User talk:72.75.85.159

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is 72.75.85.159's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to 72.75.85.159.

Contents

[edit] Striver (talk • contribs)

Can you please get an account so one can communicate with you? Your moving is makes it impossible to have communication without loosing the history of it. --Striver - talk 23:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

My reasons for not registering are not a topic for conversation ... if you would simply use the talk pages for the articles under discussion instead of User talk pages, then the history would not be lost ... that's why I have been adding {{talkheader}} templates to pages you have authored, to keep each conversation focused in the appropriate forum ... besides, I prefer not to feed trolls, and would rather not clutter my talk page with your English as a second language diatribes about why "X is notable because Y wrote the book ABC about him, and ABC is a notable book because it is about X, who is notable because the book ABC has written about him by Y, who is a notable author because he wrote the notable book ABC about the very notable X." ... I can communicate with you well enough on the Article for Deletion and Deletion Review pages, since you won't communicate on article talk pages ... besides, I've just accepted that you must have some sort of learning disability, because I am sick and tired of repeating the same things and telling you to read the same articles that explain much better than I can why your articles keep being deleted ... if you don't understand by now, then nothing I can say will elevate your consciousness about the basic issues of WP:Notability. —72.75.85.159 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
And by the way, I cut you some slack in The Harley-Quinn.com Argument and attributed your comments to the "anonymous" User:Charlie, so do not bring up the subject of my anonymity again ... if the logic of my arguments is correct, and my opinions are supported by other editors, then my identity does not matter. —72.75.85.159 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC) (Excerpt from Talk:Abi Mikhnaf#are you stupid?)

[edit] Robert Spencer's Books

Another questionable author with bootstrapped notability through (self-published?) books from non-notable publishers ...

I've tagged some of them ... let's watch. --72.75.85.159 18:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Curiouser and curiouser ... looks like Aminz (talk • contribs) has taken some of them to AfD ...

Looking at the edit histories, it appears as if some of the "notability" and "unreferenced" tags I placed were removed by other editors, and Aminz decided to escalate ... I think that this may have been premature, and I'm sure that they will all end in No Consensus (Keep) ... unfortunately all of the nominations were identical ... "Not notable enough to have a page." ... they should have begun, "Article lacks citations from verifiable and reliable sources to establish notability." ... they attacked the subject, instead of the WP:V issues with the articles that made me flag them in the first place. <Sigh!>

Regardless, this is a Fool's Errand, and I think that I'll avoid the discussions ... I do not want people thinking that my IP is being used as a sockpuppet by this deletionist that everyone is accusing of bad faith nominations ... this is one of the reasons that I prefer remaining an anon, i.e., I don't get spammed to participate in AfDs and DRVs that are a waste of everyone's time.

Well, at least I have confirmed to my own satisfaction that there is in fact a Very Active deletionist camp, and I think that I would prefer not to be associated with them ... looks like most of them spend their time debating rather than making contributions or encouraging others to improve articles. --72.75.85.159 14:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My contributions - a tale of research

It all started when I stumbled across Asia Carrera while checking members of Category:Members of Mensa after the 2nd AfD for "List of famous members of Mensa" ... she had a link to a scan of her article from the American Mensa monthly magazine ... I remembered reading that issue, which had about 20 "famous" members, and vaguely remembered her only because she was a noted porn star ... well, that led me on a quest for that issue to add cites for others who already had articles here ... that's when I added

(July 2004) "Famous Mensans". Mensa Bulletin (476): p. 23. 

That reference was enough for me to go online to the Library of Congress and request a copy of the article ... a few days later, I got a phone call from a researcher at the LoC (it's a local call), a fellow Mensan, to let me know that he had found it, and wanted my FAX number to send me a copy! Since I don't have a FAX, he mailed me a xerographic copy, and I updated the citation ...

(July 2004) "They're Accomplished, They're Famous, and They're MENSANS". Mensa Bulletin (476): p. 23. ISSN 0025-9543. 

You see, American Mensa will neither deny nor confirm anyone's membership ... active members may purchase an annual membership directory, but memebers may also request that their names not be included, so it is not a reliable source ... OTOH, a published article featuring notable members is, so I figured I'd take this as an opportunity to reliably add some names to the Category ... among the 20 or so people featured in the article (each with several paragraphs and a photo) I found others who already had Wiki-bios (to name a few):

I actually had a conflict with another editor over the Geena Davis article, which already had a mention of her membership with a reference to her IMDb biography ...

