Jump to content

User talk:Cullen328/Archive 74

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 70←Archive 72Archive 73Archive 74Archive 75Archive 76→Archive 80

Various from Kiraly17

Hello Cullen328 and thank you for your valuable comments on the page entitled "Gabriel T Rozman". I am a very new user and am having a hard time navigating to respond to comments so hopefully you will get this. Firstly, regarding the photo, others have suggested that I remove it until such time that the article is approved. DO you agree. In the meantime I will try and crop as you have suggested. Next, I have had multiple comments that the article seemed too much like a resume and I think I have addressed. Another editor has gone into the article and removed some of the text which was judged by this editor to be unsubstantiated. I get it... and will be as bare bones as required to get published and then can build back slowly. A question I have asked but not been answered....I have read that when I am ready to re-submit, I can tag the draft with specific subjects or themes to possible get a quicker review. In this case I would like to tag my entry with, at a minimum, "Uruguay" and perhaps "Latin America" as Gabriel Rozman is a very well known person. It's all relative. Uruguay is a small country but this is a big person...who in the US would not be as notable. So please if you could help with info on how to Tag...when I depress the tag button I get some sort of template with random letters already in the text boxes. Thanks a million. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiraly17 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Kiraly17. I see no reason to remove the photo but I recommend cropping it to remove the blank space to the right and left of his shoulders. Please remove the external links from the body of the article, as I recommended previously. Reviewers will disapprove. In all honesty, I know nothing about tagging AFC drafts or whether that would speed the review process. But I do know a very good way to speed a review: Make sure your draft has no obvious problems. So, get rid of those external links in the body. They are red flags. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:43, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you again for your help - much appreciated, I have cropped and removed external links except where I thought absolutely necessary. Could I trouble you once more to give a quick glance to current draft to see if you notice anything offensive or which might immediately disqualify the draft...before I submit. THANKS.Kiraly17 (talk) 05:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

No, Kiraly17, those external links are NOT "absolutely necessary". They are damaging your draft. Please get rid of them. They are not appropriate. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:02, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello again - I have removed all the external references and tightened things up a bit and pressed the publish button. Does this now go into a queue for review, or do I have to separately request re-review? many thanks for your continued patience! Kiraly17 (talk) 18:58, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Kiraly17. Your draft has been declined again, because it includes many assertions that are not verified by references to reliable sources. I believe that I informed you of this requirement when I first interacted with you at the Teahouse. I have gone through your draft and added "citation needed" tags where you have made unreferenced assertions. Please be aware that Verifiability is a core content policy. So, either provide references to reliable sources verifying those assertions, or remove them. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I really appreciate your feedback and will try your patience a bit further if you will allow me. I thought I had cited that which was citable but having reviewed your valuable input, I am at a loss on how to cite (1) birth place and parentage - other than a birth certificate, or a citation on Hungarian Jews fleeing the holocaust and settling in Uruguay? (2) BS and MBA degrees other than including diplomas? (3) I don't think I can produce a citation for career history at Ernst & Young as Gabriel retired many years ago. (4) citation for Tokai Consulting - I thought that was covered with the external reference to the Tokai website that stated the mission, but having removed external references, what can serve as a citation? (5) Ditto for the Zonamerica reference - external reference removed, what can serve as a citation ? (6) for Xeniors, understood, need to show some article of announcement about the number of companies created (7) board membership at Accion - again, like #4 and #5 above I thought this was covered with external reference (8) personal life - how do I site short of providing a home address and times for races completed? I have to say at this point I am feeling a bit stupid and can only thank you again for any guidance. thank you very much. PS I read your bio just now...it's so funny I was talking to some under 30s about the World Book - they had no idea what I was referring to...and in particular the cellophane layers showing the human body (skeletal, muscular, organs..) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiraly17 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Kiraly17. Birth certificates and diplomas are not acceptable because they are not published sources. If the Tokai website is a reliable source, then cite it as a reference instead of an external link. Same with other websites that verify content you want to include. Never include a home address. Race times should only be included for people notable as athletes and covered by published reliable sources. The bottom line is that any information that cannot be verified through references to reliable published sources must be removed from the draft. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:39, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Good day. My draft now has 19 citations - anything I could note cite is removed. Do I only need to publish it to put it in the queue for review? thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiraly17 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Kiraly17, did you mean to say "player" instead of "plater" in the first paragraph? Also, the personal life section is unreferenced. When all the problems are resolved, you can resubmit. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

