User talk:Nyttend/Archive 37

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

Talk page archives Current talk Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 Archive 28 • Archive 29 • Archive 30 Archive 31 • Archive 32 • Archive 33 Archive 34 • Archive 35 • Archive 36 Archive 37 • Archive 38 • Archive 39 Archive 40 • Archive 41 • Archive 42 Archive 43 • Archive 44 • Archive 45 Archive 46 • Archive 47 • Archive 48 Archive 49 • Archive 50 • Archive 51 Archive 52 • Archive 53 • Archive 54 Archive 55 • Archive 56 • Archive 57 (template link) (revert point)

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at

) 07:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I've unprotected

Fram (talk

) 14:43, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend. I think it might be a good idea for you to respond to the comments at AN about how you handled the situation at Turkey. Some serious concerns have been raised that I doubt will go away by simply ignoring them. One of the concerns is that there may be a pattern of you getting too personally involved in situations in which you also use your admin privileges, and then fail to address other editor's concerns about those actions. - MrX 16:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Administrators#Proposed change to WP:INVOLVED --Guy Macon (talk)

I really appreciate all the hard work you put in here. Thank you. — Ched :  ?  21:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello

) 22:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

1. After you blocked us for 24 hours, the user 46.177.119.122 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) used the User:Jaco the 3rd to avoid your block and continue the edit war betwwen he was blocked for you. 1, 2, 3. He have used this account to evade other block by edit warring in the past and he was blocked for 48 hours by block evasion. 4.
2. After the block finished, I revert the articles from pre-edit war. 5, 6, 7.
3. After this, the User:Jaco the 3rd reverted me and he continues the edit war. 8, 9, 10.

Please, I ask for your help to finish the edit war. You do whatever it takes to stop him and finish this edit war. Vasconia (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

A quick note to say I just added a comment after your question from September 30 on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. -- Asclepias (talk) 04:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey! Great map (File:Turkish provinces with Kurdish majorities highlighted.png) you've made, but some provinces are missing (

) 18:37, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

HI Nyttend. Do you know that you just slapped an IP Rangeblock on the WikiUSA conference? "This block has been set to expire: 09:22, October 11, 2015. The block ID is: 6357296." Don't know which blocked user is here, but so are several hundred other people.... (We do have altenate wifi access, but)

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) 09:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Not asking you to take action, just for some advice. What's the best way to handle Heidelberg, Pennsylvania. Check the history, you'll see the problem. The addition of the problematic text, and the two reverts of my two removals, are three different IP addresses. Do I warn (seems useless in this case), or post to AIV or some other notice board? I don't want to feed to trolls and continue to revert. Thanks. Generic1139 (talk) 03:03, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend. If you have a sec, can you restore my userpage? INeverCry 00:53, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

"any idiot can see that", is the way to comment another editor's actions? I clearly stated that I was aware that the article exists for long. The article IS (or was) a repost as it was recreated within days of the deletion. The article content is not really any different. So the speedy deletion nomination was a simple way to get a (mostly random) second opinion from an admin. You think it is not speedy deletable, fine, I'd actually would be more surprised if it would be speedy deleted than not, so I have no problem at all with that decision. All fine, except that you could have done it while remaining polite, no? - Nabla (talk) 03:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I will point out that his comments suggests that since you did not see it, that you are in fact not an idiot. If any idiot can see it, and if you did not see it then you must not be an idiot, Q.E.D.. Based on this the edit summary seems potentially self deprecating. HighInBC 03:08, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

