User talk:Cullen328/Archive 45

Archive 40

←

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

→

Archive 50

Citation tag

How can I put a reference required tag on an article please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunrays21 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sunrays21. Please read Template: Citation needed, and add that template to an article directly after any substantive statement that is unsupported by a reference. A good alternative is to search for an acceptable source backing up the claim, and add it to the article yourself. If you cannot find any source, and you consider the claim contentious or false, then just go ahead and remove it, explaining why in an edit summary. Be prepared to engage with and discuss the matter with any editor who disagrees. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunrays21 (talk • contribs) 03:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Birth date and age

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Birth date and age. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Response to your comment regarding the page ANDREA IERVOLINO

Hi Jim. Thanks for providing some honest insight on the page I'm trying to fix.

The links I have independently discussing the client are:

Andrea Iervolino, a mogul and a gentleman

The Italian-Canadian who has Hollywood Film Geeks Fuming

My Miami: Andrea Iervolino

Hollywood North is young Film mogul's perch

Because the charity foundation he's started is still new and being improved upon, I will remove the "Philanthropist" claim.

When you said remove external links - did you mean JUST external links or any citations that aren't focused on solely him?

Mackenzie.wong (talk) 14:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Mackenzie.wong. Your draft is significantly improved. The four sources above convince me that he is notable, but other editors may disagree. Consider the content in those sources, as summarized in your own words, to be the backbone of the article. Citations need not focus just on him but they should mention him and clearly support an important claim in the article. Your current references 23 and 24 do not mention him and 24 in particular is gossipy celebrity name dropping. I suggest you review each and every one of your references and remove the weaker ones. The quality of your sources is much more important than quantity. Those that mention him in detail are much better than those that mention him in passing. Remove "Lady" in connection with his partner Bacardi. We do not use such honorifics. Go through your draft sentence by sentence, removing all traces of promotional language, striving always for the neutral point of view. Your filmography section is unreferenced. You need an independent source mentioning him as a producer to list each film in that section. If his involvement was minor, leave out that film. Good luck to you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:01, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Also, please remove IMDb and press releases as references. These are poor quality sources, as they lack independence and editorial control. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! His partner is actually the Lady of Bayfield Hall (Widower of Lord of Bayfield, Luis Adalberto Facundo Gomez del Campo Bacardi, Bacardi Rum). In your opinion, would any of that be worth mentioning if she herself doesn't have a designated wikipedia page?

IMDB links would be inappropriate as references just in his filmography?

Mackenzie.wong (talk) 19:30, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Mackenzie.wong, you are writing a biography of Iervolino, not Bacardi. That title and those personal details are not appropriate for his biography, in my opinion. No, IMDb is not a reliable source for a filmography. Please read Wikipedia:Citing IMDb. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jared Taylor

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jared Taylor. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

More on NPP

I noticed that you did this:

(Deletion log); 06:13 . . Cullen328 (talk | contribs) deleted page Roberto Arevalo ‎(Unreferenced stub BLP in Spanish. G2: Test page)

despite my objection on the talk page. It was not a very serious objection, but I didn't see the page as meeting the G2 criterion. It was clearly an attempt at adding content.

I'm very new to NPP and finding it very hard to get traction. It feels to me like there's a considerable distance between what the instructions say and what happens in practice - and this page was an example. My reading was that it should be tagged with {{Not English}} and {{Unreferenced}}, and - given that pro footballers are almost always considered notable - released as "reviewed".

Interested in your thoughts. I'm trying to learn by watchlisting a selection of NPP entries to see how other reviewers deal with them. At present, I'm only prepared to CSD the most blatant examples of their kind. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:31, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello jmcgnh and thanks for stopping by. I did not read the talk page first before deleting. When I saw your talk page note, I restored the article, translated it to English, did a quick unsuccessful search for sources, and then tagged it as an unreferenced BLP. Sorry to have pulled the trigger too quickly. I have only been an administrator for a few weeks, and have a lot to learn. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Another thing to take into consideration is that he may play in the future in the second level Andorran league. Andorra is a country of only 85,000 people, and not even their first level league is considered fully professional. See WP:NFOOTY and associated pages. So, I doubt this article would survive AfD, but I have been wrong before. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:48, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That was very responsive! I know almost nothing about soccer and I didn't find anything useful about him with my Google search, either. Your actions help confirm my developing understanding of what we're supposed to do at NPP. Your willingness to undertake admin duties is admirable. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:54, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)jmcgnh, Arevalo is clearly not notable. The article states: He is awaiting his debut as a professional player. The criterion WP:NFOOTY is quite clear and unambiguous. Arevalo has not played. The article can be deleted A7. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, jmcgnh and Kudpung. This is a learning experience. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:03, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@Kudpung: I agree, A7. My ability to read Spanish is only at something like 50-60%, so until Cullen translated it, I was unaware that NFOOTY wasn't met. In both my NPP work and my AfC work, I've been working on developing my sense of WP:N, along with learning the ins and outs of CSD. What seems like a bright line for others often feels rather vague to me, so I'm watching rather than acting on most of what I encounter. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:18, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Protected Page

