User talk:Cullen328/Archive 31

Archive 25

←

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

→

Archive 35

GSL GA review

Hi Cullen, I could certainly use some of your words of wisdom. Looks like I'm given the choice of letting the article fail the GA review, or letting another editor act without consensus [1]....I'm not asking you to intervene, just let me know what you think. Thanks. Darknipples (talk) 02:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Darknipples. Can you please summarize in a neutral, succinct way what the specific issue is? How is it possible that letting another editor act without consensus is a precondition for passing a GA review? I do not understand. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

So, during the course of the review, we had reached a point where the reviewer said it was almost done. Immediately following that, the other editor decided to do a major overhaul of the entire article format without consensus. When I tried to put certain references they had removed back in, some of of it was again removed by said editor. The person in charge of the review stated that because of "instability" the article was in danger of failing. In other words, it seems I can either go along with their changes and just make objections on the talk page, or risk failing the review by making revisions and or reverting the article back to where it was. The way they have now formatted the article seems to be dictating their ability to add and remove references and materials as they see fit. The opposing editor has also stated that passing the GA review is less important than making their preferred changes (because it allegedly improves the article), by referring to WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY. I will admit I am focused on obtaining GA status, but by no means at the expense of the quality of the article, as they are suggesting. It's possible I am missing something in what they are saying, hence I am asking for your objective POV on the matter. Darknipples (talk) 03:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC) Sidenote: The reviewer only gave us 3 days to resolve the issue. Darknipples (talk) 03:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, Darknipples, it is better to help create a good article (lower case deliberate) than get a shiny "Good Article" badge. It is very difficult to bring an article about a highly contentious topic in the news to formal "Good Article" status, since the article must be reasonably stable. And if you get the GA, someone can then try to delist it. So, my suggestion is to focus on the quality of the article, incorporating any useful input from others, and let the chips fall where they may with the GA review. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen. Darknipples (talk) 03:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

GA status was awarded to GSL. Thanks for all your help. Darknipples (talk) 04:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Clearly it is you, Darknipples, who deserves the majority of the credit. I am very pleased for you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:41, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For GSL GA status. Couldn't have made it this far without you!!! Darknipples (talk) 04:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

You are kind, Darknipples, but the credit belongs to you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi.. On your response to my edit request

Hi Cullen328. Hope all is well.

By Wikipedia's own definition, and not my own, Bernie Sanders qualifies more as a social democrat than a democratic socialist.

The Wikipedia article I requested the edit from, cites Bernie as admiring Nordic social democracy, while calling him a democratic socialist. I understand Bernie Sanders calls himself that, but China calls their government communist and it is not, by the strict definition of the word, communist.

Martin Luther King, according to a source on a Wikipedia page, in 1964, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, observed that the United States could learn much from Scandinavian "democratic socialism." Back in those days, they were used interchangeably. Those terms have evolved and now they mean something different. Wikipedia articles define them the correct way. I think that at least I have an argument that his beliefs in social democracy should be pointed out, considering on the top of Wikipedia's democratic socialist and social democracy pages a warning is made not to confuse them with each other.

I also shared a lot of sources on my request. I hope you can take a look at them and reconsider making the edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phernandezlima (talk • contribs) 07:43, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Phernandezlima. One Wikipedia article is never a reliable source for another Wikipedia article. We will continue to call Sanders' ideology what he calls it and what the preponderance of reliable sources discussing Sanders call it. This is not negotiable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Decoration

Bonaparte Crossing the Alps -Napoleon Crossing the Alps

the Birth of Venus

Hafspajen (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Hafspajen. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I try. Hafspajen (talk) 15:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

• Where did Dr Mies go? That Ostrich looks weird. Hafspajen (talk) 15:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

• I hope that it is just a wikibreak, Hafspajen. I miss him. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:50, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

We are going of and on like crazy. Hafspajen (talk) 17:51, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Harassment

