User talk:Vesuvius Dogg/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Vesuvius Dogg. 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.

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm TheRedPenOfDoom. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.

In particular, please read WP:BLPPRIMARY. We only cover it if third party reliable sources have found it notable.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Susan Berman was definitely an aspiring writer http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/21/nyregion/two-decade-spiral-into-suspicion-long-after-wife-disappears-heir-vanishes-after.html 184.74.244.133 (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

"After the success of her 1981 memoir, Easy Street, she moved to Los Angeles, where she hoped to break into film-making as a screenwriter.

Instead, she had a short-lived marriage to a much younger man who overdosed on heroin, went broke and became the main attraction in her own noir murder mystery – a mystery that has endured for years but may now at last be unraveling, on screen every Sunday night in the HBO documentary series The Jinx." http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/14/susan-berman-murder-hbo-the-jinx-robert-durst-letter 184.74.244.133 (talk) 19:41, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this article. Hope it will eventually reach Good article status! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:16, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

On 11 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Statue of Edward Snowden, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a bust of Edward Snowden was erected next to a New York City monument to American Revolutionary War prisoners? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Statue of Edward Snowden. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Harrias ^talk 12:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	We did it! Statue of Edward Snowden Congratulations on a quality piece of work. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:39, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

See [1]. Dwpaul ^Talk 21:31, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Just fyi, I started an article on ApprenNet. I will get back as time permits, and try to do some sourcing both here and on Fredinburg. But I don't speak tech, and thought you might be willing to look over my language use. thanks.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

You are having entirely too much fun with the misspelled name issue at American Pharoah! So noogies! LOL! Actually, if you want to do a good deed for the day, can you watchlist Ahmed Zayat? It's getting hit by people who are not find of the fellow. Montanabw^(talk) 18:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

You are doing great work - just wanted to say thank you and to encourage you to keep it up! Yay! Montanabw^(talk) 04:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

And thank you for catching my flubs - this time last year I was working on California Chrome without a fellow copyeditor (though the WP Horse racing crowd was of invaluable help in other areas!). It's good to have a couple people working on these "must update in live time" articles. Montanabw^(talk) 16:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome, @Montanabw, and I wish there more of us, because I enjoy the back-and-forth! I'm glad you don't mind being corrected (I learn from nearly everyone who fixes my articles and edits, and I particularly appreciated your suggestion about referencing news articles by author/date, something I will continue forward). Too bad American Pharoah is not nearly as popular as California Chrome was this time last year—I have to wonder, is the bad press for Zayat put reporters off from talking about the horse itself? Just wish there more colorful articles to draw from—the buyback stories are illuminating, but the Zayats are understandably shy right now about the media. Hope that changes after the Belmont! (BTW, I amuse myself coming up with names for his younger sister, many of which involve transposed letters with unintentional meanings. Having mucked a few stalls, I also note that "Queenof the Pile" is still available...) — Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 16:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Queenof the... oh SCOMN! (Snorted coffee out my nose!). I don't mind being corrected and I actually prefer collaboration on articles, even if there are occasional differences of opinion, so long as everyone is focused on getting it right. (Noting, as always that verifiability≠truth, eh?) Heh, as for Zayat, the issue is probably that Zayat doesn't wear a cowboy hat and run "Dumbass Racing". While Zayat's a good colorful character, he lacks the rags to riches thing ... and AP doesn't "smile for the camera". Also, Art Sherman had a more heart-warming underdog tale than does Baffert. But this puts all the focus on the horse himself, which I suppose is as it should be. And AP clearly like winning!. I also think Chrome's loss kind of disillusioned people. And yeah, bad press doesn't help. I'll Have Another faced similar stuff due to his trainer, Doug O'Neill Montanabw^(talk) 17:26, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, got the "controversies" stuff done up on Zayat through the bankruptcy and first round of allegations. Taking a little break. Have at it! Montanabw^(talk) 21:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I think I'm done with the Zayat dealings, have at it! Montanabw^(talk) 19:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Pony!
Congratulations! For unwavering support and dedicated editing on American Pharoah and related articles, you have received a pony! Ponies are cute, intelligent, cuddly, friendly (most of the time, though with notable exceptions), promote good will, encourage patience, and enjoy carrots. Treat your pony with respect and he will be your faithful friend! Montanabw^(talk) 03:57, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

To send a pony or a treat to other wonderful and responsible editors, click here.

We don't put footnotes in the lead if the same material is in the body of the article and cited. I don't necessarily feel the need to put place of birth with birth date right in the first sentence, it can start looking clunky. You were probably right that Zayat's Hebrew name would keep coming around and had to go into the lead, I moved it down to the section on his faith. All that said, did you see this? http://www.cnbcprime.com/super-rich/video/superrich-american-pharaohs-owner-runs-for-the-roses/ LOL! (FWIW, learned that keeping an eye on these folks' twitter feeds is a good way to catch new articles... heh) Montanabw^(talk) 01:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

As they say in Teaneck, "OH MY G-D"!! Thank you for letting me know, I'll definitely be watching, you know, just for the horse, of course. Heh —Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 01:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Ya gotta give the kid brownie points for youthful enthusiasm. When I was his age, I already had family responsibilities and stuff, but at least I was in college, even if I went on the extended plan. Montanabw^(talk) 06:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@Montanabw, did you see it? They even showed "Air Horse One"! The Derby and Preakness celebration scenes were absolutely infectious, and yes, Justin is adorable. The horse is the star but you can't help but root for the family. Thanks again for the heads-up. —Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 03:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't (no cable, no dish, I wait for the reruns on the internet!). But I bet it was entertaining. I've been reading up on Smokey - who was a winning reining horse. Good tale there! Montanabw^(talk) 04:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