If it's possible I wanted to ask that the article DBZ be protected indefinitely. This page gets vandalized so many times. And I wanted to ask the same for the Yu-Gi-O! Page (only not indefinitely). I'm not sure how to request such things... ♠Dinah♠ 🎤 19:24, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Dinah Kirkland. Please post your request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Follow the instructions at the top of that page. In the future, the shortcut is WP:RFPP. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:25, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Help with template for inbox?

Hi Cullen, we had a useful exchange about a year ago about bios for some Saskatchewan politicians. Your help and encouragement was appreciated! I have a question for you: I'd like to design a template for a new infobox that is specific to Canadian legislation, as the current infobox is based on US parliamentary procedure, and does not translate well to Canadian procedure. But, I've not found an easy "how-to" for designing a new template. Are there any resources on Wikipedia that you could point me to? (Bear in mind that I have very limited computer skills!) Thanks. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:49, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Mr Serjeant Buzfuz. I am a guy who knows my limitations and I know nothing about template creation or editing. I suggest you ask for help at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), where editors with such expertise tend to congregate. Good luck. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:53, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Jim! Will try there. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 05:47, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Well, all right then.

All right, fair enough, I've been away from the Teahouse for a while. I can accept that you know better than I. ;) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:01, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello there, my dear Writ Keeper. I can assure you that whatever bizarre three way edit conflict that just happened was entirely unintentional on my part, and I thought I was the first to answer. Fortunately, it has been ironed out. Sorry. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:13, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Haha, no worries, I know it was unintentional. Honestly, I trust your judgment enough that I wouldn't have questioned it if I had thought you did it on purpose. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:19, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thank you! نیشابوری (talk) 20:06, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

You are welcome, نیشابوری. I hope that you will continue improving Valiollah Rostaminejad. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:37, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Follow-Up - Comments on Editor Blocking Wikipedia Page

Hi Jim--thank you for your response to my comments on the Teahouse forum yesterday. I should have been more careful with my phrasing of the issue that I posted about, and my apologies if I have offended you or your fellow editors, who do very good work for this site! I have vested a lot of faith in Wikipedia over the years--it is the primary place I go to for information before I delve deeper into any topic. It was the source I used to find information about the organization being discussed, in fact, before I started to learn more about it. All I know is that when I searched for International Federation of Interior Architects/Designers (IFI) the other day, nothing came up! I was dismayed because it has been my intention to fix this page up so that it accurately reflects the accomplishments of the organization. For some time, it has been sparse. This is not to promote a cause, but to communicate verifiable information that has now been altered or the page reverted back to an earlier state because some of the info is incorrect.

The last time I checked there was an extensive amount of information on the page that now appears to be gone. I was informed by the contributor IFIstaff that an editor named Huon had deleted a large amount of verifiable content rather than flagging the specific information or language in question and sent transcripts of this discussion. While this conversation shows neither party at its best, the larger issue that verifiable content was removed from Wikipedia at the discretion of an editor who refused to allow the user in question power to edit after the username was changed (as requested) and assurance was given that any language misconstrued would be removed (as requested) was troubling. I am not going to level any charges at Huon, I just think Wikipedia is an important source of free information and I don't want anyone to feel like they can't contribute content that is true and verifiable. Obviously users should be checked when this is not the case, but no editor should assume that content is untrue without doing the research.

In addition, the edits I made to the page were in fact changed/reversed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_International_Federation_of_Interior_Architects/Designers) and information on the page is now incorrect. IFI has not been a member of the International Design Alliance for some time now (no one is a member since the Alliance broke up). I don't know if you can check this, but none of the sub-pages that I edited appear at all-- IFI World Interiors Day (IFI WID) and IFI World Interiors for the Next Generation (IFI WING). The former is a public and globally recognized day of celebration for the interior architecture/design community and was established by IFI; the latter is a global awards competition, the last iteration being in 2013--why have these been removed from the IFI Wikipedia page?

I fully appreciate the NPOV and the information you supplied about Wikipedia and its editors. I am guilty of not doing my research before I made some of those accusations.

