127.168 (talk) 07:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well now Rifleman82 took it away. How about you put it back up and get him to justify and explain why he did it??. And then get him to prove how the Earth is not the center of the solar system etc....--122.109.127.168 (talk) 08:05, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DO YOU BELIEVE IN WHEELS YET ref (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel#cite_ref-1) SCHOLAR DO YOU EVEN READ WHAT YOU DELETE.--122.109.127.168 (talk) 08:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC) Ref (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot#cite_ref-idiot_5-0--122.109.127.168) (talk) 09:09, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You just rightfully removed my newly created page: Production (Computer Science). It was a prompt to Knowledgeable Wikipedians about Why Case Matters sometimes in Article Titles. It worked. Now you have got to Explain mE and the rest of uS when eXActly does case matter in e.G. Article Titles (methinks brackets have a Meaning). Thierry Le Provost (talk) 21:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your detailed explanation about CaSe on my talk page.

Thierry Le Provost (talk) 14:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just started the article (it's marked a stub) and you marked it for deletion. Unfortunately the band name means it probably gets a higher warning flags raised. Skim the book linked from the article to get an idea of the band significance. J_Tom_Moon_79 (talk) 07:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you please remove the {{notability|music|date=May 2013}} from article Dickless? A notability paragraph has been added. More references about notability have been added. J_Tom_Moon_79 (talk) 22:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you removed the {{notability|music|date=May 2013}} from article Dickless. Thanks very much! I think the article is a decent short music group article now. Keep up the good work!
J_Tom_Moon_79 (talk) 10:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you have a look at Daniel L. Barth - the creating editor has already removed a speedy A7 once. Thanks. PamD 16:30, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... deleted, re-created and deleted again since I typed that! PamD 16:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You recently deleted my page on the Kingdom of Hariberahtland. The Kingdom of Hariberahtland is a micronation and under the Montevideo Convention it is a legitimate nation. It has (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states. As such I request that the page be reinstated to inform readers of this newly created nation. It is not fictitious and has land holdings at 59°40'51"N -151°35'55"W furthermore, the Kingdom of Hariberahtland also has a permanent population, a written constitution, as well as the capacity to enter negotiations with other nations. This nation is as legitimate as other micronations such as Sealand, Molossia or other such micronations. I ask that you please re-review and reconsider this deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by King IntiMayo I (talk • contribs) 05:54, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have deleted a page I created for Music Video company Croftwerk. Can you explain this. CharlotteSimpson90 (talk) 17:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)CharlotteSimpson90[reply]

It's okay.. I was going to request deletion for that article the moment after making the second edit. because I only put the Youtube refs.

• Thanks, I have permanently blocked User:Josef Franz Roldeck 85958 as a disruption-only account. (User:Franzilin Dibilin 259952 is already blocked.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:31, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you have the time, please also look at the nominator's recent blanking of much of the list, which I think is just plain disruptive and

You deleted User:Russianbritish/sandbox on the basis that the sandbox article was promotional. I'm not sure I agree with that rationale. To be sure, the user is not using Wikipedia for its intended purpose, but I don't know that he is blatantly promoting his book. He appears to believe that this site is some sort of scratch pad upon which he can develop his novel ideas. He is wrong, but I don't know that I'd call what he is doing promotion. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike Rosoft

I'm messaging you this to ask for clarification on

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of American death metal bands. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Curb Chain (talk) 06:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I would like to seek assistance in dealing with this user regarding his edits at the

Hello Mike. Why do you keep putting my article KTS/KPYM software up for deletion? This is an open source project that could benefit from promoting. — Mach825 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"You have said: "This is an open source project that could benefit from promoting." That's exactly why I have nominated the article for deletion; Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia, which is a compendium of existing knowledge, not a means of making something known. (Use of Wikipedia for promotional purposes is expressly against the project policies.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 15:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)"

Wikipedia's policy is to prevent mass commercialism. Not the promotion of knowledge. If you was going to use this argument against any article in Wikipedia then every article would have to be deleted. I am not the author of this software. I make no money from this software. I get no status from the promotion of this project. I am just an IT professional that spent my time finding existing knowledge buried on the Internet to find a tool that is very useful. Now I would like to share that tool with other Wikipedia users. So on the grounds that I am not "promoting" in the context of the policy then I respectfully ask you remove this from consideration of deletion. - Mach825 Mach825 (talk)

"* While using Wikipedia for

Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below.

