User talk:Will Beback/archive56

Again don't disturb my talk page with the same issue (second warning)

David, don't you see any irony in commenting about how rude someone is and discussing their psychological problems in the same passage? Would you like us to discuss our opinions of your psychological conditions? My guess is that doing so would not further the project to any degree.

As for Edith Sirius Lee, there was a very similar editor here who went by a succession of names.User:Lumiere/User:Étincelle/user:-Lumière. The latter account was the subject of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/-Lumière. WP:SOCK says: "Misusing a clean start: Repeatedly switching accounts is seen as a way of avoiding scrutiny and is considered a breach of this policy." Will Beback talk 04:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@Will Beback, you are confuse. Why do you connect me with Lumière? I looked to its contributions and did not recognise myself. I am not, will never violate SOCK. I am not, will never misuse clean start. I am perfectly clean, right now. Please respect my talk page. Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 04:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Perfectly Clean"

If you are "Perfectly Clean" as you say, Edith Sirius Lee, then you won't mind being the subject of a checkuser, then will you? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome notice

Thank you, dear Will Beback. Best regards. --Elaither (talk) 23:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The tradition of Florentine bel canto

Hi! Regarding your removal-edit here: [1]... (an edit which I'm more and more in agreement with, the more I learn about the organization which published the article; whose link you removed) ... I'd like to ask:

why did you decide to call it a dubious source?
what are your opinions on the linked articles' contents?
Is your decision to remove the information, based only on the source; or on the contents?

Thanks. Bel beller (talk) 17:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC) PS: I have no intent in restoring the link; but your motives would interest me.[reply]

Yogi Bhajan

A detailed citation is now provided in the body of the endnote. The rebuttal to the Time article was published in the 3HO Foundation magazine, Beads of Truth. I can send you a scan of the article if you would like.Guru Fatha Singh Khalsa (talk) 18:28, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Birch Society

Hello, I noticed that you reverted the changes that I had made to the 'John Birch Society' entry on the grounds that they were apparently not minor & might be? controversial. I made the following changes:

1) original: 'kept a tight reign'. changed to: 'control' as 'reign' means rule, as in the 'reign of Henry VIII' while 'kept a tight rein' (note spelling difference!) is an idiom of equestrian origin (rein being the strap by which a horse is controlled or guided). I guessed that that the original author meant 'control' and not 'rule' and, as idioms can be difficult for non-native speakers, changed this accordingly.

2) According to the John Birch Society web page, their address is 'Appleton', not 'Grand Chute'. Changed to Appleton to match what is on their web-page.

3) Removed 'Americentrism' from the introductory paragraph as it (per wikipedia!) is considered a pejorative phrase and, as such, seems to violate NPOV. It would be more correct to use this term in a section discussing criticisms of the JBS, but I couldn't figure out where to add it.

4) Split one paragraph into two as it covered two separate topics.

With the possible exception of (3) above, none of these items seem at all controversial, and do seem (at least to me) to be minor. I'm sorry if the changes caused a problem.

Mylorin (talk) 01:31, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

Curious the extremely aggressive "new" editors on the TM-related articles whose posts are routed through Canadian ISPs - at least from all appearances. I haven't decided who ECL/67.230.*** might be, though your guess is as good as any. Clearly not a genuinely "new" editor; and quite obviously either a sock of a current editor or a former bad actor returned. And, is it too much to suggest that there is an interesting confluence between EMP/99.240..*** and KBob's editing pattern, both as to arguments and articles? Which is not to say that it is a sock of KBob, just a curious confluence. Fladrif (talk) 01:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

user rights

thx for the upgrade, happy editing :-) Wikignome0530 (talk) 05:57, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AE

Hi, Will. Thanks for alerting me to the AE posting. I'm writing my statement. I posted a comment on the Talk page of AE, since something you wrote didn't quite seem clear. Thanks. TimidGuy (talk) 16:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Clark (actor/director)

Hi Will, I see that you are aware of this article. I have replaced some unreferenced P.O.V. content with what I believe is neutral well referenced content. I also deleted a short statement about a Green Card scam by User:JohnClarknew in the articles talk page as I felt it was a potentially libelous. User:JohnClarknew has now reverted the talk page and left this comment on my talk page User:Memphisto#Your John Clark edits - Which I think more than sums up his attitude. Cheers, Memphisto (talk) 18:50, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:JohnClarknew has now carried out his threat to 'remove your edits' by reverting the page back to your last edit on 7 June 2010. I notice he has also amended a sentence to read 'the TRUE story', because that is what is important to him. Nevermind neutral point of view / verifiability / no original research. Sigh. Memphisto (talk) 15:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You help is needed

