Jump to content

User talk:Cullen328/Archive 52

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45←Archive 50Archive 51Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54Archive 55

Keep America Beautiful Page

Hi Jim - I'm curious about why you weren't comfortable with the edits I made to the Keep America Beautiful page; if there was any information for which you had issue with, please let me know. The revisions were meant to provide updated information about the organization as the information posted (and now that remains as you removed my edits) is inaccurate and outdated. I'd be glad to offer any background required. Appreciate your efforts. Just looking to have a Wikipedia page that is factual and current. While I do work for Keep America Beautiful (hence my clear name as KABMike), I'm unclear why the descriptive language I provided is viewed a promotional vs. factual and accurate. Any guidance to ensure Wikipedia users are viewing accurate information about Keep America Beautiful would be appreciated. Thank you...and I hope I'm doing this correctly to engage in a dialogue. KABMike (talk) 04:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)KABMikeKABMike (talk) 04:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, KABMike. Your username and your big attempted edit are evidence that you are probably an undisclosed paid editor working on behalf of Keep America Beautiful. I previously advised you on your own talk page to comply with our mandatory Paid-contribution disclosure. You have not yet complied nor refuted the need to comply, so I would be justified in refusing to respond to you until you do. Your comment above is powerful evidence of your need to comply. But because you are new, I will be a bit lenient with you. Comply now, or explain why you are not obligated to comply. This is not negotiable.
As for the substance of your edits, they are completely unreferenced, which violates our core content policy Verifiability. This unreferencd content seems designed to "buff up" the reputation of Keep America Beautiful, which is contrary to another core content policy, requiring that our articles be written from the Neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for KAB to get its message out. Wikipedia is a neutral encyclopedia. Instead, this article must summarize what reliable sources unconnected with KAB say about this organization. No more and no less. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:53, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Murderabiliareal13

Didn't see you comments at User talk:Murderabiliareal13 and blocked them two minutes later. If you want to unblock then please do it. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 05:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

CambridgeBayWeather, I have no problem whatsoever with your assessment of the situation, or with your block. But thanks for asking.
IP editor, you could be right, but I am not a skilled sockpuppet investigator. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:34, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Any thoughts on this [1] before I take it to ANI? Protection hasn't stopped the determination to remove this content. If, however, there's consensus that it doesn't belong, I'll let it go. Beyond that, I'd anticipate further manipulations by dealers in this, um, endeavor, after the protection ends. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 19:55, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
The first step is extensive talk page discussion, followed by various forms of dispute resolution. Going to ANI should be the last resort in this type of situation. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:55, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
I don't have any illusions that the article talk page will yield a sensible resolution. The sole long term interest in the article comes from dealers in memorabilia, not objective contributors. The history of discussion shows little or no understanding or inclination for compromise, hence the latest removal of content, again. This is pure edit warring by COI accounts, and I've spent more than enough time on it. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
If you want to be taken seriously at ANI, then you need to go through the talk page and dispute resolution process first. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:03, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
To my eye it's cut and dried, and not worth expending that type of prolonged effort, especially given the limited interest in the topic. I'm out of there, and let the dealers have ownership of the piece. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:24, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for the help! Conrad Bairagi (talk) 19:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

91st Scripps National Spelling Bee

Please explain how this violates a BLP. I have been looking through it for quite a while and I have found evidence contradicting opposing these statements rather than supporting them. Erfson (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Please read WP:BLP#Privacy of names. We take privacy very seriously when it comes to minors. Please also read Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. A list of the names of 500 minor children is the very essence of "indiscriminate information". There is no way that you will ever get consensus for what you propose. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:57, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Pea Soup Andersen's - conflicting info within a source

