Jump to content

User talk:Cullen328/Archive 71

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 65←Archive 69Archive 70Archive 71Archive 72Archive 73→Archive 75

Need help with possible bullying/ownership from an other editor

Hi Jim,

I am relatively new to wikipedia... a little over 500 edits. I've had a good experience so far - appreciate the logic of the rules, enjoy working with others etc. I've had experiences editing with people I disagree with, and found achieving NPOV to be rewarding.

A recent interaction has left a sour taste. I think there is an editor or 2 editors working together that are engaging in "ownership" of a page. Rather than engage in the content, I also feel these editors make personal attacks on editors that don't hold their point of view and establish themselves as senior to other editors.

I'd like advice on how to verify if this is bullying, and what would be appropriate steps to take.

Thanks so much!

Badabara (talk) 02:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Badabara. The first thing to do in a situation like this is to do your best to resolve the issue on the article's talk page. Avoid making accusations about other editors without presenting evidence, and instead make your case based on what the reliable sources say, and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It is as correct to warn against making personal attacks as it is to avoid them yourself. If sincere talk page discussion does not yield consensus, then there are various forms of dispute resolution available to you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. Well, that would be my plan, but one editor reverted my most recent edit and went straight to my personal talk page User_talk:Badabara with the message:
"...your edit seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox."
I'm having a hard time seeing the comment as genuine. I hope it's not too much to ask, but I'd like to show you the edit to get a second opinion. Is it standard to post on my personal page with this message, instead of on the talk page where we had been communicating for the past few days? To me, it seems a tactic to flex power and stop the conversation, rather than allow for a genuine attempt to work together. Of course it's a bit tricky to see the whole picture, but if you could please take a look and give me a first impression if this is appears to be a tactic or genuine.
I'm looking for an experienced, neutral 3rd party... looked through your information and got a good feeling. Sincerely, Badabara (talk) 22:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello Badabara. I do not think that the other editor's comment about the test edit and your sandbox was a good idea. It looks to me like language from some type of standard warning template. The concern about the reliability of the sources seems sincere and possibly legitimate, though. I have zero experience evaluating the reliability of German language sources about Tibetan Buddhism, but if the other editor's assessment is correct, then you should avoid citing blog-like sources that lack professional editorial control. When in doubt about a source, you can check at the Reliable sources noticeboard.
In general, discussion about improving an article should take place on the article's talk page, while discussion about an editor's perceived error should take place on the editor's talk page. Of course, there can be overlap and there are no hard and fast rules.
A really powerful social norm here on Wikipedia is to assume good faith of our fellow editors, unless there is convincing evidence to the contrary. I recommend that you read that important essay. I gather that the person in question is highly controversial among Buddhists, with fervent supporters and detractors. In such situations, it is especially important for editors to approach the topic as dispassionately and calmly as possible, and to bend over backwards to build consensus and neutral content acceptable to all sides. I hope that my comments are useful to you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:57, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I'll assume the best, and read the essay. Badabara (talk) 01:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Canvassing

Good morning, I'm writing to you because you're a sysop and you've replied in WP:ANI about a case of canvassing. I'd like to have your opinion (just this for the moment, nothing more) about a suspicious case that I think can be considered "canvassing".

  • A user, Barefoot through the chollas, not stranger to a certain kind of misconduct, usually makes edits, mostly constructive, about phonetic transcriptions, among which Italian words.
  • Last month, he made this edit; the summary is as follows: "Carnby [another user] set this right last November". The edit consisted in moving a phonetic symbol to another place, like that "Carnby" had already done last year. This means that Barefoot through the chollas was aware that Carnby's opinion about the placement of that symbol is the same as his, if he hadn't written that edit summary we wouldn't have been sure about that but, because of what he wrote, we are.
  • Some weeks ago it was created a survey to discuss regarding this particular matter about Italian phonetics. Barefoot through the chollas strongly supported his opinion about the placement of the phonetic symbol. Nothing bad, so far. But.
  • But. Since the discussion, at the beginning, seemed to be stalling because just one user supported his opinion, he did a thing that I suspect that can be considered canvassing. He notified that particular user, Carnby, about the survey: Canby joined and supported Barefoot through the chollas's opinion.