No, we aren't fighting ;-), just fixing stuff, easier for me to revert to the last stable version and then incorporate the new stuff. Also, it's best not to put a bunch of citations at the end of sentences when they can be used within a sentence to pinpoint who said what - I've had to verify other people's FACs, and it saves drama to make it easy for them to not have to parse three different articles for one factoid. Montanabw^(talk) 23:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Was it your intention to undo my edit? If not, could you please restore the content that I added? Thanks. Dyrnych (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

No, not at all, my apologies. I got into an edit conflict screen from my iPhone and accidentally reverted. Fixing now. —Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 21:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Thought that was probably the case. No worries. Dyrnych (talk) 21:31, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

The article Dmytro Zajciw has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. --Anarchyte 03:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I've sourced the article (three times) and am still curious to know more about the subject, where and when he lived, why his prolific and influential entomological collecting career lasted only 15 years, etc. But despite limited information, I do think the article satisfies Wikipedia sourcing standards. Let's hope future readers can fill in the gaps. — Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 01:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Just a heads up that I nominated American Pharoah for featured article here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/American Pharoah/archive1 and included you as a co-nom. Montanabw^(talk) 23:30, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Isn't it enough (i.e. Maher replied that Trump needed to learn the difference between "what a joke is and what a contract is" and that the U.S. legal system is "not a toy for rich idiots to play with") re response from Maher to Trump's lawsuit? Do we really need to hear further from Maher in a BLP of Trump (i.e. do these morons [Trump's lawyers] even know it's impossible for people and apes to produce offspring?)? To me the additional text seems gossipy/tabloidian for an encyclopedia. (Comparable to including all the nasty back-and-forths Trump and Rosie may have hurled at one another. I.e. is it necessary or does it improve readers' understanding of the conflict?) IHTS (talk) 11:55, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I see your point, but please know I included the line not to heighten Maher's invective ("morons") but simply to establish, for readers who seemed baffled by the previous Wikipedia summaries of the lawsuit, that Maher stated what should be obvious: humans and orangutans can't reproduce. I'd be fine with a neutral paraphrase of that last line rather than Maher's actual quote. Would that work? Should I try it out? (Believe it or not, there may be readers, I'm thinking fifth graders, who don't necessarily know that yet and it may help them "get the joke".) Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 12:30, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Ihardlythinkso: Fixed. And I notice that I accidentally mangled your UserName in my edit summary. My apologies. It was a memory lapse and not meant to be smarmy or cute. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 12:47, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I think he's fine. He looked more sweated up and tired than in past races. I've taken to evaluating things by how hard Baffert is chewing his gum (grin), and he was tense before the race - he was gnawing his gum into pulp. It didn't help that AP got pressed and then bumped by Frosted in the turn, but at the end of the day, I think AP was a little tired, but he looked OK to me. It was Zayat pushing for the race, not Baffert, and it was game of them to give it a shot. Here's hoping all was well. Montanabw^(talk) 22:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

@User:Montanabw i'm relieved to hear that. He worked so hard to shake Frosted on that turn, it was very tight and the bumps were scary (to me). But it seemed obvious how much Pharoah still wanted to win, and probably just didn't have the gas left to face that second challenge from Keen Ice. Can't read Baffert they way you do, but the horse looked "sad" afterwards!

BTW, CBS Evening News raised retirement speculation, as if they had heard some inside after-race talk. Is that the buzz? Am thinking this loss might put the article in ITN soon so will try to help with Travers edits. Best and thanks! Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 23:58, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like it was just Zayat crying in his (non-alcoholic) beer. [2] He looked pretty bummed out in the reaction shots, and Jill Baffert was crying for real. Zayat's wife (I'm starting to admire that lady more and more...) seemed to be taking it all in stride. So long as he's not hurt, I suspect Zayat will get over it. The Breeders' Cup beckons. And yes, I think Frosted DID bump him. Surprised that Espinoza didn't raise an objection, but I suppose it wouldn't have changed the outcome, as Keen Ice wasn't a part of it. I think Pharoah was tired, and maybe a bit bummed, but he probably was also picking up on the energy of everyone around him - he was bummed because they were. Montanabw^(talk) 00:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

@User:Montanabw Glad you said that, I really like her, too; we got a glimpse tonight of her good counsel, what obviously kept Mr. Z grounded through the bankruptcy and all those crazy media attacks a few months ago. Would love to have Saturday breakfast with these folks. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 01:01, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Interesting family. One of these days, we've got to get started on that article about Zayat's grandfather. Me, I'm plotting my Kentucky horse vacation - unfortunately won't be able to pull it off this year, dang, but I'd give my eyeteeth to see the Breeders' Cup at Keeeneland. Montanabw^(talk) 01:06, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

@Vesuvius Dogg: Greetings. On September 5, 2015, you wrote on my TalkPage: "I too am a fan of Martha Gellhorn and had the privilege of interviewing her many years ago." I envy you, as I would have very much liked to have met her, and am a big fan of, and collect first editions of her books and magazine articles. Have you by chance seen Nicole Kidman's portrayal of Gellhorn in the HBO television movie Hemingway & Gellhorn? -- fantastic!

