Thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia. So far, I am enjoying contributing. Cbsabe (talk) 04:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stick to the facts and stop your skewed anti Armstrong spin. Why insert this into a long established Article on the guy anyway? There was never a criminal case brought by the sheriff or prosecutor because they dismissed her complaint as they found it To be false. She was a well known prostitute working as a "masseuse". Armstrong visited her several times and she personally provided him the same happy ending" she gave all her other clients. Your pathetic to drag it up and smear a Guy who has been dead 14 years! And your link to YouTube is against Wiki rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.200.171 (talk) 02:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can see you feel passionate about this and I respect that. It's not the role of Wikipedia to promote or persecute anyone, but to provide verifiable articles on notable subjects. I do strive to achieve that, and hope that you do as well.

In regard to your edit saying the allegations were false, that will be fine to add if, and only if, you can find a quality secondary source where the sheriff or prosecutor state that. I added in something to the effect that 'no charges were brought' and that civil actions also failed because that's what is supported by the sources.

In regard to your comment about youtube not being a quality source, I'd have to agree in general. However in this case, it's a video of the complainant, on a national TV show making the allegations, and it's being used to support the statement in the article that allegations existed - which clearly it does.

In regard to your question of why I have taken an interest in this article: I regularly look for vandalism and non-constructive editing on Wikipedia. I noticed that this article was being systematically blanked of all information critical of the subject, including claims that were supported by references. When an anon ip, perhaps you, questioned the veracity of the references I took the time to do a little research to find good quality secondary sources for the controversial statements that were being repeatedly deleted, and in the process discovered that Mr Armstrong was most notable for his father, his role in various churches and the scandals surrounding his sexual interests. This led me to note on the talk page for the article that our coverage of the scandals is not given sufficient weight if we compare the Wikipedia article to his obituaries in the NY Times or LA Times.

AntiVan (talk) 02:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We can go back and forth on this till hell freezes over but you are not going to spin this in your own backward mindset. And you are not going to insert the YouTube link against Wiki rules or The personal blog link. Now it is being flagged and escalated for review — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.200.171 (talk) 03:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually a good idea, since we're both in danger of 3RR. Are you listing it on WP:THIRDOPINION? AntiVan (talk) 03:31, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Lucille Ball. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated unconstructive edits can be deemed vandalism and will result in the loss of editing privileges, the term of which depends upon the severity of the editing violations. Quis separabit? 13:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, you probably were a bit quick to send this, I think if you'd looked at the article edit history, or my edit history you would have come to a different conclusion. Although I'd have to admit, it was certainly one of my more muddle headed reverts - caused by moving to quick without fully understanding what the other editor was up to. AntiVan (talk) 23:26, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I am a digital marketer at my record label and we are trying to change information on a few of our pages to fit the current state of the label. However, when I went in to make changes, I received the AntiVan notice. Please advise on how to proceed. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.221.66 (talk) 23:19, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This is for the Concord Records right? So this is probably going to be annoyingly complex when you just want to get on with things - and I can see in your edits that there's changes that genuinely will make the articles better, so Wikipedia would like to have them. There's a couple of issues.

(1) The first is that the content you were adding reads like advertising copy. For example from the Concord edit you deleted:

Concord Records is an American record label based in Beverly Hills, California.

and replaced it with

Today, CONCORD RECORDS' expanding roster of artists includes an eclectic mix of legends such as James Taylor, Paul Simon, Melissa Etheridge, Keb’ Mo’ and Taj Mahal, mainstay alternative bands in elbow and the New Pornographers, as well as groundbreaking new artists like Esperanza Spalding, Valerie June, and The Record Company.

The original was an encyclopaedic recounting of facts supported by verifiable sources, the second is puffery.

(2) As a general rule, all the information in a Wikipedia article needs to be supported by quality secondary sources. So if you want to say that you've got an "expanding roster" or an "eclectic mix of legends" then you need to be able to site a reputable source for that. A good source would be an independent reviewer of record companies, maybe an article in Rolling Stone or similar. A link to a trade publication that just reprints press releases would be a low quality, and probably unacceptable, source. Primary sources (ie you own website or press releases) are okay for a few things - for example which labels Concord owns would be fine to reference back to your own press release on your web site because it's not a controversial or marketing claim.

(3) You are not supposed to edit your own articles due to the conflict of interest. There's an extended discussion of this here. The process in this case is that you add the proposed changes to the talk page of the articles and let other editors add them in. If you ever do this and don't get a response, feel free to come back here and ask for my help and I'll be happy to have a look at it. Again, for non-controversial or marketing stuff - like changing the address, or which labels you own it's probably acceptable to just do it.

(4) I suggest you resister an account that is used only by you (not other members of your team) and doesn't have a name related to the company. On your talk page add a section saying you are associated with Concord. Being a registered user makes you easier to contact and keeps your edit history all in one place.

So in summary - create an account, no advertising copy, make suggestions for changes on the talk pages of the articles you want to change, feel free to ask for help.