I replied earlier on my talk page Cullen but I'm going to be honest on this as it's been bothering me, but I think I've also been unfairly treated on this because I am not at all these wiki conferences and editathons where harassment and a ton of other stuff are obviously discussed. It is unfair for all the people at these events to treat me as if I actually knew that women regularly report a ton of what they get at these events, including editathons which remembering from Rosie's talk page you clearly attend. Rosie (at least I hope, I'm not sure she's really going to forget this) is still my friend but she'd told me absolutely nothing about what women have reported at these events. If I'd have known I'd never have said anything. I can understand how it is from your perspective, probably hearing about some of the insights into their unpleasant experiences here in person and then seeing me seemingly diminish that it happens but I have edited here for ten years and have never seen a single case except one remark recently, and even now I'm seeing some comments and emails from women editors who say it's never affected them. To me this problem is just not obvious on here from day to day as the blatant abuse from ips and trolls seems to be swiftly removed by admins, but clearly it is a problem, and it's also a problem because somebody as prolific as me here was in the dark about it. I have looked at a lot of the photos and found video footage of the event and browsed through a few, and I recognize a few people from their photographs and previous events/names and see that lot of the people who were at that conference or who have attended previous events are curiously interested in this Atlantic article, Eric and harassment and what I've said. I also notice that the Atlantic article is Washington DC based and came not long after the conference itself. I don't care who said anything, nor am I'm not blaming anybody in particular, but somebody from inside the project has obviously spoken to the press about this at some time or other. If we genuinely want to raise awareness and try to reduce the abuse that women get then articles which publicly shed a negative light on the project, make Corbett the poster boy for all the abuse on the site, and imply all men on the project are sexist pigs then it's going to have the reverse effect and frighten women reading it away from the project. It's damaging to the site and will not bring about an improvement. Awareness could be raised without publicly humiliating people and the project. I'm being totally honest, I genuinely am apologetic towards those women who have been blatantly harassed, but I'm not going to be made to feel as if I'm the only person in the wrong over this and I can't really fully move on until somebody at least acknowledges that I didn't know.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Dr. Blofeld. Work obligations prevent me from replying at length right now, but I want to acknowledge your message and reply briefly. Yes, I have attended probably half a dozen edit-a-thons, some of which were women's outreach events. In my experience, harassment is not discussed in detail at such events, but general warnings about harassment and aggressive behavior toward new editors is given. Rosiestep, a truly wonderful person, has attended several of these. Through these events, my wife and I developed a friendship with one particular woman editor and in conversations with her learned much more detail about the intense harassment she received. We have visited with her socially on many occasions and believe what she says. I agree with you that the worst of it is not easily visible or quickly migrates to off Wikipedia forums. That is all I will say for now, except to close with stating my intention to try to bridge the gap and understand the concerns of all productive editors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou Cullen, that's what I thought, you and others had heard something of some really serious harassment. But I genuinely had absolutely no idea anybody had even made the slightest complaint at any of the events let alone dozens of them. If I was at these places in person, a bit difficult as I live in coastal Wales. Obviously if I'd known about it and seen people talking in person I'd have felt as strongly as you and others do about women being treated like that. I wish others could have said what's happened to others originally when I asked them as I did sort of do my homework on it with some regulars just to see and everybody I asked said no. I acknowledge though that it is a very large site and global though so made the wrong conclusion. Just so you and others know I was totally in the dark about it and thought there was light to what I said as I've been here ten years and not seen a single incident reported from a regular editor about ongoing harassment. I stumbled inadvertently into a monster! There is a problem now though I think between what groups know at these events and want us online regulars know and it might present future problems in a range of areas when they know things have been said offwiki.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:31, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

I think that you are making way too much of edit-a-thons as sources of information about gendered harassment of some women editors. As I stated above, the subject has not been discussed in detail at any of the edit-a-thons I have attended, but mentioned more in passing as advice to new editors: "There are trolls and agressive jerks on Wikipedia, as on the rest of the internet. Be cautious."

The most obvious and visible examples of harassment that I have seen had nothing to do with an edit-a-thon. It came when GorillaWarfare's portrait was featured on a fundraising banner a few years ago. Her talk page was flooded with sexual propositions, threatening comments, insults and generalized stupidity. I reverted a few myself, and others I saw briefly many others before they were rev deleted by administrators. It was ugly and shocking. What would possess a complete stranger to harass a young woman just because her face and a sentence or two about her appears online? There is darkness in far too many hearts, which spills out anonymously.