As always, thank you. I have corrected the typo and removed the personal life section as I did not know how to cite marriage and children. It is not a necessary section anyway, had just been following the style of others. I have "published". Can you please confirm that this is the same as resubmitting as I do not find a resubmit button anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiraly17 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Your draft is now waiting for a formal review, Kiraly17. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

REGARDING THE MISGUIDED ARTICLE POSTED

Hi

This is the article Posted below. It misguides the people about our religion ISLAM and these articles people i.e 'Qadiyanis' are out of the fold of islam.

Please remove this asap.


Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya_Caliphate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mujahid 1140 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Mujahid 1140. I understand that most Muslims consider the Ahmadiyya sect to be heretical and not actually Islamic. You are entitled to your beliefs. But Wikipedia is not going to remove articles about the Ahmadiyya sect just because you don't like it. That simply isn't going to happen. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

But you guys totally published the wrong information without knowing the truth how could you be so irresponsible Waleed pakistan0699 (talk) 05:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Waleed pakistan0699, it was Google that made the mistake, not Wikipedia. Got that? GOOGLE not Wikipedia. Take your complaints to Google. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya_Caliphate (go through your article again) We are not stopping you to publish articles about them but at least publish the article based on truth .. i strongly condemn this and it needs to be correct ASAP Waleed pakistan0699 (talk) 06:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Have you complained to Google? They are the ones who made the mistake. Let me tell you something, Waleed pakistan0699. Experienced Wikipedia editors never change anything because anybody "strongly condemns" anything. Instead, we respond to carefully worded, detailed criticisms of articles, backed by links to reliable sources backing up the changes you want to make. In this case, explain at Talk:Ahmadiyya Caliphate precisely what is wrong with the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Mirza Masroor Ahmad is not a Caliph

He is a leader of Mirzai ethnic group which is not a Muslim sect. So, he is not a Caliph of any religion or religious group. The Caliphate system has been abolished since the end of first world war and Muslims have not announced any new system for caliphate since then. So considering any one the caliph or someone claiming for this title is a fraudulent activity. Atir Naeem (talk) 06:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Atir Naeem. Please be aware that Talk:Ahmadiyya Caliphate is the proper place to discuss this matter. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes he represents his own religion that have nothing to do with islam and he is not the caliph. Mujji1980 (talk) 07:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

He is the 5th "Caliph of the Messiah" of the Ahmadiyya movement, Mujji1980, and that is all that Wikipedia says. It is Google that incorrectly claimed that he was the caliph of Islam. Take your valid complaint to Google, which is the company responsible for the error. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The present caliphate of Islaam

Hello to you And Need to have abit discussion on the subject you have puted on the google about the present Caliphate of islam. For your knowledge there are Only 4 Caliphate of islam and After Time period of Hazrath Abu Bakkar siddique There is No Caliphate on earth Your are misguided please remove this Shit of Ahmeyyia Bcz in the constitution of pakistan as Islamic republic and democracy Pakistan has declared them non muslims the Ahmmadiyyaa community is not a part of Islam since 1973 After The Debate Of All Scholars,preechee, of islam in Preset 100 years This artical show Blasphemy Israr Khan Khilji (talk) 08:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just a quick comment from me, Israr Khan Khilji. Wikipedia did not put anything on Google. If you have an issue with anything Google did, there's no point complaining to Wikipedia, is there? If you buy shoes that don't fit, do you complain to the baker? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:57, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Or the butcher or the candlestick maker for that matter. MarnetteD|Talk 10:06, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Flyer22 and WanderingWanda arbitration case opened

The Arbitration Committee has accepted and opened the Flyer22 and WanderingWanda case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Flyer22 and WanderingWanda. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Flyer22 and WanderingWanda/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 30, which is when the evidence phase is scheduled to close. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Flyer22 and WanderingWanda/Workshop, which closes January 13, 2020. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. To opt out of future mailings please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Flyer22 and WanderingWanda/Notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

WikiLove Christmas!