Good luck, AntiVan (talk) 23:51, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, AntiVan I have talked to several people who founded Media Vision: 1. Sandy Pfister was not a founder, she was hired as a temp and then given a sect job. 2. Mike Humphries was a co founder. 3. MV's main business became UpGrade Kits and sound boards receded; they started to make chips which became important as shown in your Aureal piece. The chips were developed by 3 people. Korhan Titzer, John Minami and Bryan Colvin AT MEDIA VISION. 4. Tim Bratton did not raise $1mi. It was all raised initially by Russ Faust and Paul Jain. What link do u show to support that Tim Bratton raised $1mi. He was a very junior person at Media Vision and was not even a part of the top 25 executives. 5. Funds were raised thru Brentwood, Nazem Capital, 3i (UK). The law firm of Ware and Friedrich handled all the transactions. There were 2 rounds. Series A for 5.3mi. Series B for 7.5. 6. Initial IPO raised $45mi, Secondary $54mi and a Convertible Bond for $125mi. All by Montgomery Securities and Cowan. 7. Mr Jain was NOT indicted on 27 charges; it was only 2 after he made a deal with Bob Mueller, then US Attorney in SFO. 8.$200mi loss needs to be contexed; you cannot be lax in your article.

YOUR ARTICLE HAS VERY FEW ATTRIBUTIONS just vague information. Its not correct do such unethical reporting and misrepresent. Not correct at all. Sir. JUST AN INTERVIEW WITH TIM BRATTON WHICH IS SELF SERVING. MINE HAS PLAUSIBLE SPECIFIC FACTS; IM HAPPY FOR U TO SPEAK TO MR. JAIN AND OTHERS IF YOU WISH. Its your job to find the links.

Thank you!Techno-Trend —Preceding undated comment added 03:55, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Techno-Trend, thanks for registering an account on wikipedia and bringing this conversation to my talk page.

Everything you want to change in the article may be 100% true, but a requirement for content in articles on Wikipedia is that they have to be verified by quality secondary sources. This means you need to be able to link to an article about these events written by a reputable third party to be able to add them. This is especially important when it involves statements that are controversial and/or are about living people. If you are able to provide that sort of verifiable evidence, then the additions you want are not a problem.

In regards to the statements that are in the article that you say are false, the exact same measure of verifiability applies to them. If they are not backed up by quality secondary sources, then they should be deleted out of the article. If you are doing this, then just explain in the edit summary.

From your statements above, I assume you have some sort of connection with Media Vision or people associated with it. In this case, you shouldn't make any further edits to the article as this is regarded as a conflict of interest. Rather, just explain what content you know to be untrue on the talk page. Someone will likely check it against the sources in the article and remove it if it's not backed up.

AntiVan (talk) 04:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AntiVan ,I am so surprised to see a moderator of your capacity back up an article full of lies and ambiguous statements, without citing a single relevant reference the facts cited. All the links on MEDIA VISION PAGE are non-functional. One of them is a word-doc file which has been kept on a shared drive somewhere. Let me know in what capacity are you, challenging the changes made by me on the MVI page? What reference links do you have to support following statements? 1) One of the early employees of MVI- Sandy Pfister? How do you know? 2) Tim Bratton raising $ 1 mi for MVI? Where is the reference. Total nonsense? Faust and Jain raised the first $500k from a Taiwan investor and then from VCs that I have listed in my text. 3) Where did you got the Idea of BILL GATES assistant calling MVI? please cite reference? Sheer fraudulent info. 4) 27 counts of indictment? What is the reference here? The counts were reduced to two! 5) MVI was known more for its CD Rom kits than sound cards. Pls cite reference for your audio card..... 6) MVI made 3 Important chips- not Aureal Semiconductors. Where are the links to support this statement? 7) Where is the Information about MVI's investors?? 8) Where is the Information of MVI's IPO? 9) What relevance and reference is there for the NEW LOGO? According to the most people who know anything about MVI-this article is full of fraudulent reporting and concocted stories, which I believe have been narrated by Tim Bratton, Sandy Pfister and people who had no idea about what went on at Media Vision. This article is sheer nonsense and needs to be corrected. Please remove this article and accept the changes that I am making as they stand 100% correct. I will send you references for my text but I cannot imagine that you would endorse this article and then have the veracity to question my text which is obviously the correct version as it has facts and specifics.Techno-Trend (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Read my reply above. AntiVan (talk) 01:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AntiVan. 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)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:ICallThisAbandomentAlbumCover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:40, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AntiVan! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 11:28, Sunday, April 4, 2021 (UTC)

  Hello,
          Im trying to add a few things to your list of jugglers page. For any information on my History in Juggling just put my name in google or you tube search. Plenty of videos and even and interview on the video titled "Drop Everything/Michael Chirrick" My career has spanned over 50 years and still going..
                Thanks and Regards
               Michael Chirrick  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikec1951 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply] 

Hi Mikec1951, You are going to run into a couple of problems with this, the first is that on Wikipedia, it's not okay to write stuff about yourself. It's called conflict of interest (see WP:COI for more about this). The second problem is that the information included on Wikipedia needs to be summarised from an existing reliable published source. (See WP:VERIFY for more on this). So if you have a link to a reputable news source talking about how you are a notable juggler, then add it below, and I'll update the article for you if it meets Wikipedia's requirements. Cheers, AntiVan (talk) 13:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  OK.. I didnt realize all that. No problem. Its not important. I had planned on adding a few very important artists to this list...I understand how this works now.
                                     Thanks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikec1951 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply] 

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited AT&T, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Watson. 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) 05:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DPL bot: Good bot. You were right. Thanks, AntiVan (talk) 08:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:IntoTheLungsOfHellAlbumCover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:If you see me Tara MacLean Album cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]