Davis is a member of American Mensa[1] with an IQ of 140[2].

  1. ^ (July 2004) "They're Accomplished, They're Famous, and They're MENSANS". Mensa Bulletin (476): p. 21. ISSN 0025-9543. 
  2. ^ Biography for Geena Davis. IMDb.

Long story short, I replaced the IMDb citation with the one from Mensa Bulletin as being more reliable, and they reverted it ... we compromised by having two citations because it was IMDb that made the dubious claim of an actual IQ number ... since there were multiple refs made to the IMDb bio, I turned it into a {{cite web}} as well.

Notice how the two Mensa Bulletin citations have different pages? It's because once I had the actual article in hand, I could get the correct page where each person was featured, not just the starting page of the article.

The point of this little tale? Simply that those edits were part of a short-term WP:GNOME project to add a single citation to multiple articles ... based on research with the assistance of the Library of Congress ... something that I KNEW, but had to PROVE in a way that anyone could confirm ... this is the WP:V part of WP:RS ... that was the problem with the Carrera article to begin with, that the "citation" was just a JPEG of the article, but not enough information about when or where it was published, so it could have been a PhotoShop creation by the subject herself ... and the IMDb biography is anonymous and unsourced, meaning that it was not really a WP:RS, but neither was it original research ... so I fixed it (over the course of a few weeks), and then went on to my next project ... "It's what I do."

I only mention this because another editor has recently accused my of being a disruptor who never makes any helpful contributions ... if I found a page that had three explicit external links to the same article, and I made a {{cite web}} from the URL and created a <ref name=fubar> to replace the multiple links, they said that I was a WP:VANDAL and reverted to their last version.

But since my IP address changes randomly, any User Contributions will only show a few days or weeks of my activity, and it's usually focused on something Entirely Different than it was a month before, or even the week after that snapshot of my edits. So if I appear to be on a vendetta of "drive-by tagging" articles, you're just seeing a temporary, passing obsession on a single topic ... and I'll move on to something else in a few weeks.

Right now, I'm in a Strange Place ... I tag an article for dubiuos citations, the author removes the tag, another editor prods it, the prod is removed, a third editor does a WP:CSD, and the author takes it to WP:DRV, where the Speedy is overturned, and it goes to WP:AFD for consensus ... all within 24 hours, and simply because I put a {{notability}} or {{unreferenced}} tag on an article where I had just spent an hour trying to track down and clean up a bunch of refs and make Worthy Citations out of them, with author names and publication dates.

But some editors feel threatened when a stub article that they have neglected for months since creation is questioned for WP:N because it does not have any WP:RS citations, just External links to websites that turn out to violate WP:COI or WP:NPOV ... or sometimes the entire article turns out to be a WP:COPYVIO from a bio page for them on some other website, and the next thing you know I'm commenting at another DRV because after I put a {{copypaste}} on an article, an administrator replaced it with a {{db-copyvio}}. --72.75.85.159 11:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reza Aslan‎

You have tagged this article for lack of notability , which is fine but would you explain your case as to why Reza Aslan‎ would not be notable on the talk page? --CltFn 01:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Answered on Talk:Reza Aslan#Cleanup needed --72.75.85.159 01:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First Christian Church of Sylvania, Georgia

I stumbled across an edit that 162.40.238.134 (talk • contribs) had made to The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion ... they added a link to an article on http://www.sylvaniachristian.com/ that turns out to be the website of First Christian Church of Sylvania, Georgia ... when I checked their edit history, I found that they had only edited three other pages, and on all of them they had left a External link to what is essentally an anonymous, non-WP:NPOV essay that is little more than a very long blog.

I'm going to remove them per WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided - "Links mainly intended to promote a website." --72.75.85.159 09:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New IP address

Well, there was another power outage yesterday, and I see that once again I have a new IP address ... just wanted to leave my mark so the trolls don't think I'm a sockpuppet ... see you on my new user talk page!. —72.75.126.37 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../7/2/2E/User_talk%7E72.75.85.159.html"