You already know which is my doubt: is the fact that Barefoot through the chollas invited Carnby, precisely Carnby and nobody else, to join a discussion where he knew he'd support his opinion "canvassing", in your opinion, or not? In case it isn't, everything was regular and legitimate. In case it is, please suggest me what to do about this fact (relying on you, reporting Barefoot through the chollas to WP:ANI, something else...). I'm standing by for your answer, thank you.--Setcori (talk) 09:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Please see User talk:Bishonen#canvassing where I've asked this editor a question. Doug Weller talk 10:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
I think this matter has been discussed adequately at Bishonen's talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Space agency92

Hello,

Regarding the user Space agency92 which you blocked, you specify in your block summary that it is a soft block, but still disable account creation. You also posted a soft block type block notice to the talk page. Did you mean to hard block or soft block here? This has come into importance, due to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Space agency92. Dreamy <tyle="color:#d00">Jazz talk to me'| my contributions 16:46, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

If this editor had not been socking, I would have been willing to change to a soft block. Under the circumstances, Dreamy Jazz, I do not think that is a good idea. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Request for help with Signature Template

Dear Jim, I like your signature template, I tried replicating yours with different colors but it fails, could you provide a guide on how to achieve this? Cannot sign because my signature is messed up now, and I don't know how to fix this in preference. Angus1986

Hello Angus1986. I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Signatures, especially the section on customizing signatures. That includes some troubleshooting tips. I am not an expert in this. I did it just once, roughly ten years ago. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

added Eddie891
removed Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

readded SQL

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
  • A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors must or should use the articles for creation process.
  • A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Block

Please block GrayEcke (talk · contribs), user persistently spreads anti-Biden agenda and obviously WP:NOTHERE. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 05:53, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse: real-world solutions....

I didn't think I should comment at the Teahouse, and waited for some experienced editors to step in... But I had the same thought. I wanted to ask if there were "fantasy-world" solutions to "fantasy-world" problems, and perhaps this company was different because it worked in our reality only. Also, I doubt that the vast majority of "People in India" who "were not well aware of AI technology when the company became live in 2015" are any more aware now. Thanks for saying what needed to be said, and for allowing me be a bit snarky here. Regards, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 08:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Help to Create Article that is being rejected

Hello, Jim. I am trying to create Article for Balwant Dullat. He is Film Director from India. he had made many pictures for the Big Screen. All his movies were released in Cinema halls and also on Television Channels. He made more than 200 Documentary films and most of his documentaries were based on Social issues or on Social awareness.He also made Documentaries for various government of India departments like Ministry of Health, Ministry of social welfare. He made Feature Films that he Wrote and Directed.You can find Names of few Films on IMDB and can search with name: Balwant Dullat. One of his film titled "MAIN MAA PUNJAB DEE" also got the National Film Award from President of India. Film was also preserved by National Film Archive of India (All National Award winning films are preserved by Archive ) I am new to Wikipedia. I tried to crate Page for Balwant Dullat and was advised to first create Article for him. I tried 2-3 times and got rejected and the person who commented wrote that they need enough Published material. I asked that Please let me know where to send all the Published Material from Indian Newspapers and Indian Film Trade Magazines because most of the article about him were written in Newspapers and Papers were not Published ONLINE as INTERNET came late in India. Many were not knowing what is Email and were not aware of Internet. I Requested the Person that please give me Email ID or any Address where I can send the Published material about Balwant Dullat and His National Film Award. I did not get any reply. August 31, Again someone commented that it does not qualify for Article. I gave the link from IMDB and what I could find online. I am unable to send the All published material about him becuse that is not available Online. Newspapers were not online and it is not my fault. Technology came late in India that is the reason Newspapers were not online. Winning National Film Award is big achievement and Award is presented by President of India. I have seen and can give to link to Wikipedia pages to Actors from India those who have just Acted in one Film and they have Page with Photograph. I can give you Link to many other Actors who have acted in only one Television Series and they have Wikipedia Page with Image. Please help me and if you need any info from my side please let me know. Sincerely,

