User talk:Ddstellito

Welcome!

Hello, Ddstellito, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Radicalization. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! JackintheBox • ^TALK 04:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Convert's Cognitive Development Framework (June 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Needs more sources. The article is currently based on only what the originator, Baker, and one other person, Sophie, have written. A few more sources by other authors would better establish the notability of the topic.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Convert's Cognitive Development Framework and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Convert's Cognitive Development Framework, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ddstellito! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Convert's Cognitive Development Framework

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Convert's Cognitive Development Framework requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.macmillanihe.com/resources/sample-chapters/9780230296541_sample.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:18, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Convert's Cognitive Development Framework has been accepted

Convert's Cognitive Development Framework, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest guidelines

Hello, Ddstellito. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. The image you uploaded as your own work suggests that you may be the subject of the article you are editing. If so, please read WP:AUTO and refrain from directly editing it. You can instead use the talk page to request edits. Thank you Melcous (talk) 05:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing this out. However, as a student researching on terrorism as well as an account holder on PACER (the Federal Case file for Federal CAses) this is public information. I appreciate the notice, I was just trying to provide proff as requested.Ddstellito (talk) 16:55, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Melcous

Hello, I am not sure if you are aware of the Federal Database called PACER were all Federal cases are listed, but the uploaded document that was removed from Dr Bakers page is public information. In fact the case # 10-123-02, is listed in the wiki article. As a student researcher on terrorism it is very presumptuous to assume because you appear to be unaware of the United States Freedom of Information Act and the PACER Database which are both public you would make an assumption of a conflict. A person asked for proof so as a researcher I found a document that provided more accurate proof. Here is a link to hundreds of cases files such as the one you removed, that GW University has already done the leg work for. I hope you don't continue to punish independent researchers for the leg work they put in.

https://extremism.gwu.edu/cases

If you find the above information satisfactory I hope the image I provided can be restored. I worked with my department chair a long time researching this case. Ddstellito (talk) 17:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If the document is public then it can perhaps be used as a reference, but this would not mean including an image of it rather, linking to it correctly as a reference. However it would still be a primary, rather than secondary source, which is not ideal. On the conflict of interest, this has nothing to do with this image but rather with the uploading of images here under the name of the subject of the article as "own work". Can you please explain this? Thank you Melcous (talk) 20:36, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Melcous Sure, not a problem at all. When you pull information from Pacer or submit a Freedom of Information request the information comes to you. Meaning, you put in the leg work for the research so now you have the documentation, but it takes hours upon hours to find this information that are part of public court proceedings, as there are thousands of cases and PACER is not user friendly. It's possible I uploaded it incorrectly. I assumed because I obtained the information it would be considered my work. Maybe I am mistaken? So it's public information but not with an easy like you can cut and paste into Wikapedia. Below is an article written by the same George Washington University Terrorism staff about how difficult PACER is to navigate.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/03/20/pacer-court-records-225821

However, what GW University has done is created an entire separate public website that list all their independent research from Pacer and Freedom of Information request for other academic researchers to access. The Washington Post did a whole story on how hard and long it takes to pull this information from public sources. See excepts below.

^[1]

"A self-proclaimed digger, Hughes is a master of PACER, a database of federal court documents that can be hard to navigate."

"Vidino and Hughes are joined by seven other staffers at GW and oversee more than a dozen nonresident fellows who are scattered across the country. Since the program began, the center’s researchers have uncovered about 20,000 pages of legal documents — pertaining to everyone who’s ever been arrested for international terrorism in the United States..."

In conclusion. As a small beginning independent researcher I tried to post the data I found on Wikapedia from the Jamie Paulin Ramirez case. I then take it because you are new to the terrorism field you have no idea how difficult it to find verifiable proof and that individuals don't freely give you this kind of information. I hope my explanation is sufficient.

Ddstellito (talk) 03:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

^ https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/these-researchers-study-terrorists-sometimes-they-also-stumble-across-scoops/2019/06/24/baa73ce0-8b96-11e9-8f69-a2795fca3343_story.html

[1] ttps://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/these-researchers-study-terrorists-sometimes-they-also-stumble-across-scoops/2019/06/24/baa73ce0-8b96-11e9-8f69-a2795fca3343_story.html

[1]