User talk:Maryphillips1952

Welcome!

Hi Maryphillips1952! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! --Yamla (talk) 19:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!!! I appreciate your help mentorship. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:48, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your Email

Hello, Mary. I received your email, and checked out the page on Vladimir Horowitz that you added the information to. Your edit still seems to be intact; it looks like you did a good job, but I'll keep watching it. Robert Skyhawk ^{(T C)} 03:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of MAVEN (Mars Atmospheric and Volatile Evolution)

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on MAVEN (Mars Atmospheric and Volatile Evolution) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. – Njol #T·C 22:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Savas Dimopoulos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Rome (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:55, 3 June 2014 (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) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Maryphillips1952. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Maryphillips1952. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Stacy Schiff, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 15:29, 17 May 2019 (UTC) Not created for payment[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 15:49, 17 May 2019 (UTC) No payment received to post on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryphillips1952 (talk • contribs) [reply]

Thanks for clarifying you're receiving payment specifically for editing Wikipedia. However, do you have any connections with the subjects of articles you are editing and what are the natures of those relationship? Graywalls (talk) 18:27, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not receiving any payments for any edits. Thanks for your help. I am not sure how to remove $ on posts I have edited. Thanks in advance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryphillips1952 (talk • contribs)

I understand that you are not specifically receiving payments specifically for editing Wikipedia. However, do you have any connections with the subjects of articles you are editing and what are the natures of those relationship? Graywalls (talk) 18:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Graywalls - I am a fan and live in Tulsa. Schiff is receiving an award I read in Tulsa World. Thanks for your help.I am a fan of classical music, Jennifer Lopez, NASA, Gloria Esteban and other subjects. Thank you for your prompt reply. Again, I have not received any payment for my edits to wikipedia Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 18:43, 17 May 2019 (UTC) Graywall - I am not sure what you need me to do. I have posted on your talk page and tried to respond to your inquiries. I ama fan of many subjects and people. I have nolt received any payment for wikepedia posts. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC) Thank you.[reply]

Also, the "user page" is not for leaving a message. If you'd like to leave a message for someone, please do so on the "talk", not the other user's "user page". Regarding the contents of your comment, there's a discussion on the conflict of interest noticeboard, which you have been linked to in the page. The discussion can take place on that message board. Graywalls (talk) 19:22, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Maryphilrk more closelylips1952 That's the link. Graywalls (talk) 19:24, 17 May 2019 (UTC) I responded on the link. I am not sure if I did it correctly. I appreciate your help to be a better editor. Graywalls I reviewed some of the issues you seem to find on edit work by others. I am not sure why you raise issues on so many articles - including mine- I have resolved the issues by responding to you questions. I will remove the template next week. We may need to review your wore closely when I have a little more free time. Wikipedia is a collegial forum, objective, referenced and documented work.My work is well referenced and cited. I will look at your work to see if thios is an issue you have with many articles and perhaps we can address how to help you.[reply]

Graywalls and That Montreal - Thank you! I have some free time this summer and will be reviewing wikis of other musicians and editing similarly. I will also review edits made and will try update content with references and citations. You may want to look at other musicians... I have found similar conflicts you pointed out. Thanks again. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

content discussion on Horacio Gutiérrez‎

Please engage in discussion over contents at Talk:Horacio Gutiérrez rather than on my talk page. Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 15:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC) Mr. Graywalls thank you for helping with the edit - I included additional references.[reply]

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 07:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Signing posts properly

Hello! It looks like you may be signing your posts by pasting your username into the post. The proper way to sign your post is simple: you put four of this at the end of the post: ~~~~. Having a link to your talk or user page is also required in a signature. Thanks.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The exact thread is [here]. Please clarify your connection to Guttierez at the COIN discussion.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked

You have been indefinitely blocked from the pages Horacio Gutiérrez and Talk:Horacio Gutiérrez for concealing your conflict of interest as well as persistently and baselessly attacking another user for being "biased" etc against Gutiérrez. See this discussion. I strongly advise you against trying to evade this block by editing as an IP, or by editing about Gutiérrez on other pages: you will end up blocked from the whole of Wikipedia if you do. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | tålk 17:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Please review Comments