I did have the good fortune to get to know Mary Hemingway (and Jack Hemingway) back in the 1970's in Ketchum, Idaho. She was one of the nicest, brightest and wittiest persons I've ever met -- a very impressive lady, who also took very good and expert care of Hemingway's literary estate after his death. She and Jack Hemingway became quite close in her later years, and he would frequently escort her to various events. He, too, was a very compassionate, somewhat shy, but very friendly person -- always striving (not always successfully) to maintain his personal privacy in the backwoods of Idaho, often on a trout stream, as far away as he could get from the glare of the spotlight of his father's fame.

Thanks for your message, appreciated it. Regards. --- Professor JR (talk) 16:13, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@Professor JR: I completely missed the movie, didn't know about it until glancing at Gellhorn's page. I hope Kidman got her edgy charm right, her controlled (and controlling) instinctive graces; it seemed to me that even in Thatcher's Britain, this was a woman who put titanium rods in steely resolve, and whatever might be said she was VERY much the architect of her own revival, bravo for that. I was a cub reporter, I'd pitched the story to ignorant American editors—she had been getting good British press—and my interview largely served as a book promotion "re-introducing" Gellhorn to an American audience who didn't remember her in the first place. By mutual agreement, our talks were a Hemingway-free zone, which was easy even when talking about the Spanish Civil War because you were talking to Martha Gellhorn with her endless font of anecdotes (SHE'd done the real reporting, knew everyone, etc., and you could hardly disagree with the notion that Hemingway was, for her, one of life's mere footnotes) but alas, my editors came back insisting on MORE HEMINGWAY (and AUDEN WHO?!?) and I had to sheepishly telephone her, as she predicted I would be doing. While outwardly unforthcoming and offended, she provided a deliciously pointed Hemingway anecdote in a beautiful handwritten one-page letter to me, mailed to my bureau. The perfect touch, it was included in the story and helped make it run. Her publisher (or someone) later told me that she was quite pleased with the copy, with my naïve diligence, and the fact that I'd read everything on her I could find in that pre-Internet area and was still so in the dark about history, or words to that effect. So true, which is why we needed and still need voices like hers. So they made a movie? Nothing to do with that, I'm sure, but I helped her sell a bunch of books. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 18:35, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@Vesuvius Dogg: I think you'd really enjoy the HBO movie (available on Amazon). For me at least, Nicole Kidman's performance, as well as the screenplay itself, really captured the Gellhorn you describe above. Also, let's hope that the television movie, along with efforts such as yours in your article, will help to revitalize and raise her literary profile, and to more firmly secure her a well-deserved legacy apart from being some kind of "footnote to Hemingway". (I assume you know about her work in concert with Eleanor Roosevelt during the dust-bowl and Depression for FDR's Aministration.)
But, what was the Hemingway anecdote she gave you? And is your article available on-line, or otherwise, somewhere? Would really be interested in reading it.
--- Professor JR (talk) 19:08, 5 September 2015 (UTC) (p.s. - Have just responded on the Melania TalkPage regarding that subject, which for me, really pales in contrast to this one.)

@Professor JR: I was afraid you would ask that, and yes, it is available online (in pre-Internet magazine and newspaper databases) but if I say any more I've effectively 'outed' myself on Wikipedia, and I want to remain anonymous. Suffice to say that the Hemingway anecdote made my editors happy but, between the lines, actually said MUCH less about him than it did about her, even as Gellhorn seemed to be shining the spotlight outward. Clever of her-- and the fact that a movie was made, at last, almost proves that her artful deflections of all things Hemingway was, in the end, something she worked to her advantage, roping me, ever so willingly, into the role of co-conspirator because of course her work absolutely stands on its own. (Gotta wonder, though, do people even read books any more? Isn't it pretty to think so?)

Anyway, we did speak about Eleanor Roosevelt, who had known and corresponded with my grandmother (another thing that would 'out' me if I said any more) and who had separately quarreled with another relative, but none of that made the piece even as Ms. Gellhorn provided useful personal insights. I'd like to think Ms. Gellhorn actually enjoyed our exchange. I was SO young, and of course meeting someone like her relatively early in life means spending decades wondering, as you read and learn more of history, 'I wonder what Martha (no, I didn't DARE call her that) would say, I bet she KNEW so-and-so, oh HELL, I bet she was THERE when such-and-such HAPPENED, and it was COMPLETELY another way around altogether, everyone else got it WRONG" because that was just her sort of emphatic storytelling style, which had me rapt. Needless to say she had a phenomenal memory, like she was the only person who was sober and could remember anything in the morning. I do miss that, I miss her. No one else like her.