For all your hard work, here is a Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas everybody!!!
Merry Christmas everybody!!!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Cullen328 Let's discuss it is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.


Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Vamsi20 (talk) 02:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Wait what’s happening? Vamsi20 (talk) 02:47, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Vamsi20. That's nice but I am Jewish. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:58, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Ok, then here’s a cupcake!


Vamsi20 has given you a cupcake! Cupcakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cupcake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. †

Vamsi20 (talk) 17:19, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Your recent revert

Greetings, it's nice to meet you! I saw you recently reverted one of my edits due to a concern over POV pushing. I had been consciously trying to avoid doing that by restricting myself to summarizing the sources. Anyway, I followed your suggestion and created a talk page topic, feel free to chime in if you have further thoughts. Perhaps there's a way we can include the material while also satisfying your concerns. Cheerio, and have a happy and safe holiday season. Pretzel butterfly (talk) 18:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Jim, thank you. SeriousTalkTalk6077 (talk) 08:42, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

biographies of state and provincial legislators of the 19th century, or articles about hit songs of 100 years ago. There are countless paintings and sculptures of the past 500 years that have been described extensively by art historians, but lack Wikipedia articles.

Jim, I appreciate you responding to me. I'd like my first times out to work with some others and assist or with a team. "Biographies of state and provincial legislators of the 19th century", I could not do that. I think anything anyone writes for any reason, even to be of service, one needs at least a passing interest in. Or they wont do a good job. I'm not sure what you mean by articles about hit songs of 100 years ago. I think that would be Debussy and Sate, no? Impressionistic piano pieces were big then? I'd again, rather work with a team.

"There are countless paintings and sculptures of the past 500 years that have been described extensively by art historians, but lack Wikipedia articles." What sources would I go to for that. Never thought about describing sculptures and Paintings, it would be mostly just reiterating the historians writings, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeriousTalkTalk6077 (talk • contribs) 08:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello SeriousTalkTalk6077. I was trying to describe the kind of topics where there are plenty of unwritten Wikipedia articles. As for reiterating the historian's writing, that is precisely what we do, but we call it "summarizing". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Replying re. a Soiland bio

I will do as you suggest when it comes to writing style, Jim. But, having spent a lifetime as a professional writer and having spent two years researching and writing the only authorized bio of the man, I'm pretty close to it. (The bio is not yet released to the public; I was careful to not reference my own work.) And everything in my history reinforces my belief in the value of images. Cheers, Kimball LivingstonMartinKL1947 (talk) 05:43, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

MartinKL1947, your expertise is appreciated but gains you no special privileges regarding a future article about Soiland. Your comments here indicate that you have a clear conflict of interest as the author of an upcoming book biography. No, you are not yet "close to it". Your draft is full of unreferenced evaluative prose. That's not neutral or verifiable. Please pay very close attention to the input of more experienced, uninvolved editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy holidays

This year, many people had COVID to fear,
The holidays are getting near,
One thing that will be clear,
We will still have holiday cheer,
Happy holidays and happy new year!!
From Interstellarity (talk) 13:53, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

2020, be gone!

Thanks, Interstellarity. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas Cullen328

Hi Cullen328, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very happy and healthy New Year,
Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,
   –Davey2010Talk 19:43, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

2020, be gone!

Thanks, Davey2010. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:30, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Donner60 (talk) is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.

2020, be gone!

Thanks, Donner60. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:31, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas Cullen!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Cullen328, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,
Jerm (talk) 00:12, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Season's Greetings

... with best wishes for a much better year in 2021.

