User talk:Lastnightawake

Welcome!

Hello, Lastnightawake, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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! —C.Fred (talk) 16:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Gustavus Adolphus College has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Gustavus Adolphus College was changed by Lastnightawake (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.864969 on 2018-02-03T00:22:55+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:22, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When there is a "See also" at the top of a list of notable alumni, only a minimal number of the most significant notable alumni should be listed. —C.Fred (talk) 16:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nina Teicholz

Please state the source for the information that you added in this diff. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:44, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, is a linkdin profile acceptable? It is on her profile.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastnightawake (talk • contribs) 21:13, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is not an answer to where you got the information from. Jytdog (talk) 00:42, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war warning

Your recent editing history at Nina Teicholz shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.-- Jytdog (talk) 22:20, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are also close to the threshold at University of Oxford. Note that if you have not yet crossed WP:3RR, any combative editing can be considered disruptive and can be met with appropriate response including a cool-down block. Persistent disruption will be met with appropriate escalating measures. ☆ Bri (talk) 05:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

HI Lastnightawake. After some desultory first edits, your edits make more or less of a beeline to Nina Teicholz, through latin american studies to Oxford to her page.

Would you please disclose if you have some connection with Teicholz? Am asking because the page has been beset by conflicted and paid editors, coming to the page on her behalf. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 22:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

hello Jytdog,

I do not have any connections to Nina. I am an oxford student who is beginning to edit more frequently here on wikipedia. I noticed her page is rather vague on her degree. For one, if you attend oxford, you never state that you graduated from oxford university with x. It is incorrect. We are separated into colleges, which aid in conferring our degree.

If you take note on other wiki pages you will see that colleges are mentioned. For example, Exeter College, Oxford. This is what I attempted to do. I addition, I ran into Nina while doing research and noticed that her linkedin stated her college and degree while the wiki page did not. I simply wanted to edit the page, and add more facts. I do not see how it would be a conflict of interest? What I edited was factual, and far more correct than what you insist on reverting to.Lastnightawake (talk) 23:12, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, you are a student at Oxford University in the UK? And you "ran into Nina"? In person? ☆ Bri (talk) 23:28, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bri, No, through research on health, online. I have no direct connection to the subject. We are a rather large institution, would not happen, really..

So I do have a question, since I am a fairly new editor. In this case, her linkedin profile is the only source online that states her degree and college. Would that ever count as proper? I am not sure. Simply, the wiki page stating just the university, and not the college, is rather odd. I just wanted to edit it to be more precise, as it should normally be. Lastnightawake (talk) 23:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I routinely delete self-cited educational credentials from prestigious institutions. So please don't re-add it cited to a LinkedIn page. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not find the responses here credible.Jytdog (talk) 00:43, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

indenting and signing

Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting (see WP:THREAD) - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit. That is how we know who said what to whom and when.

Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).

I know this is insanely unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Jytdog (talk) 00:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]