Yes, it does make the editing task at hand rather banal by comparison. But finding consensus there need not be too "complexe", no?!? I'm more fond and sympathetic to the subject than you might believe. I don't like edit wars but always learn more on Wikipedia from people I disagree with. Funny how "Assume Good Faith" also works in real life, too. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 21:15, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

@Vesuvius Dogg: Yes, sorry, I wasn't thinking -- there would clearly be a slight "outing" problem if you were to reference a link to your article here as a User. BTW - the set-up for much of the HBO movie is Kidman as Gellhorn speaking with an interviewer, much in the way you describe that situation, and then cutting away to various flashbacks. You just might find some of your interview used in the screenplay, if they happened to find your article while doing their research for the film. Again, I apologize for having asked that. --- Professor JR (talk) 10:36, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Enjoying the exchange. On a related topic, I found this a few days ago; Gellhorn mentioned in passing. Montanabw^(talk) 20:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Durbin. 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) 11:59, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

I filled in the citation you requested, then took you up on starting that DYK. If you can think of a better hook, or a better way to phrase the current hook, feel free to do so at Template:Did you know nominations/Frederick Trump pbp 13:33, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

BTW, did you see this? Somebody tagged it for notability! That seems excessive, and disruptive to do it while it's linked to from the main page. pbp 20:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I want to try and get Beholder (horse) to GA before the Breeders' Cup Classic and the great war of the sexes between her and American Pharoah. You interested? Montanabw^(talk) 04:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@Montanabw: I'll do it! Doesn't look too onerous Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 11:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Heh! I haven't made you do those damn racing stats charts yet! LOL! Ever dig into the bowels of Equibase? (I'll start, feel free to see if you can help, but no obligation). What's driving me batshit is finding a free-use photo of her, I'm coming up blank, I've dug through Flickr, creative commons-licensed YouTube Videos (found something there for Wise Dan, at least...), I'm to the point that I may email the farm or one of the track photographers that posts stuff for ABR or something to see if they'd release a photo they own. (probably the latter easier than the former, as photographers know how to deal with sales of their own work) I haven't done much with OTRS at all (dumped that job on someone else...), and have to identify myself RL to such people to do so, which I've got to decide if I want to do that or not. Frustrating. In the meantime, we definitely need to clean up and add references, more on background, etc. Montanabw^(talk) 20:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm better at cleaning up references at this point than digging into charts, since I'm working off a fussy iPhone at the moment with a minuscule screen an awful browser which often doesn't accommodate charts (or even Google Books, argh!). Happy to clean up references, it's something I've done before to GA standard (thanks to your tutelage). BTW, have a look at Sadajirō Yamanaka to see what I've lately started and hope to expand ... a fascinating, important, but ultimately elusive character, whom I've chatted about on User Talk:CMH. — Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 21:35, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

No worries. Enjoy this video of her career highlights to date: [3]. I'd say at this point, see what's in there that still needs sources and tag away, even if note to self. Hidden text for anything that looks wonkier than a tag can flag, gnoming and copyediting as you go. It's going to be good if we can have articles on both these horses up to par by Oct 31! (Classic day, who cares about that other holiday?) In any normal year, I'd be so rooting for this mare to beat the boys, but I also do adore Pharoah and his wonderful attitude (and the Triple Crown too, of course) that I honestly don't know who to root for - I guess I'll just box an Exacta and pray for safe trips for everyone! (Add Frosted to the trifecta, perhaps - any other year I'd say he was a pretty good horse_ Montanabw^(talk) 00:43, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. You have new messages at Slon02's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Great reference. I hadn't seen that article before. Thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 06:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

thanks for your acknowledgement! I am a big fan of Marla's as she seems to be a very active philanthropist who is actually trying to do good in this world and come out of the Trump shadow and media stereotype that branded her so long ago. She is even still acting and her newest film just won an award for being so inspirational (it's about modern day racism it seems). So i applaud her and just try to help represent the current facts, not all the gossip that is decades old. keep up all the good work yourself too!  :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherbertlady (talk • contribs) 21:59, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Michelangelo Merisi, called Caravaggio - Saint John the Baptist in the Wilderness - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:08, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vesuvius Dogg. I normally do not write about hairdressers, fab though they might be. Long-dead opera singers and "forgotten" operas are my cup of tea. There's a considerable backstory to the creation of this article which you can read here. As for the DYK, I very much doubt they'll relax the rules about late nominations but that's is fine by me. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm just sorry I came in too late to read the neon-tinted promotional drafts. Sounds like I missed a Peter Sellars production, or maybe a great "mad scene" (backed by a chorus of 32 million Japanese women?!?) ... Anyway, if the DYK rules are so strict I won't feel badly if the article fails to get picked up for the pageant, you know, what with that mousy little page-cut you've now given it. But it's a "look" this encyclopedia can live with, and I liked it, at least. Voceditenore, many thanks — Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 13:39, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

There are currently 6,910,467 articles on Wikipedia.

For all your contributions, thank you! (You realize that Nyquist (horse) could have been the 5,000,000th article? (Due to count algorithms, they aren't able to pinpoint the exact one... but you never know!) 23:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Very sweet of you, MontanaBW, thank you. Of course The Signpost has already assigned the honor to some humble weed, but yes, it could have been MY longshot! To the extent that I briefly thought last week about cooking up an article which might throw a funny wrench into the fuss over this solemn encyclopedic milestone, I considered starting an article called Renoir Sucks At Painting which could be supported by a lot of RECENT media sources. But then everyone would hate me, right, and I'd have to change "Talk" to "Troll" behind "Vesuvius Dogg". Anyway, Google that Renoir thing if you want a laugh! All best Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 00:19, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I think that you could draft a humorous essay on the topic in your own userspace and see what comes of it. LOL! You could also have alternate accounts for an evil twin, as we see with User:Bishzilla, User:Darwinbish and their ilk. Montanabw^(talk) 01:38, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, Dogg. I see you removed Politifact's analysis of Carson's tax plan from the Ben Carson article. You didn't explain why, either in the edit summary or the talk page. Unexplained deletion of material creates the risk of an edit war. Please explain why you deleted the Politifact info, maybe on the Ben Carson talk page so others can weigh in. On the same subject, thanks for working on the psychology class section, it was pretty screwed up. Best regards, Lahaun (talk) 18:02, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey Lahaun, so far as I'm aware, I've only worked on the Yale psychology class section (and the pyramids a couple days ago). If I've excised Politifact's analysis it was inadvertent. I've looked over my edits — could you give me a diff which shows what you're talking about? Am happy to fix. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 18:17, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Vesuvius Dogg for your reply. It was just one sentence and I just restored it. Take a look. Regards, Lahaun (talk) 18:33, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh shit, I just realized the edit was made by User:CrossoverManiac, not you. I'm sorry and embarrassed. Lahaun (talk) 18:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