X
Merry Christmas & Happy New Year

X Hi Jim! I hope you and yours are well and not too stressed, and may you have a peaceful time. Thanks for your kind support and words over the years. Simon Simon Adler (talk) 00:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Simon Adler. Happy Holidays! The stress is there for all of us, but under control at the moment for me. I am grateful that I have a safe place to live and a steady income, and very much aware that many other people don't. I just read two of your articles about British Jews. Nice work! Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
You mean Rose Rosenberg Jim? That was entirely the work of User:SusunW, a far more capable volunteer than I could ever hope to be. I was chatting to her some time in 2017, the time the Wikipedia:Women in red project was having a big sitewide effort. She was a relative, and I had always known of her through family 'communal memory' if you will. I mentioned this to Susun, some details that I knew about her political career and some basic bio stuff. I mentioned she would be a good WIR candidate. Well Susun ran with it. I have always been grateful for that kindness. Simon Adler (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Simon Adler, yes, I thought you did some work on that but if you just inspired another editor, that is also a good thing. You also did a lot of work on Jack Nissenthall too, right? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:16, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I did the first half of Jack's article and left some notes for conclusions, but I took a long Wikibreak and lost sight of it. Again a colleague saved me, or more importantly the article. They saved it from deletion and finished the latter Dieppe and later career sections. Those experiences have always reinforced in me that the strong positive co-operative aspect of the community far outweighs the negative stuff we all come across. And it says a lot about the positives in human nature! Regards Simon Adler (talk) 02:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Dear Cullen328, I'm going to let bygones be bygones. Thank you for giving me another chance. Best wishes for the holidays. --A.S. Brown (talk) 02:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello A.S. Brown. I am happy to see that you have been unblocked, and hope we all have a good year in 2021. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:48, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you again for your kindness, which is greatly appreciated. I hope you have a great 2021 as well; right now, the future is looking rather dark on my end, but I'm not let that affect my editing. I keep my word, and anyhow this is where I go to create something beautiful after miserable days and I want to keep it that way. I wish you you and your family a Happy New Year! --A.S. Brown (talk) 02:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Kobe Bryant

Why did you undo my edit on the Kobe Bryant page? That is correct and factual. I don't see any reason for the undoing. He did died while boarding the helicopter when it crashed since he was on thd helicopter. I even mentioned that in the article. I don't see why you undid my edit. Sami0015 (talk) 22:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Sami0015, he did not die while boarding. The helicopter was in the air for 39 minutes. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:44, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
He was on the helicopter so that is still boarding whether or not the helicopter was on the air. The moment he got on the aircraft was the moment he boarded the aircraft and when he was on or boarded the aircraft when it crashed to the ground after being in the air for 39 minutes that's when he died. Sami0015 (talk) 22:53, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Sami0015, perhaps you do not understand the meaning of boarding. Please read Boarding (transport), where it is defined. "Boarding starts with entering the vehicle and ends with the seating of each passenger and closing the doors." Boarding is over before the aircraft takes off. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:27, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Will this do? "On January 26, 2020, while traveling on a Sikorsky S-76B helicopter en route to a basketball game at the Mamba Sports Academy, Bryant died at age 41, along with his 13-year-old daughter Gianna and seven others, when the helicopter crashed in a hillside in Calabasas, California" Sami0015 (talk) 24:06, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Sami0015, I reverted your edit because you used the word "boarding" incorrectly. That was my main concern initially. But I do not think we need that much detail about the helicopter crash in the lead section of the article. There is much more detail in the body of the article and in the separate article about the crash, which is where those details belong. In the lead section, our goal is to summarize in five paragraphs Bryant's entire life and career. Why should we include relatively trivial details like the make and model of the helicopter he died in, or their precise destination? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Also, why are you editing while logged out, and signing manually? Please log in to edit. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Because I thought they were worth mentioning in the intro to add a bit more but not too much detail into it about his death in the helicopter. Sami0015 (talk) 21:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Please revoke talk page privileges

For the user you blocked, BangladeshCitizenparty (talk · contribs). Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Got it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Boing. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:31, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Following our Teahouse conversation

Dear Cullen328, First of all, thanks for taking your time to respond to me at the Teahouse. But I am a bit intrigued by what you say 'That sounds like corporate marketing jargon to me, and we want to keep that type of language out of the encyclopedia.' A product name, or a brand name has indeed at a certain moment in time been invented by a marketing organization. But it's not 'jargon'. It's like giving a name to your cat or dog (often a not so very good one, but that's another story ;-)) Now, I also know that marketing organizations tend to regularly adapt these names, like putting old wine in new bottles, and then they want to create awareness about it. I understand Wikipedia doesn't want to involve into this type of game, and become a marketing vehicle, by namedropping etc. But I think it is different when a company is acquired by another, and a product (definitely an evolving one like software) changes owner.

