User talk:The Maigne Event

Hi everybody, I am The Maigne Event,and welcome to my page! I know a lot of stuff and I appreciate contributing here on Wikipedia.

The Maigne Event, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi The Maigne Event! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, The Maigne Event, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Shearonink (talk) 06:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Pass a Method talk 19:00, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Pass a Method talk 19:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The Maigne Event. The issue of whether or not George Washington can be considered a "Deist" or a "Christian" has been discussed at least 12 previous times on the article's talk pages, please refer to Previous Archived discussions about Deism. Designating him as a Deist is the current editorial consensus. Before you change that infobox information again, please take a look at the previous discussions and then post your concerns on Talk:George Washington. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 19:39, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. You did not sign your post at User talk:PAB1990 or your post at Talk:George Washington. Shearonink (talk) 20:26, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regards Fred Hampton

Im aware they monitored Fred Hampton. The reason for this is understood best in the context of the cold war, homegrown communists were feared. And Fred was not only a home grown communist but a successful chairman of a communist black political party- The Black Panthers.

But was being a communists an actual crime at that particular time, was he subject to McCarthyism law ? He was previously arrested for stealing a lot of candy bars and was punished. But one crime doesn't make a man a criminal for life.

He wasn't killed for illegal activity. He was killed unarmed, at home in bed possibly drugged by a FBI informant, because he was successfully involved in politics, revolutionary communism, which was anathema to American ideals.

To label Fred Hampton as a murdered criminal, it is necessary to prove that he was killed by the police for illegal criminal acts and not for his political activity or views, which is the consensus not only by historians but on Wikipedia. If you make a new topic in the Fred Hampton talk page regarding the issue the merits of your case can be weighed up by all editors.RedsaidFred (talk) 09:14, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see you changed the language on Fred Hampton to murder instead of assassination. Can you please elaborate on your reasoning. It might be better to take this up on the talk page, but I see you have not provided any explanation there either. Feel free to review my comment here Talk:Fred_Hampton#Murder_and_Assassination_Again. Briefly, my understanding is that assassination is the 'murder (usually of a prominent person) by a sudden and/or secret attack, often for political reasons.' How does this not apply? You reasoning seems to be that he "was not a national figure" which I find arbitrary, unexplained, and unremarkable. Please clarify. Thanks! ./zro (⠠⠵) 01:19, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I notice you have again changed the language in the Fred Hampton article without explaining the reasoning. Please make your argument on the talk page that I linked above, or at the very least respond here. Thanks. ./zro (⠠⠵) 05:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. In the future, please leave comments on my User talk:zro, rather than on my main user page. Also, it would generally be my preference to keep discussions together, rather than scattered throughout different pages.

As I understand your argument, the criteria for identifying a murder as an assassination are as follows:

the victim must hold a national political office

the victim must have been killed by an individual with official job title "assassin"

I am unfamiliar with sources which suggest this criteria. I am also unfamiliar with the discussion on Wikipedia which reached this consensus. I am going by the following definition "To murder (a prominent person) by surprise attack, as for political reasons." [1][2][3][4] If you have a valid correction on this matter, please explain in detail on the talk page. Please be sure to point to some sources, and not just make assertions. Thanks! ./zro (⠠⠵) 12:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kennedy assassination

Based on your original edit summary of "There are some questionable stuff about Lee Oswald being the assassin.Because of it, in reality this is a an unsolved murder", you appear to be inserting a variant of the "alleged" qualifier that has consistently been rejected by consensus of other editors on this subject. Please review WP:WEASEL and WP:ALLEGED for commentary on such implied equivocation, and please use the article's talkpage if you wish to explain why it is important to have such a qualifier. In general, the shorter the content of the infobox, the better. The article text is a better place to discuss less straightforward views. Acroterion (talk) 16:55, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Aaron Michaels

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 Aaron Michaels 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 important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. - Vivvt (Talk) 19:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trial name

The name of the defendant is George Michael Zimmerman, but that is not the name of the case. Both the state, Defense, and judicial are using "State of Florida vs George Zimmerman" as the title of the case.

Gaijin42 (talk) 14:54, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think the article, or article title should include "Michael" ? There is consensus on the talk page that this is not so, backed by multiple sources. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:40, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fleetwood Mac

Hi, I've left a note at User talk:Dobbyelf62 regarding the Fleetwood Mac personnel section. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved Bob Weston (guitarist) back to where it was. The other Bob Weston is also a musician, which is why this one had this title in the first place. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assassination < Murders

Hello. At Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, you have changed "Murders" from "Assassination." I would like to wonder why you are doing this, as you did not give an explanation as to why. Here are the reasons why "murder" is preferred...

It is the general consensus that they were murdered and not assassinated. "Assassination is the murder of a prominent person or political figure by a surprise attack, usually for payment or political reasons." Charles Manson did not murder the LaBiancas for any political reasons or payment, and they were not notable beforehand.
The Manson murders are just that - murders. They were sentenced for murder, not assassination, as Charles J. Guiteau was.

