User talk:Krelnik

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 2 as User talk:Krelnik/1 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

This is Krelnik's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1

Bart lists his appearence on The Daily Show on his website so he must be proud of his appearance. I will grant you the special snowflake...may I reference his website and repost?

On 7 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert A. Baker, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

DYKBot (talk) 22:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On July 23, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert S. Lancaster, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 September 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article George Hrab, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

TheDYKUpdateBot 18:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

On 23 July 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Karen Stollznow, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Karen Stollznow writes for two skeptical magazines (Skeptic and Skeptical Inquirer) and hosts two skeptical podcasts (Point of Inquiry and Monster Talk)? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have granted rollback rights to your account. Given you clearly know what you are doing on the anti-vandalism front (as demonstrated here), I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. Rollback lets your revert vandalism quicker and to use anti-vandalism software like Huggle. If you do not want rollback, just let me know and I will remove it. —Tom Morris (talk) 20:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	I, Sarah, hereby award Krelnik, with The Original Barnstar for your excellent work about skeptics. I came across a number of your articles via a recent blog and was happy to see the work you've been doing. Thank you for all you do for Wikipedia and free knowledge. SarahStierch (talk) 21:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I believe I have removed all the Peacock words that had been flagged and feel the "neutrality of article is disputed" tag can be removed. What do you think? NPHICTom2601:248:8200:1827:50DE:30E0:6DB9:A4A (talk) 18:05, 30 April 2016 (UTC)30 April 2016[reply]