The current condition of the article is vastly different from what was deleted. Let me be clear: you were telling us that the condition of the article at the time of tagging was essentially identical to what it was at the time of deletion. Did you really believe that it was? If so, what caused you to believe that, and why did you believe that the pre-deletion content included information about events years in the future at the time of deletion? And if you did not believe that, why did you make such a claim? Nyttend (talk) 03:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I may have acted right, I may have acted wrong, both happen. I may further discuss the substance of the article and of the the nomination, but only if you remove your insult. - Nabla (talk) 16:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Someone who takes such an action, understands the situation, and still believes that he took the right action, is not to be trusted with administrative tools: only bad faith or incompetence can be responsible for such a blatantly bad action, and even an idiot can see that something including post-2010 data is not a repost of something from 2008. No further response will be forthcoming. Nyttend (talk) 21:52, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to report me. - Nabla (talk) 12:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Dear Nyttend. You might recall earlier this year an incident involving editor Ndandulalibingi that resulted in this block and this COI case last year. He most recently added again a source that I had removed. This is an author whose views the editor claims are supported by many others, but he cannot include those others because they are the Wikipedia blacklist. More on Papstein here. That, only for background. For the record, Ndandulalibingi claimed last year that he was no longer the chair of the Cheke Cha Mbunda Cultural and Writers Association, which commissioned Papstein to edit the book. As you can see on the organisation's website he is the national chair. If that is not blatant COI, I don't know what is.

Accusation of racism: Further to ealier threaths to report me to the Mbunda and Angolan authorities for disrespecting their king and all things Mbunda, Ndandulalibingi is now levelling accusations of racism against me, alledging that I hate the Mbunda, that my hatred of the Mbunda is the same as the hatred of the Mbunda by Potuguese colonialists here. I seek your advice on how to proceed. Should I open a case at ANI? I am not going to stand by and be accused of racism or xenophia. I look forward to your assistance. I will wait to hear from you on what course to take and then notify the other party of intention to take action. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 16:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

all the fine nuances of changing Category:Moderne architecture to Category:Streamline Moderne architecture in the United States, or if indeed that is what happened, but if it is, then what about Moderne architecture outside the US? Is there a category for those buildings? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 04:52, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer and there was nothing brusque about it. I realize that sometimes "telling it like it is" to some who does NOT think this is how it is, or should be, can be mistaken for ruddiness or high handedness or something else negative. I have been tracking the various strands of deco architecture and WPA and PWA and all that intertwined stuff for . . . . maybe 30 years and I understand that it is difficult, if not impossible to turn that

Gordian knot into something that will make everyone happy. Anyway, you have made me happy, so, thanks. Carptrash (talk

) 16:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

) 01:26, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

The move was to

) 02:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Same thing with "Temple Town" whcih should probably go back to the version https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cecil_B._Moore,_Philadelphia&direction=prev&oldid=664526585

There are no official neighborhoods in Philly, so I should check this, but "Cecil B. Moore" is a street not a neighborhood. Will get back on this. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 02:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll get back to you in a day or two on Temple Town. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 02:55, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 4, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Jim Carter 14:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

As someone who has stumbled across that feud again and again via Talk, RfC, and AN/I discussions, let me thank you on behalf of the community for doing the leg work to take that recurring disruption to ArbCom, saving someone else the (unfortunately, inevitable) trouble and recommending the matter with the benefit of an admin's perspective. Honestly, if some other admins had been more willing to draw a line for these two much earlier, we might have all been spared a lot of trouble. Criticizing mopsters doesn't come easily to me (I know it's a complicated and sometimes thankless way to volunteer your time), but for a while now it's felt like administration can be really quite apathetic when it comes to those rare occasions when nothing is going to forestall the disruption but a direct sanction, especially at AN/ANI. I don't know what this most recent iteration of the row involved, but having seen the last six, I can well imagine. I'm glad you have interceded and brought this to a process space where a review of a totality of the circumstances and definitive course of action are vastly more likely to occur. Snow ^{let's rap} 01:56, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

hi, since you previously edited List of law enforcement agencies in Ohio, you may be interested in the talk section at Talk:List_of_law_enforcement_agencies_in_Ohio#Improper_Citations. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 18:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed you reverted your deletion of this article, which was then tagged again and deleted again (by me). My principal rationale for deletion was a lack of any significant news coverage beyond passing mentions of the company. It's possible we could go with a redirect I guess, I'm just not sure where. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

A well-known banned user has been harassing me on my user talk page. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASmallbones&type=revision&diff=688101147&oldid=688064172 and his following 2 edits. There are several before which I've left on the page, and I've told him to stay off the page last year and probably the year before.