Thank you. If you have any questions, leave me a message. Beerest355 Talk 01:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jason Simpson

The article Jason Simpson has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created 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 ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Way2veers 14:10, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dan White

Your 3 recent edits to Dan White have been reverted, as factually incorrect. Mr. White was never convicted of murder, thus he cannot be categorized as a murderer. He was not a sniper, but simply a gunman in close range. and he was overwhelmingly known as Dan White, not Dan James White, and WP convention is to use the most common name as the article name, with the full name, and other variants, in the lede. I think you should in the future discuss any such moves on the talk page of an article, especially as you are a very new and thus somewhat inexperience editor here, and you dont want to get a reputation as a poor editor. good luck in your work here.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jason Simpson

The article Jason Simpson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

previously prodded as an unreferenced BLP with no notability. PROD removed by creator with no rationale given.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Above notices

You cannot de-prod your own article without at least giving a reason. since you have yet to provide a working reference for the article, its an unreferenced biography of a living person, which can be summarily deleted if no reference is provided. i have noticed your recent edit history (which is public record, as i hope you know), and you are making very bold, often reverted edits, in a number of highly controversial areas, in particular articles on people killed or killers. I strongly recommend that you become more familiar with policy, custom, etc here, and discuss any edits to articles about death on the article talk page, before moving ahead. I would be happy to give you any help you might need, to become a more effective editor, so please ask.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:37, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I added the two books you are likely to use as references. however, by WP standards, these are by no means reliable enough sources to justify an article on OJ's son. if this suspicion is all he is notable for (aside from being oj's son, which alone is not enough), then this will probably be deleted. Please, if you dont know how to add a reference to an article, dont create new articles. its the responsibility of editors who create articles to show from the start the evidence for the subjects notability, not the job of other editors to find it and add it.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jason Simpson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jason Simpson 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/Jason Simpson 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. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:50, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Simpson

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

Harvey Milk

I just noticed that you have been edit warring over milks being awarded the medal of freedom. i sincerely hope you can recognize that your editing behavior is disruptive, and will stop this. you are doing things like taking out lee harvey oswalds middle name, which anyone knows is simply wrong, and doesnt make sense as you have been renaming articles to include middle names which arent needed, and here remove a vital middle name. I will report you to the administrators if you continue with any sort of pattern of disruptive editing. Try editing somewhere not controversial, or discussing such edits on article talk pages. you may know a lot, but you know almost nothing about editing wikipedia, and you need to learn otherwise you are likely to be blocked from further editing (which i have no power to do, and still remain willing to help. my assistance with the jason simpson article, as you can see, got you nowhere, as the entire premise for the article was invalid.).Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hello, I'm MrX. I noticed that you made a change to an article, You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! 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. - Mr X 15:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, The Maigne Event. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 22:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, The Maigne Event. You have new messages at Yaksar's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Yaksar (let's chat) 00:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. Yaksar (let's chat) 02:11, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Chapman

You seem to be removing sourced material from this article with no explanation. Please realise that while you may not like the idea that a born again christian can kill one of the world's most famous musicians, unfortunately this is what seems to have happened. If you have another reason for removing the information please tell us what it is. Otherwise please put the information back in the article. Britmax (talk) 11:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, you can explain your edits with an Edit summary. This tells everyone why you have made your change. Britmax (talk) 11:58, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. When you do report me don't forget a source for your changes that is more than "Christians don't go around murdering other people". As to that opinion, oh my, just where do we start? Britmax (talk) 15:37, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you move a page maliciously, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Yaksar (let's chat) 21:04, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting of Trayvon Martin

I tweaked your recent edit there. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Harvey Oswald

While LHO would indeed fit the definition of a lone wolf, it would be best to provide a reference that supports the application of the term to Oswald, preferably from one of the main resources associated with the Kennedy assassination. Otherwise, the addition becomes a synthesis of the available facts, which is discouraged. Acroterion (talk) 01:11, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Plymouth Colony (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Brewster

William Brewster (Mayflower passenger) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Agents

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spector

Your disruptive edits

Please stop adding middle names when they violate WP:Common name. Thank you.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, please stop claiming you are someone you are not. That is a very strict violation of Wikipedia policies.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Altering talk page comments other than your own

Hi - I noticed that you made an edit at Talk:Nicole Brown Simpson that comes across as odd. There was a username (other than your own) with a vote next to it, and the username was changed to another (also not your own). What's going on there? EricEnfermero ^Howdy! 08:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would be this diff. And, good question...? Britmax (talk) 09:26, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Acroterion (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked this account because virtually every edit has been problematic, and because there is no evidence that it's getting any better. Most recently you've altered other peoples' comments and warned an IP for removing an offensive comment, for which they should have been praised. It doesn't appear that Wikipedia is a good fit for you. Acroterion (talk) 11:49, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sir I want my block to be overturned.This is because I have plans to retire and just get on with life.The Maigne Event (talk) 16:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to unblock you provided you undertake to use the advice you've been given by other editors to change your editing practices. Any unblock request should address the concerns that have been raised, and how you will deal with those concerns in future editing. An indefinite block isn't necessarily permanent, but we want to hear from you first. Acroterion (talk) 16:58, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did not realize when I warned the IP that I was warning the wrong person.I also did not realize that it was wrong of me to edit another person's edit.I thougt that I was being helpful.Can you tell me of the other mistakes that I made?The Maigne Event (talk) 16:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]