This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Thanks for uploading File:Smyrna Public Library.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:31, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Didn't end up using it after all, in favor of a picture of the library. This may be removed. Semmendinger (talk) 02:47, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Catoosa County Library 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/Catoosa County Library 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. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 16:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

• Overwhelming result to keep as of time of sig. Archiving. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 18:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I am a long term abuser of User:PhoenixS15 Americanrifle (talk) 04:31, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Easton Area Public Library, Semmendinger!

Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I've added some tags on the talk page.

To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Blythwood (talk) 02:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Semmendinger. 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:Administrators' guide/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! Mz7 (talk) 06:24, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi I have no problem with chatting here or anywhere else but it had escalated very quickly you were close to the WP:3RR and I wanted to avoid a block for either of you as you clearly didn't understand the WP:PROD rules and the other editor was foulmouthed. I could have left you to it and you could have both finished by being blocked so maybe be a little humble and climb down off your own high horse ;o) you made a mistake as we all do. A PROD can be removed by anyone including the article creator without any explanation and it's written on the PROD tag

• You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. Although not required, you are encouraged to explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, do not replace it.

People remove them all the time with no explanation. Anyway I hope you get why I left the message on the talk page as I knew that both of you were following it and the idea was to talk about the problem with the article and not call anyone out. Domdeparis (talk) 13:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I admitted in the first response I had learned that what I did was wrong, I don't know why you're still on that. I was not going to break 3RR, I'm well aware of my reverts, even if I get reverted on a revert myself twice I never push the envelope and go three times. The reason I re-added the PROD was because of that user's edit summary to you which was out of line. He obviously didn't read it, and obviously wouldn't have heeded its constructive criticisms. So I put it back - I think that's pretty fair. In any case, I learned something new, thanks. Semmendinger (talk) 14:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

You suggested taking this to your talk page so that's what I did...anyway you're welcome and happy editing! cheers Domdeparis (talk) 14:33, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I've received a message from you that my recent contributions to Crisis management have been undone because they did not appear constructive. I would like to know what wasn't constructive. Is constructive if you search the web for same document which was linked, but link broken and correct dead link with a live link which still exists and functioning! I am new in Wikipedia and would like to know what was wrong. Rcuvgd (talk) 07:10, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey, you left this message on my talk page. I removed the edit as all you did was add five "l's" to the beginning of the word "as". You didn't add a new source, so I undid your edit. If you want to know how to add a source just ask! Please see your edit and my change here. Semmendinger (talk) 12:11, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Semmendinger. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Newspapers.com The Wikipedia Library.
Message added 04:07, 2 April 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

--Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 04:07, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

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.

Bartram Trail Regional Library System

added a link pointing to American

Hart County Library

added a link pointing to Elbert County

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick work for the Library Project. I took the liberty of looking at your Contributions list, and am much impressed and grateful. But I wonder if it's quite right to rate Nancy Lee Swann "importance" as "low." "Low" is defined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Libraries/Assessment#Importance Rating as

Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article.

Dr.Swann was key in assembling one of the three top Chinese libraries in the United States, which is of at least "mid" importance in the field of library history. I was eager to write the article in light of the drive to get better representation of women. Would you be willing to reconsider?

All the best in any case, ch (talk) 21:46, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@CWH: Hey man! Thanks for the comments. To be frank, the importance ratings are highly variable and subjective based on the reviewer. There is no hard line to contrast a low and medium importance article when it comes to librarians. Many assume that if the library they worked at was important, and they played a large role in that library, then they too are of some larger importance.

I read your article and I thought it was quite good, definitely C Class Quality. Just needs some polish, but I'm not a new page reviewer so that's a little more out of my zone. When reading about Nancy I had the impression that, yes her role was important for the library, but I didn't know if the collection itself was anything of even medium importance. You say it's one of the top three Chinese libraries in the US, but nothing in the article reflects that. The name of the library itself doesn't yet have its own page (not to say it's obscure or not notable, but if it was this bastion of Chinese knowledge that's been around half a century, I would have expected it to already be written about!) This isn't meant to disparage your work! Like I said before it's a great article, but the main reason you give Nancy medium importance is because of the library she worked at. If that library doesn't have its own page I don't have any standards to hold her to. These are the reasons I lowered the importance rating.