Information about online sexual harassment is readily available and has been for decades. I witnessed it elsewhere roughly 20 years ago. It is not new, is well documented, and is often quite frightening and intimidating to the victims. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Online sexual harassment happens yes, every site has their trolls and aggressive jerks. But how often do you see lots of different veteran male editors bullying women on here over months and years? I don't see that myself. I'd not heard about that Gorilla banner and I agree, it's pathetic. Oh I don't think editathons would be the place for that sort of thing, those sorts of things I gather are discussed at the main conferences but I do think the people who've spoken the most strongly on this are the ones who have experienced some shocking stuff firsthand. I have little idea of what actually goes on at editathons aside from actual editing, but if there are a group of people together, especially if it's an event on women then I'd have thought it inevitable that some of the women issues facing the site might be brought up in chatting. I respect the fact anybody reporting it expects it to be done in the strictest confidence but I do think anonymous cases reported anywhere should be known on here without embarrassing the actual people. I do think there's a problem though if a whole ton of stuff gets discussed at the main events which active online editors who don't attend them don't know about as it and can potentially divide the site at times. I'm glad you agree that that Atlantic article is not the way to bring about improvement. The problem with being online though is that you can never be too sure of what people are thinking or want you to do so often things become worse than they need to be. In person you could simply look the person in the eye, nod, smile and move on. I've just been trying to figure out why so many people were pissed off, I guess it doesn't help with approaching you either. Sigh. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:19, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

Thanks for the feedback on the Teahouse. I think you guys are doing a really good job there. Fraenir (talk) 13:53, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fawaz Gerges

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fawaz Gerges. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Vested contributors arbitration case opened

You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Vested contributors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 01:19, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Vested contributors retitled Arbitration enforcement 2

You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. For this case, there will be no Workshop phase. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 12:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Bill Shaheen

The Bill Shaheen article is expanding and evolving. The attempts to delete it within minutes of its creation seem premature and to ignore the actual statements of the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:01, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Why are you writing an overt attack page, Johnpacklambert? Shame on you! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

• • The shame is on those who have turned Wikipedia into drivel by describing pawn shops as "jewlery stores" especially ones that fronted stolen goods. Jeanne Shaheen has said she and her husband ran a small business for the first 8 years of their marriage, they were married in 1972, thus by her own admission they were still running the store in 1980. I will not be shamed by people who feel no outrage at the passes those involved in running fencing operations get if they make it look like just one person in the business is involved. It is this type of letting it go that leads to major support for rampant crime in places like Detroit, and it is the total failure of much of the media to even try to explore such smoking guns that means that we continue to have corruption in government. I go where the sources lead.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:12, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Your conduct here sickens me as much as does the conduct of editors who tried to insert material about Newt Gingrich's previous marital indiscretions into Callista Gingrich's biography. You have stepped WAY over the bounds of a BLP violation, and I am frankly astounded by your misconduct in this matter. Please regain your moral compass, and cease and desist now, Johnpacklambert. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:23, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

You misuse terms like moral. There is nothing amoral with including in an article documented statements. Your accusation that I am "cheery-picking" sources is totally unfair and not at all based on the truth.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:38, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

You have abandoned the neutral point of view and embalazoned overt advocacy onto your arm like a tattoo. That is not a badge of honor as an encyclopedist, but a besmirching black mark. Have you no shame? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

• The true attacks are in the language you use to harrass me.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:39, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
  • And how would the real victim in this matter, Bill Shaheen, feel if he read your ugly hit piece, Johnpacklambert? Can you put yourself in his shoes and feel any empathy for him? Or are you just an unfeeling political operative, pressing the button against the "other side"? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
    • So I am not a fake person. Shaheen is a public figure. I am not going to apoligize for posting the truth about him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
      • Please stay off my talk page, Johnpacklambert, until you have regained your moral compass. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:51, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
        • Please stop misusing the term moral.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
          • Stay off my page, Johnpacklambert! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• Comment This editor has been blocked indefinitely for BLP violations. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:20, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Cullen328:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 17:16, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

--Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 17:16, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Rubbish computer. Enjoy the day. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 17:23, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