Funny, several of your fellows said the exact opposite - that adding sources is something they called "independent research". Or is this just wikipedia's way of maintaining a monopoly on editing? 97.107.46.73 (talk) 19:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@97.107.46.73 I think maybe you are confusing the "no original research" rule with the "reliable sources" rule. They are two different, but related things. Wikipedia aims to summarize the knowledge of the world, so to put something in you need to show that fact is accepted as real somewhere in a reliable source. That is usually (but not always) a newspaper, magazine or book. In otherwords, something that has a chain of editorial control and is not, for instance, just someone ranting on a blog. I think MUFON probably deserves to be criticized as in your edit - in other words I agree with you. But it doesn't matter if you and I agree, it only matters if we can show that a reliable source agrees with us. Surely you must be able to find someone somewhere who has written something about this? Find those sources and cite them in the article (help on how to do that here). Good luck. -Krelnik (talk) 19:59, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Krelnik, with regard to the article on Firmage, it's a puffery piece and sadly, people in Utah are getting scammed by this guy. I have located dozens of people online posting reports about Firmage scamming them for money with his fake shell companies. It's sad, but Wikipedia is being used to promote this person with false information that is for the most part self-sourced and self generated. Please consider the victims of this loser and how wikipedia is helping him keep the scam going. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 17:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of someone can be included in their biography, but it has to be reliably sourced. So do your homework and find some newspapers, magazines or something that are covering this, and you can use those articles to put it in the article. But you can't use blogs and forum posts for this, because they could be bogus and Wikipedia could be sued. --Krelnik (talk) 18:12, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying this. I'll do some more research and see what I can find. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 18:35, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I am unable to locate a decent news story, though his victims are pushing for someone to write one. I found this : Tyler Riopelle, Chief Technician at Northwest Technologies, Every one at my company was lured into investing 5K apiece through a wire transfer to Utah in April of 2015. We appear to be completely scammed and have not heard anything back except to see a letter describing "Waterfall" which reads like a Ponzi scheme. We have all since filed reports with the FBI. I have not every heard until today reports about this being some free energy anti-gravity scam. Rather it was presented to us as a short term loan to be re-paid in 2 weeks maximum. A Wikipedia page exalting Joe Firmage as the technical creator of the internet and Microsoft was used to assure us that our money was going into trusted hands. There were at least four of us taken for almost 30 grand overnight. I expect more will soon surface. We are all based in Ashland Oregon.^[1]. From the looks of things this has been turned over to the FBI and law enforcement by several of his victims. Please note that the Wikipedia bio was used as bait to scam these folks. Maybe someone should Afd his bio and get it off wikipedia as non-notable. Seems he is ancient history. I'll keep looking for some sources. The above text was one of the comments to the linkedin post I referenced. You have to dig around on the site to find all the posts. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 02:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well the AfD probably won't fly because he has a long history of involvement in various industries. Keep chugging away with law enforcement, and try to get a local or regional journalist interested in writing a story. Then you can base Wiki changes on that story. If these comments you found are legit, it sounds like it is just a matter of time before law enforcement gets involved. --Krelnik (talk) 12:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is his arrest record fair game to post in that article with refs? That would be a start, and at least give folks a heads up something doesn't smell right. I called this company in oregon and the guy he scammed don't work there anymore. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It could be, but you could run afoul of the no original research rule if you just link to the raw arrest record and draw some conclusion from it. Better to find a news write-up of the arrest - surely if a known entrepreneur like Firmage was arrested for DUI it was covered in the news? --Krelnik (talk) 19:20, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a plan. He cannot keep doing this and not get nailed sooner or later. Since he wired the money from some of his victims across a state line it places his scam under jurisdiction of the Feds. I agree with your assessment, sooner or later he will get nailed by them. 166.70.213.246 (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I put a photo on the Mackenberg article, I feel guilty about this because it was all your hard work on the article so I didn't really want to interfere but that's the best I could find, feel free to remove/delete it if you don't think it's any good. I do have another but it's not as good as that one. HealthyGirl (talk) 17:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem. I kind of shy away from posting photos that I haven't taken myself, because I see so many of them deleted for various reasons so I sort of have a mental block because of the fear of wasted effort. Thanks for doing this, hopefully this one will be left alone. --Krelnik (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See William Marriott (magician), do you know of his birth-date? Have not been able to find it. You are better at finding this sort of thing so if you have a bit of spare time can you look? It might be a dead-end but worth a try. Thanks a lot. HealthyGirl (talk) 05:05, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I gave it a look, but wow "William S. Marriott" is a super common name from that era, I'm finding too many matches to figure out which one is him. --Krelnik (talk) 13:17, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you might like this. Translated it from the French with the help of one of the new tools I learned about at Wikimania: Special:ContentTranslation. It's probably going to go Dutch soon. =) Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 09:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: Nice! I think I saw someone wikilink her somewhere and I thought, "I didn't know she had an English article, hmmm." Now I know why. Had no idea she'd tried to sue Wikimedia! I've been toying with the idea of writing an ebook about the history of woos fighting battles against Wikipedia - if I do it there's another chapter. --Krelnik (talk) 13:06, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The judgement is pretty amazing, too. here's a more detailed report. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't realize how recent this was! Clearly I need to work on my reading comprehension. --Krelnik (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will create an article for this person, he was one of Houdini's agents similar to Mackenberg. Just thought you might be interested. I am currently working on an article for Houdini's lawyer Bernard M. L. Ernst. HealthyGirl (talk) 18:14, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A request for comment is available on protecting user pages by default from edits by anonymous and new users. I am notifying you because you commented on this proposal when it was either in idea or draft form. Funcrunch (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Krelnik:. I see that you updated Loretta Marron to put back her Australian categories. This is currently under discussion on the article's Talk page (Talk:Loretta Marron), so if you have any references that can support this then they would be appreciated. --Gronk Oz (talk) 10:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw the talk discussion, I thought it was best to revert the article until the discussion was complete. The person who keeps changing it is unfortunately not participating in the discussion. (Also, they are using unclear edit summaries and changing other things at the same time). --Krelnik (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am in the process of expanding this article. One user had tried to remove the claim these mediums were fraudulent from the lead twice, it is possible he might attempt this again. I have added sources to clarify the sisters were caught in fraud. I believe that information should stay in the lead. 82.132.186.199 (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the heads up. I'll keep an eye out on my watchlist for future activity. --Krelnik (talk) 18:49, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for work on the Universal Medicine article. As you can see from the talk page/edit history, this page has had numerous issues with disruption. Extra eyes are always appreciated. 79616gr (talk) 08:48, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. I have the article on my watchlist, and it looked like some user was trying to scrub negative information from the article. After reverting that, I took a spin around the sources to ensure they were all working well so nobody could argue that the information wasn't sourced well. It's frustrating how quickly most news sites expire articles, I'm starting to adopt a personal policy of including Internet Archive links with deadurl=no on CITEs I create myself "just in case". Cheers. --Krelnik (talk) 15:58, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a fantastic idea and one which I shall adopt myself. Thanks again. 79616gr (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mifter (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Request to overturn administrator's decision". Thank you. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry you feel that this is unsuitable. I am biting the bullet on this one and publishing my research on arXiv, in the hopes that one day the scientific community will accept my ideas.