At the end of the day though, the importance ratings are quite volatile. No one will mind if you change it back to Medium importance, but I personally would want it backed up with more reason why the Gest Memorial Chinese Library was important in the first place. Prove to me that the library itself is of medium importance (which is hard, too), and I'll allow that Nancy was of medium importance to the library world as a whole. I hope this answers your question! Always glad to give some honest feedback - I hope you view it as constructive because that's what it's meant to be! Thanks for your addition to the project! SEMMENDINGER (talk) 04:38, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Semmendinger, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 00:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work on the public libraries of Georgia. Thanks for your excellent work on the topic. Carrite (talk) 10:03, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@Carrite: Thank you! And thanks for reviewing those pages :). SEMMENDINGER (talk) 11:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello I Have been Contacted With Wikipedia Volunteer and they said there's Notability On Google of "Alrah im Wright III". Can you Check on Alrahim Wright III the Musician and Re Write his Article. Jeffersonfrfr (talk) 17:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Looks like it was speedy deleted, so I am unsure what you want me to do! SEMMENDINGER (talk) 20:12, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Semmendinger. On my talk page, you said: "Hey, wondering how WP:UNDUE factors in to the removal of the WikiProject Chiropractic banner. I understand the essay on UNDUE, and seeing how Chiropractic is a primary care role (as is Nursing in some aspects and Medicine, which also have WikiProject banners on the page) I fail to see how chiro project shouldn't be included as a group working on maintaining that article. The point of a WikiProject is to maintain certain articles that are relevant to it. Since this is a page about health care, and chiropractic is intrinsically tied to that subject, why the removal and tagging of UNDUE? The edit in question. Thanks!" SEMMENDINGER (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate the well-intended, courteous challenge. Chiropractic is not medicine, is far from conventional nursing, and is not mainstream health care. It is quackery, so I dispute that it be included among topics on health care. Following your reply here. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 17:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@Zefr: You're right, chiropractic is not medicine (nor does it claim to be, or want to be), but the article is not about medicine. It's about Health care, which is exactly where chiropractic fits. Furthermore, it is a rapidly growing profession that reaches tens of millions of Americans each year, so it's not as if it's even considered niche in Health care. Additionally, it's in the lead of the article itself, so your personal opinion notwithstanding, it definitely belongs as a project on the article. Your claim that chiropractic is quackery is stated in blatant ignorance of WP:NPOV as well, so I can tell your removal of the project was because of your own biases and not for any solid reason since WP:UNDUE doesn't fit and you didn't explain how it could possibly fit. I'll be reinstating the banner as your removal of it was without good reason. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 17:47, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

There are plenty of reviews in quality journals disputing the value of chiropractic, so it is not just my opinion or lack of using NPOV. Chiropractic sources are typically weak and generally fail WP:MEDRS. For the Health care article, I maintain chiropractic is WP:FRINGE and will raise the issue on the article Talk page, as well as at WT:MED. --Zefr (talk) 18:41, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

You're missing the point. It's not about the value or effectiveness of chiropractic, it's the fact that chiropractic is a health care profession included in that article, and thus is a valid wikiproject to be associated with the page. Beliefs aside, I'm saying you break NPOV because the subject is clearly health care and you're omitting the project from help on the article due to your own biases. If it's turned down by members on the talk page that's one thing, and that's the route you should have taken. But removing it without explanation as to why you removed it (outside of personal bias) is why I'm fighting you on this. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 18:43, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm aware of no credible, comprehensive source that substantiates chiropractic as valid health care. That it's used by misinformed people as health care does not validate it. Please provide a WP:MEDRS-quality source(s) to support your argument. --Zefr (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Here's some links: NCCIH defines it as a health care profession so does Berkeley [1] Chiropractic is health care for medicare patients. It's American-centric, but it answers your question at least. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 20:23, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Semmendinger. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article August Semmendinger, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
• instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the ((request edit)) template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Lacypaperclip (talk) 11:10, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Lacypaperclip: You do realize this has not only been acknowledged by an administrator eight years ago, but I have an entire column about this on my user page, the talk page of the article in question, and a WP:COI box on the talk page itself? SEMMENDINGER (talk) 11:26, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

That only relates to one narrow topic. I think the concerns about WP:COI lately concern chiropractic. Alexbrn (talk) 11:44, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