If there is something else I have to do to keep him off my talk page, please let me know what I have to do.

Any help appreciated.

Sincerely,

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:07, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

While a semi might be appropriate in this case the person is responding to defamation, [[4]] something I removed earlier for calling them a thief.

talk

) 18:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

There are currently 6,817,693 articles on Wikipedia.

for all your contributions, thank you.

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 13:25, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Regarding your close of an ANI thread I opened, see my comment to the user. Your closing rationale that the user is acting in accordance with the OED. I rather think that OED is on my side, their position is exactly the opposite to what Bazonka, and apparently you, seem to think it is. They prescribe licence for the noun but allow both licence and license for the adjective with equal standing. But that is not so much the issue, the issue is more that it is continuing with multiple editors objecting. Please reopen the thread to at least allow others to comment. SpinningSpark 16:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Spinningspark. His complaint was only open for one hour before it was pre-emptorily closed by the administrator. It was not enough time. I also agree with Spinningspark that the inane change that is being made by Bazonka should not be suffered to be allowed in Wikipedia. I request the incident complaint be re-opened. Seanwal111111 (talk) 22:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I have read the OED entry. If you had read my comment where I asked you above to "see my comment" that would have been abundantly clear. The fact that OED has put both spellings in the headword is very significant for them. They just don't do that for variants that aren't current. They frequently don't do it even for variants that are current. Just try looking up authorise or similar words with an -ise ending. You will be redirected to authorize and the alternative won't be in the headword. Further, an obsolete form is shown in the forms section with a century, or range of centuries indicating when it was current. A form that is still current has an open range dash, for instance "15– license". You will notice that we also have "ME– licence" meaning that the licence form has been current from the Middle English period to the present, longer than the license form. I don't see how you can draw any conclusions at all about current usage from quotations that are all well over a century old. I concede readily that license is the dominant form, but is easily shown that licence is far from dead. Even Fowler in his usage guide (who very likely first "invented" this licence/license split and proscribed licence as a verb) had to admit that there is some justification for licenced.

Since you have declared that you will not object, I will unclose the ANI thread. SpinningSpark 01:23, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm not trying to deny that license is the dominant form. You have misread what I have been saying. SpinningSpark 01:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

	We couldn't have done it without you
	Well, maybe. Eventually. But the encyclopedia would not be as good. Celebrate 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:41, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Nyttend, this is just a note that Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Evidence phase will be closing in 2 days. If you would like to add any additional evidence or respond to statements made by others, you have until November 4th. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 13:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

It's rather rude to restore an article without discussing it with the deleting admin. You didn't even have the courtesy to notify me, I only stumbled across it by accident. While I don't think your rationale is valid, that's not the point — the point is common courtesy.--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:54, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi I need your feedback on your request here if you want me to be able to complete it, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:28, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Memorial_at_Umpqua_Community_College_after_shooting.jpeg#Contested_deletion

^^^Other file you deleted.

First

reads "An article should never be left with a non-existent (redlinked) category on it. Either the category should be created, or else the link should be removed or changed to a category that does exist.

Your reverting my removal of the category clearly shows you don't know yet another very clear cut Wikipedia policy.