I am not promoting this software. KPYM has been around since 2002. I am sure third party sources are available. I will enlist people on KPYM forum to assist me in finding addition sources. - mach825 (talk)

I dont know whether it was on purpose or not, but your can fits clearly into Wikipedia:Username policy#Confusing usernames because of it similarity to Microsoft. was it already brought up some time earlier, and before blindly reporting you I rather talk it out with you.

My1 17:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mike Rosoft. You have new messages at My1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

My1 17:39, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mike Rosoft,

I apologize for the inconvenience, but have no other way than appealing for administrators’ help recover a deleted article.

I published a film article entitled

At last, in discussion, user User:reddogsix proposed that the article should be renamed to Drifts (film) or similar, and at the same time put at the disambiguation page of Dritf this reference «Drifs, unreleased film by Ricardo Costa (filmmaker). I created a new page for the same article entitled Drifts (Portuguese film). As the semantic root “drift” seemed to be the problem, I replaced the article name to Derivas (Drifts) and published it once more with some improvements. As a result, the article was fast deleted and I blocked for three days.

In the meantime, a new article about the trilogy was published: Faraways, which was proposed to fast deletion as well by the same user, User:reddogsix.

Although unreleased, although having no reliable secondary sources, Drifts is unquestionably an outstanding film for its uniqueness and characteristics: autobiography, comedy, docufiction, metafiction in one. I guess that “outstanding” may be a synonym for “notable” in such cases and that articles like this shouldn’t be deleted without previous cared analyses: important information may be lost.

This sequence of interventions is clearly a personal attack by User:reddogsix, supported by two or three user friend. It has no other explanation. It contributes in nothing to improve articles quality. Mists article, which I created on 10 September 2010, is the latest example. The article structure was unreasonably modified, loosing clarity and useful content.

NOTE: sent to 30 administrators.

Thanks for your attention, User:Tertulius 22:00, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Rabanes (talk) 17:32, 4 August 2013 (UTC) Richard Abanes[reply]

Hey! I was just wondering if you could undelete User:SamHildestad, so I can at least copy everything that I typed, considering it took a long time and I'd like to have it back. If you could do this, it would be greatly appreciated!!! :) GleeNewBeginnings (talk) 20:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, never knew you were Czech--never saw your user page before. It's not a big country: do you know Tomas Ptacek? (haha) Anyway, thanks for keeping things under control there; I just posted there that I'll lock the talk page if the nonsense continues. And what were you doing in bed with ketchup?? What strange kind of fetish is that? Dobry, Drmies (talk) 20:28, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be disputing the existence of the term Tara in Ireland and its origins,,sorry about my referencing,,i will find some more acceptable one's--Waterman0201 (talk) 08:52, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael J. Colacurcio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hawthorne (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) 11:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike Rosoft. Regarding your participation in the content dispute at LGBT rights in Nigeria, please see Talk:LGBT rights under international law#Duplicated text on countries' obligations under international law, an RFC which I have opened on the topic. As you are someone who (as far as I can tell) was previously uninvolved, and also an administrator, could I ask you to post a notification of this RFC on User talk:AfricaTanz? AfricaTanz is the original author of the material in dispute. I cannot notify him myself as, like so many others, I have been "banned" from his talk page. —Psychonaut (talk) 12:24, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did not change the copyright status on George Brasno, because I do not know where the image originally came from. I did research on Olive Brasno's image to find it was used in a film, and I used all of that information to update the copyright status, but I do not know where George Brasno's image came from, I only know that I found it on a website. I'm not sure on what to do with his image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zizumia (talk • contribs) 23:00, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed everything. Thanks for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zizumia (talk • contribs) 22:09, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike. On August 18, 2013 you reverted vandalism to the Luis_Cardenas article and banned the vandal. That vandalism was being reverted by several users and ClueBot NG before you banned Rockhistoryking indefinitely. Prior to your banning Rockhistoryking, the same user was making edits under the sock Loudog777, but that username went largely unnoticed at the time as the account that violated the 3RR was the one you banned. Now, Loudog777 is back editing the same article with the same basic unsourced allegations in essentially the same way. I filed for a sock puppet investigation, but since the original Rockhistoryking edits were protected and archived, I didn't know how to demonstrate the similarities between the original edits, which contain the defamatory BLP claims you reverted. Can you please review the article's history to ensure that the vandalism doesn't continue? Thank you very much for all your efforts to keep WP free from vandalism. --TechnicalExcellence (talk) 16:37, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Reaper Eternal reassessed at my request and banned the sock. Thank you so much. It's nice to know that Admins will reconsider a closed investigation! Have a great day. --TechnicalExcellence (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samizambak (talk • contribs) 17:28, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited On the Ground News Reports, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page News service (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) 11:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You just beat me to it--but I was going to delete it as a hoax, and will warn the editor. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would appreciate you taking my contribution ot htis article in GOOD FAITH. All I did was correct the original edit, which improperly converted to 98.6. The original, CITED source did not give 37C, it gave the lower, current number. All I did was properly convert to Fahrenheit.