Hello Cullen328, On Pea Soup Andersen's, ref 2 (the history page of restaurant's own website), the text reads that Anton and Juliette "opened a tiny restaurant and named it "Andersen's Electric Cafe" but in their accompanying photo, the sign reads "Andersen's Electrical Cafe". A tiny anomaly I know but is there anything you would suggest? Maybe a newspaper archive might mention? Thanks for any advice, JennyOz (talk) 08:48, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, JennyOz. In my opinion, the photograpic evidence is stronger, so I changed the text to "Electrical". Thanks for noticing. Feel free to improve the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:39, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much for looking at and changing! JennyOz (talk) 04:08, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Chochopk • Coffee • Gryffindor • Jimp • Knowledge Seeker • Lankiveil • Peridon • Rjd0060

Guideline and policy news

  • The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
  • A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

  • AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
  • When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
  • The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
  • There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

What to do about autobiography

Hi, I would appreciate if you could check out my reply at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#A_question_about_self-editing_a_page.DeeM28 (talk) 06:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, DeeM28. I have seen countless articles that are far worse than that one, but it has some problems. Please remember that autobiographical editing is discouraged but not forbidden. Also, outing of anonymous editors is a serious violation of policy. So, I suggest that you focus on the quality of the content. Talk:Róbert R. Spanó is the proper place for you to describe your specific concerns. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:39, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Ok. Would an "autobiography" template be appropriate, or not for this particular case? --DeeM28 (talk) 19:11, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
DeeM28, you have not expressed your concerns about the article on its talk page, and have not edited the article to improve it. Those are the first steps. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Congrats on the Arbitration Committee

Good job Erfson (talk) 03:18, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I do not understand, Erfson. Have I been involved with ArbCom lately? Not that I recall. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:20, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Oh thought I read that the arb committee was looking for members and left a note on your talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erfson (talk • contribs) 04:58, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
This is a project to improve an encyclopedia, Erfson. Try doing that. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:12, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
They are looking for clerks, not members. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:13, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

yes I am aware of the vaporwave article but I just wanted to help it a little more but thanks xoxo vaporwaveman34

hello i like vaporwave and cartoons AND YES I'M AN ADULT. 16:10, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
For this gem of an idea over the ANI thread:) The way things are going, (see this thread for a recent example), sooner or later, the sole-way out will be but to dispense T-bans or blocks on every user from both the sides.

Somehow it never cease to amazes me, as to how a set of editors manage to agree among-st themselves on every bone of contention, whilst vociferously disagreeing with but another particular set of users every-time, on every issue and vice-versa.Add to that the cross-branding of each other as villainous sock/meat-puppets, from both the camps.

Sigh......... ~ Winged BladesGodric 15:20, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Winged Blades of Godric. Have you noticed that productive, generalist editors stay away from such cliques? Some of us are devoted to the encyclopedia, and others to their POVs. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:27, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Adding photos (mobile)

Cullen, How do you add a photo to a page on a mobile device? Charcol77 (talk) 14:26, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Charcol77. I do most of my editing on an Android smartphone, using the desktop site, not the mobile site. If I find a good photo on Wikimedia Commons, there is a menu bar at the top of that image. One of the options generates wikicode to add the image to Wikipedia. Copy that code and return to the Wikipedia page, and open the edit window. Paste that code into the proper place in the edit window, and save. The image will display, but the caption will be the file name. Edit again, and change the second occurrence of the file name to a descriptive caption, and save. I use the Wikimedia Commons Android app to upload my own photos. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:48, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Heinz Wolfgang Herzfeld

Hi Cullen328, Can you please undelete the above article. Somebody put an A7 on it. It is brand new article. I just started writing it last night. scope_creep (talk) 06:13, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

