If you need help with something, feel free to ask. To leave a message for me, press the "new section" tab at the top of the page. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil messages.
If you are requesting administrative help and I am not currently active, here are some other options for you:
If you want to ask for help, you can ask at the help desk for questions about Wikipedia, and at the reference desk for more general questions. You may also simply ask a question on your talk page and add {{helpme}} before your question. This will attract the attention of experienced users who will most likely be able to help you.
Administrators, if you see that I've made a mistake, please fix it.
I will not consider it wheel-warring if you reverse my admin actions, however I do expect you to leave a message here explaining your reasons.
Thanks for adding the {{Copied}}s and doing the dummy edits. I redid the tags, as there was something wrong with the diff or to_diff parameter. Do you remember which you used? {{Copied}} should generally not be subst'd – I'll find the appropriate note to put on its documentation. Flatscan (talk) 04:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That explains it, to_diff is meant to be the id only, "next" in this case. Use the full URL with diff next time. I found very few templates that specify not to subst, so I didn't update the doc. Flatscan (talk) 04:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Cymru.lass. The new article created here is an exact copypaste of the original article (even including the G12 speedy template). It was deleted 4 times (3 for copyvio and once as an A7). It was also deleted when the editor, after being blocked, persisted in copypasting the same article on their talk page. You can review the attempts to discuss with that editor at [1]. They are currently indefinitely blocked for copyright violations and two other administrators have declined unblock requests (which even included more copyvio). This new account is an obvious sockpuppet created for block evasion. — CactusWriter (talk)02:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I really appreciate your help. Should I take this to SPI? I've never really dealt with sockpuppets that much, so I don't know what the protocol is... — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 03:10, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's okay. I've already listed it there. I'll wait for a confirming opinion before proceeding further. Thanks for looking into the article background. I appreciate your diligence. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)03:20, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
His notability was clearly shown in the article, as per the statement of his current position at Sony, which puts him in charge of almost all major press releases from Sony (see PSN Blog), as well as the list of games he has been credited with working on.Shardok (talk) 22:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Shardok. There was no assertion of the individual's significance. Please note that a Senior Director (essentially Senior Vice President) has no inherent notability -- there are dozens, if not hundreds of these positions in any large corporation. That he writes press releases about things which may notable, does not make him notable. And I did look at the listed game credits and looked on the IMDb reference that you provided where he his listed as nothing more than "miscellaneous crew." This should not be taken as a slight against Patrick Seybold nor his job in Public Relations -- but, in my opinion, there was nothing presented which asserted any significance for an encyclopedic biography. You are welcome certainly to discuss this further at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)00:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
GOCE drive newsletter
The Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive
The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive.
Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here.
I just wanted to thank you very much for your help in editing my N. arizonaria page - its the first page I've created and am very happy to know others are willing to help me wikify it enough for use. I just wanted to let you know that I am currently waiting for Dr. Erik Greene and John Gruber to sign permission for their photos to be uploaded to wiki-media - they have already given me free access to many very nice photos but I just wanted to let you know that they have not been uploaded yet but hopefully will be shortly. I also just had a quick question - I re-wrote the Biston Strataria page on april 30th, however I was not signed into my account and only my IP address is listed under the history so other users cannot contact me - would you happen to know how I could fix this so I can better be able to communicate with the users there?
Hi, Hellokapi. I was happy to help. And you did very nicely -- especially for a first time! An editor had listed Nemoria arizonaria for speedy deletion only because there was no text in it at the time. That is one of the categories at WP:CSD. Of course, a quick google check easily identified the topic enough for me to add a couple of introductory sentences with references -- enough for me to decline the deletion request and keep the article. In the future, it's a good idea to create a new article in your userspace (for example, at User:Hellokapi/Sandbox. Then, when there is at least enough there for a stub article (i.e. a good introduction and a couple of references), you can use the "move" tab to move the article into the main Wikipedia space. This will usually prevent any pesky Speedy Deletion tags on your new articles.