@Lahaun: No worries! I'd stab you in the belt buckle, but forgiveness is divine. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 18:55, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Vesuvius Dogg/Archive 1. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Biblioworm 21:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres - Comtesse d'Haussonville - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 03:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

		The Half-Million Award
		For your contributions to bring American Pharoah (estimated annual readership: 500,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Montanabw(talk) 19:30, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

On 21 November 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Daniel Galvin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Daniel Galvin, a British hairdresser whose clients included Margaret Thatcher and Diana, Princess of Wales, was awarded an OBE in 2006? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Daniel Galvin. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

The person you reverted on the Florida Classic page is more than likely the same person who has repeatedly removed identical information at two previous IP locations. Check the contributions for those two IP's which are currently blocked: User talk:98.254.46.182 and User talk:2601:588:C503:D220:E8D6:192D:8D8B:EF7A. Thanks for the help. Msjraz64 (talk) 21:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

On 25 November 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Louise de Broglie, Countess d'Haussonville, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Louise de Broglie, Countess d'Haussonville (pictured) was the wife, mother, sister, and daughter of members of the Académie française? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Louise de Broglie, Countess d'Haussonville. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Aloha. I'm trying to finish up another GA review at the moment. Would it be possible to get an extension on the above? Viriditas (talk) 05:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Bearing in mind the inappropriate edits of yours that I reverted today [4], are you sure you are sufficiently qualified to be doing GA reviews? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Well,after a quick check, it looks as if you are. I am surprised that I had revert you this morning. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:19, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		Thank you for volunteering your time and energy as a content reviewer on Wikipedia and for helping to insure the accuracy and qualify of our articles. Your work as an editor is far more important than any administrator and the impact you've had on improving content is more valuabe than any bureaucrat could possibly imagine. Viriditas (talk) 11:43, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lena Waithe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Showtime. 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) 09:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Happy editing! — Earwig ^talk 08:12, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

With all of the chaos going on I did not have the time to address your comment in full. There is a difference between how Andrew D. worded his statement, and how SuperCarnivore591 did so. I have nothing against poetry, but when you make almost identical posts on two RfA discussions, and post things like "I'm doing this because I am needed; I have a higher calling. I am the key to the future of the universe, I am the origin of all things." your eyebrows raise as the red flags go off. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

@Knowledgekid87: I agree with you, and there was a bit of (edit conflict) for me in that I wrote my first comment before seeing he had trolled both RfAs with the same comment. Thanks for being so civil. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 14:35, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
A very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and all your loved ones, and a joyous and prosperous 2016. All the very best from your friends: Cliftonian, Mrs Cliftonian and the two little Cliftonians. —  Cliftonian (talk)  20:36, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

	Season's Greetings
	A very happy holidays to you! I know you liked this one... --Godot13 (talk) 21:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

On 22 December 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lena Waithe, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a white, straight, female character in Master of None was rewritten as a black lesbian after Lena Waithe read for the role? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lena Waithe. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Nice work on the Lena Waithe article! It got DYK'ed recently! :) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:28, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I read your note on my talk page and will try to help you out with this ... but not today. No, a mohel doesn't have to be a rabbi, but they often give him that title out of courtesy for his religious profession. Yoninah (talk) 23:30, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a happy New Year! --Tremonist (talk) 15:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks, Tremonist! And may 2016 bring FP status to this wonderful painting by Conrad von Soest. My very best to you Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. You have new messages at Talk:Jonathan Caulkins.
Message added 19:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Everymorning (talk) 19:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

	The 78.26 RFA Appreciation award
	Thank you for the participation and support at my RFA. It is truly appreciated. I hope to be of further help around here, and if you see me doing something dumb, you know where to find me. Again, I thank you. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 01:10, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

	Wishing you a Charlie Brown Charlie Russell Christmas! 🎄
	Best wishes for your Christmas Is all you get from me 'Cause I ain't no Santa Claus Don't own no Christmas tree. But if wishes was health and money I'd fill your buck-skin poke Your doctor would go hungry An' you never would be broke." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1914. Montanabw(talk)

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:45, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Amendment request: American politics 2 and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Kevin (aka L235  · t  · c  · ping in reply) 20:08, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Paul Gauguin (French - Arii Matamoe (The Royal End) - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:48, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