At the time I deleted it, the article had only a single source, which was a primary source, a wartime interrogation report. That does nothing to establish notability. There was not even a death date for a person who is almost certainly dead. I did a good faith Google search and also a Google Books search and found zero evidence of notability. Why would you, an experienced editor, place such a poorly referenced article into the main space of the encyclopedia, instead of developing it in a sandbox or in draft space? I do not care whether you wrote it last night or six months ago. It was a non-compliant article. I will be happy to restore it if you provide at least two reliable, independent sources that demonstrate that this person is notable. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:36, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Pinging Scope creep. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:38, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
It is a brand new article, like any other article it will expanded over the next few weeks, with other reference, and because I created it late last night, when I was tired. And because it is encyclopaedic, because it shine a light on the dark corners of the world, and because other sources will be eventually found, sooner rather than later, as they always do. This guy worked in a secret German organisation during ww2, that wasn’t known about by the general public until 2008, until the NSA released the document. He is clearly notable because he worked and solved the War Office Code, which was a major British code used in the first four years of the war. He is eminently notable. The NSA thought he was notable enough by keeping the documents secret for more than 60 years, and there is other mentions of him, in the TICOM documents including the British ones, so he did exist and was he was important. You won’t find this sort of information of Google, or very rarely on Google Books, as they tend to have taken most of the low hanging fruit, and don’t address the monumentally vast amount of information that is locked up in libraries and other specialist databases. T&L does seem to mention him. Most of the references for this sort of thing come from databases, like T&L which I use most, and that I was planning to use for this. Other article of this type, that I have started, to address to the WP:BIAS in Wikipedia have always been like this initially. The B-Dienst article I expanded from an original article that had no reference, took in some parts a year hand half to find references, and now more complete and cover more areas than original academic article on it. Why this one now? scope_creep (talk) 07:39, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Every article added to main space should have enough references to significant coverage of the topic in independent, reliable secondary sources to establish notability, Scope creep. This one didn't. Please use sandboxes or draft space to develop new articles to that point before moving them to main space. If you agree to that, I will be happy to restore the content to a sandbox page for you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:35, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Coolio. scope_creep (talk) 08:44, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
There is a Sandox on my main page on Todo list #1. scope_creep (talk) 13:56, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Scope creep, I have restored the content to User:Scope creep/sandbox. I noticed that Herzfeld is mentioned in General der Nachrichtenaufklärung. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:30, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Kevin Adell

Hi Cullen328,

Thank you for candor regarding my inquiry into a page creation for Kevin Adell. It is not my intention at all to have anyone else perform my work for me on Wikipedia and I am wholly open to ideas and suggestions for improvement. I'll be happy to explore your suggestions that you mentioned and appreciate your help.

Gantman1 (talk) 20:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)Gantman1

Opinion

Hi, Cullen, do you still agree with your assessment about the notability of Akal Security at an AfD, years back? You may wish to see this and this thread.Best,~ Winged BladesGodric 09:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Winged Blades of Godric, I still think that the NYT and NPR references are adequate to establish notability. Of course, the article can be improved, although it seems fairly neutral to me. I support deleting articles about non-notable topics, including those created by followers of various religious groups. On the other hand, I oppose deleting articles about actually notable topics in a campaign to punish such editors. We have to walk a fine line. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:36, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

E.A Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant

Hi Jim (and Jim's talk page watchers). Would you (or someone else) mind taking a look at E.A Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant? Its creator is a student editor who just moved it to the mainspace without submitting it for reveiw at AfC. In addition to obvious formtting errors, I'm not seeing (at first glance) that this is notable enough to support a stand-alone article, at least not per WP:CORP; that, however, might just be me. Anyway, there's no point in cleaning up the formatting, etc. if this is only going to end up being tagged for deletion, so I thought since this seems to be located in your neck of the woods that you might be a good person to ask about it. My gut is telling to userfy this, but I haven't done lots of that kind of thing, so I don't want to create more cleanup by doing it incorrectly or unnecessarily. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly. I think that an unreferenced mainspace article by a student editor should be userfied 100% of the time. Just move it to either draft space or a subpage of the student's sandbox. As for the notability of the plant, I have no opinion one way or another, but my inclination would be to support an article about the water agency instead, comparable to our article Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), which would cover both water facilities and the history of the agency. In the spirit of full disclosure, SMUD is a former customer of my business. I know nothing personally about this facility, although I once took a river cruise that passed by their other facility. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:50, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look at this Jim. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Notability and inclusion across language-editions of Wikipedia

Greetings. I'll take you up on that. :-) Some issues on which I believe/guess we agree, first:

1. All Wikipedia editions across languages are valuable, though not all carry the same informational value in practice. (The main reason being that the various editions of Wikipedia do not have the same contributors.)