What to do about this

At user talk:Iridescent#"Marks of Cain", I queried an edit of mine she reverted with what I thought was odd wording in the edit summary, so I asked for clarification. She then ranted at me, I said something stupid and she insulted me and told me to go away (fair enough). I apologised and tried to explain and she closed the discussion, giving the impression I was harrassing her. I am extremely distressed by this and do not know what to do, I didn't mean to harrass anyone and I simply asked a question. --Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 21:37, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Rubbish computer, today might not be your day, as you also are not on my good side for that little stunt of slapping a cleanup template on an article four minutes after it was created by a user who is working on it. My guess (given that you haven't explained what editing action triggered the "Mark of Cain" comment) is that you got template-happy and put something on a user page that was not necessary and unduly mean-spirited. iri was trying to explain to you what you did wrong and you took what was said as a personal attack when it was not; it was merely constructive criticism. So take a rally deep breath and realize that you weren't being attacked, you were being educated. How about giving yourself a template rest for a bit? Montanabw^(talk) 23:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

@Montanabw: Of course, I just want Iridescent to know I'm sorry. --Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 23:11, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

@Montanabw: I thought when a user got blocked, you put Template:Blocked user on their userpage, and I asked why she reverted me as I didn't know. I said something stupid, but tried to say sorry. --Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 23:16, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, I can't answer that one because I am not (yet) an admin. But the stuff you shouldn't have said to iri was did sound kind of mean-spirited and attacking to my wiki-"ears" too; you many not have meant it that way, but I probably would have interpreted it the same iri did. You probably should have just stopped after the first error, struck the "something stupid" part and just said "sorry, I misunderstood the use of the template" without an attempt to further explain yourself. Montanabw^(talk) 23:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Rubbish computer. I suggest that you start by reading the template documentation, which says quite clearly, "While everyone can add this tag, it should typically only be placed by the blocking administrator. If the blocker doesn't think it's needed, the odds are it isn't." Then back off and leave the folks you have irritated alone for a while. Sometimes silence is the most effective apology. As a general rule, these kind of templates should be used sparingly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:46, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

She explained the matter. It was not a rant or an attempt to get you in trouble. Think carefully before making comments that escalate things. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:56, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. --Rubbish computer (Trick: or treat?) 01:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Your article on oxide jacking cited in Wikipedia's article on Oxide jacking

I read with interest your article on oxide jacking as it pertains to construction and home improvement. It was clear and engaging, even to someone with no background in the industry, and I agree that citing it in the Wikipedia article improved that article and was appropriate. I have a couple of questions. First, did anything ever come of your recommendation, on the part of either the marble industry association or any other group? Second, I see that the "James Heaphy" listed as co-author is your son, but the way your article is currently cited in the Wikipedia article looks like somebody just listed you twice by accident. Is he by chance a "Jr." or "III" that could be included to make it clearer that there were two authors with similar names? —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 02:43, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind words, GrammarFascist. I really appreciate what you said.

In response to your first question, there has been no change to the applicable stone industry standards, as far as I know. I am not a member of the trade group in question and they responded in a defensive and slightly hostile fashion to our constructive criticism. They described the problem as rare, though we were getting customer inquiries about this type of problem once or twice a month just in our market area. How do you define "rare"? Therefore, we did not pursue the matter but have seen many dozens of similar failures since that article was published.

As for your second question, yes, my son and I do have very similar names. Actually, I am the "III" and he is the "IV", if you can believe that. But I go by "Jim Heaphy" on a day-to-day basis, while he goes by "James Heaphy". I am reluctant to use Roman numerals in this Wikipedia article that were not used in the original trade journal article. Neither of us use the Roman numerals except when giving our full legal names in a formal setting. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:40, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

You're very welcome, Jim, I meant my praise in all sincerity. It's a shame, though not really surprising, that the industry association has responded that way. Is it at least possible for you to get accurate information from suppliers about what material they use for rods when you're ordering countertops? Regarding your and your son's names, I do in fact know another father and son who are III and IV, and they don't use those numerals except in formal situations either. (The father goes by their middle name and the son goes by their first name.) I see your point about the numerals not being used in the source article. Well, readers can follow the source link, see your mention that your son contributed to the column, and draw the same inference I did; that will have to be good enough. See you at the Teahouse! —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 08:07, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Here I venture far deeper into the realm of personal opinion than I usually do on Wikipedia, GrammarFascist. (Facebook is another matter entirely). Yes, a customer ordering stone countertops can ask the fabricator what type of material they use for rodding reinforcements. And that company would be legally obligated to respond accurately. The problem is that only a tiny percentage of consumers would have any reason or motivation to ask that question. Awareness of the problem is minimal. Only if a friend or relative had the same problem and it was properly diagnosed would a customer have the awareness to even ask. And in my experience, most stone industry professionals are mystified when they see the problem, and concoct a variety of false explanations for these failures, all in good faith. It is a lack of information both among consumers and professionals. Perhaps by some definitions, the problem is "rare", but I believe that this problem.affects thousands of homeowners each year in the U.S., with damages of thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in each case. I consider that a significant problem. Others seem to disagree. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:37, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