I've seen involvement from neither you nor the other pedantic fellow until I fixed the conversion. I was not the one to post the original temperature.

The temperature of cats at the vet is taken with a rectal thermometer. Do you really want to trudge through it to get there?75.118.68.149 (talk) 21:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Rosoft, Mr. Rosoft, here is what I'm talking about. By the way, do you know a colleague of mine, A. Pull? With a handle like that, I can't believe I am justifying myself to you, but here goes!

"The normal body temperature of a cat is between 38 and 39 °C (101 and 102.2 °F).[8] A cat is considered febrile (hyperthermic) if it has a temperature of 39.5 °C (103 °F) or greater, or hypothermic if less than 37.5 °C (100 °F). For comparison, humans have a normal temperature of approximately 36.8 °C (98.6 °F). "

This is the original article before I fixed the conversion for Fahrenheit. It is cited in SOURCE 9 for the article.

I couldn't care less about code or autoconversions or where you take a cat or a human's temperature. But I know from my visits to the hospital that human body temperature is in a range and that the original figures memorized by school children were before this was realized.75.118.68.149 (talk) 22:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused as to why are page was deleted. We are one of 40 Outward Bound Schools globally and we are simply adding a page to our existing Outward Bound entry. Please explain, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RDStuart (talk • contribs) 19:45, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mike Rosoft. You have new messages at Jayadevp13's talk page.
Message added 16:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

- Jayadevp13 17:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:KingRouoV obviously the same sock puppet you've just blocked. Valenciano (talk) 18:21, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk back doesn't seem to work to a Commons page. Linking instead to the page for the file:Universe-Image.jpg Found copy of that image - thought you should know - same image is currently shown at http://www.mysearch.org.uk/website1/html/384.Radiation.html 🍺 Antiqueight ^confer 20:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been protected long enough, and I don't sense promoters/companies coming back or more companies causing trouble. Lower to "Pending changes"? --George Ho (talk) 20:58, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, you may want to take a look at this.[6] The editor is determined to keep trying to promote his blog, and has added 5 reviews since you gave him a final warning. I can't see him stopping without a block. Cmr08 (talk) 08:16, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, another editor blocked him while I was leaving this message for you. Cmr08 (talk) 08:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike Rosoft! I wanted to direct your attention to an article you fully protected a while back that needs to be edited. The article is a redirect that has recently become a double redirect:

Mike you assisted in the deletion of the article create by me a few days back. I appreciate your assistance but the article is still visible on the google search. Is it because the article is cached on google search and hence will take some time to automatically vanish? The reason I write this is that either we keep the article or we do not keep it at all. Also I did read your message about changing my username. I will do that soon.(- CrickeArchiveIndia) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CricketArchiveIndia (talk • contribs) 06:06, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike. THanks for reverting the IP edit on Crispian Sallis. You may be interested in this at WP:ANI. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:10, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen that you removed some of the external links that i have added to certain articles on wikipedia. My links where pointing to the posts where i compiled the Youtube links of the TV shows . These youtube links are uploaded by content owners on youtube. i just compiled them in one place for the ease of people. If you still feel that i have posted copyrigted material then please reply so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.20.66.87 (talk) 19:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Please look at this user talk page and block him from editing it. He is a born vandal. Hitro talk 18:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mike Rosoft. You have new messages at Steve Quinn's talk page.
Message added 04:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

It is strange to note that one admin remarks the article as original research. One says a duplication (I have summarily deleted the article as a duplicate of Creationism and other articles). If EN-WP is a personal property then You may block me. Please consider your marking. Being an Atheist I expect from you to be a human first and should have the tolerance above all, this was my thinking. I am sorry to note your wording of blocking me. Please point out what wrong you have find in the article.

I am compelled to lodge complaint against you for being superstitious to me.Nannadeem (talk) 09:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Im trying to write a complete Article on celebrations around the world.I am adding almost all countries for the readers ,I think its uniqueness will lost if its merged.Though Main Article has similar heading but that will become too lengthy.Msoamu (talk) 11:41, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It won't become too lengthy now that most of the (numerous) unreliable sources and sources that simply don't verify the claims have been removed. MezzoMezzo (talk) 18:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Mike Rosoft ,

It's me Ala'a Abu Rezeq , I am a new member in Wikipedia, I am sending you this message to tell you about the speedy deletion of my article المرضعة . Actually , I do not know the reason of this deletion , I have translated from the source language ( English ). It is provided with the same content , the same references and the same Structure. I see It is an appropriate to have this article in Arabic language , it is full of information and too many people do not know these information about wet nurses .

