User talk:Steven Paul Fisher

Archives: 1, 2

A brief word about Wikipedia

Hi, Steven.

I will add the code to the articles you linked above, but please in future do be sure you put that code on the talk pages of articles. The content you place from the university's website should be judged on its own merits within Wikipedia's policies, not rejected simply because of copyright failure.

I do want to be sure you understand some of the other issues you've been facing, though.

As a nutshell, Wikipedia exists to be a neutral compendium of what reliable sources say about notable subjects. (Fuller policies and guidelines: neutral point of view, verifiability, identifying reliable sources, notability.) People who are connected to the subjects we write about often think we serve a purpose like other websites that exist to allow entities to discuss themselves. By contrast, generally, we discourage that; see WP:COI and WP:PRIMARY. We feel like the only way that we can create a reliable reference guide is by relying primarily on secondary and tertiary sources.

Sometimes even after people are advised of our purpose, they will attempt to influence articles related to them and their business to promote those entities or to whitewash negative material. Because of this, I'm afraid, our community has had to develop a very wary eye about promotion. (We actually have to be just as wary for attacks. People also like to voice their unhappiness in our articles.) If you have or may appear to have a conflict, it is especially important for you to avoid any seeming of bias and to work with others who have concerns about your content.

I hope you find this information helpful and that it will help you work with the community around other concerns with the content than copyright. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughts. I am really just trying to add content related to DU. I am not trying to advertize in any way. If a Trustee happens to be for example (and I am just making this up) a very successful real estate tycoon I should be able to say that I believe. Just the facts. Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 15:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC) Steven Paul Fisher[reply]

A couple of points arise:

neither being a trustee at DU, nor being a "very successful real estate tycoon" make somebody notable. If they're not notable, Wikipedia doesn't want the material, regardless of what you want for DU, and regardless of whether the copyright is OK.
the terms I italicised above are WP:PEACOCK. How would you quantify very successful? Is a real estate tycoon a successful realtor, or a property developer, or something else? What does it mean? It's just promotional language which is likely to get the article deleted as advertising.
"I am really just trying to add content related to DU." You're clearly stating the point that has been my objection for days now - that you're adding articles just because people are trustees regardless of whether they meet Wikipedia's requirements for notability.

Emmit McHenry is really, really notable. But you downplayed his notability as a founder of Network Solutions and a pioneer on TCP/IP (why didn't you link to those articles?) in favour of his role at DU. Reading the source material you linked to, but didn't use, it's possible to see the outline of a fascinating story of how he and his partners were robbed of a fortune. There's the start of a great article there. If you're interested as a wikipedian there's an opportunity to shine. If you're just acting as a DU employee, well you've done all that was required of you for your pay cheque.

Otto Tschudi was an olympian. But you chose to obliterate the sources and the details of his skiing career in favour of a bland bit of corporate-speak about DU.

You've not been telling "Just the facts", you've been telling just some facts, not even the most notable ones about these people. So long as you're laser-focussed on DU and oblivious to the wider picture you'll continue to have problems.

An aside: Back in 2009 I was working on Sir Thomas Halsey, 3rd Baronet, the grandson of a local MP. I was trying to fill out the succession of the baronetcy his grandfather had been awarded. He had a fine career as a naval officer and county official. User:Xn4 was working on Thomas Halsey (cricketer) who had played international cricket for the Egypt national cricket team. We realised that these two articles were the same person and were really happy to merge the two pieces into one. It gave a more complete picture of the man, and provided two claims to notability. Your current attitude would close you off from that kind of serendipity and leave Wikipedia a poorer place.

Wikipedia wants your facts, just so long as you're not trying to impose them as the only facts.

Decide whether you're here to add to the wiki, or to publicise DU. The first choice will have you welcomed with open arms, the second will have most of your material deleted at a rapid pace. Your choice. Bazj (talk) 16:44, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you- this helps. I really do want to add to the Wiki! I will try to be more eclectic and universal in the future. Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 16:50, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Steven Paul Fisher[reply]

What woulod you think of my using Sandbox?Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 19:50, 2 July 2015 (UTC) Steven Paul Fisher[reply]

Your own sandbox, Special:Mypage/sandbox, is a safe place to work, and used to be THE place to create an article. The general sandbox, Wikipedia:Sandbox, gets wiped on a regular basis - it's a relic from a quieter and simpler time in Wikipedia's history (long before I joined).

It's best to create articles using the Wikipedia:Article wizard. It'll create Draft:articlename, allow you to collaborate on the work, and to get it reviewed before promoting it to the live wiki. It's a bit of a long-winded process, but gives your article a better chance of survival.

Article review isn't something I do often, but if your article is ready for review ping me using the code {{u|Bazj}} or write on my talk page, User talk:Bazj, and I'll have a look and save you a wait in the queue. Bazj (talk) 20:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You rock! Have agreat weekend...Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 20:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC) Steven Paul Fisher[reply]

Have a good one yourself - even if you will be celebrating leaving us. I'm sure the Queen would still welcome you all back ;-) Bazj (talk) 20:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Assumed you were one of us! I had a sudden panic attack when I read your "celebrating leaving us" I thought you meant Wikipedia!! :)Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Steven Paul Fisher Just tried logging in again after being off a few weeks - I am blocxked again! Steven Paul Fisher (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)Steven Paul Fisher[reply]

Blocked

Hi, Steven. Your account is not blocked, which means that you were most likely caught up by a block of your underlying IP address. This happens most often if you're logging in from a public institution (like your university) and it has been temporarily blocked for vandalism. Handling of this depends on why the IP is blocked.

If your IP is blocked, you should see a note of some kind when you try to log in that explains what's happening and what to do - for instance, Wikipedia:Autoblock. So, what you should do is this:

Please ensure that you are logged in before you do this.
Your account name will be visible in the top right of this page if you are.
If it isn't, try bypassing your web browser's cache.
Try to edit the Sandbox.
If you are still blocked, copy the {{unblock-auto|...}} code generated for you under the "IP blocked?" section. This is usually hidden within the "What do I do now?" section. If so, just click the "[show]" link to the right hand side to show this text.
Paste the code at the bottom of your user talk page and click save.

If you are not blocked from editing the sandbox then the autoblock on your IP address has already expired and you can resume editing. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I've taken the liberty of archiving your talk page again. All previous notes can be found in User talk:Steven Paul Fisher/Archive 2, unless they had already been archived to User talk:Steven Paul Fisher/Archive 1. If you click "show" on the "archives" box on the top of your page, you can also use the search box in there to search for usernames or key terms to quickly find specific notes. :) If you would prefer your page not archived, please let me know, and I'll just put it back as it was.

Your draft article, Draft:Matt Bond

Hello, Steven Paul Fisher. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Matt Bond".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 18:06, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Caleb Frank Gates

The article Caleb Frank Gates has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to be notable. Google pulls up mostly articles about his father, and Newspapers.com gives me one decent article and some brief mentions.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 00:02, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Caleb Frank Gates for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Caleb Frank Gates 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/Caleb Frank Gates 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. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 20:43, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for considering it and discussing!

Steve

Your draft article, User:Steven Paul Fisher/Frederick M. Hunter

Hello, Steven Paul Fisher. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Frederick M. Hunter".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Carrie Morgridge for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carrie Morgridge 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/Carrie Morgridge (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. DGG ( talk ) 02:02, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Robert Russell Porter

The article Robert Russell Porter has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't assert notability per WP:NBIO. Ran a university department and directed some plays and donated his papers there. The source is just a dead link to those papers, not non-trivial coverage of him which would be useful in an encyclopedia article.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Here2rewrite (talk) 17:20, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]