That's not what this COI notification was for. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 11:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Oh. But do you have any COI wrt chiropractic? Alexbrn (talk) 11:49, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Users edit within their interests. None of the chiropractic articles (save one) I have any real COI with. I also make thousands of edits to library pages and I often use my local library, shall I make a COI post about libraries as well? SEMMENDINGER (talk) 11:52, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

That's a bit different (unless your library pays you - which I doubt). If you have a COI with a chiropractic article you have worked on, you should really be declaring it, and probably tag any affected article. Not declaring this while there is a COI declaration on your use page is an unfortunate omission. Some of your many edits on chiropractic seem rather promotional and weakly sourced e.g.[2] which is the kind of thing we see from WP:PAID editors. (If you are paid you of course must say so to avoid being in breach of Wikipedia's ToU). Alexbrn (talk) 12:04, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Chiropractic doesn't pay me either. Like I said, I just have an interest in it (just like the editors who created and run WP:MED are usually physicians!) As for the activator article, I have never used, or have had used on me, an activator, so I'm clearly not associated. I have heard about activators, I have seen them, but I have no close ties with them. It would be the same as me declaring COI on a hockey stick. I've seen them used, I know what they look like, but I have never used one. And no, no one is paying me to edit Wikipedia. If they were their money would be sorely wasted on rambling sentences and cataloging talk pages. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 12:09, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

@Alexbrn: Just FYI, this post by Lacypaperclip is obvious payback for Semmendinger challenging them in the following AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Geier Robman94 (talk) 22:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Aha! Alexbrn (talk) 06:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Apologies for jumping in here. Although certainly many editors in Project Medicine are physicians I think it is a conflict of interest for them to edit articles about the profession ie: professional organizations, accrediting bodies controversies about the practice of medicine and treatment modalities among other subjects a physician is in general or specifically involved with. I think there is substantial grey area there and in the case of chiropractic the issue of fringe complicates things. From what I have seen your editing reflects sources and is generally encyclopedic. An overabundance of caution would suggest you might acknowledge COI on most articles you edit involving chiropractic. I more measured approach is probably acceptable. I am not sure how the policy should be implemented. Should an orthopedist put a COI notice if they edit an article on fractures, on their treatment? Certainly if the treatment involves a recent device they use/favor. What about an emergency physician? Personally I am more concerned with the quality of editing and it's adherence to policies and guidelines. Just my 2 pennies worth. MrBill3 (talk) 14:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

I just uploaded a photo of the Wayne County Library . --Mjrmtg (talk) 11:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Wonderful - thanks! SEMMENDINGER (talk) 12:05, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I just uploaded a photo of the Doerun Municipal Library . --Mjrmtg (talk) 12:50, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again  :) SEMMENDINGER (talk) 13:20, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

I noticed that the Barnesville Library was not on the Flint River Regional Library page - here you go --Mjrmtg (talk) 19:49, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

I have added some potential references to the "Further reading" section of the article and more on the talk page. Best. MrBill3 (talk) 14:27, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks MrBill, appreciate the help! SEMMENDINGER (talk) 14:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Nice work. Some refs for the membership section would help finish it up. I see it as an encyclopedic article that covers the organization well and clearly. Thank you for your contributions. MrBill3 (talk) 14:24, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Let me know if you want this dropped or if it needs to be extended. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch for the help (and last night too!) :) SEMMENDINGER (talk) 03:33, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

NP. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:38, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem:, if this could be extended, this guy is still obsessed with me. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 15:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:00, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Semmendinger. 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)

Hey! Based on your edits to NationStates, I thought maybe you would be interested that I started a series of userboxes for the game. Feel free to add any or add your own!-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐) 06:38, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Help expand this article. Thank you!171.248.51.34 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but no thanks. Not my specialty or interest. Can't imagine how you even came across my talk page. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 03:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Semmendinger! I stumbled upon your userpage a while back and thought it was really well done! I've been working on formatting my own userpage and hope you don't mind that I utilized a lot of your formatting. If you do, I can totally change it. Cheers! Thsmi002 (talk) 01:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey @Thsmi002:! Glad you liked the format, feel free to use it as much as you'd like! I think it looks great on your page :) SEMMENDINGER (talk) 02:54, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you :) Thsmi002 (talk) 19:11, 28 December 2017 (UTC)