Second

Your edit summary "My stalker ought to know not to get in the way of a technical problem: wait until this is sorted out." Your calling me a stalker constitutes a personal attack. Per

20:08, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

@WilliamJE: How coincidental, I've been thinking about you the last couple days as I have had a… Let's just call it a spirited exchange. However, in the middle of it, Nyttend noticed a technical issue I've been unable to solve for couple years and offered to help. I haven't looked at the exact diffs but I see it involves UMass minutewomen, which is where I was having the problem. Please cut him some slack as he's trying to be helpful.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I have repeatedly provided you with extensive evidence of stalking me to a wide variety of pages, making edits immediately after mine to never-before-edited-by-you pages on the most random of topics. This page was just another example of this behavior, and the diff you cite at Acroterion's talk provides more evidence of the same. You have pledged your willingness to follow me in order to take me down, a diff that I have repeatedly linked in past examples and that I linked in the diff you cite of Acroterion's talk. There is no need to re-link edits that I have already provided. It is most marvellous that anyone would tolerate your years of stalking me, your years of

fulfilling your grudge, and your baseless accusation here of a WP:SOCK violation. Let me note that WP:Scrutiny talks about "Using alternative accounts that are not fully and openly disclosed", and User:Nyttend backup has been fully and openly disclosed since I created it in 2007. Kindly provide evidence of my use of undisclosed alternative accounts to avoid scrutiny if you wish for anyone to believe you. Nyttend (talk

) 20:53, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Your Nyttend backup page states 'I use this account when I'm on other computers than my own, in order to reduce the risk of password theft. See WP:SOCK#LEGIT's "Security" line.' You used it in hopes of getting me blocked in an edit here[6]. One minute later you were editing[7] from your Nyttend account. You say you only use the backup when on other computers. It stretches credibility past breaking point to think you went from one computer to the next in the matter of a minute. Don't forget your post[8] to Commons for the exact same purpose of getting me blocked. I have never once edited at Commons and the issue between you and I is here, so what purpose to avoid scrutiny would you have for posting there? Please tell @Sphilbrick: where you even one time made a complaint against a User at Commons that was about a matter exclusively at this site? I've seen your last 500 User talk edits going back to 2011 and don't see anything like your August post to Sphilbrick in any of them. No one should tolerate this behavior or when you got Orlady to block me for bogus reasons. There isn't one editor who said I was making NPAs against you in Januray 2014 however you got me blocked. You were also told afterwards by an administrator then that your behavior wasn't becoming of an administrator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Since you are well aware that the policy says undisclosed alternative accounts, but you continue complaining, further complaints will not be dignified with responses. Nyttend (talk) 03:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I am kinda against CSD#G5. But I had nominated those two images;

} 04:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the deletion. G5 is difficult to understand most of the times, especially when socking is involved and then over time the main reason for someone's block is totally forgotten. I had been against this speedy criteria and have somewhere in the backpages also discussed it with many editors/admins. But now am learning to use it to at least speedy up deletions of things which would be most likely deleted through normal processes. Thanks again! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:50, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about Winchester- I was mistakenly following the PA rules for villages. Generic1139 (talk) 16:31, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

You might find this interesting. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 01:17, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

External videos
Weird Engravings of Indian God Rock - Petroglyphs Of Pennsylvania, Phenomenal Travel Videos[3]

		Happy Diwali!!!
		Sky full of fireworks, Mouth full of sweets, Home full of lamps, And festival full of sweet memories... Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:55, 10 November 2015 (UTC) Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

ur:تبادلۂ خیال صارف:Obaid Raza--Obaid Raza (talk) 14:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Nyttend. I promised WilliamJE to ask you to use the word "hounding" instead of "stalking". We don't want to confuse a crime with something oddball that happens on Wikipedia. See

. Thank you so much.