It sounds like it might be a situation that calls for intervention by California's department of consumer protection (or whatever name the equivalent state agency out there has). In the state where I currently reside, the office of the Attorney General, and the Department of Consumer Protection which is under the AG's purview, are quite aggressive in pursuing businesses which seem to have acted in bad faith contrary to the public interest. I would think California would have good consumer protection laws and enforcement as well, but that's just an educated guess. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 08:50, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello,

I have spent my life dealiing with design, construction and technology related to these topics. I would like to create a section on Design and Construction. I have created a massive outline of topics and subtopics, but there is no content. Is there a way to post this outline so contributors can start adding content. For any one topic dealing with design or construction (selecting insulated glass, sound transmission levels for a school classroom, best painting process for a damp location, layout for a handicap bathroom for a pre-school, etc) you can go to the Internet and there will be hundreds if not thouosands of listings but most or old, wrong, an add for a product, etc. I would like to help create a single location with the "best" information for these thousands of topics. As I said I have the topics, just need to figure out how to get content.

I am not sure how I see your answer so my email address is dennis@neeley-consulting.com

Neeleyjdennis (talk) 18:47, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jamalul Kiram III

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jamalul Kiram III. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

I commented there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:01, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bal des débutantes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nina Ricci. 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) 12:31, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 Done --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 18:16, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback

Hi Cullen328, I really appreciate your feedback on the citations for the Hasso Plattner page. I'll continue digging around to see if I can find alternative resources. Thank you! Harper70 (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2015 (UTC)Harper70

Irvin Jim

 Done. GiantSnowman 13:10, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakki_Suleyman

Hi Jim - This "bio" would appear to be a highly targeted "hit" article driven by factional politics - and with a primary objective to "tar" by association the subjects daughter, a sitting member in the Victorian State Parliament. In the local Australian context, its tone is highly one-sided and written with the objective attack the subject, and by association his daughter. Many of the cited sources, and emotive language, are allegations, not proven violations of law. Thanks for the opportunity to provide feedback. AusEditFrame (talk) 00:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, AusEditFrame. I have expressed my general agreement with your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hakki Suleyman. Although I am interested in Australian politics from a distance, I know very little about the day-to-day details. But I do not need that level of expertise to detect an attack page. It appears highly likely that the article will be deleted. The situation is disappointing to me because the editor who wrote and defended the article is one who I have collaborated with and respected for several years. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:13, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Help

Hello Cullen,

How are you doing? Please I need your help. Will this constitute a copyvio? Although the article Isaac Folorunso Adewole had been created before the "Vanguard News" publication. I intend to expand the section "Work" with his scholarly article publications already in the "Vanguard. I hope this will not constitute copyvio and there is no way I can write it in my own language. Please I need your help. Thanks in anticipation. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 18:39, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wikicology. I am fine and hope you are as well. I see no copyvio and it looks like a false positive to me. Almost all the similarities are proper names of institutions, job titles and the like. I see no original prose being copied. In my opinion, you have nothing to worry about. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much Cullen. Can I go ahead to add more? I like to add more to that section. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 19:52, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure, Wikicology. I see no problem. Link to the papers or their abstracts if available online. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jim

Hi Jim - I thank you for your invitation for my immediate ban at Wiki by various who seem to be angling for such a result. I have expressly wished that a proper review of Wiki procedures be put in place concerning political elections because it seems more than clear to me that there is a gang of apparatchiks who get on my cause with remarkable promptness whenever I edit & then do their utmost to prevent any meaningful progress being made. M Mabelina (talk) 05:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Mabelina. I favor a BLP topic ban, not a complete ban. Evasiveness will get you nowhere in this matter, nor will doubling down and claiming that a source that any other experienced editor immediately sees as unreliable is actually reliable in your imagination. You would be better advised to admit your error and resolve never again to use such a crappy source. Digging in your heels is a really bad idea. Accusing other editors of being Soviet style operatives is also unwise, and a personal attack. Do not reply here, please. Defend yourself at ANI. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:39, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Jim - yours is a most helpful reply with which I agree wholeheartedly - perhaps others in this circle might also endeavour to be more restrained? & I look forward to hearing further. M Mabelina (talk) 06:55, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Note An administrator blocked the above editor for one month. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Marco Rubio