I have been blocked from posting on Horacio Gutierrez' post. I have been an excellent contributor to many posts. One post in particular is of concern: Horacio Gutierrez. I have worked with editors and vetted the article. But, I do believe some of the people who are currently editing and deleting information have a bias against Mr. Gutierrez. I think you should follow up. His article is well referenced. I have never denied connection to my interest as a fan of music and artists. Please help me restore my standing. I have donated to Wiki and love using wiki.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Maryphillips1952 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been blocked from posting on Horacio Gutierrez' post. I have been an excellent contributor to many posts. One post in particular is of concern: Horacio Gutierrez. I have worked with editors and vetted the article. But, I do believe some of the people who are currently editing and deleting information have a bias against Mr. Gutierrez. I think you should follow up. His article is well referenced. I have never denied connection to my interest as a fan of music and artists. Please help me restore my standing. I have donated to Wiki and love using wiki. =17:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Maryphillips1952 (talk)

Decline reason:

You are not listening to what is being told to you and are being unresponsive about the reasons for your block, choosing to deflect, instead. I am declining your request. El_C 19:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This isn't what the help me template is for. Do not use it again. You can read about appealing blocks and bans here. Praxidicae (talk) 17:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you continue your attacks on other editors, which were part of the reason for your block. If you keep it up you will be blocked from all of Wikipedia, not just from a couple of pages. (Note: I think people would understand you better if you used the words "article" and "page" when relevant, instead of calling everything a "post". A post is one edit posted on a discussion page, such as this edit of mine right now. That's what the word means on the internet.) Bishonen | tålk 18:06, 29 June 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Bishoen- I raised possible questions of bias of editors (not attacks) just as they were raised of me. Were these attacks on me? My goal is to make great wiki article edits and posts. My apologies for any problems. I am still learning protocols. I am willing to change, continue to reference appropriately, and resolve all biased issued raised. I love editing wiki as my hobby. I hope you can help me resolve, I only want to write excellent, unbiased, and referenced posts. Thank you. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 18:22, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) You have yet to show an understanding of Wikipedia's conflict of interest policies, how you violated them, and proper conduct going forward. Without that, an admin will not unblock you. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=I have explained the conflict of interest on my Talk page. I am a fan of artists, music, and film. I have made many good wiki entries. My entries have been edited and approved. My apologies for questioning edits of others. I am still learning from the wiki community. I sincerely and deeply apologize. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 18:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is untrue. You have not explained your conflict of interest on your talkpage. User:ThatMontrealIP has explained it here. Surely you've read that? I linked to it in my block notice. Bishonen | tålk 19:12, 29 June 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Bishonen: I am not sure what more you need me to explain or apologize for. I have explained my conflict of interest being a fan of classical music, film, artists, and Cuban music and musicians. I have never received any payments for any wiki posts. My posts have been edited and reviewed and approved. I am sorry. I am not sure what you want me to say. I apologize for any conflict of interest. I apologize for question possible conflicts of others. I am willing to work with the wiki community to provide excellent and unbiased articles. I appreciate your help. Thank you again. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that you are not related to the subject in question, with a deep conflict of interest despite the policies being explained to you numerous times, Maryphillips1952? You were asked pretty clearly about that and as an outsider, I don't see an honest or transparent response. Praxidicae (talk) 19:28, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae: I am not sure what you are asking here. I am a fan of Gutierrez and have been a fan for years of classical music, film, and artists. I believe I addressed I was a fan on several occasions on my talk page. I sincerely apologize for any bias on my part. I am committed to writing excellent articles. I am sorry I raised bias concerns. They were not meant as attacks, but genuine concern that all editors be vigilant regarding posts. What raised the current issue was the removal for great pianist. I was shocked. His post was started in 2006. I realize Horowitz and Rubinstein do not need references, but others have posts without references to the claim and have not been removed. I suppose the question for us all is of racial justice in our wiki posts. It must be equal and transparent for all. My deepest and most sincere apologies. I believe we can all work together to write excellent unbiased entries and posts. Please accept my apologies and my regret for any inconveniences. I am willing to learn form the community. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe one can be a fan who also has a conflict of interest, will you please just answer the question? Do you have any affiliation personally or professionally outside of being a "fan" to Gutierez? This is a yes or no question. Obfuscating does you no favors. Praxidicae (talk) 19:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Maryphillips1952: Have you edited any articles on people in your family? Doing so is a conflict of interest. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The question for us all is of racial justice in our wiki posts". "Racial justice"?? What do you mean by that? Does race come into this, or was that a typo for something else? I know you don't believe in answering questions, Mary, but you need to answer about what you meant before you post or edit anything else, or I will block you sitewide with talkpage access revoked. Bishonen | tålk 19:57, 29 June 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Doubtful that was a typo. That line of discourse needs to be retracted with apologies, categorically and without qualifications. El_C 20:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, I am sorry I have edited many subjects and entries. Please accept my sincere apologies. I am concerned about equity, and transparency for all posts. I am still learning appropriate protocol. If anyone is willing to mentor me and edit my posts, I am willing to work alongside of you. We must all check our own biases in posts. Than you for your help. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Maryphillips1952: We must all check our own biases in posts. Your comments are pretty hilarious. I guess you could start by contemplating your own bias, i.e. promoting a family member for nine years, which is 100% of the issue here.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:36, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sitewide block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing, including passive-aggressive provocations. And for repeatedly stonewalling queries. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.