Finally , I hope you allow me to re- create this article.

Best Regards ALa'a Abu Rezeq — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ala'a Abu Rezeq (talk • contribs) 07:41, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Once again an editor removes a PROD tag without anything on the talk page....TheLongTone (talk) 21:03, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey what's happen with u? Im editing the article with Orbitel (Colombian Company) and you reverts my change's????? --Juancameneses11 (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Put more carefully. :S --Juancameneses11 (talk) 18:49, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Forget about it Mr. Rosoft, I just will not make any additional donations to wikipedia. Believe me I have learned, that when others want to cause trouble, just dump them all together. See ya... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indirsgame (talk • contribs) 08:00, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You must notify me before you delete a page and give me an oppurunity to defend myself. --Odditës (talk) 13:06, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the middle of adding my sources, etc when you deleted my page without warning. Could you please restore it? Thank you.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:17, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I have recovered the deleted article as a draft into your user space at User:Mike Searson/5.11 Tactical. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 22:20, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, if you follow my edits you will see I removed a large swath of it from Tactical pants, much of which was specific to 5.11 but a copyvio from their website if there ever was one. The company is large and notable and makes a ton of law enforcement and military gear and deserves its own treatment.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mike Rosoft. You have new messages at MikeTheEditor104's talk page.
Message added 18:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

MikeTheEditor104 (talk) 18:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Might want to rethink that as the page and editnotice state:

You can edit this page!

Really, you can! If you would like to, please feel free to do so. Make an edit! Make several edits! After all, that is what Wikipedia is all about.

--NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've seen that there are some changes in my talk page by SineBot which you have reverted. Is there something wrong ? am I doing something wrong ? Please let me know--Jnanaranjan Sahu (ଜ୍ଞାନ) ^talk 04:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have been watching the whole scene on ESys Group. I was wondering, should I resort to dispute resolution? This kind of "War" is turning into a mess. I think dispute resolution might solve this problem, because I have this felling that he (the IP address) is trying to censor Wikipedia, but no matter what we say he is just going to keep on doing this. Happy_Attack_Dog "The Ultimate Wikipedia Guard Dog" (talk) 21:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Panam2014 made a move request

How about : http://thomaspluck.com/2010/02/22/mondo-mini-movie-reviews/ ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.73.13.61 (talk) 19:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Nope, that also looks like a blog (a list of movies somebody has watched). - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I got caught up in reverting Thex3's edits--Thank you for blocking him so we can continue to improve the encyclopedia. Also, Thex2did the same earlier in the page history, so we should keep an eye out for thex4, ok? Thank you so much, talk) 15:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply ]

Hello! Might I inquire why this edit was reverted? — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:46, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you lock editing from the IP 208.60.125.226 if users aren't logged in. The IP is for a school, at which I work, so there are hundreds of students and teachers who access the site from the IP, and many of the students have chosen to make disruptive edits, add intentionally incorrect information, and generally cause disturbances on wiki articles. I don't think the students need the ability to be able to edit any pages without creating their own accounts, to ensure accountability. Thanks. Legomationer (talk) 19:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm posting again without my username to verify that Legomationer is indeed on this IP, the unregistered IP is used by students almost exclusively to vandalize pages, so permenantly blocking editing from the IP is fine with me. 208.60.125.226 (talk) 19:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

128.223.146.123 (talk) 19:50, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's the big idea? Grundgetta deserves to have her own page here. She's been appearing on Sesame Street for over 30 years. Not tryin to sound rude or disrespectful but what gives?? -- 100.0.101.126 (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The problem with the article was that it cited no references; a fan wiki is not a
  inclusion/notability criterion. Given that, it seems that character is probably sufficiently covered in List of Sesame Street Muppets; if you disagree, feel free to make your case at the talk page. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:51, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • & the Muppet Wiki doesn't count as a reliable source?? Not tryin to sound rude or disrespectful but you are CRAZY if you actually think that. Nothing is more reliable than the Muppet Wiki. -- 100.0.101.126 (talk) 09:59, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2.27.145.115 (talk · contribs) Has been subtilely changing race information without citing sources. Some of the information is rather hard to track down, but what I have found is a stretch ("brakes" to "mechanical") or outright errors: grid positions in 2005 Malaysian Grand Prix. The changes occur in bursts with a few minutes between each suggesting little time to research. Either it's all in the anon's head or subtle vand. The anon appears to have stopped for now after several warnings. Jim1138 (talk) 09:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike. This organization seems to have made news sort of big time recently, though in its initial form it looked like a