I've told WilliamJE to leave you be, and will enforce my advice if he doesn't listen. Jehochman ^Talk 23:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nyttend, in the open Catflap08 and Hijiri88 arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed.  Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee,

Many thanks for restoring this batch! I've made the case for keeping them there. Johnbod (talk) 07:58, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello,

Your neutral opinion on the content dispute currently on-going at

Thanks. cӨde1+6 ^LogicBomb! 15:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

p.s. I cited your suggestion that all the criticism chunks be moved to the main criticism article on the TP. You don't need to bother involving yourself if you don't want to in the discussion. I just wanted to cite the suggestion you already made, so I thought I'd ping you there in any case. cӨde1+6 ^LogicBomb! 17:18, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

This image is nominated for deletion in Commons. I invite you for discussion. --George Ho (talk) 20:41, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Many historians and scholars along with the Turkish government deny a

Hi, Nyttend! I really don't know why this discussion got archived a mere day after the last comment and without any resolution, but that's how it went. I still believe that something – anything, whatever it needs to be – really has to be done about this, and so was thinking of trying to re-open the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems, where it might be allowed to remain for a little longer without being dislodged. Would you mind if I quote in full your suggestion here, in the hope of getting the ball rolling again? Unless you have a better idea on how to do that, of course. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:56, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. it is/was in Patterson township. The village of Pleasant Ridge in Patterson Township is mentioned in the Google Book History of Darke County, which mentions Pleasant Ridge Church and Pleasant Ridge Cemetery. Pleasant Ridge cemetery is on Find A Grave, but has no location information, so that one may be the Pleasant Ridge Cemetery in in Mississinawa Township. There is a blog http://darkecountyohiooneroomschoolhouses.blogspot.com/ , which has photos of 62 presently existing one room-school houses in Darke. It states that there were over 200 at one time. Somewhere I have a copy of an old atlas photo of Patterson Twp. It helped me locate the farm where my grandmother was born. I'll look further for it. Best wishes.

On further research I have found two "Historical schools", i.e., no longer extant. near where my grandmother was born. School No 4 which was right across Reed Road from the NW corner of her grandfather's land, and School No 6 which was east of School No.4 on Stonerock Road east of Willodell Road. Apparently School No 4 was called Nason School. Here is a map of where the schools were: http://www.dcoweb.org/land/patterson.htm

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the National Register of Historic Places listings in Saginaw County, Michigan page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

. Thanks,

talk

) 00:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Manatee County School District

Hi. Hope all is well. Two questions about your CSD removal. First, was unaware that government entities are inherently notable, could you please point me to that guideline? Second, the article is not about a school (educational institution), rather it is about an organization comprised of educational institutions, a school district, and therefore the educational institution exclusion for A7 would not seem to apply. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

I have reverted your removal of factual information in the Church of England article. Your reason for the removal was invalid. The facts are quite clear, the Church of England now indefinitely bars clergy convicted of serious offenses from having any authority to minister as clergy. Such a bar can be removed (in cases of miscarriage of justice for instance). It is not the same as "defrocking" which requires a strict legal process and cannot be reversed. Afterwriting (talk) 12:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, there. The last delisted property on

17:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC).

Thanks for cleaning that Fremont County thing up. No, I don't know of any statewide library jobs list, sorry. If you want an academic position, I recommend looking at the job site for each university or university system. Ours is at jobsatcu.com, but please look at it today as it is going to be removed tomorrow. There are also some national library job lists that cover openings n this state. Good luck, and let me know if you end up heading out this way

(talk)

20:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC).

Regarding this edit (and a couple of others), why did you replace {{National Register of Historic Places in Michigan}} with {{National Register of Historic Places}}? It's much more useful to be able to navigate between counties than having links to state-level lists and places like Guam and Palau. Also, you changed the 102–106 Francis St. address to use a hyphen instead of an en-dash. I assume this was an unintentional consequence of search and replace all? kennethaw88 • talk 02:04, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation. kennethaw88 • talk 02:22, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

I went ahead and added a new section to the MSHS article. There's no need to create a new list, since there's only 8 of them. I do have another question. What's the best thing to do about

01:53, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Friendly request

When you move National Register listing pages (as you recently did to the Denver pages), can you please move the talk pages as well? Not doing so breaks the statistic update script. Thanks! Magic♪piano 16:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Could you please review and delete Spooky Church if you don't mind. Thank you, JMHamo (talk) 03:49, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Out of the 1,300 Admins on here, you seem to be the only one active at this time. Thanks for your prompt help! JMHamo (talk) 03:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah! Took me a while to remember this.