Apologies for taking up too much of your time already. Disagreements fleshed out online like this are unusual for me and I would not like them to become commonplace. If you want evidence of my claims against the editor in question, I think you can go to Huon's page and view the conversation with IFIstaff unless it has been removed. As I said before, it was not my intention to offend and I'm not pursuing charges against this editor now that the page is restored. Wikipedia is an important source of information for many, and the content that appears on there is trusted as fact. I just hope that the power editors have is not used to make other people's lives more difficult, block them when they have agreed to comply and publish/restore wrong/old information on a site that many, including myself, use and trust daily.

Thanks for your work.

–ynejdawi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ynejdawi (talk • contribs) 15:08, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ynejdawi,

In my Teahouse comment, I advised you to stop attacking and spreading falsehoods about Huon, and here you are on my talk page, again spreading falsehoods about Huon. Let me be crystal clear: Huon has never once edited The International Federation of Interior Architects/Designers. Huon has not deleted the article, blocked the article, locked or protected the article, or done any such thing. All you need to do is click the "history" tab at the top of the page and you can see a record of all the edits and who made them. So, the first thing you should do is withdraw your false allegations and apologize to Huon.

What Huon did, and it was entirely proper, was to explain to an admitted promotional editor, IFIstaff/DorianHawkmoon, how inappropriate their behavior was. Huon did not even block that editor. That editor was blocked by administrator Mz7, and Huon is the administrator who unblocked that editor today, as anyone who reads User talk:DorianHawkmoon can see in complete detail.

I also advised you at the Teahouse to make your recommendations for improving the article at Talk:The International Federation of Interior Architects/Designers, and you have thusfar failed to do so. Instead, you have posted false information on the talk pages of three highly experienced editors.

Many experienced editors, several of whom are administrators, are now watching this article, and we simply will not allow it to be transformed into a promotional brochure for this group. Again, let me be clear: Wikipedia editors unaffiliated with this group do not care at all about what this group and its supporters say or write about the group. This article will summarize what reliable, independent sources say about the group. By "independent", I mean completely unaffiliated with IFIAD. The day of celebration and the awards ceremony will not be included unless you provide independent sources describing them. If the International Design Alliance is defunct, provide a reliable source for that. Talk:The International Federation of Interior Architects/Designers is the proper place for all further discussion of changes to this article, and please limit yourself to discussing how best to neutrally summarize what identified reliable independent sources say about the topic.

I will not be editing the article content as an editor myself, because I want to monitor this article as an administrator. I will not hesitate to block any disruptive, promotional editors who show up at that article, if they ignore warnings. A new account, MB717, has now showed up and is also acting in a promotional fashion and adding copyright violations to Wikipedia. That is unwise behavior. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:20, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hello Jim! Sorry for jumping the gun, but this is very strong behavioral evidence in my opinion. I have blocked MB717 to prevent further disruption for the time being until the relationship between these three accounts are clarified. My apologies in advance. Alex Shih^Talk 08:05, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

No apology needed, Alex Shih. Thanks. You did the right thing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:50, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Possible Sock puppet.

Hello again! So I went to open a sock puppet investigation on a new editer because their wording and edits are very suspicious however I cannot seem to be able to take the survey or whatever it is called. Could I possibly give you the information and you open it for me? I do believe I know the puppetmaster as well. ♠Dinah♠ 🎤 22:09, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Dinah Kirkland. I have no experience with sockpuppet investigations. You will need to provide behavioral evidence in the form of diffs. Please read Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations carefully. If you look at the chart of open investigations, you will see the names of various editors who participate there regularly. One of them can give you help with the process. Good luck! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:19, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

From Thisssecretperson from the Teahouse

Ok, so we talked about whether my YouTube video is a source on Wikipedia, and if so, how to put it in references. Here is what is found about the video.

• The title of the video refers to America's Got Talent (season 12).
• The title of the video includes the intro and the Judges' comments of an act called Final Draft.
• At some point, a judge named Howie Mandel asks the act where they are from (Atlanta, Georgia). (This info is already listed on the page, but I want to add a reference next to it.)
• The title of the video is called " 2017 Final Draft Just the Intro and Judges' Comments S12E05" by a YouTube user called Anthony Ying.

    *Anthony Ying credits the show and act in the title.
    *Anthony Ying mostly uploads the full clips of several reality competiton shows, such as America's Got Talent, Britain's Got Talent, and The X-Factor.