El_C 20:29, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Mary, this is to acknowledge that I am in receipt of your email. However, I have nothing further to add and I request that you do not continue to email me at this time. To challenge your block, please follow the appeal instructions outlined in the block notice directly above. Another admin will then go on to evaluate its merits. Thank you. El_C 11:36, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

El_C, is this a little excessive? I’m no admin or anything but I just read this User’s history and they seem to be willing to learn. They are also very apologetic. An indefinite site wide ban as well as talk page bans seems quite excessive. Seems like they just didn’t get the point. I don’t see how this was passive aggressive. Let me know if I’m missing anything, but I just wanted to bring this up since it appears to me that this is a good faith editor who just made a mistake. I could be completely wrong, just thought I’d inquire! Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 00:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are completely wrong. It was not excessive, the user was given many, many chances, which is par for the course, so WP:PACT applies. If you wish to raise the matter on the editor's behalf, it would be prudent to notify the other editors involved (including the original blocking admin), as they are far more familiar with the editor's activities beyond the tendentious innuendo that led to their final block (not ban) by me. El_C 12:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry El_C, it’s been a busy week! I’m not sure where I’m completely wrong though, where did this editor not take the chance to make up? All I’ve seen were unblock requests where the editor appears both apologetic and seems to be leaning in the right direction towards productive editing. I can’t seem to find a time where they were hostile. Also, aren’t you the admin who gave this editor an indefinite block? Just wondering. I’d like to know the entire facts before I involve other editors. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 06:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mary was asked (repeatedly) about their possible conflict of interest, which they kept evading, including with innuendo about racial justice, and so on. Finally, she was asked: Do you have any affiliation personally or professionally outside of being a "fan" to Gutierez? This is a yes or no question. Obfuscating does you no favors. The answer was yet another obfuscation, unfortunately, which was the last straw. Going around in circles like this should not be an indefinite affair, no matter how many apologies are attached. I submit to you that you are reading too much into tone and not enough into substance. And, yes, the other editors involved in this thread would be able to give you a more complete picture, if you're interested. El_C 11:07, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Email 2

Hi again, Mary. Again, I request that you stop emailing me, as that is starting to resemble harassment. Again, you may appeal your block through the Unblock Ticket Request System. Good luck. El_C 15:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked

With the consent of the blocking administrator and after extensive discussion via UTRS, your block is lifted. Before editing further, you are expected to declare your conflict of interest on your user page (User:Maryphillips1952). You have agreed to a topic ban, broadly construed, on all subjects for which you have a conflict of interest. That means you will not edit articles or article talk pages, you will not suggest edits, and you will not solicit other people to edit, for any subject for which you have a conflict of interest. Indeed, you will not even discuss those topics at all, except to declare your conflict of interest and, eventually, to request that your topic ban be lifted. Any violations of this (the topic ban and the requirement that you declare your COI) may result in an immediate reblock. You are welcome to request that your topic ban be lifted, by discussing with me or with any other admin, after 1000 productive article edits or six months, whichever comes later. Other admins are free to act without consulting me. Welcome back, and happy editing! --Yamla (talk) 13:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Responses