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Marco Rubio. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I passed on that one. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:08, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Carly Fiorina

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Carly Fiorina. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I have no strong opinion on this matter. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:10, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Bataclan

Hello. I don't see how having a picture of the lead singer is appropriate in the Bataclan article. Mind you, this is the article on Bataclan theatre itself, not just the attacks. It seems out of place to have a large photo of the singer in an article about this historical theatre. The band is already mentioned in the article, but to focus on this one singer in the aftermath of the attacks trivializes the event. DrRNC (talk)

He is more than just a singer, DrRNC. He is the front man, the public face of Eagles of Death Metal, and the only permanent touring member of the band for 17 years. Josh Homme only performs in the studio, and the other guys are hired session players. He is the performer that 1500 people came to see, that ISIS chose to attack, and 89 people were murdered as a result.

I understand that the article is about more than just the attacks and in recent days, I have added lots of material that has nothing to do with the attack and relatively little about the actual attack itself, other than the names of the known attackers. I am committed to the article being an overview of the 150 year history of the theater. However, it is performers that draw people to a successful concert venue, including last Friday night, and Jesse Hughes will forever be intertwined with by far the most stunning event in the history of the Bataclan. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

I believe you are putting more importance in this singer than is warranted. If the article was extensively about the attacks, a picture of the band may be justified. However, this is not an article about just the attacks and the picture showing emergency crews outside the theatre suffices. Also, I don't buy the argument that because they played, people came to see them, and therefore, the attacks were against this singer. People came to see the other act, too. It's not known if the attackers had an issue with this band (which I highly doubt; more likely it was a venue that was seen as an open target). Therefore, having a stand alone picture of the main singer is incredibly out of place. DrRNC (talk)

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) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Battle of Karbala

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Battle of Karbala. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	This barnstar is awarded to recognize particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia, to let people know that their hard work is seen and appreciated. I award you this in appreciation and recognition of your continued excellent contributions to the project, both on and off article space. Cheers, Softlavender (talk) 06:26, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

That is very kind of you, and I appreciate it, Softlavender. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:44, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Hi, Jim. Thanks very much for your prompt reply to my query about translation.

Nadnie (talk) 04:30, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Nadnie. Happy to be of assistance. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:43, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Smartphone

I'm only using it because Windows 10 makes my netbook unusable, dear Cullen. But I do feel kind of hardcore, yes. Drmies (talk) 05:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that you were having computer problems, Drmies, and I sympathize. I didn't want to mention it at ANI. If you haven't noticed, jackals and vultures hang out there.

By the way, I also noticed that your ArbCom candidacy has sextupled voter turnout. Well done! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

• Really? All because of me? How do you know? Drmies (talk) 05:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

I am just joshing with you about my made-up "pet theory", Drmies. I would love to discuss my more serious thoughts about this "interesting" election after it is all over. As for now, I will simply say that getting all worked up about the situation is premature, in my opinion. Neither Trump nor Carson are yet president, and X, Y and Z are not yet on ArbCom. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:01, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference

Why is reference so necessary? We cannot even just copy and paste articles from the other sites why not Wikipedia allows o just copy and paste the information.BOTFIGHTER (talk) 12:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, BOTFIGHTER. This is an encyclopedia with much higher standards than other websites. One of our policies is verifiability. References enable our readers to verify what they read. Copying and pasting from other websites is a copyright violation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:02, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for this!BOTFIGHTER (talk) 09:11, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Firebug (Dinghy)

Jim,

Thank you for your encouragement regarding the Firebug (dinghy) page. It would appear that it is no longer under query/review.

I am greatly encouraged by the kindness, in internet terms perhaps I should say gentleness, that has been displayed to me.

MRossV — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRossV (talk • contribs) 01:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

I really appreciate your kind words, MRossV, though my assistance was minor. On a personal note, my father built a similar very small sailboat about 50 years ago. My parents then rented a cabin on Lake Huron, and my sister and I had a pleasant afternoon sailing the boat in perfect weather. Sadly, someone stole that boat a couple of days later, but I do have some pleasant memories.