Now I have a question: Is this a reliable YouTube video that can be put in the References section of America's Got Talent(season 12)? Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzapkO8cPuU Thank you for reading this, Cullen328. Hope you can help.Thissecretperson (talk) 19:57, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Thissecretperson. I see no evidence that this YouTube channel is authorized by the producers of the TV show, so in my opinion, linking to it would be a copyright violation by Wikipedia's strict standards. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:03, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you VERY much! ~ I'll try to find another source.Thissecretperson (talk) 00:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).

Administrator changes

Nakon • Scott

Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news

• ACTRIAL, a research experiment that restricts article creation to autoconfirmed users, will begin on September 7. It will run for six months. You can learn more about the research specifics at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial, while Wikipedia talk:Autoconfirmed article creation trial is probably the best venue for general discussion.
• Following an RfC, WP:G13 speedy deletion criterion now applies to any page in the draftspace that has not been edited in six months. There is a bot-generated report, updated daily, to help identify potentially qualifying drafts that have not been submitted through articles for creation.

Technical news

• You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
• Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
• In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration

• Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

credible sources

Hi Jim,

when a product makes news on tv or in a newspaper, is this the credible source you are referring to.

Many thanks Jim

Steve Roeder (talk) 19:23, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Steve Roeder. Simply "making news" is not enough. The coverage must be significant, sustained, not generated by press releases, and in a variety of reliable media outlets. Since you stand to benefit financially from this product's success, you should not write an article directly. Please read WP:AFC. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Jacob Frydman

This article continues to be the target of someone with a grudge against its subject, as shown in the edit histories of the ip and registered account continuing to reinsert material that violates BLP. Kablammo (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Kablammo. Thanks for the information. I have left a formal warning on the talk page of the registered editor. Please let me know if you see any more such edits. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:48, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen. The vandalism continues, including by an IP. I don't know what else should be done-- long-term protection? SPI and blocks? Regards, Kablammo (talk) 18:02, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Kablammo. Strictly speaking, this is not vandalism. It is slow motion edit warring to add content that violates BLP policy. Please keep reverting, always mentioning BLP policy in your edit summaries. I will ask for advice from more experienced administrators. Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Kablammo, I have indefinitely blocked the editor in question. Please keep me informed of IP activity. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:37, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I have no knowledge of or interest in the protagonists, but we shouldn't provide a forum for revenge. Thank again, Kablammo (talk) 01:14, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

"The new page patrollers are deluged ..."

Your recent comment in a Teahouse discussion caught my attention. You wrote, "The new page patrollers are deluged with a flood of terrible garbage and may pass by a relatively well developed article like yours." I agree completely. I ventured into patrolling new pages for awhile, hoping to help to whittle down the backlog. I read some good articles, but many more were poorly done, often with no citations and no content to demonstrate notability.

When I found articles that were unsourced and showed no indication of notability, I marked them for deletion and moved on to review another article. Eventually, however, I was chastised because I had not searched the Internet to try to find sources that would establish notability for an article's topic before nominating it for deletion. After that, I stopped patrolling new pages and returned to using my time on Wikipedia for creating new articles and editing existing articles.

It seems to me that as long as patrollers must do research to look for material that authors did not find (or did not include in an article), the backlog will continue to grow. It's hard enough to wade through that "flood of terrible garbage", without having to do research for justification that often probably does not exist. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your observation, Teblick. I have been active in deletion discussions for about seven years and I do not support deleting articles unless I am highly confident that the topic is not notable. Usually, 10 to 20 seconds on Google is enough to determine whether notability is possible. A few weeks ago, I became an administrator and have been working on deleting speedy nominations. I declined one today because the brief article stated the person had been elected to a city council of a city of over 300,000 people. That is a plausible claim of notability and the article should not be tagged with WP:A7. Always remember that this is a project to build an encyclopedia, not to tear it down. If people get jaded and yearn to delete all poor articles, then that is bad for the project. I am much more proud of saving and improving articles than deleting them. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:47, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback. I fully agree with the principle of building an encyclopedia, rather than tearing it down. I suppose that I am just better suited to doing that by creating new articles and enhancing existing articles rather than patrolling new pages. I appreciate you and others who have that latter talent. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:07, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