	Happy New Year!
	Best wishes for a wonderful 2016!---- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Vesuvius Dogg, the nominator has responded to your most recent comment in your review here. Please stop by when you can to proceed with the review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Apocalypse Now (painting), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East Village. 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) 09:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I'll peek at your article (I'm already entertained) instead of reviewing the DYK -- but I suggest you add * ALT2 ... that Donald L. Bryant, Jr. did not ‘SELL THE HOUSE SELL THE CAR SELL THE KIDS'—instead he sold the painting" and consider appending "—for about $400,000?" Or something like that... I like the concept of keeping this one really punchy for the DKY "quirky" slot (the last of the DYKs in any set, when possible). I'm also going to ask my buddy SusunW to do the review; she always needs qpqs for her DYKs on Latin American Women and she knows how to review a BLP. (holy shit a $26M stencil? WTF are we doing wrong here editing wikipedia for free?) Montanabw^(talk) 22:51, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

MAYB EWE SHO ULDS CULP TURIN ALS TOO? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 01:53, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

ANDS PELL INALL CAPS !!! Montanabw^(talk) 14:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

TAKEO UT BANK LO ANSAGA INSTO UR WORSTED ITS Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 16:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

That just might work, god knows I have enough of those! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 09:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. An article you either created or significantly contributed to has been nominated  to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 00:22, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Vesuvius Dogg, you opened this review over a month ago, and haven't been back since. Are you planning to return, or should the nomination be put back into the reviewing pool. Please let me know here. Note that although Cirt hasn't been around, another editor will be available to work on the issues that you uncover in the course of your review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, let's return it to the reviewing pool. Thanks for your attentiveness. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 00:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response. I've updated the article talk page accordingly. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:30, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

The amendment request for Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2 has been archived at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Amendment request: American politics 2 (January 2016). For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 14:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

On 13 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Arii Matamoe, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Arii Matamoe. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 22:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Apocalypse Now Christopher Wool 1988.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. George Ho (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

On 20 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Apocalypse Now (painting), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Donald L. Bryant Jr. did not "SELL THE HOUSE SELL THE CAR SELL THE KIDS", but sold the painting in 2001? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

On 20 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Donald L. Bryant Jr., which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Donald L. Bryant Jr. did not "SELL THE HOUSE SELL THE CAR SELL THE KIDS", but sold the painting in 2001? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Vesuvius Dogg, I was wondering whether you were planning to return to this review now that issues that you raised earlier have been addressed. Please let me know here, or just post to the nomination template. (If not, I'll call for a new reviewer.) Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, it has come to my attention that you have found my recent edits to this article to be "a whitewash in every sense, full of false information." I would like to kindly ask you to elaborate on this, and I want to have a discussion about it, and why you think it is all false information. Thank you, kindly.

TheFancyFedoraWielder, the proper place for a discussion of your repeated additions to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 (which have been reversed by several editors) is on that article's Talk page. I have reversed your changes for several reasons, namely that you are deleting reliably-sourced information and making new assertions based on unreliable sourcing, including World Net Daily and Allan B. West's website. See WP:Reliable sources. And again, please take up your discussion on the article's Talk page, and thanks. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 19:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. As you can see I am still learning the ropes of Wikipedia and its rules. I should have read the page on reliable sourcing, and have had sources readily prepared at the time of editing. Perhaps I could attempt to re-edit and improve my edit on the page. Also, you were the only one who had reverted my edits, just to clarify. Thanks again.

I'm not an idiot. See also this, and WP:SOCKPUPPETRY. Thanks. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 20:31, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

	Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

There is an editor with a personal COI who works to diminish any recognition on Wikipedia about his local personal adversary. (He lives in Media, Pennsylvania, and his adversary is in West Chester, PA.) As you'll see, he has undone your work, despite having a personal conflict of interest. You may want to seek discussion about whether your work should stand or not. I would do it myself, and I'm safe here in Florida, but I don't want to get in the middle of his tirades that will result when someone challenges his point of view. He's a really nasty human being. - 50.153.102.202 (talk) 13:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

	Brianhe RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated even if I did get a bit scorched. Brianhe (talk) 02:50, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

	Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:33, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Vesuvius Dogg, thank you very much for taking on this review of Think of the children.

I commented at Talk:Think of the children/GA1 and I'll be able to respond there.

Thanks again very much for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 14:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@Vesuvius Dogg:, Have you had more of a chance to look this one over? — Cirt (talk) 11:08, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Just letting you know: [5] Montanabw^(talk) 03:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi there! I'm reaching out to you because of your involvement on the article. In the "In Popular culture" section, do you think it would be appropriate to add mention of notable comedic impressions?

There's Tony Atamanuik:

• http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/11/politics/donald-trump-bernie-sanders-debate/

Who does a well-known "Trump vs Bernie" series:

• http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-vs-bernie-comedy-series-fusion/
• http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-vs-bernie-comedy-series-fusion/
• http://www.salon.com/2016/02/05/meet_the_comedians_behind_the_trump_vs_bernie_debate_tour/

Jimmy Fallon:

• http://digg.com/video/jimmy-fallon-donald-trump
• http://www.ew.com/article/2016/02/04/jimmy-fallon-donald-trump-video

Dana Carvey:

• http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/10/dana-carvey-trump-impression-jimmy-fallon