The nomination for Hull's Trace claimed that the remnants of the Trace are visible in various places along the west side of Jefferson for a distance of about 1250 feet north of Harbin Drive. If memory serves, I chose coordinates along Jefferson about halfway along that section to represent the "average" location. However, the only sections I saw were in the open area about 100-200 ft north of the bridge. (If you check the area along Jefferson in Bing birdseye view, though, you can see the Trace segments there pretty clearly.) I don't particularly mind if you'd like to change the coords to reflect the easiest spot to find the Trace remnants reather than the "average" spot, though. Andrew Jameson (talk) 16:38, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Congrats on having your excellent photo on the main page! — Kralizec! (talk) 20:40, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

He falsely accuse me of being a sock of shulinjiang whom I do not know of.

Admin, please do not listen to him. I am not a sock, I got blocked for unjust reason and I do not know whom shulinjiang is. Capitals00 however, is a proven sock. Just go take a look at his block log. He has the exact same name! He has at least 6 accounts dedicated for vandalizing trolling and spreading pro Indian propaganda. Here are some of his other socks: User:D4iNa4, User:OwnDealers, User:Littleboygenius, User:Chipperdude15, User:D4iNa4, and urser:122.170.132.127

Here is his sock puppet investigation archive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Capitals00/Archive

Please note that Capitals00 was actually banned for 2 weeks for being a real sock way back in 2013 and now that he is back.

Here is his block log: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ACapitals00

My guess is that he got block many time back in 2013 with this account

, and recently his main account got blocked for a long period of time and that he is back using this one again.

Look at who is the real sock here.

More of suspected Caiptals00's socks.:
1. 115.184.65.211 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cho_La_incident&action=history)
2.User:MBlaze Lightning (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cho_La_incident&action=history) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.74.52.147 (talk) 13:38, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

--162.74.52.147 (talk) 22:26, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Have you seen the form that Catlyst got about Old Stone Arch Bridge (Clark Center, Illinois)? The 1933 US 40 runs a little south of the current US 40. The bridge in question is on what was a loop in the Old National Road that went south of the 1933 US 40 for a while. The bridge I photographed is on the old US 40, not on the loop of the old National Road, so it is not the correct bridge. You have a photo of the top of a bridge - is it on the old US 40 or on what was a loop of the National Road? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 01:21, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello User:Nyttend: I would like to request the restoration of Mast Brothers, a chocolate company that has been in the news recently. If they weren't notable at the time of deletion, it's possible that there are enough sources now to warrant an article. If it is not suitable for article space, perhaps it could be restored to my userspace where I could work on it? Thank you. :) generic_hipster 04:44, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! :) generic_hipster 06:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:59, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

I am surprised that you would say something this offensive. (this wasn't very appropriate either) Did your account get hacked? Montanabw^(talk) 08:34, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Re: Offensive language

Um, are you familiar with the terms? A cripple is someone who is lame, unable to walk normally, etc., and a bastard is someone born

) 13:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I am and these two words are both archaic and highly offensive. It is not euphemistic to use professional langauge. See

WP:LABEL. We also don't say the "n-word" any more, we don't use the "r-word" or similar archaic words to describe people with developmental disabilities and we don't refer to sex as "f---ing". You need to learn the difference between professional phrasing and offensive terms. Montanabw^(talk)

18:24, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Nyttend, the terms "cripple" and "bastard" haven't been part of civilized discourse for more than twenty years. I realize that the state of Ohio prefers to live in the past, but this is just silly. Viriditas (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Offensive_language NE Ent 19:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Please see

) 04:11, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I saw your edit to

) 23:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Don't be an ass and threaten me when you are in error. [9] Legacypac (talk) 01:51, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Nyttend, Hope your holidays are happy, and have a happy new year! Steel1943 (talk) 17:23, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