I have noticed that names of some recognised Pakistani playback singers have been removed from Playback singer page and appears to be an edit war. I require your help in this regard as Akhlaq Ahmed, Saleem Raza, A Nayyar, Alamgir, Mujeeb Aalam etc are authentic names in south asian playback singing. Thanks Wings spread (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I require your help again. The editor of Playback singer is involved in an edit war with many editors for the last three months. Once with his permission I again added the names of Pakistani playback singers, he removed those again. Now you understand well what actually he is up to...Wings spread (talk) 19:22, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well sir, you are talking about good faith and what is exactly happenning with the names of Pakistani singers?? its prety obvious. Why the rules out of the sudden started applying once a powerful admin is involved??? But I will keep protesting till the time matter will not resolve. Wings spread (talk) 22:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting

I wrote most of the articles about the smoky mountains, including all the ones you edited and threaten to block me for ? Thesmokymountaindirectory.com is the birth place of all these entries . Signed HMMMM —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adekyn (talk • contribs) 21:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Raising hand here too!

This user is being rather insulting [2] would you please warn her, to back up what I told her about this extremely serious subject? [3] very bottom of page. Thank you very kindly, Respectfully yours, Joy, a.k.a. DocOfSoc (talk) 08:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope yo realized I had my tongue firmly in cheek. I was far more disturbed about her insulting remarksDocOfSoc (talk) 08:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again doc, could you quote where i insulted you anywhere and where is the name i supposedly called you? also mr big admin can you fix the problems that are rife through the french fries and potato chip articles they both need splitting or they are going to continue to offend the british94.168.210.205 (talk) 16:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CC of my reply from ISP's page:

Regardless of your personal attacks, did you miss the part where I said I support you? I went to admin discussion yesterday and argued for your "crisps" case and got no where. Name calling" how about: I am not "stupid", am already a "grown up" and BTW written language is libel not "slander" of which I did neither,as discussed here: [4] No where did I "lie", as inferred and I refrained from mentioning you only created the ISP to argue and you can't spell worth a damn. You were so busy impugning me that apparently you missed where I said I agree with you. I am extremely disappointed that an admin did not show Good Faith, assuming I "do not understand." I understand perfectly. I AGREE with you. Needs separate articles. Good luck with your quest, too bad you have lost my support. Namaste DocOfSoc (talk) 01:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

—o=Joy=has given you a Cheeseburger! Cheeseburgers promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cheeseburger, whether it be someone you've had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating! DocOfSoc (talk) 08:07, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sock

Hey. Don't know what happened there but YellowMonkey blocked another sock of his. It appears that this user creates two or three accounts at a time and then uses them (as the page he wants to edit is protected). He once also started abusing my name by creating many accounts which insult me (see here). Thank you, Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-07-29/Prem Rawat

I knew it was only a matter of time since this happened again...have you tried MedCom? Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 08:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huh.

I didn't realise you were serving on MedCom again. Heh. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 03:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

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

...again. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report

user:Gray hours is clearly another sock of Dr. Mukesh - the same edits on Playback singer, Zeba and more. Shahid • ^Talk2me 14:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:BassandAle

User:ColScott, aka Don Murphy, has been abusing Wikipedia since 2007, and his off-wiki harassment of users is unacceptable. I want to bring this to the attention of ArbCom for the purposes of instituting a permanent ban (to bypass 3RR, et cetera) but I'm not sure exactly how. Would you be able to help out? Let me know, please. elektrik SHOOS 02:39, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. Alright I just wish there was anything more we can do, but you're right, there's nothing, really. (Though I should point out that some of his behavior may qualify as cyberstalking/harassment under certain jurisdictions and is criminally punishable.) elektrik SHOOS 03:15, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Forge tipsy

Who is User:Forge tipsy a sock of? They seem to be back as Outings chair (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Everard Proudfoot (talk) 05:58, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, they got dealt with. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 05:59, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation: TM lead

I will ask for formal mediation for Lead (research content): Transcedental Meditation in the next few days. Would you like to be included as an involved user. I’ll check back on your user page for an answer. Thanks.(olive (talk) 02:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Sent you an email

(Feel free to delete this note once you've read it) elektrik SHOOS 07:18, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Slow edit-war help needed

Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semyon_Reznik&curid=21280034&action=history again. Borealis is reverting again.--Galassi (talk) 22:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your help is needed in Blood libel and Defamation. An editor is pushing through an idea that blood libel is NOT false by definition.-Galassi (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for block

Would you please block user User:Conrad940 for repeated vandalism and removal of sourced statements on the Iglesia ni Cristo article? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.68.106.13 (talk) 02:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Be Back

Sorry I am a such a firecracker. Redhead ya know. Am anxious to have you back on the 2010 controversy article. Couldn't do it without you! YOur input is highly desired!

message Please~Will Be Back ;-) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Namaste....DocOfSoc (talk) 22:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another Dr Mukesh sock...