As far as your IP edits are concerned, there is nothing that can be done to change their identification to your username. (This is because IPs are anonymous and there is no way to prove those edits came from a particular registered account. Especially in cases where the address is located at a large institution.) Most every WP editor at some point forgets to log in when making an edit. It is no big deal. If you want to discuss a particular edit you made as the IP, you can always leave an explanatory note on the articles talk page Talk:Biston strataria.
Hi, doncram. I'm not certain the US Census data adds anything. More importantly, drawing conclusions from it could be considered original research. It is best to allow reliable sources to develop that info. (I only used it in the discussions to confirm there were indeed two separate architects as several editors had mentioned -- and that the article was wrong.) I can give you the source if you want to look at it yourself. It is quite easy to find online if you have an ancestry.com account. I'll take a look at the split articles tomorrow when I have a moment. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)05:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did I do something wrong with the speedy deletion request? I had already removed it three times and have warned op de talkpage. There several people putting the copyvio in. Quite new to en-wp but 5 years experience on the Dutch WP. Eddylandzaat (talk) 21:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Eddylandzat. Welcome to the English side -- not much different than the Dutch version, I imagine. I would have speedy deleted the article if there was not a previous clean version prior to the copyvio additions. But your version here appeared to be clean, so I simply rolled it back rather than lose the entire page. I then placed a warning to the violator to stop adding the copyvios. If they persist in adding more copyrighted text, they will need to be blocked. Additionally, if you run into this situation again -- an editor or group of editors persisting in adding copyvios or reverting your edits -- than you can request the page be temporarily protected at WP:RPP. If you any further problems, please let me know and I'll see what I can do. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)21:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The main difference between en-wp en nl-wp is the way procedures work. Templates here en templates there. Whole storybooks about who to asked for a block or a page deletion. IEW!!! nl-wp is more user-friendly on that point: just ask it nice, clear, politely and with evidence. I will read the page you've mentioned. Eddylandzaat (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I agree that smaller wikis are more user friendly. On the Danish Wikipedia at home, almost everyone knows everyone else -- and rather than use a template, we can just open the window and shout at the other editor down the street. :) The English Wikipedia tends to require more strictly-by-the-policy behavior (especially for administrators) -- just because of the immense multi-cutural global nature of the beast. Hope you enjoy it anyway. — CactusWriter (talk)22:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly. But who would notice? The Danish joke goes: "Danish isn't a language, it's a throat disease." I believe the Dutch might have the same joke. — CactusWriter (talk)23:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Personal attacks - User:AnnekeBart - (A new category: The mathematician - historian)
" Having to deal with these idiots is really trying " [2]
" I am loosing my patience and have a hard time staying civil when confronted with such people. " [3]
" Please find an actual reliable source, not this encyclopedia nonsense. " [4]
For the mathematician... Professor of History: " All are tertiary sources "
The claim for a Croatian Clovio emerges every now and then from that country's dilettante historians (also mathematicians, analysts, engineers etc.)
This person does not recognize published documents and after attempts to explain on the talk page, apparently suffers from a reading problem. Can you help?Thanks.
-- In 35 years of teaching. Absurd and humiliating. --
Having had no interaction with you, the other editor or the article in question, I have no idea what this is about. I see that you are spamming the same confusing message on multiple administrator's talk page. If you are having problems which require administrator intervention, I suggest that you post a single clear and concise message at the WP:ANI bulletin board. — CactusWriter (talk)17:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that was a bit of a "whoops" on my part. I didn't realize the misspelling until I had rewritten the article. By the way, for your future reference, when you copy-paste someone else's text, than you must provide attribution to them. This is for our copyright policy. (See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia). I'll do a history merge of the pages in a little bit to cover it. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)16:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CactusWriter , After 6 years of using wikipedia as primary source of reference , I came to know I can also contribute to wikipedia through editing of articles Although I have made some minor edits (including creation of 2 articles) but still I am not able to the find the link or you can say the way to find the articles which requires editing (grammatically incorrect/
sufficient references not cited etc etc.) from a single repository relating to a particular subject.Also tell me the significance of new wikipedia projects being created.