And may your holidays be merry and bright . . . . Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:34, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:32, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

I was almost overwhelmed at having to get an OTRS ticket for every single of my images. Thank you Yanping Nora Soong (talk) 03:10, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Merry Christmas! Thank you for your helpful message today. You deserve yet another barnstar. Still pondering my options. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 17:57, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

As per your request I will copy the relevant discussion from my talk page to yours.Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 14:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, Nyttend! ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:26, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sir Alfred T. Goshorn House, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oriel (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) 11:09, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

The article under discussion is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mitzi.humphrey/Edward_Cornelius_Humphrey.Mitzi.humphrey--- (talk) 15:00, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Here is the discussion from my talk pageMitzi.humphrey-- (talk) 14:51, 28 December 2015 (UTC) to yours: "The discussion was about Publish or …[edit] User space drafts are not allowed to exist for ever. What should I do with User:Mitzi.humphrey/Edward Cornelius Humphrey (your grandfather?):

move it to draft space and put a {{submit}} tag on it delete it as use of Wikipedia as a free host? — (talk · contribs) 16:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

To: RHaworth. This Edward Cornelius Humphrey was my husband's father. He was an extraordinary person and I don't want him to languish OR perish on Wikipedia. There is some danger that he will be confused with Edward William Cornelius Humphrey, so I'm trying to find lots of documentation before submitting. What do you recommend?Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 17:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC) I recommend publish elsewhere. The article does not contain sufficient assertion of notability and I suspect you will not be able to offer any. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:10, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

See [1], for one thing. I marvel at the aggressive tone used here, which grossly misrepresents the cited policy page. Nyttend (talk) 05:28, 25 December 2015 (UTC)"----- Mitzi.humphrey----- (talk) 14:49, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

You removed the Happy Days section from the George Blanda article, calling it trivia. Perhaps it can be called trivia, but having one of the top rated TV shows at the time put a period related joke in is an underline to the foremost feature of his career. Don't just reflexively remove content because it is labeled "In Popular culture." Trackinfo (talk) 18:22, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Would you mind re-deleting. He fails

00:24, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Number 57 00:26, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I realized that you have removed the proposed deletion template. The main problem is that being married to the son of the Ottoman sultan doesn't always mean that you're notable. Besides, if the print sources had recorded the existence of such person, then I didn't mind the existence of this article but actually there's no reference to such person in reliable sources that have been used on Ottoman sultanas' articles. For example I can't find any information about this individual on The imperial harem: women and sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire, published by Oxford University Press (ISBN 0-19-508677-5). Now you have forced me to give a deletion request! Keivan.f^Talk 07:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for closing that, perhaps the edit war will disappear now. As to what box to use either {{archive top | "your closing statement"}} and {{archive bottom}} or {{Rfc top | "your closing statement"}} and {{Rfc bottom}} will do. I have done a lot of NAC, and think the Rfc box looks better, but thats just opinion. AlbinoFerret 14:43, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

I did place a plain archive box around it without changing anything.AlbinoFerret 18:04, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

I noticed that you closed the RfC at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Identifying_reliable_sources_%28medicine%29&curid=7933684&diff=697593001&oldid=697592647

Part of the closing statement had the following rationale: Final note — some of the votes were simply weak, and they tended to be much more on the "and health" side. Short is fine, e.g. We want to have a simpler wording and adding health simplifies it and too broad, but per Doc James, Tryptofish, Jytdog, etc. and as per several others above. Biomedical is clear to me simply need to be given less weight, not to mention votes without rationale, and I'm seeing more of the latter sort in votes on the "and health" side than on the other.

I would like to ask you: does this mean that you discounted !votes simply because they referenced others arguments without providing their own arguments? --Jules (Mrjulesd) 18:08, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{

subst:Happy New Year 2016

}} to send this message