2. Non-English sources can be valid and acceptable for Wikipedia.

Now, my personal viewpoint about cultures, with which I have no idea if you'd agree or disagree: I sdop not respect all cultures. I remain hopelessly curious about each and every culture, I'm grateful for the fact that different cultures exist, and I continuously strive to learn more about every culture.

I also view each person as a composite of cultural affectation; cultures are broadly defined sets of beliefs, not always or strictly followed by every ostensible acolyte. So, this conversation will be, perforce, generalizing.

But on the basis of my personal principles, I do not respect all cultures the same. And I do not expect others, on the basis of their principles, to respect my culture. For example, someone else might abide by a culture where honor killings are culturally acceptable; they're bound to disagree with me on many an issue and disrespect my personal take on honor.

And here's something I believe, on which I do not know if we agree or disagree: The fact or the prospect of having different Wikipedias across languages (as far as subjects and content are concerned) is to be expected, in practical terms, and accepted, in terms of cultural differences, if nothing else.

Now, about the English language: it's our day and age's lingua franca, there's no denying it. The English Wikipedia is, therefore, by definition, the most easily accessible version, although (on account of population sizes) we cannot expect it to be the most used one forever. (Relatedly, this also means that its users come from a wider variety of cultures than users of other Wikipedias.) Where we might somewhat disagree is about having, as you put it, the English-language Wikipedia as "the English encyclopedia of the entire world." I feel that what's notable in one language cannot be expected to be notable in every language. Why burden the Swahili version with an item notable in the Ukrainian version? That's pushing tolerance to where it's irrelevant. I conclude by admitting I have no quick and easy rule to define our approach this issue. But an encyclopaedia should have principles and the most important for me is the validity of the information imparted. And this necessitates rejecting a lot of candidate texts, on the basis of sources of doubtful or undefinable value. Take care - and thanks for the invitation. -The Gnome (talk) 08:43, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, The Gnome. As I said earlier, I was speaking only about the English Wikipedia since I am not familiar with policy variations on other language projects. I think that every culture has its pernicious aspects that need to be identified and corrected and its nurturing aspects that should be embraced and exalted. I am the product of a culture based on and rooted in the genocide of Native Americans and the slave labor of imprisoned Africans and their descendents. I grew up in a city where unemployed workers were shot dead in the streets for marching to demand justice. I will oppose honor killings, without arrogance but with the humility that comes from acknowledging that my culture tolerated thousands of lynchings, even when I was a child.
Because of the unique position of the English language in the early 21st century and the developed status of the English Wikipedia, I generally favor an inclusionist position here, tempered by core content policies and notability guidelines. Perhaps the minor Wikipedias are language preservation projects, and if so, I support that as long as those efforts are structured as encyclopedias. When it comes to "mid tier" languages like Ukrainian and Swahili, I feel safe in expecting that most editors in those projects would write many articles related to their cultures, but would not reject policy compliant articles on any topic under the sun. Swahili readers should be able to learn about physics, chemistry and the history of Latin America, as well as about African topics, and the equivalent can be said of Ukrainian readers.
I believe that the overall goal should be the expansion in comprehensiveness of every language Wikipedia, taking into account the developmental level of each.
I apologise for my failure to respond more precisely. The hour is late and sleep beckons. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 09:37, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. It all inevitably comes down to a critical dialogue about culture. I do not disagree with your take on the history of the United States. And indeed history (material events, material conditions, social power relations, etc) shapes culture. So, when we talk (when I talk) about this or that culture, extreme care and precision is required. Me, I can vouch for the former; I cannot guarantee the latter, much as I try. Yet, I'm certain of a few things. One of them is that my opposition to the aspects of certain cultures is exercised without any humility at all, since I am neither guilty for the past that shaped my tribe's current culture, nor do I represent said culture or said tribe. Therefor, I oppose forced marriages, state-sanctioned slavery, patriarchy, and so on, no matter how they come calling, be it disguised as a popular movie or an edict from high above, and so so vehemently and forcefully.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch: I now see your viewpoint about Wikipedia(s) more clearly. It's a legitimate, IMVHO, one. I should clarify that I expect different language-versions of Wikipedia to differ on issues of social sciences, art, sports, etc. I certainly do not expect them to differ much on mathematics. (And I say "much" because I've seen quite different attributions to scientific discoveries across languages. Chauvinism has little respect for historical truth or scientific fact.) I haven't researched this but I'd bet that the vast majority of contested articles (and those about which there are the most intense disagreements) are not about Fermat's conjecture but on things like whether or not that Somali actress is notable or that Colombian writer was the first magic realist.
One thing, though. My personal worldview outline above I try not to commingle with my approach to Wikipedia editing. I strongly oppose, for instance, Daesh in all its manifestations, but if a statement they make is inclusion-worthy I'll try to contribute so that it's reproduced here as needed, even if this action may be considered by some as "promoting propaganda." Perhaps, we agree more than we disagree. Have a restful Sunday. -The Gnome (talk) 12:10, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Firebird75 comment