gauravpruthi 07:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gauravpruthi (talk • contribs)
Hi, Gauravpruthi. I know what you mean about the difficulty of finding pages and projects -- after so many years, I'm still wandering around looking for pages. And forgetting where pages are that I could swear I had seen previously! Anyway, if you're looking to find lists of articles that require editing, a good place to start is at Wikipedia:Cleanup. There is a box there with links to lists like Category:All articles with unsourced statements and Category:Articles lacking reliable references. Wikiprojects are gathering points for editors who are interested in collaborating on a specific topic. For example,Wikipedia:WikiProject India and Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight might be projects you would be interested in joining. Each project will have lists of articles which need attention -- and you can talk to the other project members about articles, ideas, questions or whatever. If you have further questions, let me know. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk)15:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dutch Pronunciation Help
Hi,
I am still trying to figure out the IPA stuff. Anyway, I'm trying to get a Dutch IPA for the Yde Girl page. I don't really understand how to do this. Could you help me please?
Thank you, --GouramiWatcher(Gulp)18:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, GouramiWatcher. I'm not familiar with the Dutch language at all, so I can't help you with that. The {{IPA-nl}} template is the one to add to the article, but you will need to use a Dutch dictionary to find the proper pronunciation symbols. Perhaps you can ask an editor from the Netherlands for help -- someone like User:Martijn Hoekstra or User:Drmies might be able to help. Good luck. — CactusWriter (talk)04:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just a reminder of a merger proposal you made here almost two months ago. You might want to go forward with it, it just gets harder and harder to merge as time goes by. --Muhandes (talk) 9:08 pm, Today (UTC+3)
Hi, Muhandes. Thanks for the reminder. I had hoped there would be more responses from interested parties -- but plenty of time has passed and with no apparent objections . And I agree with you that a merge is best done early on, before much work is done on the new article. Since I am not very familiar the subject, would you mind moving any useful text and references from Anti-Ahmadiyya sentiment to Persecution of Ahmadis? (If you do any copy-pasting, please remember to note it in your edit summary per our copyright policy at WP:COPYWITHIN). Afterwards, we can change the one article to a redirect. I also would also suggest the introductory sentence at Persecution of Ahmadis be changed to something like: The Persecution of Ahmadis is the persecution of Ahmadi Muslims (Ahmadiyya) for their religious beliefs and political positions. This is because many sources I saw seemed to be about Pakistani Nationalism rather than simply Islamic Beliefs. Anyway, let me know if you are able to merge them, otherwise I'll try and get to it in a few days. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)20:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I probably misremembered, I believed the law suit also were for off-label advertising for use of Zyprexa by children, but there is no such mentioning in the sources I supplied. As I remembered it there was no research backing such usage and it was not approved for use in children until november that year (but I can't find my references for it now.) Nopedia (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. The list entry only needs to be a brief overview of the case. If you find better references, than you are welcome to add the extra info -- otherwise, I think the entry is fine as it is. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)20:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Page Move
Hi Cactus Writer,
I have been working on this userspace:User:Gourami Watcher/List of bog bodies for a long time to replace the old List of bog bodies page because my version has more reserch and organization than the previous. I'd really appreciate it if you could delete the old page and move mine in its place. Would that be possible for you to do since you are an admin?
Thank you, GouramiWatcher(Gulp)02:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, 117Avenue. That change from an A1 CSD decline to a redirect was a long while back. And the topic of hip-hop mixtapes is not exactly my area of expertise -- so editors more familiar with the topic should make the decision. But I've provided some neutral commentary at the discussion. If you have any questions, let me know. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)18:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm not a fan of Drake either, but somehow his discography has ended up on my watchlist. So I decided to do a good favour (perhaps too tired), and tried to cleanup the redirects to the main article and the discography. 117Avenue (talk) 22:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Elections are currently underway for our Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days and ends on June 30, 23:59 UTC. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! There is also a referendum to appoint a Coordinator Emeritus. Cast your vote today.
Hello. I am asking for you to unprotect the page Katrina Dunn. You were the last admin to protect it, and rightfully so, as it was a recreation of a thrice-deleted version of the article because it was a copyright violation. I have drafted a new version of the article, which includes verifiable third-party sources which establish notability, that I would like to create under this title. Thanks in advance. Agent 86 (talk) 10:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The latest GOCE backlog elimination drive is under way! It began on 1 July and so far 18 people have signed up to help us reduce the number of articles in need of copyediting.