Hello Mike Rosoft. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of 300 Entertainment, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 12:00, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2011 you deleted a page called Ladell Parks due to your reasoning, well he has now created some buzz around the internet He has started an YouTube page which has now have over 1 million views for his music he got to be on MTV.com and he is now an actor who has featured in movies as 17 again, 10 things I hate about you and he's in the new upcoming movie "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" Now is there anyway you can undelete him so I can create a sandbox or user page before making an official article on him so it doesn't get a speedy deletion. Mikeunknown (talk) 17:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick reply on my talk page. I know that the article is in a better state now. But yet it currently not satisfy

BTW, sorry for suspecting you. It was my fault.

If you meet again with a similar situation than please don't hesitate to let me know, because I'm always here to rescue articles. Regards.

Any idea who the puppet master is? This[7] suggests he/she knows you. And the edits tonight are obviously those of someone who's edited before.

• It's User:Holyspiritdance, whom I have blocked for spamming articles with an allegation that Falun Gong members are being murdered by the Chinese government for transplantation organs; see also his contributions at the Commons. (I don't think I have interacted with him before.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Surprised you didn't block him.

talk) 14:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

I intend to create an article in respect of proposed Nomination of Ayatollah Sistani for Peace Prize.Daily Telegraph’s Colin Freeman also published an article on Wednesday (4th March, 2014) in which he admitted that the best one to attain the Nobel Peace Prize at the time being is Ayatollah Sistani (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/colinfreeman/100262048/ ). Your advice and approval for creation is sought. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 19:39, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• There's no evidence that Ali al-Sistani has been actually nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (and in any case, Nobel Prize nominations are not publicized); the source of this information is a blog giving the writer's personal opinion; and we don't even have an article about Colin Freeman, author of the blog. Given that, it's probably not appropriate to mention this information in an article about the cleric. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Besides above, I have atleast two more sources of news [1] https://www.facebook.com/AhlulBaytIslamicMission & ) http://www.tehrantimes.com/middle-east/114569-iraqi-mps-launch-move-to-nominate-ayatollah-sistani-for-nobel-peace-prize [2] http://wilayah.info/en/iraqi-mps-launch-move-to-nominate-ayatollah-sistani-for-nobel-peace-prize/ I should refrain from writing elsewhere in order to save the cause .Nannadeem (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I think the Tehran Times reference is good and could be used a source in the Ali al-Sistani article. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for encourage. Can I submit you draft for creation of article here. Theme would be (1) Humanity (2) Bridge between terrorism and true tolerance (3) Source of seeking Appreciation from non religion quarters (4) Encouraging efforts to shia sect of the initiative (5) His guidance in the present scenario (6) Bright prospects of award if approved, without any comments in respect of approving/processing authorities.

Please also see the tag/temp of the present article Ali al-Sistani. Therefore I do not think it appropriate to insert a new section there. However, afterward, new article may be shorten and appropriate section may be inserted there, if deemed necessary or otherwise. Nannadeem (talk) 06:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Careful! You are likely to run into the Wikipedia policies and guidelines once again; Wikipedia does not accept duplicate articles, and Wikipedia articles are not opinion pieces (see "
  What Wikipedia is not"). A brief mention of the initiative in the existing article, along the lines of "In 2014, a group of members of Iraqi parliament announced that they intend to nominate Ali al-Sistani for the Nobel Peace Prize" would be appropriate. An article that you describe would most likely not. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 10:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply
  ]

I have inserted a new section (serial No.3) in the page - Ali al-Sistani, please see and modify if there is something inappropriate. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 20:32, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Filth Pig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heavy metal (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) 08:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm blanking it because i'm putting new content on User:Wickyk. Anuvarshanw ^Talk_Welcome 19:59, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to reason with the ip editor all day, for example at

Sigh... User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Complaint. Valenciano (talk) 22:12, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, just for info.... There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Valenciano (talk) 23:11, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you do that? I don't want it to look like that now it is weird written User:AboutABoyFan/Ljubke Lažnivke (Tv Serija) ! I wanted to look like Ljubke Lažnivke (Tv Serija)