In the meantime am writing an essay for the Parapsychological Association containing some of my ideas, with the data thus far collected including third party verification that something strange is going on with some laptop BIOS and SPD (e2prom) chips suggesting that specific hardware failures might not just be random. Nearly lost a job once because this occured, they literally could not explain how a previously working machine got totally scrambled but in light of my recent discoveries just proximity of a low level radioactive source to an open case PC could be the actual cause. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.14 (talk) 09:04, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@185.3.100.14: Thanks for stopping by. Your contributions are certainly interesting. But unfortunately Wikipedia has a policy that all its material must be not just interesting, but verifiable. That means they must be supported by reliable sources (i.e. third parties who have commented, not just the original author of the idea. Usually this means books, magazines or newspapers). On most articles that requires inline citations so the reader can easily see the source of each fact or claim. I think some of the material you are posting would be well suited for a blog, but until there is a significant body of third-party commentary on your ideas I don't think you're going to find a very good reception for them here at Wikipedia. Sorry about that! --Krelnik (talk) 12:06, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. I am also trying to isolate the mechanism involved, seems that my research could actually have practical applications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.61 (talk) 09:41, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Probably relevant, the method I obtained this information refers to a classified document leaked on Wikileaks (ie takedown of "hostile" over US airspace) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.57 (talk) 06:14, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've proposed to rename Mind control to Brainwashing. I'm letting you know since you contributed to the article. Redddogg (talk) 23:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was literally just reading that Mythbusters edit, trying to figure out what they meant. I figured "exepull" meant example, saying electrocutions was confirmed even though it had mixed data. PUNKMINKIS (CHAT) 14:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Punkminkis: Yeah, it dawned on me that was probably what they meant, but I'm not sure we need a ton more examples in that section anyway, per "Wikipedia is not a directory". Cheers. --Krelnik (talk) 14:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am glad to notice your contributing in a few National Register of Historic Places topics in Georgia, and especially glad to see your adding full references to the NRHP documents (sometimes labelled "Registration" and sometimes labelled "Inventory-Nomination") in a couple articles, including at Bibb City, Georgia, to which Bibb City Historic District redirects. I agree with your redirection there, as I find, deep in the NRHP document, that indeed the historic district covers the entire Bibb City. But hey, when adding full NRHP document reference, don't delete any reference to the NRIS database. It's a small technical point, but the NRHP nomination document for a place usually cannot document that the place was listed on the NRHP, because it is an application, in advance. The NRIS database does document date of listing and the reference number assigned at that date. And, where the NRIS reference is used supporting a NRHP infobox, usually all the information in the NRHP infobox is from NRIS, i.e. NRIS is the actual source. You should be aware of NRHP-related resources at wp:NRHPhelp and the fact you're welcome to post at wt:NRHP, whether or not you join WikiProject NRHP, where you'd be very welcome.