This drive will give a 50% bonus for articles edited from the GOCE requests page. Although we have cleared the backlog of 2009 articles there are still 3,935 articles needing copyediting and any help, no matter how small, would be appreciated.
We are appealing to all GOCE members, and any other editors who wish to participate, to come and help us reduce the number of articles needing copyediting, as well as the backlog of requests. If you have not signed up yet, why not take a look at the current signatories and help us by adding your name and copyediting a few articles. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words".
I would like to ask why this article was deleted due to "unambiguous" copyright infringement. The North-South Center was a major publisher of academic books, articles and monographs, using U.S. Federal Government money for publishing operations. Its published material is still used and referenced by many academic institutions and by major international organizations. There was no copyrighted material in the deleted article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blotz1 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The North–South Center article duplicated the text from http://www6.miami.edu/cgmaps/northsouth.html. (It was almost an exact copy -- the only alteration being a shift from present to past tense.) The original website page clearly states "Copyright 1997-2000 University of Miami, All Rights Reserved." As such, the Wikipedia article was properly deleted as a copyright violation. Please note that this has nothing to do with the notability of the subject itself. If you wish to recreate an article on the subject, please do so without copyied text or close paraphrasing, i.e. using only original language. Regards — CactusWriter (talk)21:44, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
About Avalon University School of Medicine
Dear CactusWriter,
I hope you are fine. First of all I apologize if I have violated any copy right law of wikipedia. I am Associate COO of Avalon University School of Medicine (If you want any proof for this I can provide you). Since very long time some people keep changing our page on wikipedia and we are facing lot of problem because of that. I don't know how we have to deal with this situation. For example some one from ip address 67.176.167.7 changed our page and wrote some incorrect information about our accreditaion on July 27, 2011 i corrected that and posted information about our medical school on our wikipedia page I took all the text and all the information from our website and after few days again some one change our page and the ip address was 208.54.40.163. This ip address did again incorrect change about our school license and accreditation on July 29, 2011. Again I corrected that but after that you and someone named TeapotGeorge but these changes were not against our university.
I am really new to wikipedia so don't know how can I stop this kind of incorrect information posting on our wikipedia page. Please guide me on this. I will really appreciate for that if I can get any help on this.
Hi, Asfateh. I understand -- don't worry -- there is a learning curve to understanding the rules of Wikipedia. I have removed all the copyrighted text from the Avalon University School of Medicine page. And I also rewrote the article with neutral non-promotional language using only information confirmed by an independent source -- the WHO website. So it is no longer a copyright violation. Permission to use copyrighted text is handled only through the Wikimedia Foundation OTRS office. As you can understand, because all Wikipedia editors are anonymous online (i.e. anyone can say that they are anyone), proof is obtained only through official channels. (Please read Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for more information).
If you find an editor or IP address is adding disputed information to an article, you should first attempt to discuss the issue with that editor directly. If the discussion does not resolve the issue, you can seek help from any administrator or editors at Third Opinion or Request for Comment. If the disputed information is truly blatant misinformation or vandalism, then you can report the individual to Administrator intervention against vandalism for action.
Cactus writer, On one link for avalon university school of medicine there is no mention of the school being un-accredited. Then when I go to the link for xavier university school of medicine curacao, which is the same school as avalon university, it says that the school is un-accredited and the link it posts was to the W.H.O. This school is accredited by the government of curacao and is subsequently accredited by the ecfmg in order for its students to sit for the usmle exams. I tried to make some revision but I am new to wikipedia and I hope I did it correctly. There was a poster named teapotgeorge who was correct in making the changes. I might have undid them, dont know. If I did I apologize. My intention was to remove that line about xavier university not being accredited because it is. The w.h.o is not an accrediting agency, simply a directory of medical schools around the world. So that comment with the link to W.H.O. is incorrect. Thanks, ng54 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ng54 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ng54, you may have a misunderstanding of the term accreditation. A listing in the IMED means the school is recognized by its appropriate governmental agency. This has been added. ECFMG is not an accrediting agency -- it's function is to checks that students are eligible to take the USMLE because they attended an IMED school, etc. -- it certifies students, but it does not certify nor accredit the school itself. You are correct that the WHO is also not an accrediting agency -- however, it's AVICENNA directory is considered a reliable source for information about medical schools including accreditation-- and it was in this regard that it has been used. — CactusWriter (talk)18:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
deletion of my page
Dear Sir:
I am the president of Water Without Borders, in Pleasant Valley, NY. An associate of mine, on my behalf, submitted our information page to Wikipedia. It was copied directly from our website, with my permission. I see that it has been deleted. I would like to have it put back on. Please let me know what I need to do for this to happen.