You have not yet declared your conflicts of interest. See WP:COI. Remember, that wasn't an optional step. You must declare your conflicts of interest over at User:Maryphillips1952 before editing further, following the process explained at WP:COI. As to why you can't add the alumni to the article, the problem is described in the revert. See here, where ElKevbo said, "we should have an independent source". That means a source independent of Tulsa Community College. See WP:RS for more information. An example would be an article from the New York Times. That has nothing to do with the Tulsa Community College. On the other hand, a newspaper published by the college itself would not be independent. You did the right thing by stopping and asking questions. In general, you should ask the person who reverted your change and/or discuss the matter on the article's talk page. --Yamla (talk) 17:41, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, we don't care what Tulsa Community College themselves wish to say, only what independent sources say. Remember, though, you have a conflict of interest with regard to Tulsa Community College, so will not be editing that article, right? "You have agreed to a topic ban, broadly construed, on all subjects for which you have a conflict of interest." You most definitely have a conflict of interest related to the Tulsa Community College. --Yamla (talk) 17:44, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Just catching up on my emails now) You could edit an article about a Cuban artist, so long as you have no conflict of interest. For example, you are unrelated to them, they have nothing to do with your family or your place of employment. Two examples: you have a conflict of interest with regard to Horacio Gutierrez, so must not edit about him. You do not, to my knowledge, have a conflict of interest with regard to Celia Cruz, so could edit about her. You do have a conflict of interest related to your place of employment, so cannot edit about that. You do not (to my knowledge) have a conflict of interest related to the movie, Thirteen Days (film). WP:COI goes into more details on what counts as a conflict of interest. --Yamla (talk) 17:49, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Any violations of this (the topic ban and the requirement that you declare your COI) may result in an immediate reblock. Not to state the obvious, but they've already broken the topic ban stated in the unblock, and failed to disclose COI. They clearly do not understand the ban, seeing as their most recent edit is in the topic ban area. Why is so much goodwill being extended to an editor who has consistently and flagrantly ignored the COI policy for so many years?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My approach here is to try to immediately course-correct their contributions. One final opportunity to come in line with the agreement. You are correct that they have already repeatedly broken the agreement, but I'm hoping that was a final misunderstanding and will not be repeated. Also, frankly, I'm personally susceptible to Escalation of commitment fallacies. ThatMontrealIP, I understand your frustration and share it. I'm hoping this is immediately rectified. If not, I will have no option but to reimpose the block. --Yamla (talk) 17:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I am trying to understand all the rules. I am not sure where or how to place COI. Any help is appreciated. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 18:02, 17 September 2020 (UTC)My apologies. I am not sure if I should respond here or via email. Thank you for your patience. Best regards, Mary[reply]

Please respond here. In general, communication about Wikipedia should be public. WP:COI explains how to declare your conflict of interest, and you do it on your user page. Your user page is User:Maryphillips1952. The specific part of WP:COI that explains declaring your conflict of interest is WP:DISCLOSE. Remember, you need to disclose ALL INSTANCES. All your family relationships, your employer, everything. --Yamla (talk) 18:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my user page disclosure Is this OK? Maryphillips1952 (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is sufficient. I have copied it to your user page. Thank you. --Yamla (talk) 19:32, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I am grateful and appreciate your help. If anyone needs help with a wiki page, please let know. I am happy to help edit. Kind regards, MaryMaryphillips1952 (talk) 19:37, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI and WP:DISCLOSE

I will not edit any pages where I have a WP:COI (Horacio Gutierrez, Lino Gutierrez, Tomas Gutierrez Alea, Logan Phillips, TCC).Maryphillips1952 (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Finding reliable sources

Hi Maryphillips1952, I just wanted to give you a heads-up: Wikipedia, and copies of Wikipedia, can never be used as a source in Wikipedia articles. There is some more information about that on this policy page. The article http://www.artandpopularculture.com/Scientific_racism_in_the_work_of_Carl_Linnaeus is a direct copy of a section of a Wikipedia article, and so I have removed it; I also rephrased your addition to Carl Linnaeus a bit to integrate it better into the text, and give some basic background. Thanks for your contributions! Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I thanked you publicly on the post. I was not sure how to redirect and mention Scientific Racism and Carl Linnaeus. I appreciate your help. I see how you redirected to main article source. Best regards, Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maryphillips1952, I placed a section right at the top of your user page. See User_talk:Maryphillips1952#Welcome!. Please take the time to step through the Introduction to Wikipedia and make sure to read all of the policies and guidelines. You've been editing for a really long time but it looks like you missed taking the opportunity to read these when you started and as a result, are running into some problems. It's important because your unblock (my lifting of your block) was somewhat controversial and so you are expected to follow all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines going forward. --Yamla (talk) 19:47, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yamala, WOW! I have never seen these resources. They are amazing! I will take time to study all the resources. Thank you!Maryphillips1952 (talk) 00:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Racism and classical music