Anyhow, I have been enjoying expanding existing Georgia NRHP articles and creating new ones, cooperating some with User:Bubba73 who has been contributing lots of great photos, for several months. Bubba73 and i have both been watching the approximately-weekly-updated graphics at wp:NRHPprogress. And I have been learning a lot of random Georgia history. :) Keep up the good work! cheers --doncram 17:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Doncram: Ah, thanks for clarifying that. I guess I've been super lucky, because every one of the scanned PDFs of Georgia NRHP documents I've looked at in my travels includes not only the application but also the certification page with the admission date. Based on that and the way that NRIS template just links to a search page, it seemed kinda tedious to me for verifying facts. ("Dear reader: You can verify this here, but hope you punch in the right search term!" ha.) But good to know not all NRHP documents are created equal - I suppose I might have guessed that. Incidentally I just posted my latest opus you might find interesting at Ellamae Ellis League, a Georgia architect of note. --Krelnik (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, wow, that architect article looks great. As you noticed, i created Shirley Hills Historic District, which I will add more to later, and then i have gotten bogged down in creating Dennis & Dennis. I get antsy and can't keep at any one article very long. About Ellamae Ellis League House (currently a redlink), which I see is discussed at wt:NRHP, i think you should go ahead and make it clear that it is being covered in the architect article in part by setting an anchor ({{anchor|Ellamae Ellis League House}}), then redirect to there (redirect to Ellamae Ellis League#Ellamae Ellis League House), unless/until you or anyone else feels it needs a separate article (i would also encourage any NRHP editor to go ahead and create a separate article if they are really expanding the coverage). Or go ahead and start a separate article now. I would have created the redirect but I don't want to be the "creator" of the article, if/when the redirect is expanded into a separate article. :) --doncram 23:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Doncram: Good idea, I went ahead and created the anchor and the redirect so existing redlinks to the house will take you to the infobox in her bio. We can manipulate to make it better going forward, but at least clicks get you somewhere useful now. I know the feeling about getting distracted, I went down several rabbit holes cleaning up articles I found while working on League. --Krelnik (talk) 00:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks great but it will take some time for me to go through it at the level that it deserves. I was amazed to see your 2 woman's bios for each man's project on your user page. I think I'll go check out my on contributions and see how well I fit, not well I'm afraid. Perhaps one of us can suggest it to a larger group? Thanks for all your work. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smallbones: Thanks! Yeah, it's going to be a challenge - especially since I loathe writing true stubs and then having to fight the inevitable AFD attempt. As you can see from my League biography I often try to source articles I create to the point where it sort of says, "I dare you to question this person's notability!" But that is very time consuming of course, it took me about two weeks of spare time to write League. --Krelnik (talk)

You are correct. I spotted the numbers on two ordinary links in that last section and mistook them for the source of the references at the bottom of the page. (If later comments do not add new references, I think it is sometimes easier if the reflist-talk template stays above those later comments, but it's normal for it to go at the bottom of the section.) Thanks for fixing it. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmcgnh: No prob. Thanks for calling my attention to it, I had never seen that template before and it is handy to have. --Krelnik (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mifter (talk) 03:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Krelnik,

Hi. I'm responding to your message to me at [email protected]. Yes! You were indeed correct that I wrote the article myself. I was on a phone conference call on Tuesday (yesterday), and someone told me that there was a Wikipedia entry on my, which admittedly shocked me. However, they told me that it was only one sentence long - apparently put up by someone at AAAS. So I decided to expand out the entry, but wasn't aware of the rules and regulations of Wikipedia. I actually had been aware a bit about editing Wikipedia because a Wikipedia person told me about Wikipedia parties at scientific meetings where people get together to provide information and references for wikipedia entries. I'm thinking of trying this for my courses.

Anyway, I'm happy to have you edit what I wrote, or to do anything else (for instance, I work at Boston University, and could have someone else at BU edit the entry.) Just let me know what you think is best. Thanks in advance. Ben Wolozin, [email protected] (aka BrainMan2017). — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrainMan2017 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mifter (talk) 00:04, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yo. Some lovely pages appearing in Women in Red campaign. In other news, that guy is the pits. Is there no one around here who would take exception to threats and libel? His Twitter is full of ##it Jfderry (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Jfderry[reply]

