User talk:Peiris Fox

Welcome!

Hello, Peiris Fox, 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 take 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! DES ^(talk) 19:37, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

I first tried the gentle approach of removing promotional content, though I would have been entirely justified in deleting the article as promotional content under criterion G11. Apparently that did not work. Do not again put back again any removed promotional content to Pedro Scuro, or you will be blocked from editing. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:47, 3 June 2017 (UTC) Your reaction is utterly out of proportion Seraphimblade, so I can only surmise that what botters you - to the point of misinterpreting content as "promotional" - was my description of the subject's strong personal involvement with his discipline and projects. Too bad for him I suppose, but much worse for you. Carry on.Peiris Fox (talk) 22:11, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Pedro Scuro for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pedro Scuro 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/Pedro Scuro 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. PRehse (talk) 12:18, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old Quarrels

Hello PRehse. This morning I edited a page on Francesco Sidoti and, exclusively by my own mistake I clicked on an old entry ["Pedro Scuro"] the subject of a bitter discussion with one or two of your colleagues, on account of the entry having "promotional content under criterion G11" (!?). That happened years ago and their allegations were so outlandish that I simply gave up publishing the text altogether. There was absolutely no "promotional content" whatsoever, as the subject of the entry is a highly regarded intellectual with important contributions to his fields of knowledge, and a member of prestigious international organizations. He was also my former mentor, so I would have never wanted to put him or his work in any embarrassing circumstance. Nevertheless, as I concede that one might always be in the wrong, it would be much more profitable if my fault-finders disclose exactly where exactly my text was "promotional". On the other hand, over and above all that unpleasant hugger-mugger, I'm now trying to publish a new entry, on Francesco Sidoti, so I'm awaiting your kind reply. Yours, Peiris Fox (talk) 00:16, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fellows. I do not understand why you're taking so long to resolve this matter. I've been bullied and it's taking too long. Peiris Fox (talk) 14:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Peiris Fox

A tag has been placed on User:Peiris Fox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. bonadea contributions talk 16:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article about this person, created by you, was (as you know) deleted two years ago following a deletion discussion here. I don't know whether you are Scuro and were trying to use your user page as an autobiography, or if you simply wanted to recreate the article from two years ago; it is not appropriate in any case. Some of your recent posts suggest that you feel a little frustrated with your experience at Wikipedia, which is unfortunate. However, if you choose to edit this website, you will have to do so according to the policies of the website, including a collaborative attitude and a strict adherence to a neutral point of view in your writing. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 16:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Peiris Fox

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 User:Peiris Fox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. bonadea contributions talk 20:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because, after a lenghty and abstruse discussion on a page the User wrote years ago, no concrete reason for deleting the article has yet come to the fore. In defense to what I wrote long ago it must be said that I simply tried to reveal some of a very rich and stimulating intellectual history. If that seemed "promotional" to some Wikipedia's weaverbirds it was my subject's fault not mine. By the way, some days ago I wrote a new article, this time on Professor Francesco Sidoti, which was also not published, and again no reason was disclosed. I wonder if it was considered "promotional" as well. Thanks to weaverbirds Wikepedia is speedingly losing its bonds with knowledge. Never mind, "My courage always rises with every attempt to intimidate me." - said Jane Austen against prejudice.Peiris Fox (talk) 21:10, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you deleted your reply to me above while I was writing my response to that reply, I will add the response here instead

You created an article draft – not an actual article – at Draft:Francesco Sidoti and that is still there. Nobody else has touched it, except that I just added a draft template to it to assist you; your user page is not a suitable place for that kind of material, as explained in the notices above. If you rewrite the text in a neutral tone and make sure to add reliable independent sources for the information (it currently has no sources, but the page I just linked to explains what kind of sources are required) you can then submit it for review. As for the deletion discussion about Pedro Scuro, I was not part of that, I simply added another link to it for your convenience. Back when the discussion took place, you were notified about it (as you can see higher up on this page), and the same link is there as well. The core policies that the article were in violation of are common to all articles: notability, neutrality, and verifiability. I'm sorry you did not get a full explanation of that at the time. Let me simply mention again that Wikipedia is built on cooperation and collegiality, and assuming good faith and abstaining from personal attacks is absolutely fundamental. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 21:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Francesco Sidoti (March 20)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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:Francesco Sidoti 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:Francesco Sidoti, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 04:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Peiris Fox! 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 04:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes were used !!!. Ten footnotes are included. Is there a minimum required ?? Peiris Fox (talk) 13:56, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Francesco Sidoti (March 25)

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

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The inline citations have been covered, but the body of the article is not formatted in an encyclopedic tone.

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:Francesco Sidoti 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:Francesco Sidoti, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:09, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at Draft:Francesco Sidoti. I can't speak for Utopes, but I hoped it might be helpful to share my perspective. The article is supposed to be a biography, but there are only two sentences specifically about the person, and those are in the opening paragraph. The remainder appears to be an analysis of some concepts in Sidoti's work, but it is not written in a manner helpful to the reader unless they were already familiar with that subject. The section on On intelligence and intelligence failures doesn't even mention Sidoti.

Thus, the article reads like an essay about Sidoti's concepts, not a biography of the person. You might find it useful to read some other biographies on academics on Wikipedia, such as Émile Durkheim and Ralph Larkin (both are rated as Good articles. I hope that helps. Schazjmd (talk) 15:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your post on my talk page

I have read the comment which you posted at the top of my talk page (it should have been at the bottom). I see that you are accusing unnamed editors of various actions on unspecified pages. It is not clear to me why you should have posted on my page specifically; while I concede I have a lot of seniority here in terms of experience, I do not have any authority over other editors apart from that enjoyed by all other admins. But Ok, if you would like to post specific details of your problem (at the bottom of my talk page) I will, without prejudice, promise or commitment, review them.----Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 21:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Francesco Sidoti

Hello, Peiris Fox. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Francesco Sidoti, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Francesco Sidoti has been accepted

Francesco Sidoti, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 07:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]