PARMJEETPALLU — Preceding unsigned comment added by PARMJEETPALLU (talk • contribs) 04:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello PARMJEETPALLU. You seem to think that reliable sources used as references in Wikipedia articles must be available online. That is not true. It is perfectly acceptable to use pre-internet sources that are not available online. You just need to use a truly reliable source, and then you need to provide complete information, such as the title of the article, the author's name, the name of the publication, the date of the publication, the page number, and it is often useful to provide a one or two sentence exact quotation from the reference, that directly confirms the content you are adding. If online sources are readily available, then use them. But it is perfectly OK to use old paper sources if online sources are unavailable. See Template:Cite news for more information. You can ignore any fields that do not apply.

Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:26, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Reporting disruptive editing by Koronerman

Hello Jim, the user Koronerman frequently targets two articles -- (1) Madurai Nayak Dynasty, and (2) Thirumala Nayaka. Please look up his vandalism in frequently deleting referenced content on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Madurai_Nayak_dynasty&action=history

For specific examples please see these -- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tirumala_Nayaka&diff=prev&oldid=975766892 and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Madurai_Nayak_dynasty&diff=prev&oldid=976854823

Also he has been flagged earlier for nonconstructive disruptive editing https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Koronerman&diff=prev&oldid=976152765 -- Yet he continues to vandalize. More recently, he was asked to explain his disruptive edits, but he hasn't and instead blanked his page again https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Koronerman&diff=prev&oldid=976866482

Both articles , especially ≈Madurai Nayak Dynasty is frequently vandalized by casteists of a group called Kammas who seek wrongful and historically inaccurate representation, hence the vandalism. Request the article be locked so that vandals cannot continue vandalizing. Also please ban Koronerman for disruptive editing. Thanks. Kautikutta (talk) 17:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC) Kautikutta

Hello Kautikutta. In all honesty, I do not have the expertise in Indian history to evaluate the content dispute, especially a dispute between various social groups including castes in India. Please remember that content disputes are not vandalism which has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia. If you want the page to be protected, please explain why at Requests for page protection. If you think the other editor should be blocked for edit warring, file a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. You really should discuss the matter at Talk: Madurai Nayak Dynasty. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:19, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Please note that this is not content dispute. Koronerman is continuously deleting referenced content. He has been warned for nonconstructive disruptive editing. Yet he continues to vandalize. Please ban him for disruptive editing. In meantime shall write in at Requests for page protection by tomorrow evening. Thanks.Kautikutta (talk) 01:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)Kautikutta
It is not clearcut vandalism. You are incorrect. I advised you to discuss the matter at Talk: Madurai Nayak Dynasty and you have not done so. You have also failed to discuss the dispute with the other editor. Those are the first steps. You only have five edits, one to the article and four to my talk page. Who are you? What was your previous account? I am not going to block an editor for disruption at your request when you are contributing to the disruption. Think about that, please. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
How is it not a clear cut case of vandalism? Please see the same talk page Talk: Madurai Nayak Dynasty. Note how many have already discussed the same point throughly. Also kindly note the number of times it has been discussed. The Kamma casteists have no historical proof. Hence the only thing they can do is to delete referenced content, which is what Koronerman continues to do. Now, why would you want me to discuss the same point on the talk page when it is done and dusted by several others many times earlier? What purpose does it serve? Can you guarantee that people like Koronerman will stop vandalizing the page ?
Please let me know in what way have I contributed to the disruption ? Am surprised you use a different benchmark to protect Koronerman, especially when he has been flagged for nonconstructive disruptive editing earlier. Why?
Who am I ? How should that matter ? Am reporting vandalism by Koronerman, why wouldn't you take action? Thanks. Kautikutta (talk) 04:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)Kautikutta
Kautikutta, I asked you to discuss the the matter on the article talk page and you have declined to do so. There is no recent discussion there. I asked you to disclose your previous account(s) and you declined to do so. I asked you to discuss the matter with the other editor and you declined. You are not willing to cooperate with me and not willing to engage in the basics of dispute resolution. Accordingly, I consider your editing pattern suspicious and disruptive. Unless you are willing to do the reasonable things I ask, please stay off my talk page except for required notifications. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Advice Adding to Garden City, NY