Sorry , but I don't want it that way — Preceding unsigned comment added by AboutABoyFan (talk • contribs) 06:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think Businesses and organizations in Second Life could be unprotected? Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are two articles covering the recorder: the original

• I could swear that I had already reverted myself ... I have done it now. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cubedmass — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubedmass (talk • contribs) 21:49, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Compound mathematics. You are correct. every piece of knowledge each individual thinks is glenned from other individuals, your attitude or policy denies new knowledge. your thinking is very conservative and that only increases the knowledge because of experience of a very few aristocrats or academics. --Cubedmass 21:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC) The knowledge today will not be the Knowledge of tomorrow yes the fundamental rules / laws will remain intact. however the interpretation will change. do you think the boson is quantum you are wrong if you are that fixed in your thinking. do you think the universe is the end of everything. The one advantage knowledge has it is not controlled by the view of obsession --Cubedmass 21:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubedmass (talk • contribs)

Sorry.--Exasperation115 (talk) 20:37, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. UpEpSilon (talk) 11:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Likely you are not knowing if that is working like myself with some but not best expert knowledge but maybe anybody can say in WP if possible or maybe anything done already like finding also by myself predicted never changing like HIV cover CD-4 receptor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.220.100.81 (talk) 16:05, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a troll? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.46.94.66 (talk) 16:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am just letting you know that you tagged this page for refimprove, but this page is about person or community. Infact if you check

It's none of your business. <3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diggydzz (talk • contribs) 04:28, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

idc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diggydzz (talk • contribs) 04:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you would be interested in this report that I just declined: [8]. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:41, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike,

I accidentally deleted an article on Cynthia Carlson that I had written. I thought I was deleting a copy of it that I had in my Sandbox which was where I created it. Can you help me out a bit more with emptying my Sandbox? Thanks, Mursimon (talk) 21:48, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanks Cubedmass 00:06, 26 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubedmass (talk • contribs)

mike,please help me.

i have history knowledge but i don't have english and computer knowledge. please help me to teach me how to contribute to the writtings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.33.211.25 (talk) 03:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps time to unprot Linus sebastian and Linus Sebastian? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 11:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC).

why are you undoing my corrections?Shikamakiba Kuraimizu (talk) 17:54, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The newly created user

Mursimon (talk) 18:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• (Just passing through:) No need to complain: the page was deleted as an "abandoned draft"--a user page is not the place for such content, and it hadn't been worked on in quite a while. Mike Rosoft noted that the article already exists, at Cynthia Carlson. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, I won't question this any further because I don't know or understand the specific uses for each of the defined users' pages. I had simply decided that my user page was a good place to store the most recent version of my work because I had seen other people whose editing work had been deleted as unacceptable and they expressed concern that they didn't know how to recover their work. I also just saw and removed the redirection code on my sandbox page. I have no idea how that code got there and since I read that the sandbox was the place that work could be done on articles, I assumed that it was my space and not the actual Wiki article. I found out how to re-create my user page and did so. So I assume that all things are back to normal for me. Thanks for your patience. Murray Mursimon (talk) 15:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:FAKEARTICLE. Best thing to do (always), is to create a subpage, like User:Mursimon/draft or something like that. A sandbox, if you will. Then, when a draft is ready to go live, you simply move it (not copy and paste, but Move) to article space, which preserves the entire history, and that's always a good thing. Following that procedure also prevents administrative problems, so to speak. Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 15:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Thank you for blocking User:BMW M4. I listed him at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Altimgamr. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 05:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not really for much. This edit was clearly unconstructive and disruptive (as well as the same edits before it) and I don't believe their intention was to benefit the encyclopedia, but rather compromise its integrity by adding politically fuelled statements, in the lead, in a sarcastic fashion, for everybody to see. I support gun control too, but that is irrelevant. Regards, —

• I think the edit was caused by complete ignorance of how Wikipedia works, rather than outright malice. In any case, he now stopped editing altogether. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments

• I doubt it. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, just being a pain, or maybe a sock you've encountered before.

talk) 17:51, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, Mike. Isn't it customary to put a block notice on the blockee's talk page, too? --71.178.50.222 (talk) 19:41, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you speedily deleted the article "

Thanks for protection of the Article. I support the request for backup of the current version of Article Berliner Tageszeitung. I support also the blocking of the IP 122.161.203.149 because of malignant cowardly Defamation IrynaGruschwytsch (talk) 20:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I restored the article for