Hi, Franklin. The article Water Without Borders was deleted two years ago (August 2009) because it was copied entirely from this web page -- a violation of that page's "all rights reserved" copyright. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text borrowed from other websites. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Permission to use copyrighted text can only be granted by the copyright holder. Please see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for details. Contact is made through the Wikimedia Foundations's OTRS office.
As a side note, even if permission were granted, the text on the organization's page would not be acceptable "as is". The language is far too promotional for Wikipedia. It is always better to write an article using original language which meets our criteria for neutral and independently verifiable encyclopedic content. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)15:35, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Question
Hi CactusWriter, I've been working on the List of bog bodies article for around 6 months. There are certain pages that redirect to my article because they were too short, for example Elling Woman redirects to the page, but the section about her is far down on the long list. Is there a way for the redirect to go to the part of the list about the Ellling Woman and several others?
Thank You, --GouramiWatcher(Gulp)20:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good question, GW. I'm not sure that it can be done. Offhand, I don't know of any way to create a piped link into a table. Perhaps someone at the Wikipedia:Help desk can give you a definitive answer -- or direct you to someone more knowledgeable. Let me know if you discover a way. Otherwise -- people who are redirected to a list usually understand to scroll through the alphabetical listings -- so I don't think those redirects will cause any significant problem. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)20:46, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their September 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy editing backlog. The drive will begin on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles in the backlog, as we want to copy edit as many of those as possible. Please consider copy editing an article that was tagged in 2010. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". See you at the drive! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters.
Hello CactusWriter, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Shankar chandraker, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: He is a newspaper journalist. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. nymets2000 (t/c/l) 22:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi NYMets, please note that passing WP:A7 criteria for people requires a bio page to make some assertion of significance. In other words, it answers the question: why is this person significant? Simply having a common job is not inherently significant. "He is a newspaper journalist" is no more an assertion of significance than "She is a plumber" or "He is a teacher". (Of course, as a newspaper journalist myself, I am quite aware how insignificant that job is -- there are hundreds of thousands of us). Although A7 criteria require a lower standard than Notability criteria -- it is a still good idea to be aware of our Wikipedia guidelines for notability (in this case, you may wish to read WP:CREATIVE as well as WP:GNG). These will provide you with a better understanding of expected biographical requirements. As the article stands now, there is still no assertion of significance. Additionally, no independent reliable source is provided for even cursory verification -- a violation of WP:BLP. I had actually already deleted the above article after it had been A7 tagged earlier, then tagged it myself after the same editor recreated this autobiographical article. If you wish the article to remain, please address the above issues. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)18:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clarence Bicknell- article deletion
Hi Cactus Writer
My article on Clarence Bicknell got deleted very quickly, apparently for copyright reasons. However I own the material and am authorised by the family to publish it and have already replied as such. Can you tell me what I should do to get it reinstated? Thanks.
Also while you're there please give me the URL for tutorial on putting images into the article. Thanks!
HI CactusWriter. I have read those pages. My article specifically complies with the policy on donating material which I own. What aspect does it violate? Thanks Mbicknell (talk) 20:04, 28 August 2011 (UTC)An email containing details of the permission for this text has been sent in accordance with WP:OTRS.[reply]
Note to uploaders: Please copy the URL of this image or article in the email to assist OTRS volunteers to find it. If an email cannot be found in the OTRS system, the content may be deleted for lack of valid licensing information.