Only Rafi (talk · contribs)... Shahid • ^Talk2me 23:12, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It must be annoying but we have another one: Hill view lane (talk · contribs). Shahid • ^Talk2me 08:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something Ain't Right

I've read enough posts on the TMM talkpages the past year or so to have a pretty good sense of the writing style, vocabulary, and approach of the various editors. These posts [5] may be signed by BwB, but I am 110% convinced that BwB did not write them. They are completely unlike his style, and use vocabulary that BwB has never shown prior evidence of possessing. I have a pretty good idea who did write them. I don't know if this is a situation for CheckUser, but I'd point out that BwB almost always posts from the SE US, not from Fairfield. I'm guessing these posts either came from Fairfield with someone else using BwB's login, or BwB is forwarding ghost-written posts. If so WP:NOSHARE appears to apply. Fladrif (talk) 15:23, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010_City_of_Bell_salary_controversy

Your views on recent edits to this article would be appreciated at Talk:2010_City_of_Bell_salary_controversy#Article. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 15:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		For your Objective and Logical Wisdom, you are valued! Thank you! DocOfSoc (talk) 00:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good too see

Thanks for deleting of TheWindpower.net so I dont come into trouble with time and to bring the special thematic Wind Power on Wikipedia to a better presence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.219.30.140 (talk) 22:58, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MHP mediation groundrules

Can you remind folks about the ground rules they've all agreed to? In particular, Glkanter says [6] "since Rick Block just said he wants to continue arguing the math ..." (I didn't say this, and it is not what I want). I'm at a complete loss for how to get him to stop this sort of behavior. Any suggestions you might have would be appreciated.

And, Gill seems to be encouraging a forest fire (see [7]). Keeping discussions on the mediation page seems like a very good idea. Can you suggest this as an additional ground rule? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:56, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Here's one of the naughty boys reporting to Master. Moreover I admit to having deep expertise. My name is Richard, by the way.

I thought I was following the instruction to have discussions about side issues, The Truth, whatever, elsewhere. Not starting a forest fire. BTW I was off wikipedia and the dear MHP for several months and the re-mediation was already progressing far. I had a lot of catching up to do. Don't worry, WP:MHP is not my day job.

On the other hand esteemed co-editors write expansive essays about wikipedia policy mixed up with little bits of POV on MHP including hidden assumptions (ie POV's which are implicit, not explicit)Gill110951 (talk) 06:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Maharishi Peace Palace

On 17 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maharishi Peace Palace, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey again

I'll have to bother you yet again - I've found two other socks of Dr. Mukesh:

Endless Life forever (talk · contribs)
Fact Viewers (talk · contribs)

Honestly, this whole thing is really getting tiresome. I can't stand it any longer. Maybe it's better to full protect Playback singer or you think it's best to leave it that way? Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "Pro" Team

I wanted to make sure you didn't miss the Guardian article about Israeli training of information guerrillas to fight shoulder to shoulder with you in defense of Israel and the Holocaust mythology that provides its power.Gombulandun (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sent you an email

See title. elektrik SHOOS 06:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Walter Mercado's bio

Hi Will Can you guide me here? I'm new to wiki. My source is Mr Walter Mercado himself. Walter asked me to edit his bio. He was ok with the information that has been taken out of his bio. How do I present him as the source of the information and put everything back? I also have to traslate all the information for the spanish version of Wikipedia. JamesJLynn (talk) 18:10, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your guidance. Mr Mercado and I will be gathering all the necessary news and magazine clippings along with other verifiable references in order to submit more information. Thanks JamesJLynn (talk) 20:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sorry saga of a certain satguru

Hi Will. I tried to post the following on the Prem Rawat article talk page, but it doesn't seem possible to edit it at present. I mentioned there that I'd found more quotes on the topic, but didn't want to 'bore the pants off everyone'. However, with Momento apparently impersonating a Jack Russell terrier that won't let go of its current favourite squeaky toy, it seems necessary to go the extra mile.