• Oops, my bad. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 04:21, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Eh, it's all good. It looks like it was an easy thing to mistake due to the amount of pages the user created and blanked.
  (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:50, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Hey, the page I tagged for deletion and you deleted, Postmodernism Building in Malaysia, has been made again. It doesn't look much better than the first, but is there anything that can be done? Staglit (talk) 18:58, 2 July 2014 (UTC) (P.S. Leave a message on My Talk Page, I never look at my watchlist) Thanks![reply]

The user doesn't seem to listen and keeps reverting to their preferred version. On another article, I also see them remove content without any explanation. Could you take some action? — LeoFrank  ^Talk 15:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the page Kayla Servi is real, it is an actress on Nickelodeon. Please stop posting that it is a user page, which it is not. (JasmineLoves111 (talk)) — Preceding undated comment added 21:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I took it to AfD and the edit conflict removed your BLP PROD. Sorry. Eeekster (talk) 21:48, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that it doesn't matter if it is None (agnostic) or Agnosticism. They are both the same. Go look at Salvador Allende or Michelle Bachelet it says Agnosticism. I do not want to go into an edit conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SocialistDemocrat100 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(

open channel) 22:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Another (talk page stalker). Religion: Agnosticism is incorrect, as agnosticism is not a religion. Religion: None (agnostic) is correct. The two statements are different. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:07, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Mlpearc:The format Religion: Agnosticism is correct. I doesn't matter and why are you making a big deal about it. SocialistDemocrat100

My apologizes to all, I mis-read and thought the changes were made to my comment.

open channel) 23:22, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

About the edit in Mohonk Mountain House, the picture may show ceiling fan, but it is taken in Parlor. Is it still not acceptable? MohonkMH (talk) 22:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the same author has created Ryakin rip as an alternate to the other 2 pages you've speedied recently. Amortias (T)(C) 22:46, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had reported that

Why are you mass-removing the word "Science" from mentions of the school? - Mike Rosoft (talk) 18:12, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Because various publications from the time the college existed (1875-1898) show that it was normally referred to simply as 'Mason College' (these are available on the web if you need links). Also the college changed name in 1898 from Mason Science College to 'Mason University College' by Royal Charter, which it remained until 1900 when it became the University of Birmingham by royal charter. Naming it 'Mason College' removes the issue of whether to call it Mason Science College or Mason University College. Also the name Mason Science was an informal name as no Royal Charter existed until 1898 - in the deed setting it up it was called 'Sir Josiah Mason's College for Practical Science' and in other formal documents variations such as 'Sir Josiah Mason's College for Science'.'

Hi, I noticed you'de hidden the edit-history of the pages on the page-history itself, do you know if its possible to remove them from the contributions log for the editor where the edit summaries are still visible? Amortias (T)(C) 19:12, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. It is possible for administrators to separately hide the edit text and the edit summary; in case of this user, I have done the latter. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:23, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Many thanks, I figured there must be a way to do it but unfortunatley I havnt quite got a total grasp on the range of things administrators can/cant do/do as standard in these cases(yet). Amortias (T)(C) 19:27, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Still life, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parrhasius. 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) 08:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, you deleted an article,

Hello , may I know why my page was deleted. there are no violation of copyrights and all information is correct and legit. --User:Cano Creations

