User talk:Inkerifi

Comments? inke

Hello Inkerifi. You used the {{helpme}} tag but you did not post a question. Please write out your question and when you are done, place back the tag. I or someone else will be along to help. Alternatively, you can ask your question at the new contributors help desk, the help desk, or join the #wikipedia-en-help IRC help channel to get real-time assistance. Click here for instant access.

What is your question? fetchcomms☛ 23:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

inke

ok. again:

I also had the tag "This page is a new unreviewed article"

The question is, when shall the new text be reviewed by an independent editor? When will be the tags removed? Also. If there is any other thing I could do to improve the text please let me know and I try it right away.

I thank you in advance

Inke

You can remove it if you think it's OK. However, someone else removing it might be better, though when depends on if someone happens to see it. fetchcomms☛ 00:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I also wouild prefer if an independent editor do the tag removing. Also. to tell you frankly, because I do not know how to do it. I am new in this thing. Fun thou! Would YOU be able to have a glance at my text? Inke

(edit conflict) Hello, you requested feedback so take a look at WP:FEED. Editors there can give good advice. What I see it is missing the date of birth. Also, take a look at WP:MoS. Regards, The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 00:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you require any further assistance, please join the editors on the IRC by clicking here. Please insure you join the "#wikipedia-en-help." This is the default channel. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 00:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button

located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 00:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) To remove the tags, just delete the code from the edit area. fetchcomms☛ 00:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on deletion of article

I created the article Marcello Ferrada de Noli in 2009, which during EIGHT consecutive years in Wikipedia it kept developed by multiple editors (I ceased to edit in that article several years ago). Recently, ensuing a failed move to delete the article on Swedish Doctors for Human Rights (SWEDHR), a participant in that initiative asked for the deletion of the article on "the SWEDHR founder". His initial motivation in the presented AfD was: "Non-notable academic. All non-self-published mentions of this retired professor of epidemiology are because of his association with SWEDHR, an organization founded by him...and whose only output is statements supporting the views of the Russian government, which are in turn repeated by pro-Russian media outlets."

After that the objections on academic notability did not prosper (the 'Russian-conspiracy' theory was never elaborated), a new objection arose, this time referred to 'political notability'. Meaning, the claim that Professor Marcello Ferrada Noli 'has never been a founder of MIR, the Revolutionary Left Movement (Chile). This argument was then held in the discussion as "the main claim to notability" to be objected. Other accusations of misrepresentation followed, such as Ferrada Noli would have been granted political asylum in Sweden on false premises, for he was "an old man who fled to Sweden (where gaining political refugee status in the wake of the overthrow of Allende was extraordinarily easy - the sympathetic Swedes just took your world for it,)"

But the statements contesting the "main claim to notability" on which the deletion was based, have now been demonstrated being a complete falsehood, hence libel, according to evidence documented in SWEDHR's new published "Statement on deletion attempts in Wikipedia articles on SWEDHR and its representatives", signed by "Professor Emeritus, med dr Marcello Ferrada de Noli (Ph.D.), Professor Emeritus, med dr Andres Romelsjö (Ph.D.), and Dr Lena Oske, MD, on behalf of the Board of Directors"[1]. Among the documents accompanying the affidavit, there is a new important testimony [2] issued by Andrés Pascal Allende, nephew of the late President Salvador Allende and ex General Secretary of the MIR, stating: "Marcello Ferrada de Noli was one of the founders of MIR", adding that he was a co-author of the "Political-Military Thesis", "the first document approved in the history of the MIR".

The SWEDHR statement sees the disrupting editing against the organization and its representatives, as a political reaction "after a SWEDHR report authored by Prof Ferrada de Noli was cited in the United Nations Security Council on April 12, 2017 and later in a discussion around the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons OCPW". The cited report refers to analyses done by SWEDHR doctors on a White Helmets video, concluding that the shown life-saving scenes were "fake, non-medical, non life-saving and counterproductive" [3][4]. Inkerifi (talk) 22:42, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the delete is ridiculous, and, I would claim, clearly political motivated. (Though I do not blame the deleting admins, deleting admins seem to look more on the number than the argument these days...) And, as I mentioned on Talk:Swedish Doctors for Human Rights that the Marcello Ferrada de Noli article is deleted, when articles on Bana al-Abed and Ibrahim Qashoush are kept!! Seriously. Anyone who can help the Saudis are noteworthy...Lol.

The whole AfD was clearly a revenge for unpopular opinions.

You can ask an admin to have it undeleted to your userspace, that is, have it copied to User:Inkerifi/Marcello Ferrada de Noli

Having said all this, I’m not sure I would advice for having the delete undone....I’m afraid it could become an attack article. I am more concerned with the Swedish Doctors for Human Rights article, which is in horrible state, IMO. Im getting nowhere on the talk page, but as it is, it is clearly against Wikipedia policies, as I see it. I will probably start a RfC about the lead in a few days.