If you have found a productive niche that brings you gratification, then that is a wonderful thing, Teblick. If you ever need help from an administrator, please feel free to ask. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:10, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you; that is what I decided, too. I focus on people and programs associated with old-time radio and, to a lesser extent, television and film personalities, with occasional ventures into other topics. I have created about 150 articles and edited many more (usually adding sources and/or content to articles lacking in those areas). I enjoy that, and I hope that occasionally someone may benefit from something that I have contributed. I appreciate your offer of help, and I will keep that in mind. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Teblick, I don't see immediately where anyone has chided you for not adding sources. As one of the leading proponents for correct and accurate patrolling, I wouldn't even recommend adding them; NPR is a front line triage, it's not a clinic. A quick check in Google before tagging for notability is all that's required. A quick note to the creator via the Curation message feature should do the rest. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:37, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Teblick, our friend Kudpung knows vastly more about the mechanics and standards of new page patrolling than I do. My work related to deletion has almost entirely been at AfD until I became an administrator and started working the articles tagged for speedy deletion. I hope that Kudpung will give me advice if I screw up, and I will take such feedback seriously. Take care. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:52, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Kudpung and Cullen328, for your comments. I'm sure that both of you are busy, so I appreciate your taking the time to respond to my post. After my limited experience in evaluating new pages, I have a great appreciation for what you two and many other Wikipedians do as you review submissions. Eddie Blick (talk) 19:53, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dina Powell

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dina Powell. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Mortal wound

I came across this plaintive request from a newbie. Not aware of the deletion discussion, and the deletion note not pointing me directly to the AfD, I did some looking around. It appears that deleting the pages to terms mortal wound and mortally wounded leaves a lot of redlinks behind (strangely, links almost exclusively related to articles concerning the American Civil War). Would it be better to unlink, or to direct to the Wictionary link to "mortal"? BusterD (talk) 02:26, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, BusterD. Yes, I deleted the article on August 3, based on the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mortal wound. That discussion focused on medical and legal usages, and the military history context did not come up. The American Civil War connection is interesting. Perhaps there was an official government designation for that as a listed cause of death in that war only. If coverage as opposed to usage of the term in reliable sources about the Civil War can be found, then a new article can be written. If you do not want to take on that project, then the Wiktionary redirect seems like a good solution to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:52, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

With due respect to the completed process, I'd like to put the subject up for discussion at the Military History Wikiproject talk to see if some unexpected evidence is brought to light. Thanks as always for your efforts and again, congrats on the shiny new mop. BusterD (talk) 10:02, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Help edit Verve International article flagged as containing "content that is written as an advertisement"

Hello,

I'm referred here by an administrator Alex Shih to seek your assistance in improving an article I wrote two days ago, Verve International. It had been deleted but restored after incontrovertibly contesting it. It is tagged as having "contain content that is written like an advertisement" which I have been having a difficult time to fish out. I'll appreciate your helping me with it.

Thank you. RovingFingers (talk) 04:41, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, RovingFingers. Examples of content written like an advertisement include "established and promoted", "flagship", "pioneer staff", "solutions" (perhaps the worst buzzword of the 21st century), "bouyed by", and "launched". This is all promotional marketing-speak that does not belong in a neutral encyclopedia article. Scrub all such verbiage from the article, guided by the neutral point of view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:10, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Verve International scrubbed of promotional verbiage as advised by you

Hello User talk:Cullen328. I'm here to discuss about Verve International as advised. I have scrubbed the article of all the words (and others) as you pointed out. Kindly see if the page is qualified now to be untagged . Thank you.RovingFingers (talk) 07:07, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Earlier conversation held reproduced below:

