User talk:Mosesheron II

Hello all. You can post a message here or on my main account's talk page. -Thanks--Mosesheron (talk) 22:19, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Mosesheron II! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Image Upload under Fair use clause, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. 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}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Caner Dagli

My friend, I won't revert again, but only because I don't want to kick off any edit warring. University bio pages are produced by the faculty themselves, so they are neither independent nor third-party sources. The issue of controversy isn't a factor in this discussion. I edited in good faith, and I believe you do too. So there's no need to write an order not to revert again. All the best, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 13:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

@GorgeCustersSabre: First and foremost, I apologize for any negative impact my comment may have had on you. Have you noticed, however, that the referenced source, i.e. the website, is owned by Georgetown University? Dagli is not and has never been a member of the faculty there. So I'm not sure why we can't utilize this source for Dagli's background info. Sources about many notable academics are already hard to come by. We shall end up with nothing if we place such unnecessary restrictions on their biographies. Best regards. Mosesheron II (talk) 14:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Dear Mosesheron II, thank you very much for your courteous reply. I appreciate it. Actually, the very Georgetown link you cited says that, although Caner Dagli is not a direct employee, he has "worked with one or more of our core projects or programs." When he did, he wrote for them a bio. That's how it works, and that's why it isn't a third-party source. You correctly point out that for many academics there is not much third-party coverage. True. That's why academics aren't as prominent on Wikipedia as say, sportspeople or politicians, and it's why their bio pages tend to be rather sparse. But it is what it is. Anyway, I don't mind if want to add it again. It's far from being a big deal, and I thank you again for taking time to reply. It was good of you. Best regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 14:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC).

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)