But remember, as Tyrion put it: "if you want justice, you come to the wrong place". That is true both for Game of Thrones ...and Wikipedia.... Cheers, Huldra (talk) 23:57, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Huldra: Thanks for the feedback, most appreciated. About the lead and other sections in the SWEDHR article, this statement analyses item after item why many new edits are based on false premises, equivocal citing, and/or deceptive sourcing. You may find worth reading section "On the lead", and the comments on the other sections too, here: [5]. Brgds, Inkerifi (talk) 10:49, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Options for a new article

Inkerifi (talk) 08:00, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Replying to a consultation about the deletion of the article "Marcello Ferrada de Noli" (article publishe in 2009) the closing administrator said [6] that I have a couple of options for trying the article to be published anew. I would like some advice on the following: Before trying deletion review, or a new article (thoroughly revised, shortened, and only with the bio essentials and sources ref. notability), is it of any idea to ask an administrator to undelete the article and having it on for a while (a week or two), in order to do the new edits there directly? It would be lots easier and less time-consuming. Also because I have no access to the article in the edit-mode. I thank you in advace. Brgds, Inkerifi (talk) 07:58, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Explaining new article (new from scratch)

This new article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Ferrada_de_Noli) is done from scratch and it is an entirely different version than the one originally posted in Wikipedia in 2009. It addresses all the issues for which the old article was criticized. Although the article itself being shorter, 62 new references to reliable third party sources have been added to a total of 86 references. These consist of mainstream- newspaper articles, followed in number with books published by “established publishers” (as specified by Wikipedia) and public documents –e.g., UN Security Council public documents referring De Noli’s investigations, European history archives or history academic publications. All references are verifiable.

All self-published sources in the previous version (including bibliographic references to scientific articles) were deleted, with only one exception. I.e., in a bibliographic reference corresponding to the mention done in the article of the book “Sweden vs Assange – Human Rights Issues”, it had to be indicated the name of publisher, being in that case Libertarian Books, Sweden. Being a non-profit publishing outlet founded by Ferrada de Noli in 2013, it could make that reference to fall in the “self-published” category. Reviewer admins should decide whether this ref. could be kept.

The inclusion of the journal Clinical Psychology as secondary source in denoting the relevance for psychiatry of one research finding, is done according Wikipedia guidelines in “Using sources”, which states: [7] “a review article that analyzes research papers in a field is a secondary source…”

Text in Notes and References resulted relatively extensive (article text is shorter than the early version), because of these reasons: 1.- Following Wikipedia guidelines, quoted texts in references and notes are now given in both translated and original language. 2.- Inline citations, In-text attributions, etc. In order to meet previous observations about unclear or insufficient sourcing, I have tried to make the references as explicative as possible. The relatively long explicative texts may be shortened after the administrators approve the article.

About the article’s length. Rationale: 1) long life span covered in the bio, i.e. 1961-2017 (subject born 1943), 2) parallel activities (political and academic) overlapping in time had to be treated separately. On the other hand, bio aspects such as family, other education or extra permanent activities beside academic/political/ (e.g. publishing or artistic) are not included in this version.

Found in Google:

a) Google News mentioning Marcello Ferrada de Noli. N=231 results, (retrieved 8 Feb 2018, 9.39 PM) b) Google News mentioning SWEDHR (Swedish Doctors for Human Rights), NGO founded by Ferrada de Noli. N = 273 results (retrieved 22 January 2018) c) Google News mentioning The Indicter (magazine online founded by De Noli) N = 136 results (retrieved 22 January 2018) d) Google Scholar: N = 750 articles citing original articles authored by M Ferrada-Noli and/or M Ferrada de Noli; e) Google Books: N= 61 books quoting the work of author M Ferrada-Noli and/or M Ferrada de Noli. f) Standard Google search for Marcello Ferrada de Noli N=168,000 results (retrieved 7 Feb 2018, 2.05 AM)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedida

Hi Inkerifi. I work on conflict of interest issues in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing. Your work here has mostly been about Marcello Ferrada de Noli, in a quite dogged and focused way, including adding unsourced content of a personal nature. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, Inkerifi. 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 COI 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, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
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 must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by our WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some connection with de Noli, directly or through a third party (e.g. a PR agency or the like)? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), I can walk you through how the "peer review" part happens and then, if you like, I can provide you with some more general orientation as to how this place works. Please reply here, just below, to keep the discussion in one place. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 22:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:OUTING, Inkerifi: you do not need to reply to this. I can say about myself that I have 0 connection to Marcello Ferrada de Noli, I do not know him, or even anyone who knows him. I do, however, understand/read Swedish (as well as Norwegian and Danish), so I can read all the news articles there have been about de Noli in Scandinavia, Huldra (talk) 23:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Huldra all that I have asked is that the user disclose any connection. I specifically noted that they do need to OUT themselves. Is they are the person, they can simply say "yes I have a connection with this person" and avoid OUTING in that way. Following the COI guideline is essential to ensure the integrity of WP content and to avoid behavioral disruption. If needed I can escalate this to COIN, but that should not be necessary if everybody just stays calm. Jytdog (talk) 18:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just by way of example for the kind of disruption that can happen when people edit about themselves or their family members (for example), please see this ANI and this user talk page discussion]. Things don't have to get that difficult if COI is disclosed and properly managed. I am not saying for sure that this is what happening here, but it feels similar, which is why I asked for disclosure.Jytdog (talk) 19:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inkerifi would you please respond to my inquiry? I'm hopeful of handling this here; if not we can bring this to the COI noticeboard for community discussion. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 18:29, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Inkerifi: I would suggest you don't answer (unless you desperately want to). If Jytdog is unhappy with that, he can bring it to the COI noticeboard, Huldra (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Huldra would you please explain why you are interfering with basic conflict of interest management here? Jytdog (talk) 21:44, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know I wasn't allowed to speak, and voice my opinion? Huldra (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Advising people to evade conflict of interest management is not helpful; please answer the question. If you need a reminder evading COI management was the subject of a recent Arbcom case that led to an admin being desyssoped; along with evading COI management himself, part of what that person did that was objectionable, was advising someone how to evade COI management. So again, why are you doing this? Jytdog (talk) 22:44, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because I think you appear as a bully? And Inkerifi is hardly an admin, so that case is hardly relevant here. If you think anything is vital here, then please take it to COI noticeboard. As for myself, as I said before: I have had nothing to do with Marcello Ferrada de Noli, or Swedish Doctors for Human Rights, BUT: I do understand the language (Swedish), and I have read many of the articles about them. Hence my interest. (I hope you dont count anyone who understands the Scandinavian langues as having a COI w.r.t. any Scandinavian subject. Hmmm, if so, that would be interesting: that would ban say, any Israeli from the IP area....) Huldra (talk) 23:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I haven't asked you; you have done nothing that looks like conflicted editing. And I will not escalate to a board until I hear from Inkerifi. Look, COI management isn't bullying. It is good for everybody, including the conflicted editor. I provided an example above where somebody who had a COI similar to what Inkerifi appears to have, almost get themselves indefinitely blocked by not following the COI guideline; they didn't understand COI nor what it does to people nor our process for management (and neither do you). That is the road I see Inkerifi going down and it would be better for everybody to prevent that whole drama. Why you want to thwart that, is not understandable to me. COI management is not "bullying" and I am sorry that you are so confused about these matters. In any case I will not respond to you further; I asked and you have replied. Jytdog (talk) 23:46, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inkerifi, please do reply. Again, I am only asking you to disclose if you some connection with de Noli. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 23:48, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inkerifi: I (mostly) write Palestinian history here on Wikipedia...I have had all sorts of speculation about myself, including that I am a Palestinian Arab woman, that I am married to an Arab, etc, etc, etc. My view is that it really shouldn't matter if I am a Palestinian, Jew, Swede, or Eskimo. What matters is my edits. And that my edits strictly follow WP:NPOV and use WP:RS sources. Though the WP:PAID policy is obviously very important, I somehow dont think that is relevant here. When I have seen/suspected WP:PAID editing, it is virtually always something to do with commercial interests. Which I cannot see that you have touched on. As for WP:COI, that is a much more diffuse policy: where does COI end? Are Palestinians or Jews forbidden from editing the I/P area (=Israel/Palestine)? No, they are not. Though it could be argued that they would have a "personal interest" in the conflict. As you can see, editors here have different views on the matter. The best advice I can give you is Keep Calm and Carry On, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:28, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Marcello Ferrada de Noli (February 16)

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

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Marcello Ferrada de Noli instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is almost the same as the version that has been moved into article space. Also, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcello Ferrada de Noli.

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:Marcello Ferrada de Noli 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:Marcello Ferrada de Noli, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Inkerifi! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcello Ferrada de Noli for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcello Ferrada de Noli is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcello Ferrada de Noli (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:18, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Marcello Ferrada de Noli

Draft:Marcello Ferrada de Noli, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Marcello Ferrada de Noli and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Marcello Ferrada de Noli during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marcello Ferrada de Noli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SES (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marcello Ferrada de Noli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Lester (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marcello Ferrada de Noli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page International (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marcello Ferrada de Noli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DN (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marcello Ferrada de Noli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Media.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]