When you have a draft, ping me. I have no expertise in classical music, but systemic racism interests me. —valereee (talk) 21:17, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also: Abbie Conant may interest you. I wrote that, and tried to get it included more prominently at Sergiu Celibidache, but other editors there seemed to be very protective of him. I think he sounds like a ginormous asshole, myself. :) At any rate, after you've written Racism and, maybe you can write Sexism and. :) —valereee (talk) 21:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! How do I "ping" you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryphillips1952 (talk • contribs) Maryphillips1952 (talk) 21:42, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You write a post that includes {{u|Valereee}} AND you must sign it with four tildes ~~~~. If you don't sign it, the first time, the ping won't work. You can't go back and fix it. If I haven't answered for several days, it likely means you didn't do it right. Just try again. —valereee (talk) 21:38, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do I ping you on my page or your page? Sorry- I forgot to sign previous post. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 21:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Maryphillips1952! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 21:19, Sunday, September 20, 2020 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Maryphillips1952! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 21:33, Sunday, September 20, 2020 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Response

Our communication should be here, not by email. That way, there's a record for others to review in a few months' time. For example, you are requesting your topic ban be lifted in a few months time. The reviewing administrator would be able to see what I told you. With that in mind, can I answer your email here, on your talk page? I don't think there's anything private there but it doesn't hurt to check. --Yamla (talk) 20:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yamala, thank you. I just want to clarify contributions and edits. So, it's best not to email editors with questions and ask on their talk pages, right? Maryphillips1952 (talk) 20:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best to ask here. Any non-trivial edit counts. Adding a reliable citation counts. Just correcting a spelling mistake, though, that normally wouldn't count. But look, nobody cares if you've made 1022 edits or 957 edits. That restriction is just to prevent people waiting six months with basically no edits, then asking to get their topic ban lifted. Instead, you have to demonstrate a constructive series of edits. This gives you a chance to learn the ropes, too. Really, you can think of it as "at least six months and a substantial constructive edit history", we just try to provide some guidance on what that looks like. --Yamla (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I did make a suggestion on the Racism page talk page and an editor added the suggestion on my behalf. I am learning......thank you!Maryphillips1952 (talk) 20:59, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You'll request your topic ban be lifted in a few months, seriously? Maryphillips1952, in my opinion you were lucky to be unblocked at all. If you think you'll be free to edit about your relatives and your place of employment in a few months (or, as far as I'm concerned, ever), I'm sure you're mistaken. Bishonen | tålk 20:34, 22 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Bishonen, I have learned the appropriate way to edit pages is to discuss on the talk page and get a consensus. Thank you for your help and confidence. I will follow all rules and guidelines. All my best,2600:1700:FDA0:8C00:70CE:F97D:4239:D36C (talk) 23:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)Maryphillips1952 (talk) 23:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(The appropriate way to indent your comments in a discussion is by using colons.) Mary, I know I posted here first, but when you posted a "thank you" (sic) on my page, I removed it with an edit summary about passive aggression. Then you posted another. I've now removed that as well. Please take a hint and stop thanking me, at least on my own page. Bishonen | tålk 15:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Oh, thanks for your help. I am still not sure if I should thank people on their pages or not. Should I not leave thank you messages on editor's talk pages? My apologies. I really appreciate your help and tips. Are we allowed to remove comments on out talk page? Not sure. Do you want me to remove your comments from my talk page? Not sure what you would like me to do? Maryphillips1952 (talk) 16:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

if it were me, I'd just put my head down and do the work for now. Interacting with other editors other than at article talk pages is a skill you can develop later. —valereee (talk) 18:27, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!Maryphillips1952 (talk) 19:44, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Maryphillips1952. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Maryphillips1952! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Insert a PDF file or article, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Maryphillips1952! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Racism and Classical Music, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:04, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

Marthe Servine

added links pointing to Great Barrington and Aeolian Hall

Julia Smith (composer)

added a link pointing to Denton

Khadija Gayibova

added a link pointing to Azerbaijani

Wynne Pyle

added a link pointing to Ladonia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]