Thanks for the Teahouse conversation about libraries

Hey there, I went to respond to our threaded conversation, but it's now archived, so I'll ping you here to say thanks for the connections and responses. Yes, I work with Merrilee at OCLC! This is a great project. I've edited for a while, here and there, I'm still learning. I am looking forward to introducing library staff to Wikipedia. I also have found Teahouse in general a fascinating space, it seems like a ripe opportunity to get to know people and help them beyond pointing them to guidelines and policies. I'm thinking about a question that I responded to under my volunteer username, that was about the non-degree granting school in Kenya/Brazil. You also responded to this user, I think. I looked through the history of that article and are a number of ways that the person's contribution to AfC could have been addressed. It's a missed opportunity (in my view) that the editors who had a look at that page responded by declining it and giving the reason it should be a degree-granting school and needs more independent references. There's so much we need to cover to improve the encyclopedia, especially about spaces outside the North American or European contexts. Non-degree granting schools may very well be notable for the services they provide to a population. And a way to help someone is to guide them to how to search for independent sources, this is something that perhaps a "librarian in Wikipedia' could do, by suggesting books or reference sources that could be accessed via the Wikipedia Library or a local pl, which might help someone improve their contribution. I'm riffing a bit here, but wondered if you have heard of anything like this happening in Teahouse or in the AfC process before? The AfC seems to me like it is a cry for help from new contributors and a real opportunity to create a human-to-human partnership with new contributors by someone who is experienced in information searches, newcomers could be made to feel more invited to contribute if their interests were affirmed and respectfully guided in that AfC. Monikasj (talk) 18:54, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Monikasj. Thank you for the kind words. Sadly, the AfC process has a lot of problems including a tendency by many reviewers to decline submissions based on lack of notability a bit too stringently. There is a fairly strong presumption (though no guarantee) that accredited degree awarding schools are notable. The converse is that most experienced editors will insist on clear evidence of notability of other types of schools. The AfC process is not strong in developing that human to human connection but we try to provide that outlet at the Teahouse. I am in 100% agreement that we need to expand our coverage of topics outside Europe and the U.S. but without relaxing our core content policies. I had the chance a year or so ago to evaluate about 100 new articles about Nigeria many of which were biographies of women academics and government officials. In almost all cases, these were fairly well written articles about clearly notable people. I want to wish you the very best of luck with the upcoming course for librarians and if I can be of any help, please let me know. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:38, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328 thanks for your quick and kind respond in return, I appreciate the conversation. I'm sad to have you confirm my observation that the AfC is a bit flawed and can be hostile/patronizing to newcomers. I saw that my volunteer account qualifies to apply to be a AfC reviewer, so I was actually thinking about trying my hand at it, to see what I might do differently. Just a thought. In any case, I am proud to recommend newcomers to the Teahouse, it is a space for connections. Thank you and other editors for the kindness and humanness you bring to these many (often repetitive!) questions from such a diversity of people. What a hard but important job in terms of building community! For the Wikipedia + Libraries project, we're having a few Wikipedians be 'guides' to our course participants in our course space ... I wonder if you would be interested in participating and be a "Wikipedian" for the course participants? No pressure, I know you are a busy person, but I wanted to be sure to extend the invitation given your rhetorical strengths in Teahouse and our conversation here. As for broadening coverage of notable topics, how wonderful to hear that so many new biographical articles were created about Nigeria. Was that a part of a WikiProject? I'd love to have a look and perhaps use some as examples in our course materials. Feel free to ping me by email if you would be interested in guiding, or recommending any of your colleagues who would be interested and a good fit I'm at jonesm at oclc dot org. However, I'd also be happy to continue conversations on wiki. Until next time, Monikasj (talk) 19:52, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Monikasj. Yes, I am willing to be a Wikipedian "guide" for your course. The Nigeria work was an editing contest organized by WikiProject Nigeria in 2016. I was one of three non-Nigerian judges who evaluated these articles and identified the best ones.

As for shortcomings of AfC, it is important to keep in mind that these are overworked volunteers who are trying to manage and triage a flood of new content, a large majority of which is simply not suitable for the encyclopedia. They are constantly struggling against backlogs and people rarely thank them. That can lead to cynicism and burnout, and a perception that there is not enough time to write personalized responses to new editors who too often ignore our core content policies and are here only to promote some pet topic. The same issues apply to New Pages Patrol, which may be worse in some ways. All that being said, these volunteers do essential quality control work.

I have made a conscious decision to contribute to Wikipedia in ways where I can be deliberative, friendly and thoughtful, and do not feel pressured to crank out quantity at the expense of quality. That is why I am not directly active at AfC or NPP, although I frequently encounter editors trying to figure out what just hit them. If you think that you can be useful at AfC, then I encourage you to give it a try. I will send you an email, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Atlantis Discussion

Hi Jim, I am having a difficult time trying to get an article started regarding Atlantis. Researching Atlantis is a hobby that I enjoy. Before I make another attempt to put up an article, I would like to talk to you about it. What about an article with a name like “The search for Atlantis” or Atlantis in America. People have been searching for Atlantis for years and have a lot to say about it. Also, some people think Atlantis was in America. Do you have any ideas?AlternateYou 21:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlternateYou (talk • contribs)

Hello AlternateYou. I see no reason for you to start a new article since we already have a well developed article called Atlantis. Proposing various alternative titles does not help. If you can identify problems with that article, then propose improvements at Talk: Atlantis. But you cannot interpret ancient sources yourself. You need to summarize what high quality modern reliable sources say about the myths and the ancient sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:36, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox writer

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox writer. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

AfD

Just a note that you recently speedy deleted the Liberalized Arguments article, but the AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberalized Arguments remains open. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:26, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Northamerica1000. I saw it on the list of pending speedies but did not notice the AfD debate. Someone else has closed that debate. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:04, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