If I can be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to ask. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:53, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kim Jong-un

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kim Jong-un. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

I commented there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:00, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Firebug (Dinghy2)

Thank you for that Jim. Sad that your father's effort should be snatched away so soon after completion.

In many ways, the importance of the Firebug is not the boat itself, good though it is. It is the creation of a mechanism and an online community to encourage the passing on of skills from one generation to the next. I support the project primarily because I believe that for thousands of years children learned their skills next to their fathers and mothers. To me that suggests that as a species we are well adapted to that kind of skill transmission. Sadly, with high density urban living becoming the norm for so many, such "learning by doing" is becoming much more difficult. The 'Bug is an attempt to provide a space where young people do get the opportunity.

I didn't think it pertinent to the Wikipedia entry but the building of these craft has been used as a method of promoting social engagement in Samoa, Lisbon (Portugal) as well as parts of New Zealand and in other areas where the practical skills required have been beneficial to young people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRossV (talk • contribs) 03:17, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

If a reliable source discusses that aspect of the Firebug, MRossV, then summarizing that in the article seems appropriate to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

You're invited! Women in Red World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Religion

You are invited! Join us remotely! World Virtual Edit-a-thon on Women in Religion

Dates: 5 to 15 December 2015 Location: Worldwide/virtual/online event Host: Women in Red (WiR): Did you know that only 15% of the biographies on Wikipedia are about women? WiR focuses on "content gender gap". If you'd like to help contribute articles on women and women's works, we warmly welcome you! Event details: This is a virtual edit-a-thon hosted by WiR. It will allow all those keen to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in religion to participate. All levels of Wikipedia editing experience are welcome. RSVP and learn more: →here← --Rosiestep (talk) 05:35, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of ministers of the Universal Life Church

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of ministers of the Universal Life Church. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Request for resolution of queries regarding Wikipedia Article Deletion

Hello Jim,

I am a new user on Wikipedia with the username, Annie 86. It's great to connect with you here. I loved your profile headline "When was the last time you tried something new for the first time?" :) Well, I created my first article on Wikipedia, 'D&H Sécheron Electrodes Private Limited' on November 20, 2015. But, this page has been deleted.(For Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%26H_S%C3%A9cheron_Electrodes_Private_Limited). The information stated in the article was true, complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge.I am learning but, I never tried to misuse Wikipedia for merely sharing promotional information and referred to the Wikipedia pages of other Welding and Engineering companies such as Ador Welding, Lincoln Electric, Larsen & Toubro, Siemens, etc. while creating this page. I also added logo of the company, other important details, links to other Wikipedia articles, references and news links. I am keen to know the reason for the deletion of this article. Though it is painstaking and boring activity, I would be grateful if you could please check and guide on measures, which need to be implemented to get it a place on Wikipedia.

Thanks for your time.

Regards,

Annie Annie 86 (talk) 06:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Annie 86. The debate was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D&H Sécheron Electrodes Private Limited. The article was deleted as unambiguous advertising by a very experienced and respected administrator, DGG. Please read WP:G11 for a description of the deletion criteria. As I am not an administrator, I can't see the text of the deleted article. I will offer a few general comments, though. If by any chance, you have a paid professional connection with the company, then the Wikimedia Terms of use require you to disclose this. You should read Your first article. Please be aware that an acceptable Wikipedia article should neutrally summarize what reliable, independent sources say about the topic. Please also note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory of every welding and engineering company on Earth. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:39, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Annie B6, the article contained such phrases as "Considered the "Complete Welding Support", Quality, Innovation and Import Substitution have been the three watchwords in the organisation.Most of the content was long list of products with the dates the firm began carrying them. WP does not publish product catalogs. It was supplemented by a list of the countries where the firm has distributors It also had a list of trade shows where the product was shown. Such lists are appropriate for the firm's website, not an encyclopedia. Furthermore , a WP article will not be kept without references providing substantial coverage from third-party independent reliable sources, not press releases or mere announcements. The only reference here was the firms own website. If and only if you have such references, try, but using WP:AFC, and not forgetting to make any necessary declaration off conflict of interest, just as Cullen328 specified. DGG ( talk ) 07:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

"

Hello Jim,

Annie 86 here. Thanks a lot for your reply and guidance. I will make the necessary changes and then share the draft for your suggestions. Have a good day ahead.