Let's take the dog analogy :-) On Wikipedia, you have plenty of pages about famous dog owners (-> companies), famous dogs (-> software products), and about the tricks they can do (-> applications). You even have lots of pages that list up the dogs (along with their owner) who can do certain tricks, like these 2 for example: [[1]] and [[2]]. Now if a dog changes owner, for whatever reason, it usually learns new tricks, it might also unlearn some, but it also often changes its name and haircut. In other words, it changes quite a lot. I hope that illustrates what I mean. The company I work for has done around 8 acquisitions over the past 10 years (and that's only in my area of expertise). In total, this effects information on, besides all these former companies, around 35 software products, mentioned in various places around Wikipedia.

I am having difficulties to understand why I am in a conflict of interest if I adapt these names to what they are now. I can see it a bit more if I link it to the new owner and I cut the connection to the previous one. And I can definitely see it if I start assigning new tricks to it (and thereby ignore that maybe also other dogs can do similar tricks). But I hope you understand my point, and what I mean by 'actualizing names'. Maybe I am making a too big deal out of this, and the process is less of a hurdle than I imagine. I guess the proof of the pudding will then be in the eating.

Now... the page I created is actually part of the same story, and for this one, to be clear, I declared a COI. There can obviously be debate about the exact content, and I would even be delighted if others would shed their light, as I can only learn by interacting with expert-Wikipedians like yourself and your colleague-administrators. But I had the impression, and maybe I am just being to soft by nature or not used to the harshness of this medium, that I wasn't very welcomed to initiate something I think is a large correction of information on various places. For example, the requirement to declare myself as a paid user (rather than the mentioned COI), is in my opinion a bit of a stretch, as no one in particular at my work is asking me to do edits on Wikipedia, let alone paying me for it. I just think it is fair and correct that what is out there, is rectified. Now, if that's the rule, and that is what it takes, I can do that. But I don't have any clue what the consequence is, as I thought it's forbidden for people to be paid for writings. So all that is very unclear to me. And in the meantime, I also don't know what happened to my submission. It has been replaced by a redirect. So is it somewhere following an approval/review process? Or should I start from the beginning again?

Thanks again for your time BartVanLierde (talk) 16:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello BartVanLierde. You are a paid editor. Period. End of story. Make the disclosure before editing any further. I have told you that the best course of action in order to make changes to any article concerning your employer or any of its products or acquisitions is to use the edit request process on the talk pages of the articles. Stop with the shaggy dog stories. Highly experienced volunteer editors do not appreciate it when paid editors waste our time. It never ends well for the paid editor. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Cullen328 point taken. I do want to apologize if you think I have been wasting your time. That was definitely not my intention. Kind regards BartVanLierde (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you for warm welcome i m new here can you plz guide me on article which i have written Rathoredeepa (talk) 08:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Delete Draft:Interstate 42

Draft:Interstate 42 doesn't he enough information for it to be an article. It was mentioned on U.S. Route 70 in North Carolina talk page that Interstate 42 doesn't a need an article yet. Cwater1 (talk) 04:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Cwater1. No, I am not going to delete a good faith draft outside of policy. Please read WP:Deletion policy and follow the procedures there. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:26, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Cullen328 On second thought, that article can always be improved. Cwater1 (talk) 01:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Ah well...

Sorry, I responded to the "dating" diatribe before I saw your response on the user's talk page. Oh well. Might be good for them to see that this is not the isolated opinion of one editor... --bonadea contributions talk 19:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

No problem, Bonadea. I expected someone else to reply promptly, and your reply was excellent. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Terry A Simmons article.