I've been busy at work and haven't been following the latest. Can you summarize what he's done lately? --Krelnik (talk) 14:10, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I found your To-Do List while making a draft on Gayle Barron. Thought I let you know that I just recently started it. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:06, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MrLinkinPark333: Oh cool. I'm very slow on some of my article projects, I must admit. I do have some sources and stuff on her squirreled away in Evernote, I'll see if I can throw a few sentences into your draft if you don't mind. I also live in Atlanta and I think she still lives here, so its possible I could go get a photo of her if needed. (I've never met her, but I'm a member of the Atlanta Track Club which operates the Peachtree Road Race. I actually stumbled on her as a possible article subject because the Track Club has a quite striking black and white photo of her at one of the 70s or 80s era Peachtrees that they sometimes put up at events). --Krelnik (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. If you want to send me an email on what you found, that be great. Also if you could arrange a picture that would also be awesome. :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great article creation in Rose Connor! Keep it up! Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 04:45, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Georgia Aviation Hall of Fame.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

A well-referenced article!

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:36, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Shih (talk) 12:01, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting my edits on the Wikipedia or I will report you to an administrator! 2001:871:28:89:85C2:B344:886E:CE22 (talk) 08:32, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have made three errors today which I will now point out.

First: you were changing from English (6' 6") to Metric units (2m)- this is English Wikipedia. There's a way to do it that accomodates both.

Second: But more importantly you were not only not supplying a source, but in some cases you were putting in a height that contradicted the source that was there. All information on Wikipedia must be verifiable, so if you want to put in someone's height you need to find a good news article (not a blog post or Twitter link) that has the info in it.

Third: Do not threaten other editors. We try to remain civil here, perhaps if you had ASKED me why I reverted your edits you'd have learned something? --Krelnik (talk) 11:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Go look on Penn Jillette now, and examine the change I made in my last edit. That's the correct way to do it. --Krelnik (talk) 11:32, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I made a good faith effort to find a new link by navigating the target page and failed. I'm glad that you found a new link but you could be less condescending about it, and right after the guy who left me the vandal message. 93.136.184.51 (talk) 19:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it sounded condescending. I literally clicked on the old link, and pasted Moberly-Jourdain into the search box on that site and the correct URL popped right up. --Krelnik (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I started a discussion about the removal of the {{commonscat}} links from scores, maybe hundreds of articles. It can be found here: Category talk:Commons category Wikidata tracking categories. --evrik ^(talk) 03:46, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Evrik: thanks for the heads up, I posted a comment including an example that I think is illustrative. --Krelnik (talk) 22:45, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For reasons I have forgotten I came across an 1896 quote from Amy Tanner about comparing the variability of interests of men and women.doi:10.1037/h0068394 She wrote "The real tendencies of women can not be known until they are free to chose, any more than those of a tied-up a dog can be." JSTOR 3173639, page 785. While trying to see how I could inveigle this into the article I found you had started an improved draft with possible DYK in mind. Might this snippet help DYK? Best wishes. Thincat (talk) 15:46, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Taner Edis has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 15:58, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Santacruz ⁂ Please tag me! 23:03, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thank that you gave me for my edit on Edward Jenner. Support me like this forever.... Thanks and regards. Itcouldbepossible (talk) 02:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting my edit, I am sure you did not go to the sources and check an accurate translation of the native sources. This shows me how useful Wikipedia is without my contributions. How accurate, precise and honest it is. Abdphysics (talk) 19:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit did not add any sources for me to check, in English or any other language. You changed the word "mullah" to "sorcerer" in several cases. There is such a thing as a mullah, there is no such thing as a sorcerer. --Krelnik (talk) 15:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - my name is Susan Gerbic (Sgerbic) and I'm writing to you because at some point you joined Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism. This might have been months ago - or even years ago. With the best of intentions the project was created years ago, and sadly like many WikiProjects has started to go dormant. A group of us are attempting to revitalize the Skepticism project, already we have begun to clean up the main page and I've just redone the participant page. No one is in charge of this project, it is member directed, which might have been the reason it almost went dormant. We are attempting to bring back conversations on the talk page and have two subprojects as well, in the hopes that it might spark involvement and a way of getting to know each other better. One was created several years ago but is very well organized and a lot of progress was made, Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skeptical organisations in Europe. The other I created a couple weeks ago, it is very simple and has a silly name Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Skepticism Stub Sub-Project Project (SSSPP). This sub-project runs from March 1 to June 1, 2022. We are attempting to rewrite skepticism stubs and add them to this list. As you can see we have already made progress.