Note to OTRS volunteers: If the email contains sufficient confirmation of the validity of the license, please replace this template with {{PermissionOTRS}}. Otherwise, remove the copyrighted content, deleting the page if necessary. Mbicknell (talk) 21:58, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Approval to use outside text from your website can only be granted through official communication with the Wikimedia OTRS office -- talk page declarations are insufficient. I will assume that your placement of the "OTRS pending" on my talk page means that you have sent an e-mail to the OTRS office. After that letter is processed by one of Wikipedia's OTRS agents (usually a week or two), then use of the website text will be free from copyright violation. In the meantime, I've restored the page and replaced the copyvio text with a brief introduction with references. You are, of course, welcome to expand that entry using original unpublished language. Thanks for complying with our policies. — CactusWriter (talk)15:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jeeloy
ealov (talk) 05:25, 29 August 2011 (UTC)Hello,
I have written an article about jeeloy, but the article is deleted, the article is about the musician duo. I've added an accurate reference in the article. Can you explain how that article can be approved by wikipedia?[reply]
Hi Ealov. The article was deleted because of WP:A7 criteria -- an article about a musical group that does not make any assertion of significance. Simply being a musical group is not enough. And although the A7 criteria are a lower standard than Wikipedia requirements, you may wish to read WP:Notability (music) so that you are aware of the notability standards that are expected. Additionally, when writing an article, please do not copy text from other online websites -- that is a violation of copyright. If you have further questions, please ask. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk)15:51, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Misrepresentation, poorly sourced materials, incorrect allegations, potential for uncalled for harm to living person
I am not an Administrator. I am a subject: Terri Crawford Hansen; I check periodically to ensure no vandalism or distortions to bio, as has happened to fellow journalists and authors. Moreover I recently reported misrepresentations in Wikipedia to Native journalism that generated negative comments from major journalism organizations, and swift change by Wikimedia. I was warned by fellow journalists to keep an eye on the bio for vandalism. That said, you've created several poorly or non-sourced assertions and misrepresentation. Who or what is your source for removing my role as a key environmental journalist in Indian Country? I have letters signed by current editors from more than one publication attesting I am one of Indian Country Today's most important news reporters, especially on environmental issues. This I agree is subjective, but I believe was generated by Wikipedia's Native American/Indigenous working group. Copies of letters may be posted at the National Press Foundation, or one of the other fellowship awarding organizations. I have them on file as well but I would consider it in very poor taste to post them publicly on my news site. I have a 16-year history as an environmental journalist in Indian Country. I am likely the only reporter in Indian Country to win key environmental journalism fellowships, not just in Indian Country but in the arena of U.S. journalism. My national reporting on climate change in tribal communities is some of the earliest reporting in this area. What qualifies as "key"? What is your logic? Who are your sources? I can provide copies of half a dozen letters from more than one editor and more than one publication, but I am not invested in this. It's part of the overall problem here.
Mother Earth Journal is a news site. It was constructed and established as such. It provides news reporting, not blog posts. Guest blogging, opinion and commentary is restricted to the Commentary section. As a news reporter I do not write op-eds. MEJournal has a small circulation, but more than some small newspapers I've written for. Over 5,000 Facebook fans. When active well over 100 hits a day. The most hits for one article was nearly 800. MEJournal was established when there was a lack of environmental reporting in indigenous communities. That has changed, and perhaps MEJournal will fold, or be sold. Regardless explain your reasoning for targeting this non-income producing news site to reduce it to "blog." You, one person's judgement has caused its monetary value to plummet.
Here I am very concerned: Who is "worldcat" and "other sources?" Name them. I co-authored the multiple volume Encyclopedia of North American Indians. Editor was Don Birchfield. Another co-author was Philip Red Eagle. Both still living. This was a major project for me. This encyclopedia is used in many public school systems to educate grades 7-10 to Native American issues. I know all volumes of this encyclopedia is in Portland, Oregon's Multnomah Country Library. It cannot be checked out but it can be photocopied. I can provide proof of authorship. To who do I send it? Name your own sources so I can address this at its root.