I believe inclusion of these comedic impressions is notable and especially worthwhile in the "Popular culture" section. What do you think? Feel free to ping me for a reply. BBoyle81 (talk) 22:28, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@BBoyle81: You're probably not going to have any luck adding an impression by a comedian without an independent Wikipedia article (Tony Atamanuik) about the comedian himself. The Dana Carvey and Jimmy Fallon impressions would probably need to be footnoted not to YouTube or direct video links, but to independent articles mentioning or directing readers to those impressions. I otherwise don't anticipate a problem mentioning impersonations and satires, but to be honest, it's not an area of great personal interest to me. Hope that helps! Edit boldly . . . . Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 00:09, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

...wanna add a new section on Joseph Weichselbaum and John Staluppi, both of whom operate helicopter businesses and are trained mechanics, besides being convicted felons?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/the-donald-and-the-dealer-173892

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/trump-and-staluppi-092157

SocraticOath (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

SocraticOath, Oy. I read articles like this and wonder: what would a Trump cabinet be like? What friends would he reward with government power, and how would those Trump friends wield that power? Would his court nominations include mob-friendly judges, promoted as "pro-business"? Think on that....

Anyway, it may be easier to write about Staluppi because he has known reported mob family connections and was in business with Trump on the branded Cadillac project. There is more press on Weichselbaum and Trump, and Trump's clemency appeal letter for his drug trafficking barges is a colorful detail, but Weichselbaum is more distant from Trump in business (he's more of a vendor of services) and is not himself a known mobster (just an associate of known mobsters). So we'll have to figure out how he fits in, but I'll bet there's a way. I'll get to this in the next few days. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 23:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

On 18 March 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rafflesia consueloae, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that unlike other members of its genus, including the giant "corpse flower", the newly discovered Rafflesia consueloae smells like young coconut meat? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rafflesia consueloae. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Also please see WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE. It is your responsibility to seek consensus for your edits in a BLP before restoring them.CFredkin (talk) 15:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

As the editing timeline makes clear, CFredkin, I restored the copy and made a note on the Talk page before you posted this challenge here. Contrary to your assertion that this is Original Research, the Trump Taj Mahal money laundering settlement has been reported in The Wall Street Journal (which does mention Trump by name, distancing him from the $10 million fine by pointing out his disengagement from active casino management since approx. 2007), Fortune, and in the press release from FinCEN (U.S. Treasury). Your first deletion of this copy alleged that the issue ought to be supported by reliable secondary sources, and in that spirit I restored the copy with proper WSJ footnoting. The $477,700 US Treasury fine in 1998, and the warning in 2003, both came at a time when Trump was indisputably in active management. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 17:10, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

BLPREQESTRESTORE doesn't say that you need to start a Talk discussion before restoring. It says that YOU need to obtain consensus for your edit BEFORE restoring.CFredkin (talk) 17:25, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

IS this over yet? Montanabw^(talk) 05:23, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

No, it's taken up huge space on Talk:Donald Trump. Ridiculous! Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 12:10, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

God that's a cesspool into which even I fear to wade...! Montanabw^(talk) 23:54, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Montanabw Raincheck is fine! I'll save you an invitation to friendlier, shark-infested waters Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Katrina Pierson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Justice. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:08, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Vesuvius Dogg, the Robert Durst GA nomination is now the oldest unreviewed nomination, but it still has a note on it saying that you're cleaning up footnotes and the lede, which you put there last December. If you've completed the clean up, please remove the note so potential reviewers know that it's a safe choice to review. If you haven't completed the clean up, then I urge you to do so right away, so you can remove the note and get a prompt review. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Please see my application for assistance at the Dispute Resolution noticeboard. Regards, Dontmakemetypepasswordagain (talk) 04:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Please give renewed attention to this attempt at mediated discussion. Thank you. Dontmakemetypepasswordagain (talk) 23:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Bill Cosby 2015 Sexual Assault Charge Mugshot.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 5 May 2016.

The request for formal mediation concerning Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

art of horse racing

Thank you quality articles on horse racing and the arts, such as American Pharoah, Ahmed Zayat and Apocalypse Now (painting), performed in collaboration, for featured pictures and reviewing, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

At my talk page. Swing by for a beverage and if you have a fine Derby hat, post a pic! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 17:39, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

May want to add an infobox, such as the one at Karen O'Connor. Montanabw^(talk) 19:54, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

On the other hand, infoboxes are optional. See WP:DISINFOBOX about reasons not to include an infobox in some articles. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:27, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

And that is a really absurd fight to get into. The sports articles almost to a one use infoboxes, this is a longstanding style and appropriate. Just saying. Montanabw^(talk) 03:23, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your updates to the article, especially about her recent TV role. I removed your quote about The King and I. Every actress would use the source material in researching the role, and the fact that she had never seen the show is not encyclopedic material. If you want to include more about her in the role, it would be better for it to be comments or analysis by independent third parties, not by herself. For example, we probably could say that she was the second actress of asian descent to win a Tony, although we should cite a better source than The Korea Times for that proposition. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:26, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ssilvers: I accept your edit and rationale for it, but I do think Miles distinguishes herself in all her projects by intense character research, and it is notable that she is the first actress to win a Tony for Lady Thiang (while the Anna character has now won three times, in the original production and in two revivals). I don't think her predecessors in the role shared her diligence, going back to the novelistic source material, but that's an inference on my part... Yes, we certainly could add material about her being the second Asian or Asian-American actress to win a Tony, but that would mean bringing up Lea Salonga and I'd rather her entry not be clouded by comparison. But there's no question her Tony win has inspired a new generation, so why not, perhaps? I'd also like to include material about her Shakespearian training, and maybe something about having been an ensemble player who didn't particularly aspire to lead roles. That's all in her words, from various interviews. In any event I'm confident we'll be seeing much more of Miles soon and the article will develop appropriately in time. Thank you for starting it. (If you haven't yet seen her in The Americans you are in for a treat! She's a standout in a very talented cast.) Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 05:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

• "Obviously this a developing angle, but I think it is should be included as more information emerges."