Regards,

Annie

Annie 86 (talk) 10:40, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jim,

How are you? Perhaps, I am writing to you after a week. Just wondering how busy have been your Thanksgiving holiday was. As suggested, I proofread the article and made necessary modifications. Jim, it would be great if you could please suggest how can I send you my edited article? Thanks and have a good day ahead.

Regards,

Annie Annie 86 (talk) 06:39, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Annie 86. My wife and I made a traditional Thanksgiving dinner for our two adult sons and three other relatives. We had a wonderful visit. Thanks for asking. If you celebrate Thanksgiving, I hope yours was good as well. I suggest you post your draft article in your personal sandbox page. Let me know and I will comment on it for you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:26, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jim, Great to know that. I saw your wife's photo on your page. I guess she also extends her support and guidance to new editors. And yes, I also love celebrating festivals with family and friends. Thanks. I will post my article in sandbox page.

Regards, Annie Annie 86 (talk) 08:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jim,

I have shared my article in my sandbox page. Could you please spare time and read it? Thanks for your continuous support. Regards, Annie Annie 86 (talk) 10:30, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jim,

How are you? Could you please spare time out of your schedule? I hope I have improved this time and it's not "running in circle and back to the pavilion" story this time. Thanks for responding to my incessant requests. I have shared my article in my sandbox page.

Regards, Annie Annie 86 (talk) 06:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Annie 86. Was the founding partner Société Anonyme des Ateliers de Sécheron? If so, that should be mentioned and wikilinked. However, being a subsidiary or division of a notable company does not confer notability. I will take a closer look at your draft. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:08, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Annie 86, your draft article is entirely unreferenced, except for links to the company's own website. It is full of phrasing that shows every sign of being copied from.the company's own literature. This is unacceptable. Perhaps you do not understand what Wikipedia is all about. A Wikipedia article about a company should summarize what [[WP:RS|Independent, reliable sources say about the company, not what the company says about itself. Your article is nowhere near ready for the encyclopedia. Start fresh. Assemble a list of independent sources that discuss the company. Sources that have nothing whatsoever to do with the company. Sources like reputable newspapers and business journals. Build your article by summarizing what those independent unaffiliated sources say. This is your only acceptable path to writing an article about this company. These standards are not negotiable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:26, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jim, It is not our founding partner. Thanks a ton for reading the draft. Regards, Annie Annie 86 (talk) 07:20, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Annie 86. It appears that you have ignored the excellent advice that DGG gave you above. In addition, when you mention "our founding partner", that is strong evidence that you have a conflict of interest as either an agent or an employee of this company. You are obligated by our Terms of Use to openly disclose your COI. Please do not request a further review of your draft article until you have fully complied with all of our policies and guidelines. It seems that you are being paid to do so. Do your job properly, and then we can talk again. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Central Elementary School (Albemarle, North Carolina)

When I was looking for dates, I was given a draft of the National Register application. I just didn't know how to deal with all that detail.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Re: Thank you

Hello, thanks for your message. I'll keep your kind offer in mind. Graham87 08:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Please do. My offer is both entirely sincere and permanent. Thank you for editing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

How to determine afflicted references

Hi jim

Thank you in advance for reaching out. This wiki project of trying to get my first article published has been a daunting experience.

I am curious as to what is considered affiliate website as in your comment to my draft ohlson packaging. I do not control the content or own any shares in the reference links that I have listed. They have their editors whose names will appear on those pages

The term Affiliate websites seems to me to be quite subjective and really could be used for any online link, that I could find referencing the ohlson packaging company

Am I trying to beat a dead horse here, and unless Harvard University or NBC does an expose I can forget about trying to get approval

I have spent months on this I am about to give up any last words wisdom To save my dream of getting an article published

Nshone (talk) 11:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Nshone. A topic is notable by Wikipedia's standards when it has received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. A routine trade publication directory listing that was obviously written by the company, using "we" and saying "call us" is clearly not an independent source and no experienced editor would accept it as such. We are looking for detailed, in depth articles written by professional journalists and published in credible magazines and newspapers like Business Week, Forbes, Fortune, Inc., the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times or comparable publications. Coverage of the company in a book issued by a mainstream publisher would also be acceptable. It is the obligation of anyone who drafts an article to provide persuasive evidence that the company has received such coverage. I hope that this clarifies things. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)