User talk:Ceese

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Ceese, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 07:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incidents on Wikipedia involving anti-manosphere bias

Hi Ceese, a new wiki is being created to provide more thorough coverage of neomasculinism than is possible on Wikipedia. For the announcement of the wiki's formation, the wiki's founders want to list some reasons why this new wiki is needed.

Generally speaking, as was noted here, Old Media sources (e.g. newspapers) tend to be considered more reliable, yet these sites almost always have an anti-manosphere bias. Their coverage of the manosphere also tends to be cursory rather than covering a lot of niche concepts insiders are interested in; these concepts then fail to meet the GNG and cannot be covered on Wikipedia. An example would be the term white knight, whose red pill definition has been repeatedly removed from Wikipedia for lack of reliable sourcing. Sites like Return of Kings usually can't be quoted on Wikipedia, because they're blogs. This is the primary impetus for the wiki's founding, but there could be others we could cite.

I was wondering if you knew of some incidents involving (1) editors being kicked off the wiki based on an anti-manosphere bias, or (2) dispute resolution forums (article talk pages, ANI, ArbCom, etc.) making biased decisions concerning manosphere-related topics, or (3) any other information that would help as the new wiki's founders seek to prepare a list of grievances as part of their explanation for why Wikipedia's coverage of the manosphere won't suffice to meet readers' needs. Thanks. Kertezc, Raymond (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elvis Schmiedekamp for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elvis Schmiedekamp 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/Elvis Schmiedekamp until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]