Hallo, Mike Facebook syndrome is a reality. It may be misunderstood as a joke but I like to mention it as an example http://www.yourtango.com/experts/allison-cohen-m-a-mft/facebook-syndrome-do-you-have-disease-expert You may see there some features that does not conform to any medical standard. If you do not keep this page in your site then I am going to publish it in another site but then I think you will not be able to call it a joke. It might appear as a new addition but it is important because it is the most important unrecognised health problem of the present day. I think you will be more realistic then before. The facebook syndrome might be added to www.alzheimerbd.com because of its enormous importance in causing depression and dementia. Our research is going on and you may find newer additions and implications of this new syndrome. As you have delete this page, I am not going to create this page again unless you clear your position. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharifneuro (talk • contribs) 18:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I hope that you are aware that the article you want to use as a reference is half-serious, half-joking. On the other hand, I agree that your article wasn't a joke page; rather, it was scaremongering. In any case,
  Original research and synthesis is outside the scope of Wikipedia. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Dear Mike, I like to add three more sites just to support my point that Wikipedia should speak something about FBS. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8235302/Facebook-generation-suffer-information-withdrawal-syndrome.html http://www.apiindia.org/medicine_update_2013/chap152.pdf http://socialtimes.com/facebook-addiction-disorder-the-6-symptoms-of-f-a-d_b60403 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharifneuro (talk • contribs) 21:43, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The problem is that while your references do mention "Facebook addiction disorder" or the like, they don't actually support claims made in your article. Also, Wikipedia already has the article Internet addiction disorder. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 04:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I'm fairly new on Wikipedia, and found a company which I interned for during university in the suggested articles list. Have been working on a draft for the past few days. I did an advanced search of the company name today and realized that there has been more that one attempt to get the page up earlier. You had deleted one of the pages created earlier. Could you possibly look at my current draft, so that I don't repeat the mistakes made earlier? You are evidently an extremely experienced member of the community, so I figured that it would helpful to chat with you regarding this. Do have a look at Draft: SoftAge Information Technology Limited when you can. Cheers PankajVer (talk) 08:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike. I noticed you patrolled and tagged Gradely for attention but you did not leave any messages for the creator. This article may or may not be appropriate for en.Wiki but it is a serious creation by a good faith editor. We need to retain editors of this calibre for Wikimedia projects, so for patrolling perhaps you could consider using the Special:NewPagesFeed and its Curation Toolbar features - especially the one that lets you leave a friendly message for the author. Cheers, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, I gather from your user page, that you are native English speaker, born in Prague, interested in Czech culture (List of nat. cultural monuments). I am author and coordinator of the WikiProject Knihovna umění (Art Library) in cz:Wikipedia, but my principal goal is presenting Czech art in English Wikipedia - both artists and art jewels from the collections of galleries. Would you, please, help us with translations from Czech or with proof-reading of articles in English, or (better) to address wikipedians who might be willing to participate? Thank you. --NoJin (talk) 11:01, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Tupolev Tu-4's current Payload is wrong, being only 2,205lbs, I did the math, and the Bomb load for the Tupolev Tu-4 is: 13,227 instead of 2,205lbs, care to let me know why it was edited back to the wrong information? DemarticusStone (talk) 17:19, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Yes, that may be, but most if you look at Bomber's like the B-17, it shows how much the entire payload weighs in at, not how much each bomb weighs.

dude,

i'm not editing nothing. i did not edit and i do not plan to edit.

so stop blocking me. simply because i'm sending you info for your review

and for you to edit, this doesn't mean you should act vicious and keep blocking me man.

what the heck??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

gokturk is mistranslation of kotrag

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kotrag

review this and fix it if you feel like it.

if you refuse to fix it,then heck of it, but don't block me,you got no reason to block me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.70.251.91 (talk) 19:47, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you were the last person to delete "Azhar Sabri' and "Azharsabri", I think I should let you know that there has been another article created about that person, this time as Azhar Sabri. with a period on the end of the name. I have nominated it for deletion. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 10:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for blocking, revdel-ing and helping to revert this vandal this morning, almost certaiainly a JarlaxleArtemis sock.

I noticed you blocked the IP for one week. This vandal has a habit of being particularly active early on Saturday mornings (UTC), when North American admins are (nearly) all in bed, and only a few European early risers are around, so getting a response from AIV can be very slow - so well done for getting on the case so quickly.

It occurs to me that it might be better, as a matter of policy, to block such IPs for 8 days rather than 7, thus impeding the vandal for 2 weeks, for the loss of only one extra day for genuine users of the IP address. Or just block all IP vandals of a similar level of seriousness for 8 days rather than 7. Just a thought.

--NSH001 (talk) 17:58, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm not clear why this template needs to remain on my talk page if its purpose is a warning -- I'm presumed to have read it by deleting it -- but if that's Wikipedia policy, let it stay.

What concerns me is the poor editing and bias in the Corona del Mar High School article. The school's detractors have disproportionately highlighted a few incidents involving a handful of students and unfairly attributed them to the entire school. These were isolated incidents and related to social issues in an affluent community, not problems with the school, faculty, or students as a whole. The article is a poor reflection on Wikipedia as a reference tool. If anyone could improve it that would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.194.125.162 (talk) 16:49, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should block 112.207.184.40's talk page privileges too, as he would continue on with his harassment in userspace. I can attest to the fact that he has been a nuisance over the past few months. Edgar181 tried rangeblocking the 49.151 range, but it looks like he dodged the hammer we threw at him and I doubt he'd stop any time soon. Blake Gripling (talk) 06:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Somebody beat me to it, but I have increased the block length to one week. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • So I noticed. Been thinking about reporting him to PLDT for continued abuse, but it's a long shot and he seems to be operating from public terminals given the prevalence of them in the Philippines. Blake Gripling (talk) 06:54, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you see any more ceiling fan pics, let me know on Commons, or report it on AN/BP over there. We're pretty well used to ol' Davy, so you'll get a much quicker response. INeverCry 06:48, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]