Hi I got your message. Thanks. As the person in the page is a radio presenter, actor , writer, etc. I was wondering what more would make a person interesting enough. I'm new to this and want to ensure I comply but at the same time want to provide a good service. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firebird75 (talk • contribs) 07:26, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Firebird75. We do not care how "interesting" a person is. We care only about summarizing the significant coverage that the person has received in independent, reliable sources. If that coverage is lacking, then the person is not eligible for a Wikipedia article. I gave you several links to read at the Teahouse. If you have any specific questions about our policies and guidelines, I will be happy to answer them. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:22, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dana Loesch

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dana Loesch. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Cullen, do I have your permission to move the extended discussion following your !vote down to the 'Extended discussion' subsection? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:10, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Please leave it to uninvolved editors to refactor the discussion, DrFleischman. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:33, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Then would you be so kind as to do it yourself? I do think the survey section has become severely sidetracked, making it difficult for newcomers to follow (as well as the closer). --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Please note that I said "uninvolved" above. Neither you nor I are uninvolved at this point, DrFleischman. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:53, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Teahouse Question: Referring to youtube/vimeo

Hi Jim - just wanted to say thanks very much for your response to my question about referencing. I've edited as per your suggestion, and will resubmit for review once I've clarified one other point with another commenter. I do have another referencing question for the article, but I think I'll post it separately to the Teahouse as it may also be more generally applicable. Girish.l (talk) 03:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Septrillion

You may want to take a look at Septrillion (talk · contribs)'s recent behaviour (personal attack in editsummary, editwarring on my userpage). Hard redirects (example: #REDIRECT [[Target page name]]) are not allowed on userpages, but soft redirects are, see Category:User_soft_redirects. He is abusing rollback and Twinkle. Edward Mordake (talk) 05:53, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

And then this happened. Edward Mordake (talk) 05:55, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) That probably wasn't the best edit summary. Where does it say redirects to mainspace are allowed? Revert was unintentional. 10Eleventeen 05:57, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@Septrillion: Are you going to apologize now? Edward Mordake (talk) 05:57, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes, for the edit summary. 10Eleventeen 05:59, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
And for the rest of your behaviour? I think Cullen328 is more than willing to take a look at it. It would be wise to apologize before he does (take a look at it). Edward Mordake (talk) 06:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@Septrillion: Edward Mordake (talk) 06:03, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
WP:3RR 10Eleventeen 06:04, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, you may get blocked for 3RR, but that doesn't answer my question. Are you going to apologize for the rest of your behavior now? Edward Mordake (talk) 06:05, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I have no clue what you're talking about. 10Eleventeen 06:08, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