Dear Jim. Is there a danger that the Simmons article will be deleted in the near future? There is a news outlet here working on a piece communicating news of Simmons' death, and outlining his accomplishments. I anticipate that it will be published in the next week or so. I expect that it will ease your mind a great deal. I hope that you can wait that long for their piece to appear, before deleting anything. As you can understand I have invested a lot of work into this page. Dw861 (talk) 02:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dw861. Yes, there is a danger that the article will be nominated for deletion, because at this point, it does not include references to any independent, reliable sources that devote significant coverage to Simmons, as far as I can see. Also, the article is full of content that is not properly referenced, and includes references that are not reliable by Wikipedia's standards, such as unpublished sources. Of course, I look forward to reading that upcoming news article you mentioned, but notability requires multiple sources. I will not nominate the article for deletion myself, but I really encourage you to trim the article back dramatically. Remove all unreliable sources, and remove every bit of content that is not supported by published reliable sources. A lean, well referenced article is much more likely to survive than a bloated, poorly referenced article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Dear Jim. This is quite interesting. As an academic, and one trained to write historical narrative, I've been schooled to seek out first-hand, eye-witness accounts (and have an allergy to the second or third-hand reports that you seem to prefer). These favoured primary-sources would include the Vancouver Maritime Museum oral-history interview that has caused you such alarm.
Rather than including much material on the Don't Make a Wave Committee in the Simmons article, do I understand that more properly, you would prefer that material be moved to the Don't Make A Wave Committee article, and the remainder into the Phyllis Cormack articles? If that is so, then I can do that. Dw861 (talk) 04:06, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Dw861, your training as you briefly summarize it applies to academic writing where publishing peer reviewed original research in respected journals is king, and leads to tenure and lifelong distinction. Wikipedia honors that type of research, and we exist to summarize it, and other types of reliable sources as well. But we do not exist to be the first to publish original research or synthesis of sources, and a core content policy explicitly forbids anything like that. On Wikipedia, a precocious anonymous 14 year old is equal in every way to a 68 year old PhD with a lengthy curriculum vitae, because most editors are anonymous and our job is accurate, concise, well-referenced summarization, and definitely not brilliant research. On the internet, nobody knows that you are a dog. On Wikipedia, editors are assessed solely on the quality of their edits. Once you understand the policies and guidelines that undergird this incredibly successful project to create an enormous free encyclopedia, you should be able to recognize the problems with the article you wrote. My comments to date have entirely to do with the Simmons article. I haven't yet given the slightest thought to incorporating any of this content into any other articles. All Wikipedia content must be well referenced. Your references seem poor to me, so far. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:32, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Jim, given the passion of your response, it is possible that I may have hit a nerve--if that is the case, then I apologize. I can certainly replace Simmons' first-person observations with published sources. With what I have here at home, I've just switched out one of the Simmons' citations, for Ken Ross' 2000 publication "Environmental Conflict in Alaska", published by the University Press of Colorado. However, doing that for all of them will take time. The pandemic means that my institutional library is not presently open for in-person service. Signing books out is presently labourious. Thank you for defending the article from deletion while I go about this careful process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dw861 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Dw861, any passion you perceive is only me trying to uphold Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. As an long time editor and administrator, that is pretty much my never-ending unpaid job. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:35, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) comment: Perhaps the article could be moved to Dw861's user space while the referencing and notability issues are worked on? That would remove the time pressure and risk of deletion. Schazjmd (talk) 16:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

A pie for you!

I just wanted to thank you for your great service to Wikipedia, as hosr of the Teahouse and also as an admin. So thank you, and I hope you shall continue to make many more great contributions to Wikipedia. Векочел (talk) 13:30, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind words, Векочел. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
It only feels right to me to give thanks to someone who has made such a large impact on this encyclopedia. Векочел (talk) 20:09, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
  • Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

New Article

Hi Cullen, I'm new around here. I've been trying to get an artist's Article(Draft) back on the top of a really cool backup from people in WP(Editors were very imporntant to teach me that i was wrong). Right now I'm creating a new article because what I've tried for two months, belongs to someone else, whose wrote the article i was trying to improve. My point, I've been invited to the TeaHouse and I'm very interested in helping people like me, who have arrived without knowing and continue to seek improving. As soon as I start writing the article, I'm gonna have some doubts and I wish I could count on you. Thank you so much. Felipe Fanzeres (talk) 16:42, 8 January 2021 (UTC)Felipe Fanzeres

I want to continue the Teahouse conversation.

Here's the conversation so far: "Is is civil to imply that another editor may not edit something?