I can't speak to Water in the West book. It's an anthology; I authored one chapter. Perhaps Wikipedia has a policy that individual authors are not considered "authors," when the book is an anthology and if so, fine. If not I can send or research proof. My primary concern is the appearance now that I have stated untrue claims at points in the past, and this is not true. As a professional journalist I am bound to tell the truth and report attributed and sourced facts. You say you are a journalist. As such you know the harm you are doing. All a journalist has is their reputation and credibility. As a freelancer and correspondent I represent the news organizations I report for. I strive for excellence. Your allegations have the potential to damage the reputation of a living person, cause a loss of editorial assignments, and loss of income. You've combed this profile and made major and poorly sourced ("and other"?) changes. This profile has stood since the Native/Indigeous group launched their initiative. My overriding concern is your justifications, and intent. Are you a competitor? Is this retaliation, as happens by subjects of stories? Is there ill intent? Tell me what proofs and documentation you need, and how I supply it. Name your sources who are saying I did not co-author these books so I can get to the root of this situation. If you can't provide solid sources undo your allegations, and changes. Do not change them, undo them or the damage remains.
I ask forgiveness if I have not handled this properly. I am heavy with assignments, this was unexpected, and I lack time to learn the collection of Wikipedia rules (I know there are a number of intricate rules based on past news reporting of Wikipedia.) Yet time is of the essence due to the great potential for harm. Thank you,
Hi. I'm not CactusWriter, but was coming by to leave a note for him and saw the above. I can understand your concerns that your article may be diminished by a competitor, but CactusWriter is a long-term editor and administrator of Wikipedia who has worked on a wide variety of articles (as of this writing, he has worked on 5,423 different articles).
While I do not know which sources he meant by "others", I can supply a few links: WorldCat, GoogleBooks, ottobib, shelfari, Tower Books. I'm afraid that the challenge with Wikipedia is that we need reliable sources to include information. Reliable sources in the context of Wikipedia means a source published by a reputable peer-reviewed publication (online or print) that is not connected to you. The degree of connection permitted varies depending on how extreme the source. For instance, we might include authorship information based on the publisher's website, even though they are connected to you, but we would not verify something like "best-selling" or "important" based on that.
The source once given to verify that you were co-author of this text is neither active nor archived. The Library Journal reviews reproduced at Amazon suggest that there were 56 or 60 authors, but I'm afraid they don't name names or single you out as being a more substantial contributor. The difficulty of being a contributing author to compilation works of those kinds, of course, is that it's often the editor who gets sole credit on the cover and in catalogs, and finding reliable sources to document author involvement and the degree of author involvement can be difficult. Certainly, information on your role in those books can be included once reliable sources are produced.
Verification through reliable, published sources is also required for language such as "Indian Country's key environment and science journalist". I'm afraid we are not permitted by the site's policies to refer to letters from editors for that, unless they have been published somewhere that we can access. We are not permitted to use unpublished information in Wikipedia articles.
In terms of Mother Earth Journals, this is what we term a "self-published site" on Wikipedia. The term "blog" is not intended to be pejorative; we actually do permit and encourage citations to blogs maintained by reputable individuals. As our article on Blog notes, they extend well past the traditional diary form. I can see why you might find the language "blog" misleading, given that traditional connection. Pending input from CactusWriter, I have incorporated the language used on the site itself describing it as "online public service news project", but we cannot include you as a correspondent for this, as it is your own website. --Moonriddengirl(talk)12:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Terri Hansen. The comments by Moonriddengirl accurately describe the situation. In addition, I will explain that we attempt to edit every article so that it provides a neutral point-of-view -- avoiding language that presents an opinion or judgement as if it were encyclopedic fact. We regularly remove biased words like "celebrated" or "leading" unless they can be attributed to a significant and independent reliable source. For example, rather than call someone "award-winning", we simply cite their awards -- allowing the reader to draw their own conclusion from a position of verifiable fact.
The term blog was not meant to reflect poorly on your Mother Earth Journal website. (In fact, blog is used to describe even major websites like the Huffington Post.) I used it to be more accurate. The original language stated that you were a contributor to the Mother Earth Journal in the same way you contributed to independent news sites. This, of course, was misleading because it is your own website. Moonriddengirl has now tweaked the language to the website's self-description.