SELF SOURCED ARTICLES RESPONSE TO YOUR TEAHOUSE POST

Thank you for your input. I can let the whole thing go but the book is about Herman Armour Webster who now has a (not great) Wikipedia page. I have been studying Webster since 2009 at the Smithsonian Archives of American Art, the American Field Service(AFS) Archives (they took over from the people who supported Webster's volunteer ambulance work in WWI), and I have access to all Webster's Yale Class reunion year books. Oral history is not great but Webster had many things destroyed in WW II (He remained in France) and it is the best we can do in some cases. I have also done research at the Bibliotèque Nationale in France, visited his gravesite (He didn't give me any secret insights), and, of course, used the net. I published an article about him in Janus the organ of AFS. I spoke to a friend with more experience than I have in publishing and he suggested self publishing. Part of the problem is that I can try to make things interesting by writing about his service to France, but Webster is not the kind of artist that a mainstream publisher is going to jump to publish a book about. Really and truly I would like to list it as an external resource when it is done so that people who know that it is there if they want it. The number of copies sold is not going to make me rich. It is just that this began so very long ago I would like it done. Nicodemus (talk) 20:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Oldsilenus. The article in question is Herman Armour Webster. When you say that this article is "not great", that is an understatement. It is packed full of promotional language that violates the neutral point of view, and is not at all encyclopedic. The references are a mess. So, the very first thing for you to do if you want to contribute to the Wikipedia article about Webster is to transform that poor quality article into a decent, useful encyclopedia article. As for the self-published book you are working on, we would need good evidence that people other than you consider it reliable. This might include favorable reviews of the book in reliable publications. Perhaps the 2012 Janus article might be considered as evidence that you are an authority on Webster, but I do not think that AFS is considered a reliable source for art history, though I could be wrong. I read your article published in Janus, and it is clear that your research is serious. I will try to do some basic stylistic cleanup of the Wikipedia article and encourage you to address the more substantive issues. Let's stay in touch as your book develops. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Indenting

Hi Cullen! I have edited the indentation here. Please read WP:INDENT. Feel free to ask any questions you may have. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, The Quixotic Potato. Please feel free to correct my indentation at any time, and there is no need to notify me. Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. One more tip: WP:PING says: "if the mention is not on a completely new line with a new signature, no notification will be sent", so if I make a typo when pinging someone (e.g. I ping User:Culllen328) then simply fixing the typo won't work. See also Help:Fixing failed pings. Most people are unaware of this. I have your page watchlisted. Keep up the good work. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:10, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I cannot count the times that I screwed up a ping, corrected it, erased my signature, and signed again, thinking I had solved the problem. Countless editors have no doubt missed my clever replies. Can I pay you to follow me around, correcting my frequent technical errors? I am thinking of a salary of a potato a week, to start, payable Friday mornings. What think you? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Pinging The Quixotic Potato! Cleanup in Aisle Nine! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:37, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I'll do it for free if you answer my emails for me. I receive over 300 emails on most days. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 09:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

According to Sturgeon's law, "90% of everything is crap". In my experience, that figure sometimes approaches 99% for email inboxes. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:45, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

We Meet Again

Hi, totally random, but we meet again. A long time ago (year or two) I saw you had edited an article that I had as well. I just randomly remembered your username, as my real name is Cullen (I suppose because it is uncommon). And today, I just happened to see you in the teahouse. Just wanted to stop by and say hey, even though we've never even talked. VTnav (talk) 05:17, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, VTnav. Nice to hear from another Cullen. My real middle name is Cullen, which I share with my grandfather, my father and my oldest son. My grandfather died suddenly in the back seat of a taxi, just before I was born. I happen to be quite fond of the name, although I rarely use it in everyday life off Wikipedia, except when signing legal documents. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dismissal of James Comey

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dismissal of James Comey. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Question about duplicated content

Today I found the page Kansas State Aggies football, 1900–09, and as I was adding some material, I noticed the similarity of its 1906 section to the content of the article 1906 Kansas State Aggies football team. I then found the articles 1900 Kansas State Aggies football team, 1901 Kansas State Aggies football team, 1902 Kansas State Aggies football team, 1903 Kansas State Aggies football team, 1904 Kansas State Aggies football team, 1905 Kansas State Aggies football team, and 1907 Kansas State Aggies football team, all of which are essentially the same as their corresponding sections on the 1900-1909 page.