That's the problem, there isn't any secondary material, and it's unconscionable. This is an absolute treasure trove of American architectural history and no one seems to know anything about it. I've had to dig through dusty old microfilms to find out anything. If the basics could be made wiki pages, other information might come forward. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambassador.Ryan (talk • contribs) 05:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ambassador.Ryan. At the risk of repeating myself, original research does not belong on Wikipedia and it will be ruthlessly removed if discovered. This is a core content policy which is exceptionally unlikely to be changed. On the other hand, you could write a journalistic quality article or an academic quality paper on your research which can be submitted to a reliable newspaper, magazine or academic journal. Once published, that research can possibly be incorporated into a Wikipedia article. Until then, no. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you,

Thank you for helping me out. I am slowly learning to place my thankyou's in the appropriate pages. Oscar Waldoosty (talk) 13:18, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Plumber

Please read Wikipedia:You must feed the trolls. TheThingy Talk 21:31, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

headings, insert info box, move to publish

Hi Jim, I wrote an article about MATH+, the Berlin Mathematics Research Center at first in German for the German wikipedia website and it worked fine: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exzellenzcluster_MATH%2B. Now, I like to do the same for the English wikipedia website because the research is international and sciences communicate in English but I have problems with moving the draft to be published. I also need to know how to include the info box and the logo. I would be happy to get your help and tips. (----) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeateRogler (talk • contribs) 09:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello BeateRogler. Your draft is not ready for the encyclopedia. It has some strange redirect to the main page that needs to be removed. Your references are presented as external links. The formatting is not standard. There is no lead section before the table of contents. Non-free logos do not belong in drafts, only in actual encyclopedia articles. Read WP:INFOBOX. Please also read Your first article and keep working on your draft until it meets the standards of English Wikipedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Jim, I will keep working on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeateRogler (talk • contribs) 07:31, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Usedtobecool/Tea

I was wondering what your thoughts may be on this? I think I have enough volunteers to launch and want to move this to project space, as a subpage of Teahouse, I reckon, and start recommending it to the hosts. But I'd like to know what you think about it, and if you notice something needing fixing before it gets activated. I have added you to the list for "mobile editing", by the way. Everyone else who is currently in the list has given their explicit permission. So, also asking whether you'd like to be removed or remain listed. Please take a look. Thanks in advance, and best regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:17, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Usedtobecool. Sure, I agree to be on that list. I added myself to the admin help section. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:25, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Emmanuel Lemelson on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion re disambiguation bot

Hi, I am most pleased that the Tearoom found a solution to the problem of colouring "disambiguation" links as yellow. There is no need to do more, unless there is an easy way of telling other editors. ----MountVic127 (talk) 01:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello MountVic127. I am pleased that the matter has been resolved to your satisfaction. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Tommy Robinson (activist) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I want to know more about Wiki and the do's and dont's of it.

Hi,

I hope you might be able to help me figure this out. I edited a page and wiki says that I might be doing it for being paid for it. I am not doing it for that. How do I handle this. How should I start to learn and understand Wikipedia better? I hope you can help me with that.