Although the links for authorship of the two books were no longer active -- I did look for some information about them. For example, descriptions of Water in the 21st-Century West at Amazon and the publisher revealed this was a compilation of newspaper articles that had been previously published in High Country News. The book itself is attributed to the editor Char Miller. It would be incorrect to call you the author of this title -- notwithstanding inaccurate sources like this -- but, as Moonriddengirl explained, information on your contribution to this book and the encyclopedia can be included once reliable sources are produced.
I understand that it can be worrisome to have a bio page on Wikipedia -- especially with the seemingly vast construct of rules here. But that is why Wikipedia takes a very conservative approach with regard to our core principles of verifiability and neutral point-of-view in biographies of living people. This is especially true for bios that have very little coverage independent of the subject. And, no, I am neither a competitor nor have ill intent nor have had any prior knowledge of you. The only vested interest I have in this article (and in the thousands of other myriad topics on which I have volunteered) is the accuracy of the information. — CactusWriter (talk)19:49, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello CactusWriter! Warm kitchen rewards from a fellow Wikipedian, DisneyWizard. Thank you for your swift fleshing out of the Hrubetz ride manufacturer article. I was collecting much of the same information, from other sources, when I was informed the new article was marked for speedy deletion. Your words were much neater, in a nutshell, than my verbosity. Disneywizard (talk) 06:16, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thank you, Disneywizard -- for creating a page on a very fascinating subject. I'm learning a lot of new history because of you. And there appears to be many articles on that topic that still need creating. This guy, Lee Eyerly, was very important, so Wikipedia could use an article on his company and its original rides like the Orientator or Acroplane.
By the way, after reading some of the links you added -- I need to tweak the history at Frank Hrubetz & Company to bring it in line with sources on Eyerly. Also, an entire section could be added on the impact of numerous lawsuits filed against the company. A google search shows hundreds -- and, according to Hrubetz, it was a major part of business for these companies. Thanks again for building the topic! — CactusWriter (talk)16:55, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Plandest. A reviewing editor tagged your editor for deletion per Wikipedia's WP:A7 criteria -- that means it was an article about web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. (Before deletion, I did a quick search to see if I could find anything which might make a relevant claim of significance, but could not. Although the A7 criteria is less strict than our notability criteria (i.e. "Is the subject notable?"), you should read our guidelines for Wikipedia:Notability (web). This will help you in determining when a podcast is considered a notable subject for a Wikipedia article. If you have further questions, please ask. — CactusWriter (talk)05:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, would you be willing to suspend this user as they were warned about placing advertising on Wikipedia, and here we are a year later and they do it again. It may be a good idea to revoke their talkpage abilities as well. SwisterTwistertalk04:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, SwisterTwister. That user's actions are concerning -- not only is it advertising but also a copyright violation. However, the notice from last year was only an initial warning -- it didn't mention the possibility of a block -- and their actions are not yet sufficiently bad enough to block them without notice. I have left them with a single warning clearly stating they will be blocked if they continue with more of these violations. If there are more problems after this, than any admin can block them. Hope that helps. — CactusWriter (talk)18:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wagner Calhoun
I noticed somebody made an article named Wagner Calhoun that was deleted by you, is it possible I can be emailed the original content of that page and the name of the editor that made it? SalfEnergy08:20, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, CactusWriter. Thanks for your improving of sacrificial metal article. In another article, that is porcelain dish (Laboratory), I found out that it is actually no need to remove and redirect to the evaporating dish article. I know they are similar articles, but after I made some research on the internet, I found out that porcelain dish is not equally to evaporating dish. Although porcelain dish is a type of evaporating dish, not all evaporating dish is porcelain dish. This is because porcelain dish still has other functions, like heating, drying, calcination and others. Besides, evaporating dish is not stated clearly in what aspect, in that article only written as a type of laboratory equipment for evaporating. If talking in merge field, I think the evaporating dish article is too little made the porcelain dish article perfect. So if you are free, please review the porcelain dish article and see wherther it is compulsory to remove and redirect to the evaporating dish article or not. If you have any comments and opinions regarding to these articles, please post at my talk page. Thanks.