True, but that is no excuse. CIR. Edward Mordake (talk) 06:08, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Hm. Edward Mordake (talk) 06:11, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
? 10Eleventeen 06:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Septrillion quickly went on a wikibreak. The only 100% foolproof way to escape consequences for your actions. Edward Mordake (talk) 06:24, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I noticed. I think that the time for this conversation to end is now. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:27, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. If Septrillion continues this kind of behavior after his Wikibreak I'll know where to find you. But I think that is unlikely. Thanks for your help. Have a nice day! Edward Mordake (talk) 06:29, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Feel free to visit my talk page at any time to discuss any other incidents. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:31, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Help

Hi, can you help me with a question - how to play the wikipedia adventure? and how to become an extended confirmed user?. Regards , Kpgjhpjm (talk) 17:17, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

For the first, go to WP:ADVENTURE and click the blue button that says "Start the adventure". If you have problems, scroll down and read the additional information below that, which includes mention of needing Javascript enabled, and it not working on "tablets and smaller mobile devices".
For the second, it will eventually happen automatically if you edit Wikipedia constructively. MPS1992 (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Want to hear a joke?

I got blocked on Facebook for three days. Some Dutch person, in a thread on the violence in Gaza, said that Israel is still "exploiting the 40-45 legacy; victims have become perpetrators." I said she was a Jew hater (and no friend of the Palestinians, since racists can't have friends), and apparently that is not allowed, but antisemitic comments are. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, that sounds like a bad block. I wonder if Facebook has an ArbCom? Of course, the current situation there is painfully and deeply tragic, and nuanced conversations can rarely take place on social media where passions run high. One thing that I like about the NPOV is that I can refrain from expressing my own intensely emotional opinions and focus on what reliable sources say instead. Take care, Drmies. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:35, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
No, you can't appeal that. I really hadn't heard that one, about the Jews exploiting the Holocaust, in a decade or two--I found it quite shocking. You'd think that in a country that hardly defended its own Jewish citizens in 40-45 they'd feel just a bit of shame, but no. Drmies (talk) 04:42, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, that argument is pretty shocking. Lots of things in the Middle East are shocking as well. I am the eternal optimist but I see very little hope for substantive progress any time soon. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:01, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
So I'm looking into this canard--odd how that word is used mostly or only in the combination "antisemitic canard"--and arrived at The Holocaust Industry. The supposed exploitation of the Holocaust (either by "the Jews" or Israel) in its extreme aspect leads to Holocaust denial, of course, but what I see in such comments is that sure, the Holocaust happened but is possibly exaggerated and certainly used somehow falsely, to legitimize... fill in the blank. These days, that blank is violence against Palestinians. So it merges all kinds of things in varying proportions--anti-Zionism, pro-Palestinian advocacy, antisemitism, anti-Israelism, Holocaust denial or trivialization, criticism of "the Jewish lobby"--which at times is just really antisemitism (if certain elements in the cocktail are preponderant), and at times more a critique (if some of the elements are zero). But that "the country of Israel just lives on the Holocaust", I consider that a canard. Anyway, all this also means that I cannot delight you via Facebook with the good news that we found Pigeon's laying place. You'll get to see the picture showing SIXTEEN EGGS in two and a half days. PS I was going to order this to see what I can do at home, considering the lack of knowledge of the Holocaust in younger generations, but phew, that's quite a price tag. Drmies (talk) 14:37, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
BookFinder.com to the rescue! Not sure how many copies you need Drmies, but there are over a dozen used copies for less than $10, shipping included: [2], [3] (look in the righthand columns). Softlavender (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! $5.14. Drmies (talk) 16:22, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

27.125.174.116

Hi,

I saw that you have blocked this IP address twice in the past as an IP sock of Bryan4562013 (talk · contribs). Well, it looks like they've continued their edits once again, and since the IP address appears to be very stable (similar edits have been coming from the IP address, so its clearly the same person over a very long period of time), so a much longer block duration might be necessary here. Thanks! 24.253.108.114 (talk) 18:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I have blocked that IP address for a month this time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:00, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Arcataroger‎