Hello Arti Koul. That tag was referring to another editor or maybe two. But it did not refer to you.
This is not "Wiki" which is a form of software. This is Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia that uses wiki software. To learn more, try The Wikipedia Adventure. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:49, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Revert question

Hello,

You reverted my edit to Camp Fire (2018). The edit removed a CNN article as a source; the article only contains opinions, and so is inappropriate to cite for a statement of fact.

(1) I'm not aware of any consensus around keeping the source, except for your objection.

(2) An additional user after me mentioned the "rather suspect sources" which I take to be consensus.

To re-state my position on removing the source, the sources are supposed to be supporting a statement of fact (that the tweet is incorrect). Therefore, it would be a violation on NPOV to cite a source that is opinion, as the CNN article is. ("Usually, articles will contain information about the significant opinions that have been expressed about their subjects. However, these opinions should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice. Rather, they should be attributed in the text to particular sources, or where justified, described as widespread views, etc.")

The article is entirely a statement of opinion. The president of the California Professional Firefighters makes the only claim in the entire article that the tweet is "dangerously wrong" which sounds like an opinion, and it's surrounded by other statements of opinion, by stating things like "His comments are reckless and insulting to the firefighters and people being affected".

This could be rectified by qualifying the sentence ("The of the president of the International Association of Fire Fighters has stated..."), or by removing the source. In the short term, it seems easier to do the latter.

--Awwright (talk) 01:26, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Awwright. There is only one proper place to discuss the article content, and that is Talk: Camp Fire (2018). Please make your case there. I suggest that you spend some time studying Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, because NPOV does not mean what you think it does, and it is a core content policy.
To be crystal clear, I will not discuss that article content with you here, though I will discuss other things. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:36, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Undone

Hello Jim, My name is John Decker Maher. The name on my birth certificate is Johnnie D. Maher. The birth certificate is a handwritten document written by Vitoria Hall, a midwife who was summoned to the tent where my mother and father and their children were temporarily residing on the night of February 24, 1948, within a small township called Brooklyn in Conecuh County, Alabama. The county seat of Conecuh County, Alabama, is Evergreen. Other than my birth certificate, the only knowledge I have of my birth is what was told to me by my mother, whose name is listed on my birth record as Anna Bell Decker. Later in life, after I became an attorney licensed to practice in all Florida courts, two U.S. District Courts located in Florida, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal for the 11th United States Circuit and the United States Supreme Court, I legally changed my name to John Decker Maher. My older brother is named Jimmie Edward Maher. He likes to be called "Jim."

I graduated from H.B> Plant High School in Tampa, Florida in 1966. My diploma states "with honors.." I received a BA degree from the University of Florida in 1970, my major was Political Science. The official transcript of UF states that I graduated "With Honors" and was admitted to the society Phi Kappa Phi and Omicron Delta Kappa. Upon graduation I was commissioned a second lieutenant in the United States Army and assigned to the Military Intelligence Branch of the army. After my Honorable Discharge from active duty, I attended the University of Florida College of Law. At the conclusion of my first year of law school, I was selected to participate in law review, a privilege reserved to only about the top 10% of each class. In 1974, I received the degree Juris Doctor, J.D. I practiced law for 35 years and retired in 2010.

I recently decided to participate in Wikipedia to share some of my life experiences, but now I am having second thoughts because of how complicated I have found it.

Hello, John D. Maher. Wikipedia is not a place to share some of your life experiences. Read What Wikipedia is not. Try Facebook, Twitter or Instagram for stuff like that. You can put some of that on your user page but nowhere else in this encyclopedia.
Why would you possibly think that I (or any other Wikipedia editor) would be interested in what a midwife wrote on your birth certificate or an anecdote your mother told about your birth? Congratulations on your career. We care about whether or not you actually improve the encyclopedia. We do not care not even one tiny bit about your name change or where you went to high school or your Army service or your law degree or your Greek honors. You are an anonymous editor who could be lying or telling the truth. All we care about is the quality of your edits. I do not care if you are a precocious high school student or a Federal Judge fooling around on your breaks. All we care about is the quality of your edits and whether or not they comply with our policies and guidelines. Nothing more, nothing less. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:41, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Kindly reflect upon your comments on my username.