Should the 1900-1909 overview page be deleted? I noticed that its 1908 and 1909 sections contain links to the main articles about those seasons. If that were done for the other years' sections, little would remain on the page. Eddie Blick (talk) 00:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I have no strong opinion either way, Teblick. Discuss it at the respective talk pages. Which pages are getting more activity and are likely to be improved or expanded? In all honesty, I have no experience editing sports team season articles. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Like you, I have no experience editing sports pages, either. I just happened to see empty sections on that overview page, and in the process of looking for something that might fit there, I found the overlap. I will post something on the talk pages and see what results. Thanks. Eddie Blick (talk) 15:52, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Richard L. Gage

Are you going to explain why you don't think Richard L. Gage qualifies for CSD? Natureium (talk) 19:54, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Natureium, I posted on your talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:59, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Liposuction Page - assistance

Hi Jim,

Do you know an editor, including yourself, who might be interested or willing to assist with edits to the Liposuction Page? The information on the page presents a misleading portrait of procedures that remove adipose tissue, which is an important endocrine organ. The long-term health and contour outcomes are not good for the well being of the recipients. I have much information complied and knowledge on the subject.

Thank you, Juliet Sabine (talk) 02:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Juliet Sabine. I do very little editing on medical articles because I have no medical training and, thank goodness, we have strict standards for such articles. You cannot use your "personal knowledge" directly on Wikipedia, although it can help guide your editing interests indirectly. If you want to add new content, please be sure that it is supported by reliable sources that comply with our strict standards for medical sources, and that the new content also complies with our other policies and guidelines. One of our very best editors on medical topics is Doc James. He is very busy but perhaps he might have a few words of advice for you (and me). Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! I taught anatomy for several decades and have researched liposuction and adipose removal with a group of health care practitioners for many years. We use scientific information. I appreciate your help. 06:31, 22 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliet Sabine (talk • contribs)

You are welcome, Juliet Sabine. I am happy to assist with general Wikipedia editing questions at any time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:50, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey, Jim

Here's a dirty little story that's still a redlink... Seth Low Junior College

SEE THIS. Alumni include Isaac Asimov and Herbert Aptheker. Carrite (talk) 00:35, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey Tim. That short lived college is covered at Columbia University School of General Studies#Defunct predecessors. It may deserve a spin-off article, or perhaps just a redirect. I will do a bit more reading. As for Asimov, I corresponded with him about Reagan's "Star Wars" project in the early 1980s. He was reluctant to speak out on a political controversy, but eventually did. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

I have now read the entire Leeza Hirt article, Tim, and it is fascinating. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Duh...

I rarely make such a stupid mistake but I have a half-assed excuse. The new editor posted above the oldest post on the TP, and I wasn't paying close attention when I replied which is how my response ended up in the older post below his question. I also wasn't aware of my screw-up pinging Doc James. It has been a long time since I've screwed-up that badly. Anyway, the reason I pinged you was because the editor is new and seemingly from a country where Homeopathy is the norm fairly common. I was hoping with proper guidance and a better understanding of our PAGs, he could be a productive editor, although I am aware that he is editing a topic that can be quite controversial in a hurry, which I why I thought it best to escalate it into your capable hands. I see that he has also been active here. ^{Atsme📞📧} 23:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Atsme. If I had a nickel for every one of my Wikipedia screw-ups, I could take my wife out to dinner at a very fancy restaurant. No worries at all. I tried to offer the new editor some guidance above. As for homeopathy being the "norm" in some countries, I see evidence based medicine as the norm in every country on Earth, and in low Earth orbit as well. FYI, the "DocJames" account was set up by a troll to impersonate the real "Doc James" Heilman. I made that same mistake not too long ago myself. Did you know that you can adjust your settings so that a blocked editor's username is shown with a strikeout? That can alert you to such errors. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:00, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen. I struck my misstatement above and added what I actually meant. I actually do have the strike-out feature for blocked accounts turned on, and also have the various color filters to show stages of activity for articles. I don't know why it didn't show up when I was pinging Doc. It's possible I simply overlooked it - not seeing what I've not seen before much less expected to see...but there is a legitimate excuse for my selective selectivity. 😆 ^{Atsme📞📧} 15:12, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

I edited as per the guidelines but reverted. How to appeal?

Deletion of Mohandas petition in Homoeopathy page. As per the Wikipedia:[reliable sources (medicine)] page, only" position statements from national or international expert bodies" are allowed not individual responses.<br Dr Kurian John Poruthukaren 19:12, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Drpjkurian. The proper place to discuss this matter is Talk:Homeopathy, and I see that you have begun a discussion there. You are correct that any edit which makes a medical claim must use a source that complies with WP:MEDRS. However, the material you removed makes no medical claim. It is instead discussing government educational policy. Accordingly, ordinary reliable sources are acceptable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Dear Cullen. Thank you very much for guiding me Dr Kurian John Poruthukaren (talk) 17:04, 25 September 2017 (UTC)