User talk:Bearian

Legal disclaimer: Please read this linked page before even attempting to ask me any legal advice. Bearian 18:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archived discussions For older discussions on this User's talk page, see

1. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesMarchToJune2007,
2. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesJulyToMidAugust2007,
3. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesLateAugust2007,
4. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesEarlySept2007,
5. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesLateSept2007,
6. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesEarlyOct2007,
7. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesLateOct2007,
8. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesNov2007, and
9. User talk:Bearian/ArchivesDec2007.

Welcome! Hello, Bearian, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place :{{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  Jokestress 19:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bearian. You seem to have participated twice at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Camaron1 I have boldly indented your second participation. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 17:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! :-) I was wondering if anyone actually paid any attention to that. Mr Senseless (talk) 17:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bearian. I saw that you recently banned the IPs *99.133.177.249 (talk · contribs) and *68.123.109.90 (talk · contribs) and since this was shortly after my COI report I'm assuming it was in relation to the CRSQA article. Although I appreciate your quick action I have been trying to clean up that article and now that those two IPs seem to be restricted *Ghagele (talk · contribs) has now recently undone the update. I'd appreciate it if you could step in as I don't want to play games with this user. Please note that on his talk page he has already been warned about editing the CRSQA article due to a previous COI problem, and you can see the COI report I posted on the talk page of the CRSQA article. Thanks. --SirDecius (talk) 09:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Bearian. --SirDecius (talk) 23:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, although I have attempted to open a discussion with Ghagele (talk) about the CRSQA changes, he has once again edited the CRSQA article despite the warnings. --SirDecius (talk) 06:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bearian,

The vandalism at the Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance (USAEyes) article by SirDecius continues. I have repeatedly restored the article after the vandalism, however SirDecius returns to vandalize again.

Here are examples:

SirDecius adds a link to usaeyes.info. Let's start with the domain name itself. USAEyes is a registered trademark of the Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance. The organization has not authorized any other party to use its mark. The domain usaeyes.info is subject to a Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy arbitration National Arbitration Forum case FA0712001118174.

SirDecius added a link to usaeyes.info as "a website created specifically to discount the claimed merits of CRSQA certification and provides criticism of the CRSQA, Hagele as well as many of the surgeons listed on the CRSQA website."

The owner of the website usaeyes.info is Brent Hanson of Seattle Washington. Mr. Hanson is currently being sued in California Superior Court, Sacramento (Case 06AS00839 Hagele v. Hanson) for defamation including defamation published at the usaeyes.info website. Mr. Hanson is also being sued for invasion of privacy for publishing my personal identity including Social Security number, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, driver's license number, etc. on other websites he owns and/or controls.

Mr. Hanson previously used the Internet to attack a surgeon in Dallas Texas, violating a court order and was sentenced to 18 months in jail for contempt. Mr. Hanson used eGold accounts, an offshore registrar, and an offshore web host in an attempt to hide his violation of the court's order.

Mr. Hanson and the usaeyes.info website are not reliable or objective sources of information.

SirDecius adds to a criticism section about the organization "publicly criticized for promoting CRSQA certification by spam as well as profiting from a certification system that bears little merit to the patient." This statement is not in any manner neutral, is unsubstantiated, is casting aspersions against an organization accredited by the Health on the Net Foundation and named as a reliable source of information in US Congressional testimony and has been cited by dozens of news articles from NPRto USNews & World Report to Oprahfor the patient advocacy it provides. I have personally testified before the FDA regarding patient safety issues. I have personally researched and responded to thousands of patient questions regarding Lasik and similar vision correction surgery.

SirDecius added that I have "been the subject of criticism and his detractors have claimed that since he is neither a medical doctor nor an ophthalmologist that he does not have the credentials to accredit doctors involved in refractive surgery." We do not accredit doctors. We certify that patient outcomes meet pre-defined standards. I facilitate the policies regarding surgeon certifications that are approved by a governing Board of Trustees with the assistance of a Quality Standards Advisory Committee that includes ophthalmologists and optometrists. This facilitating the policies is primarily statistical and does not require a doctorate. Furthermore, the statement by SirDecius is unsubstantiated.

SirDecius added "questions relating to the non-profit nature of the CRSQA have arisen since it claims to hire an 'Executive Director' (Glenn Hagele) who is paid for profit by the CRSQA to manage the 'day-to-day activities'"

This statement is not neutral and is unsubstantiated. I am a paid employee of the organization and function as Executive Director. The conditions of my employment are determined by the organization's governing Board of Trustees. It appears that SirDecius is implying that there is an impropriety in a nonprofit organization paying its employees. There is not. There are thousands of nonprofits who pay their employees.