Calling my username with words such as "creepy" and "bizarre" has hurt my feelings, I take it personally because I am the creator of the username, so you are implying me to be a creep and bizarre. In no way it is bizarre or creepy, and also AngusWOOF never informed me that they ever felt it as harassment or trolling like Johnuniq has stated. AngusWOOF and AngusMEOW are two unique different names, this all boils down to individuals whose ability to distinguish between two names isn't that great, as for the signature I liked that style too, I was willing to change the signature style too, I was co-operative but you kept calling my username creepy again, forcing the change of username. That being said, I have applied for a username change to QuantumUniverse, just because it was confusing to Cyphoidbomb and other users who cannot distinguish between two different usernames(this boils to human error, in the computer world those two usernames pass as unique and very much different as oppose Luk3 and LuK3(exact same characters), it felt more like you have to change my username no matter what or sanctions and block will be placed. I see all you care about is the contributions to Wikipedia to be constructive or not, but also try to see the editors as humans with feelings. Please be kind, not everyone is emotionally strong on the same-level like you are. AngusMEOW (chatter • paw trail) 05:13, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I did not intend to hurt your feelings but I did intend to motivate you to change the username voluntarily without having a formal sanction on your record. And it seems you have agreed so I thank you for that. I encourage you to think about why a level-headed person like me would call your behavior "creepy" and why several other editors also expressed deep concern about your behavior. Going forward, do not behave in ways that cause experienced editors to fear that disruption is going on. Stay away from that kind of thing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:25, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Jacques Coghen

Hello


I read your message - please note that I have put in information and corrected some words because they are not accurate. As for reference to published works, please help me to do it. I urge you not to delete my input because it is reliable information from two books:

- Etienne COGEN & Alice DEMEYER, Uitvoerige genealogie van de familie Cogen van 1300 tot 1993, Vol. 1-2, Gent, 1994. - Etienne COGEN, Jacques-André graaf Coghen: zijn afstamming, leven, werk en nakomelingschap = Jacques-André Comte Coghen: ses origines, sa vie, ses activités et sa descendance, Gent, 1998.

Can you insert footnotes with references to these two works for the input I have made? By the way, I helped on the research for the two books as a relative of Etienne Cogen.

Thanks

Hello Jamaco20. I cannot add those references unless I have actually read the books, and I do not speak Dutch. I have already given you information about creating references at Talk: Jacques Coghen which is the proper place to discuss the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Opinion Requested

Hello Cullen328! I want to ask for your opinion concerning a recent spate of events [1]. Thanks for any help or guidance. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:36, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Page needs deletion but I can't be arsed to figure out the proper rationale ...

... because clearly I have more important things to do. Anyway, it's this page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toni Ann Johnson. Seems like it should be outright deleted (not just blanked) in case the article (Toni Ann Johnson) ever does go to AfD. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 09:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Softlavender, (talk page stalker) most likely as a test page (G2) but I've asked them what their intention is with it. If they are still working on it it may be okay. Glen (talk) 09:56, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 Done Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Pointer to repeated user behaviour after block

Heya. I noticed that you blocked this user last year and suggested they avoid deceptive edit summaries. I notice that the user is doing that again, saying "fixed grammar" or "typo" and instead replacing content: [2][3]. I'm not very familiar for procedures on how to handle this sort of thing, but I figured I'd let you know, since you were the last admin to provide a temp block. Thanks! Jlevi (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I blocked that editor again, Jlevi. Thank you for bringing the matter to my attention. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good. Thank you! Jlevi (talk) 23:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Admin