"Sublime devotion, however, comes from implicit faith and confidence in the Satguru of the time, and it must be clearly understood that only He who can bestow God-vision instantaneously within oneself is the Satguru of the time, and no one else. In reality, He is God incarnate."

excerpt from discourse given by Yogiraj Param Sant Satgurudev Shri Hans Ji Maharaj, Father of Guru Maharaj Ji, in June, 1961, at Prem Nagar, India.

"Concentration is acquired by infinite devotion and devotion is acquired from Satguru, from the Perfect Master.”

“Guru Nanak said, and Saint Tulsidas said, that anyone can become even like Brahma or Shiva, but without the Perfect Master, without the True Guru, there can be no upliftment whatsoever. Knowledge only comes from Satguru. Okay, so how do we recognize the Satguru? How do we recognize that Perfect Master?"

excerpts from ‘Remembrance is the Unbreakable Devotion’ Shri Hans Ji Maharaj. March, 1964

"Seek the shelter of the Perfect Master who has realized God; He will show you the way to realize Him. The Satguru or Realized Soul is the only shelter and it is He alone that can provide you with the vision of God." Lord Christ said, "Come to me and I shall deliver you from all troubles'" Prophet Mohammed and other prophets have all said the same thing. The question now arises, how to know and recognize the Satguru who can bestow the vision of God. Lord Krishna was the Satguru of His time; He bestowed the vision of God to His disciple Arjuna. But where to find the present living Satguru?”

excerpt from ‘How to Save Mankind from Extinction’ Satsang given by Param Sant Satgurudev Shri Hans Ji Maharaj at Prem Nagar Ashram, Hardwar, India

The claim is evidently this: that there is only one Satguru, and on his father's death, Rawat succeeded to that title. Also evident is the fact that "Satguru" and "Perfect Master" were terms that were used interchangeably by Rawat's father, but with preponderance actually given to "Satguru". The biography 'Satgurudev Shri Hans Ji Maharaj, Eternal is He, Eternal is His Knowledge' published by Divine Light mission in 1970, uses the term 'perfect master' only once (quote: "In the story of Christ we find an example of a perfect master and his message."). Nowhere else in the entire book. By contrast, the term "Satguru" is used no less than 30 times. (See http://ex-premie.org/papers/Satgurudev.htm for evidence). Enough said? Revera (talk) 10:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am reluctant to get involved in this debate, mostly because after careful reading of everyone's input, I still have no idea WTF it is about. Anyway, his father spoke no English, so it is natural he would use the Hindi word Satguru. That doesn't imply it was the preferred term; it was probably the only term. It seems to me "Perfect Master" was adopted to express the same idea in English. i.e. they are one and the same. Is this problematic? Rumiton (talk) 13:31, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editing now seems to be possible once again on the Prem Rawat talk page. Have resumed there. Revera (talk) 15:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not problematic for me, Rumiton. Here's one of the cited sources (Downton, 'Sacred Journeys', p4): "Premies prostrated to them (his family) as they did to Guru Maharaj Ji, even though in India and the United States he was the only one spoken of as "satguru", the Indian term for Perfect Master". Revera (talk) 05:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Franklin Pierce edit

Re: your comments on my Franklin Pierce edit, I was just adding some background for a statement the article already contained. Though it's true I didn't add a citation, I actually read the book I cited (yes, some of us old fogies still read hardbacks), despite the fact that you couldn't find it in Google Books. IMHO you would have done better to have added a citation needed tag than to take it upon yourself to assume that neither the other contributor's statement nor my supporting statement were of merit and to remove both to the talk page. Please remember to assume good faith when editing the efforts of others. Thanks! Bonehed (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Maharishi Heaven on Earth Development

On 28 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maharishi Heaven on Earth Development, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

William Gheen

I think that American Daily covers the previously omitted info.RichardBond (talk) 17:22, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you, very much, for your kind words at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia about my work on the article. Much appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

views of Lyndon LaRouche and the LaRouche movement

I've rewritten this article. Please do suggest any further improvements which you believe can be made.

Moreover, if you agree with my rewrite, I'd just like to say that I'm in the business of article-improving, not article-defending. I guarantee that the article now (which based as it is on secondary sources, is much more critical of LaRouche than it was before) will be under attack from LaRouche sympathisers. You're an admin and you can do something about that, but I'd just be whistling in the wind. BillMasen (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: FA

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

Hi Bruce

I guess you are trying to hide and promote your POV. Actually the books you stated as reliable sources were self published? What is your real hidden agenda? Who are you???????Whithj (talk) 05:54, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

Hi,
you've got mail.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:57, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]