Your meaning is unclear. Include, but only if and when more information emerges? What about until then? Figured you may want to clarify. General Ization ^Talk 00:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

@General Ization: I actually think it's enough to include now, but others may disagree. Another named witness in the LA Times article places Mateen in the club a dozen times before the attack. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 01:04, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I was mainly confused about your position, due to the "I think it is should be" construction. General Ization ^Talk 01:05, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

@General Ization: Yes, I was being rather tentative about it, because until his online activity is confirmed or verified by law enforcement, it's an explosive allegation (as it implies Mateen may have had uncomfortable gay leanings and acted out in a homicidal manner, a common M.O. for these hate crimes). I must admit, the selfie/mirror images apparently gleaned from his Facebook profile STRONGLY resemble the genre of Grindr and similar apps. So it doesn't surprise me. But the inference many in the LGBT community are likely to draw, that he was gay/closeted/self-hating/whatever, deserves strong supporting evidence. We may never know. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 01:14, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm working on Secretariat with some other editors with an eye to FAC. Want to pop by and either comment as a neutral observer or help us shepherd it through FAC? We haven't put it up yet, so you can still choose if you want to comment on it at FAC or help point out problems as a peer reviewer.. Thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 22:40, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@Montanabw: Please ping me when it goes to FAC if I'm not already weighing in. I'm such a sucker for that silly movie, gosh, even though I'm well aware of its fictionalizations. Thanks for letting me know! Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, User:Vesuvius Dogg. My name's Chris. I'm a reporter for The Washington Post, and I'm currently working on a story about edits made to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's pages during the presidential election. I'm interested in speaking with you about your experience as an editor this election cycle. Please let me know if you'd like to talk by pinging me here or shooting me an email at: chris[dot]alcantara[at]washpost.com. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriswapo (talk • contribs) 17:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))

Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas, Vesuvius Dogg!

"Here's hoping that the worst end of your trail is behind you That Dad Time be your friend from here to the end And sickness nor sorrow don't find you." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1926. Montanabw(talk) 23 December 2016 (UTC)

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:43, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: I archive 'Old Talk'.

A year ago ...

art of horse racing
... you were recipient no. 1377 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Two years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm sure you know that's inappropriate. WP:Edit summaries are meant to be "a brief explanation of an edit to a Wikipedia page." Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:13, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh I am most sure I do know, but “inappropriate” is in the eyes of the beholder—and I take pains to make sure my edits are sound, not of a frivolous or arbitrary nature, and will stand the test of time (though time on Wikipedia is not a static thing).

I don’t believe I am defacing the encyclopedia’s content in any way—one does have to be a Wikipedia “insider” even to know that there are edit histories, edit summaries, and a customary protocol which is subject to a learning curve in itself—but if you do have a problem with a specific doggerel summary I’ve occasionally made, all of which do indeed allude to and reflect upon the actual edits I make, whenever possible—by all means take it to a broader Wikipedia discipline venue where it can be discussed and seen by many more eyes, and I can be appropriately disciplined or banned from this community altogether if necessary. I’m quite certain there are people who would prefer I be silenced. Story of my life. Thank you for your concern. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 12:39, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

I've no idea who they are. Clearly your edit summaries don't deface the content as they don't touch the content, so I'm not clear why you even mention content. And of course I wouldn't use my tools here. I also don't know why you're thanking me, but whatever. Doug Weller talk 17:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ada (name), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cold Mountain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:31, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

A year ago ...

art of horse racing
... you were recipient no. 1377 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Two years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm sure you know that's inappropriate. WP:Edit summaries are meant to be "a brief explanation of an edit to a Wikipedia page." Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:13, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh I am most sure I do know, but “inappropriate” is in the eyes of the beholder—and I take pains to make sure my edits are sound, not of a frivolous or arbitrary nature, and will stand the test of time (though time on Wikipedia is not a static thing).

I don’t believe I am defacing the encyclopedia’s content in any way—one does have to be a Wikipedia “insider” even to know that there are edit histories, edit summaries, and a customary protocol which is subject to a learning curve in itself—but if you do have a problem with a specific doggerel summary I’ve occasionally made, all of which do indeed allude to and reflect upon the actual edits I make, whenever possible—by all means take it to a broader Wikipedia discipline venue where it can be discussed and seen by many more eyes, and I can be appropriately disciplined or banned from this community altogether if necessary. I’m quite certain there are people who would prefer I be silenced. Story of my life. Thank you for your concern. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 12:39, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

I've no idea who they are. Clearly your edit summaries don't deface the content as they don't touch the content, so I'm not clear why you even mention content. And of course I wouldn't use my tools here. I also don't know why you're thanking me, but whatever. Doug Weller talk 17:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Vesuvius Dogg. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ada (name), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cold Mountain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:31, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Fatted Taft. Since you had some involvement with the The Fatted Taft redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. DannyS712 (talk) 02:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Vesuvius Dogg. 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.