The reason I'm writing to you now is because we would love to have you come back to the project and become involved, either by working on one of the sub-projects, proposing your own (and managing it), or just hanging out on the talk page getting to know the other editors and maybe donate some of your wisdom to some of the conversations. As I said, no one is in charge, so if you have something in mind you would like to see done, please suggest it on the talk page and hopefully others will agree. Please add the project to your watchlist, update your personal user page showing you are a proud member of WikiProject Skepticism. And DIVE in, this is what the work list looks like [2] frightening at first glance, but we have already started chipping away at it.

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism/Participants page has gone though a giant change - you may want to update your information. And of course if this project no longer interests you, please remove your name from the participant list, we would hate to see you go, but completely understand.

Thank you for your time, I hope to edit with you in the future.Sgerbic (talk) 07:12, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hey, you liked one of my edits about 2 years ago

i was curious so i checked out your page and it's pretty cool how much you've done for wikipedia and how passionate you are about sharing knowledge :D thank you for all you've done

SameeRayhan (talk) 00:07, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Women in Red 8th Anniversary
	In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

GnocchiFan (talk) 14:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | July 2024, Volume 10, Issue 7, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 312, 313 Online events: New: Translation contest 2024 | Science Fiction and Fantasy | Women in Sports Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Wiki Loves Sport 2024 22 July - 22 September Tip of the month: A foreign language biography does not guarantee notability for English Wikipedia. Check the guidelines before you start. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 14:28, 30 June 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red | August 2024, Volume 10, Issue 8, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 313, 314, 315 Online events: New: | Women in film and stage | Indigenous women Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) | Translation contest 2024 (July, August, September) | Women in Sports (July, August) Announcements from other communities TBD Tip of the month: Check your athlete's notability before researching and creating her bio. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red | September 2024, Volume 10, Issue 9, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 316, 317 Online events: New: Women writers & their works | Geofocus: Islands A - H Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) | Translation contest 2024 (Jul, Aug, Sep) Announcements from other communities August 30 is the tenth anniversary of WikiProject Women writers! Tip of the month: Try her pen name when searching for sources, and remember to add her to any of these that apply: List of pen names, List of literary initials, and Category:Pseudonymous women writers. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Rosiestep (talk) 19:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red | October 2024, Volume 10, Issue 10, Numbers 293, 294, 318, 319, 320 Online events: New: Women in STEM | Geofocus: Islands I-P | Women in archaeology Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities October is Women in Green's "Around the World in 31 Days" Good Article Edit-a-thon Tip of the month: Unsure how to expand a stub article? Take a look at this guidance Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:06, 29 September 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red | November 2024, Vol 10, Issue 11, Nos 293, 294, 321, 322, 323 Online events: New: Asian women | Geofocus: Islands Q-Z | Women in engineering Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Annual Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) is an online campaign designed to boost Asian content on Wikipedia each November. Unreferenced articles backlog drive. These Wikiproject clean-up lists offer a start to November's backlog drive, e.g. Women's History and Women writers Tip of the month: Looking for an image? Sometimes you can find openly licensed images at search.creativecommons.org/ Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red | December 2024, Vol 10, Issue 12, Nos 293, 294, 324, 325 Online events: New: Women who died in 2024 | Religion Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Women in Religion have a monthly virtual edit-a-thon and the next session is December 2nd 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. CST. For Zoom meeting details, contact Dzingle1 or RosPost. Women in Red members are welcome to join the Zoom Meeting here Tip of the month: Think of rewarding contributors, especially newcomers, with a barnstar. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 18:45, 29 November 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]