Just as an FYI I just blocked him 72 hrs for repeating the BLP vio on his talk page right after we both warned him. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Ad Orientem. If the editor pulls any more similar stunts, a much longer block would be in order. By the way, I semiprotected Assassination of John F. Kennedy a few hours ago. Keep an eye on it, please. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Done, though I'm off to bed in a few. That's probably an article I should be watching anyways given that it is like a magnet for the fringe crowd. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:33, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Peter Thiel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Peter Thiel. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

bulls

So, the bull play on words about the bull is bull??? You've got me cowed. :( ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:56, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps you can find a local comedy club that has an open mic night. Your schtick is not appropriate at the refdesks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:13, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Maybe I should report it to you when anyone else tries to be funny. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:07, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
This discussion is about your behavior, and you know that many experienced editors, not just me, are concerned about that. So take corrective action. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
One corrective action I'll take is to try to never interact with you again. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:49, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Simply avoid the problematic behavior and there will be no need for us to interact, Baseball Bugs. All will be well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:05, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
That's not it. The problem is that you reveal yourself to be a disagreeable individual, someone I would never hope to encounter in real life. (And I'm sure the feeling's mutual, be that as it may.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Actually, I have never seen you behave in a disagreeable way and have said previously that I like you and often find your comments amusing. That is not at all incompatible with my opinion that your behavior has too often been inappropriate for Wikipedia. So, please be careful about what you are sure of. As for your opinion of me, well, you are entitled to it, and my response is that my many friends and family members seem to like me and respect me just fine, and there are only a handful of people that I can recall who have expressed a dislike for me in 66 years. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:53, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, I could say the same things. So I'll just chalk it up to a bad day, and hope not to incur your wrath again. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:06, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Bay Area WikiSalon invitation!

Please join us in downtown San Francisco!
A Wikipedia panel discussion about journalism

Periodically, on the last Wednesday evening of the month, wiki enthusiasts gather at Bay Area WikiSalon to munch, mingle, and learn about new projects and ideas.

We allow time for announcements, informal conversation and working on articles. Newcomers and experienced wiki users are encouraged to attend. Bring a friend! Free Wi-Fi is available so bring your editing devices. This months focus is images!

We will have beverages (including beer and wine) plus light snacks (maybe pizza too!).

For further details and to RSVP, please see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, May 2018 (note: we are meeting at the new WMF HQ at 120 Kearny Street!)

See you soon! Ben Creasy, Nikikana, Stephen, and Wayne | (Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice here) | MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Dave Min Wikipedia Page

Hi, I saw a mention in response to Gbonline's request for assistance in how to approach editing the Dave Min Wikipedia page. I agree with Cullen328 that this page fails to meet the notoriety threshold, but also understand that local candidates often place themselves on Wikipedia in order to show up in internet searches. I'm not attempting to delete the page or mislead anyone. If you look at the language I use on the article it is neutral, factual, and cited by respected sources (NBC, The Intercept, Huffington Post, etc.)

The reason I removed the 'Min response' added by Gbonline is simple: there was already a quote from Min's campaign statement that was cited from a secondary source. Reposting the entire statement after Min had it added to Ballotopedia was wordy and unnecessary. Furthermore, Ballotpedia is not considered a reliable source. I was not, as Gbonline characterized it, portraying myself as an administrator. I followed the lead of the discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Ballotpedia

The truth is that I've added to Dave Min's page when media attention warrants it. The fact that his media coverage hasn't been entirely positive is not my fault, nor does it suggest biased editing. Attempts to remove reliable sources because it does not reflect the narrative of Gbonline's chosen candidate, however, suggests his complaints over an "edit war" are in fact an attempt to shield his candidate from earned negative media.