I read in a talk page in Wikipedia something like 'There is nothing wrong with the first paragraph. You may edit the other paragraphs in that section.' Is it civil to imply that editing the first paragraph is now forbidden? There was no indication (that I could see) that the person who posted it was in an official position of authority so it seemed a bit bossy or even threatening. I've seen this sort of use of 'may' more than once. Arctic Gazelle (talk) 03:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC) 

   Hello Arctic Gazelle. I agree that the comment may be perceived as a little bit bossy. But please try to assume good faith. Perhaps the editor was trying to say that they would not object to your edits to other paragraphs but wanted to have input into changes to the first paragraph. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:54, 23 December 2020 (UTC)"

How should I respond to someone who is bossy like that? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 13:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Another question, if I may? When should I tick the 'watch this page' box? What does it do? What are the pros and cons of ticking it whenever I edit a page? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 13:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Arctic Gazelle. Often, there is no need to respond, and moving on may be best. If you choose to respond, do so in a level-headed fashion, focusing on improving the specific encyclopedia article. As for your second question, please read Help:Watchlist. You should tick the box if you have any interest in following the developments on any given page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
How about if I ask, 'Do you mean I am forbidden to edit the first paragraph?' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arctic Gazelle (talk • contribs) 21:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
I had an edit conflict when I tried to add four tildes in a second edit when I realized I had forgotten to do that, and I could not figure out how to fix that. Sorry for any inconvenience. If I am logged in, why do I still need to add four tildes? Why not let the SineBot take care of it? Why does it say 'Unsigned' when it is autosigned?

Should I still write edit summaries and sign my edit when talking with you here?Arctic Gazelle (talk) 22:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Improvement

Hi, Jim. In the spirit of those friendly words at the top of your talk page, I am coming to you to seek your thoughts on how I can improve as an editor. Creating an article on a coat of arms was an error in judgement. I recognize that, and asked for it to be deleted, which it was. I am not sure that I will ever appeal the TBAN again. If I do at some point in the future, however, it will be more so that I know that I have improved enough to have regained the confidence of the community than to return to that corner of the encyclopedia. As you have opposed my request twice, I would appreciate your thoughts on how I might improve. Thanks. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 03:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Slugger O'Toole, all I can suggest is to edit from the neutral point of view all the time, summarize reliable secondary sources that are entirely independent of the topic, and keep use of primary sources and affiliated sources to the bare minimum. But you already know all of that, don't you? So what else can I say? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Questions

How do i contribute Andrea yolis (talk) 07:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Andrea yolis, start out with The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive learning game. Then, work on asking specific questions rather than overly general questions. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:53, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
How specific should my questions be? Andrea yolis (talk) 09:37, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Andrea yolis, your questions should be specific enough to allow more experienced editors to give you helpful answers. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:28, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Submission Declined

Hi Jim,

My submission for Draft:Institute of Project Management was declined on 31 Dec 2020. I understand the reason for the declining. However, could you give me practical steps on how to improve the articles? Or if you provide professional help to work on my article until it's approved you can also let me know. Thank you!

Kind regards, Cnagita — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cnagita4 (talk • contribs) 09:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Cnagita4. Unless you can provide references to several reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the Institute of Project Management, then it is simply impossible to write an acceptable Wikipedia article about the organization. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:01, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Gelotia lanka

Dear Cullen328, I am Mu Quan, a 14 year old boy who recently did some expansion of the Wikipedia page on a spider with scientific name Gelotia lanka based on a scientific research article. This page is still classified as a stub, and I wanted to ask if you think it reasonable to remove its stub status — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mu Quan (talk • contribs) 13:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Mu Quan. You did some very good work. Thank you. I upgraded the article to start class. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Kristle Murden § Maintenance template removal

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Kristle Murden § Maintenance template removal. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jim. You previously helped this editor out before at User talk:7light7#Offer of assistance; so maybe you can help her out here as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Marchjuly. I commented there. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Jim. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:38, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Want some help

Sir, i create draft, i still didn't published it but a admin suggested it for deleting. So what should i do. Please help.Waiting for you — Preceding unsigned comment added by POTIMANCH (talk • contribs) 04:19, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, POTIMANCH. My advice to you is to stop violating copyright laws and stop promotional editing. Fully comply with the policies and guidelines if you want to edit this encyclopedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Sir i am not violating the policies