Additionally, SirDecius removed relevant links that substantiate claims about my litigation against critics of the organization and me, specifically litigation against Brent Hanson in California and a separate litigation against Mr. Hanson's former housemate Lauranell Burch.

A review of the activities of SirDecius indicates that with one exception, this person's entire activities have revolved around vandalizing and attacking me or USAEyes. Also, the entity SirDecius suddenly appeared shortly after I brought litigation against Ms. Burch. The timing is, I believe, relevant.

SirDecius apparently has a greater understanding than I regarding the policies and proceedures of Wikipedia and has successfully used those policies in an attack upon me, including getting the Glenn Hagele article removed.

I respectfully request that SirDecius and his relevant IP address(es) be banned from editing the USAEyes article, the article be protected in its pre-vandalism state, and very serious consideration be made to the permanent removal of edits by SirDecius. I ask that you use your knowledge of Wikipedia's procedures to assist me with this situation.

Ghagele (talk) 04:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bearian, Thank you for your kind attention to the Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance article. How do I go about getting the Glenn Hagele article restored? It too was subject to SirDecius vandalism.

Ghagele (talk) 16:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale for deleting the Glenn Hagele article can be seen at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Hagele. At the moment, the contents of the deleted article are still visible on a mirror site at http://www.answers.com/Glenn_Hagele. EdJohnston (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bearian. I am uncertain as to why the current revision of the CRSQA article is the one that is now in requirement of discussion prior to edits as the current incarnation is almost entirely constructed by the IP addresses that have been subsequently banned for their edits and Ghagele after he was warned not to make edits by yourself and another editor. I suggest you first revert to the version I implemented which includes important information pertaining to the criticism section and then permit the discussion of changes. I have no personal interest in the article and so if it becomes unreasonably difficult to maintain some lack of bias in regards to editing it (due to Ghagele's interference and non-compliance with the multiple COI warnings he has received) I will likely not involve myself in further matters relating to it. Thanks, regardless of what you decide. --SirDecius (talk) 17:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What prompted you to do this?

If you really must issue a warning template to an editor in good standing and you haven't just reverted one of their edits, it'd be very helpful if you specified what it is that you're objecting to.

Cheers ---Dweller (talk) 16:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, great job on adding airport articles. But is this one really notable? Also, I think it contains wrong information, e.g., near Milwaukie. Bearian (talk) 17:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good day Bearian, please see The Bruce's Airport talk page. Thanks, --Trashbag (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding all these articles has been kind of interesting, such as finding an airport with a land runway and a water runway. Pretty cool...--Trashbag (talk) 17:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 46 support, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thanks for supporting me!

-Djsasso (talk) 18:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bearian, Please give us a chance to develop our page on wikipedia. You are acting like a rabbit… This page is not an advertisement it’s a information (informative). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Directionfive (talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Bearian (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC) P.S. Sorry about the standard template warning, but I feel it was necessary to give you a quick heads up that your actions at Hirohito could possibly end up in a block for you. So don't get mad at me. Bearian (talk) 16:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I wish I knew for what exatly you blame me. My actions at "Hirohito" were only to rename the article back to "Emperor Shōwa" after someone else reverted it to "Hirohito". The first move was done by another user. It was made after a vote that indicated seven votes for the move, zero against (see here). Those who reverted my changes didn't even read the articles, replacing "Emperor Shōwa" by "Showa Emperor", "Emperor Hirohito", "[[Hirohito]], the [[Showa Emperor|Showa]] emperor" or even non sense sillyness. Never by "Hirohito" ! So why do you speak to me about the sandbox? Švitrigaila (talk) 13:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bearian, Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 34 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. I appreciate your support! I promise I will wield the mop wisely, and do my best to improve Wikipedia.

-- AKeen (talk) 15:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've rewritten the article. Please reconsider your stance at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bluetooth advertising -- Whpq (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bearian, thank you for participating in my request for adminship, which closed successfully with 47 supports, 3 opposes, and 0 neutrals. I am glad that the community thinks it can trust me with these tools; I will try and use my new mop and bucket (or vacuum cleaner!) carefully. I would like to personally thank you for your double support, I hope I meet your expectations. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 18:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...to the next New York City Meetup!

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday January 13th, Columbia University area Last: 11/3/2007 This box: view • talk • edit

In the morning, there are exciting plans for a behind-the-scenes guided tour of the American Museum of Natural History.

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to discussing meta:Wikimedia New York City issues (see the last meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck are Ghits, as I've noticed in a message to Chardish? Please reply on my talkpage, as I am not here as often as I'd like. Razorflame (talk) 00:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]