Ultimately, I'm committed to continuing my neutral editing; keeping things concise, well sourced, and reflective of the public record. BrittonBurdick (talk) 18:23, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

BrittonBurdick, are you an employee of a rival candidate? Please answer. If so, you must comply with WP:PAID and must stop editing Dave Min. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:36, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Cullen328, I am on the staff of a rival candidate, but have not been directed to edit this Wikipedia page and it is not a function of my duties (which are field related). I only began editing once it became clear that the page was essentially being used as a brochure for Dave Min's campaign by his volunteers and staff, like Gbonline, and thought it necessary to include all media coverage, not just copied and pasted campaign statements and promotional articles. I will include the disclaimer on the talk page; thank you for bringing it to my attention. BrittonBurdick (talk) 19:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
BrittonBurdick I am neither a volunteer or staff for the Dave Min campaign. He is the candidate I support, but I do not create fake Twitter accounts or sock-puppet on Wikipedia. I believe in transparency and want to keep Wikipedia honest. Thank you. Gbonline (talk) 19:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


Britton, perhaps you misspoke when you said "I agree with BrittonBurdick that this page fails to meet the notoriety threshold" and you meant to refer to someone else that you agree with rather than yourself.

I don't think the community is best served by having this conversation on Cullen328's page. Please make your comments on Talk:Dave_Min where I had previously addressed the issues you raised regarding Ballotopedia (sic) and your imaginative attribution of information not found in the cited sources. Gbonline (talk) 18:53, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


Thanks for your help, Jim. One other question - if a page is temporarily blocked from further editing, can people still comment in the Talk page? I would really like to see issues discussed on Talk before edits are made, and it may be necessary to block further edits to prevent disruptive behavior.
To this end, I have created a Talk:Dave Min Topic called "Proposal that this article be deleted" to allow Wikipedians to weigh in on the subject, where I have shared my reasons why I think the page should be retained. With all of the hands that had gone in historically to maintain this page, it would be terrible if somebody could just 'nuke' the page and maliciously remove it. Gbonline (talk) 23:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

How to use the encyclopedia?

Hi Jim,How can I put my details on Wikipedia? Ngcupe Yibanathi (talk) 16:16, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Ngcupe Yibanathi. That depends on what you mean by "my details". We only summarize what published, reliable sources say. Please read Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:03, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi Cullen, in regards to the "my details" comment above, I just reverted these edits from Joseph Herbert Tritton article. Looks like editor added his details to an existing article. Cmr08 (talk) 21:57, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

UPDATE! Bay Area WikiSalon moved to June 6!

Please join us in downtown San Francisco!
A Wikipedia panel discussion about journalism

Our apologies, but we are rescheduling to Wednesday, June 6 at 6:00 p.m. due to a WMF host scheduling conflict.

For further details and to RSVP, please see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, June 2018 (note: we are meeting at the new WMF HQ at 120 Kearny Street!)

See you soon! Niki, Ben, Stephen, and Wayne | (Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice here) | MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Woody Allen

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Woody Allen. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
Thank you so much for your help. I am grateful to you for your assistance.

Much appreciation, Mark Geier Titta1920 (talk) 01:40, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

John Lehman, former SecNav

Dear Jim,

I'm Mark, the guy asking for help with John Lehman's bio. Thank you for much for bringing it up to date. This has been a very tough process given my lack of experience with Wikipedia.

As for your question about availability for the public the answer is yes. I got on their web site page, library section, (Jason Schwartz, I believe at the Library too) and searched for Mr. Lehman who came up right away. There's a very, very long reprint of memos, reports, etc.

Another source would be the Nixon Library discussion of the president's foreign policy and the NSC that was taped at the Foundation by C-span on 27 May 2011. It is available on their web site. He is acknowledged as a member of the NSC staff. (This is not the same reference as the earlier reference to C-span.)

I can't thank you enough for your support though I will continue to support in a modest way Wikipedia.

If for any reason you need any more information from us, please feel free to contact me at JF Lehman & Company, mg@jflpartners.com in NYC.

Thank you, Mark

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titta1920 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome, Mark AKA Titta1920. I think the reference I found from The Diplomat is just fine to verify his work at the NSA, although the sources you mention would be excellent for any editor wanting to do a major expansion of the article. I suggest that you post them at Talk: John Lehman. Feel free to contact me for other assistance. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:52, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328/Archive_52&oldid=888962522"