I have permission from the authorities and i do not cross the limit of copyright. I developed that website which you mentioned. Please give your email for help.My email id is (redacted).Thanks POTIMANCH (talk) 09:17, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

POTIMANCH. Email communication is not required for this matter. You did violate Wikipedia's policy on copyright. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your heartfelt comments

I think your Survey comment was very effective and I want to thank you for sharing the comment. I believe it really helps the discussion. Lent (talk) 12:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

I truly appreciate your feedback, Lent. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:35, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
:-) Lent (talk) 20:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Continuing conversation from Teahouse

Thank you so much for the quick response! I tried finding a way to reply in the old thread but alas, Wikipedia confounds me again. I will admit that Wikipedia isn't an easy or intuitive platform to use but I'm learning.

In regards to the post, thank you so much for pointing me in the right direction. Despite my lack of experience here in Wikipedia, I thought that by following another post that has been approved in the same product category (HIubSpot), that I would be able to use that as a guide to source and write my entry. In fact, I read through some of the linked sources — hence why I selected the sources that I did.

I see that I've also received additional feedback from other users. I will review my sources and modify them accordingly to the Wikipedia rules. But first, some research to make sure I fit the notability rules.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AzumSauce07 (talk • contribs) 01:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AzumSauce07. You are a paid editor. Presumably your client is paying you to be competent. Please do not expect long term, highly experienced volunteer editors to help you to learn your job. Can you see how irritating that might be to people who deeply believe in a volunteer ethos? There are some excellent books published about how to edit Wikipedia, but if you do not want to spend money on books, there are a multitude of help pages that can be found easily from Wikipedia's main page.
You linked to an article HIubSpot, which does not exist. One of the things all editors are expected to do is to proofread and correct their posts. I will assume that you actually meant HubSpot. You say you modeled your article on that one. That article includes references to significant coverage in excellent business publications like Forbes, Fortune, the Wall Street Journal, TechCrunch and the Boston Business Journal. Writing a Wikipedia article is not imitating an existing article while using poor quality sources. Source quality is by far the most important factor. Writing an acceptable article starts by identifying high quality sources and neutrally summarizing what they say. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:17, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Help Regarding Page move.

Hello Sir, Hope you are well, Sir I have proposed to move Raantas page to Rantas. But there is already a page named Rantas, which is actually a redirect link to Rântaș . Can I know after the discussion is over How can we move the page to Rantas and what should we do with the redirect link on that page. Waiting for your reply. Peerzada Iflaq (talk) 13:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Peerzada Mohammad Iflaq. Please read Wikipedia:Requested moves for instructions on what to do when consensus is reached. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Capriaf

In May 2019, you gave User:Capriaf a formal warning for incivility[3]("The next time you call a fellow editor a "fucking moron" or anything like that, you will be blocked.") Here[4], the user refers to me as a "racist dipshit". The user also ignored my request to self-revert on a page covered by 1RR editing restrictions (the editor has previously been blocked for violating 1RR, so they know how 1RR works[5]). Snooganssnoogans (talk)

Blocked for a month, Snooganssnoogans. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Now that the suspension is up and I could not appeal or anything. Let the record show I deleted my comment calling him racist dipshit within seconds of posting it. However, his previous comment was in fact racist as there is no justification for calling an article on a British website, Bellingcat, "Russian disinformation."

Kurds and Kurdistan case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 5, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 16:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Possible COI

Hi Jim. Maybe you could offer some advice at User talk:Somapsyche#Welcome! about the changes that were made to Francis Thompson (film director). Dividing the article up into sections shouldn't be too difficult, but there might be no point in doing so if it's just going to be sections of unsourced content. I came across this via WP:THQ#uploading an image and the image that was added seems fine; it's just the other content that was added that might need some cleaning up. I tried looking for sources, but I'm unable to even find anything to verify what is supposed to be his full name or his date of birth, let alone anything to verify any of the other early life details that were added. I don't want to discourage this editor so perhaps input from someone else would help. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Jim. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328/Archive_74&oldid=1045703661"