User talk:Susan Mason
Comment
[edit]Hello Susan. Looking forward to collaborating with you to describe various psychiatric pharmaceuticals in full detail and precision. I would be interested in compiling a List of psychiatric pharmaceuticals Tzuhou 22:00 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)
What bias do you notice on the History of the Soviet Union page?
I dunno they think we are each other! lol Dietary Fiber
Heh heh. Caught out, Adam/Lir/Vera Cruz/Susan Mason/Dietary Fiber, which is why of course you removed the evidence from this page.
For anyone looking for evidence as to Susan Mason's multiple identities, look back on the older versions of this page, where Adam thought he could hide the fact that one of his creation, 'Susan Mason inadvertently admitted to being Dietary Fiber.
DIETARY=SUSAN=VERA=LIR PROOF: http://www.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-April/002479.html
Adam, I locked your account today, at Jimbo's request. As you know, you may apply for reinstatement either on the Wikipedia mailing list (which you are NOT BANNED from), or in person to Jimbo. As before, I am willing to help smooth over any communication with Jimbo: e-mail me personally, if you like). --Uncle Ed 13:57 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
I wonder what his new account name will be. 172
Oh you cynic, 172 :-) STÓD/ÉÍRE 01:04 Apr 15, 2003 (UTC)
Adam is barred from the mailing list under the account he was using. He'd have to come in with a different email address. -- Zoe
You don't need an email to log on. Martin
(To Martin regarding The top of Wikipedia talk:Vote) If you do not agree with the outcome of a vote, please state why. Vandalizing the vote is not acceptable. Susan Mason
from village pump
[edit]I do not understand how the editing process works here. I have been trying to contribute to the article on Idolatry however my changes are constantly reverted without comment. What can be done to improve the situation? I have tried communication with other users on the talk page, however there are only a handful of users there and most of them have been quite hostile and unwilling to discuss things with me. Susan Mason
- This is a good start, Sue.. your admitting not knowing exatly how things are done.. (which is haphazard in most cases) Second, youre admitting that there is a revert war going on (Nice to be aware of if your in one). Third is your acknowleging that communication outside of short wisenheimer comments is required to proceed. And fourth, is your honest appeal to the community. Let silence follow... go do something else... and perhaps even take it to the EN mailinglist... but MOST IMPORTANTLY - allow some time for things to settle! I dislike getting my shit reverted constantly by "some people" but what can you do? Keep your head on! -豎眩sv
In addition, I tried to remove the POV assertation that Ira Hayes is a "hero", something which he himself denied. I have not been able to engage in significant dialogue with any other user, instead, my change was reverted with the "fact" that Hayes was a hero being submitted as proof that the assertation is somehow NPOV. Susan Mason
- Isnt it Drunken Ira Hayes? - Bad joke. SV
- lol Susan Mason
RK reverted work I had done on Idolatry and left this message
- Reverting Susan Mason's gross abuse of this article. Stephan, I am willing to work with you, but Susan is making huge amounts of edits screwing this up. She is writing things that just are not true
Implying that he is not even willing to work with me. What am I supposed to do? He refuses to even discuss such things! Susan Mason
Invitation to discuss
[edit]I noticed your contributions to the choicepoint page. There is currently discusssion on the Talk:U.S._presidential_election,_2000 regarding disenfranchised voters from the infamous choicepoint list. Your insights would be welcome there. Kevin Baas | talk 20:41, 2004 Aug 17 (UTC)
Article Licensing
[edit]Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)
AfD nomination of Michael W. Wooten
[edit]Michael W. Wooten, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Michael W. Wooten satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael W. Wooten and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Michael W. Wooten during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Jreferee (Talk) 02:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Drooling requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Woland (talk) 02:21, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Notability of Mothers Organized to Stop Environmental Sin
[edit]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Mothers Organized to Stop Environmental Sin, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Mothers Organized to Stop Environmental Sin seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Mothers Organized to Stop Environmental Sin, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 20:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
[edit]
Hello Susan Mason! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 710 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
- Derek V. Smith - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 17:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of The Best Democracy Money Can Buy
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. --Nuujinn (talk) 18:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Non-Proliferation Trust has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- No sources to verify notability, no substantial changes since creation of article in 2003.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gabbe (talk) 15:26, 6 May 2011 (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) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Nomination of Joe D. Dowdy for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe D. Dowdy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe D. Dowdy until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sierrak28 (talk) 19:23, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of List of people associated with the 2003 invasion of Iraq for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people associated with the 2003 invasion of Iraq until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Pi (Talk to me!) 17:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CorpWatch until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 13:57, 21 November 2023 (UTC)