Show your opinion and ask Questions Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Acid Of Carbon.Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Corrosive liquid) 13:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Acid Of Carbon, are you sure you know what you are doing? Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:24, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Acid Of Carbon, with only 520 edits and a few months of editing, your chance of success is zero. I encourage you to wait until you have much more experience. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Acid Of Carbon, you're so inexperienced you can't correctly format an RFA or even indent your replies correctly. Can't tell if you're trolling or not but likely this will boomerang soon. Good luck transcluding your RFA. Glen (talk) 14:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool and Cullen328:. I know what I do. I also know WP:VANDNOT, and many admin-y things. I am almost an admin because I use WP:Twinkle. I decide what I do.I think I am fit.Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Corrosive liquid) 11:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Acid Of Carbon: to be blunt: why did you ask for Cullen's advice if you were going to disregard him when he said something you didn't want to hear? That in itself is not a good sign about whether you actually are fit to be an admin. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 12:49, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
This user is clearly trolling.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Message

Hello, Cullen328. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello Camdan. Thank you for your email. I, too, miss that retired editor. We can discuss editing English Wikipedia here on my talk page at any time. Be well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your kind response. I have a question. Is it possible to block editor from editing art. that I create? This because I will later start to translate more than 70 art. from pl:wiki but there are some users on en:wiki that change, redirect, rename without any consultations and are not willing to listen to any arguments. Even during discussion to reach consensus, they change art. as they wish. I have no time to discuss over and over again, year after year with those editors. I have no problem with any other editors, that post even not polite comment on subjct or talk page - we always reach consensus and at the end help each other. But here, I dont feel that I manage. If someone put a tag or post comment on talk page - no problems cause all art. can be improved. Please advise on this subject. Regards,Camdan (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
No, Camdan, that is not possible. Once you upload an image to a Wikimedia project under a free license, anyone else can reuse or modify that image as they see fit with no restrictions other than the requirement of attribution. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:31, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
I was more into art. on Wiki, not Wikimedia. Question is how to protect art. - is there any tag I can put on talk page or something to prevent from redirecting or taking away large part of the art. without consensus or discussion? In not familiar with WP:X and since I have been gone for years, I need to imporve in this. Second question. If I have a list of people (lets say 60 of them) that belong to one organization and list them among those that have own art on en:wiki, there will be "red links" like below - is it agianst the rule of Wiki and have to be removed? Then, I so - if I dont link them so people/ the list of people are not "red" can it still be removed?

...

I would appreciate help in questions above so I know the rules about this.Camdan (talk) 16:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Image

Couldn't figure out why the orphaned image was on Commons, but yeah, it was a stupid move. I just had surgery and am on percoset.--Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 21:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Scottandrewhutchins. There is a lot of bad stuff on Commons that is not in use elsewhere on Wikimedia projects. Please stop editing until your good judgment returns. I wish you good health. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:39, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Until his good judgment returns in whose judgment? EEng 12:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
EEng, who will educate the educators? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:33, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Who watches the watchers? Who judges the judges? Who shaves the barber? Who Moved My Cheese? EEng 16:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Need editing help

Hi Jim...we need help with page edits. We took it down as a rapid deletion due to the alert received saying it read too much like advertising. Hoping you can make contact (redacted) Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olympiajnr1 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Olympiajnr1. There is no need to communicate by email. You can ask questions here or at the Teahouse. First of all, who do you mean by "we"? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:58, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your response! I am looking for help on a rewrite or edits. Is there a fee to be paid for Wiki editors (like yourself?) to make it Wiki suitable? If so this would be understandable. What would that be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olympiajnr1 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Olympiajnr1. I am a volunteer and do not accept payment. Please explain who "we" is. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:18, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello again Jim, your volunteer work is admirable and your history with Wiki really impressive. My apologies I didn't think "we" was important. My assistant wrote the article for me and I was keeping her in the loop. I believe I may have found someone to do a rewrite before submission again. I hope at that stage we can send it to you first before the upload? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olympiajnr1 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Olympiajnr1. Please stop using the word "we" in this context and only use the word "I". Then read WP:SHAREDACCOUNT. A Wikipedia account is for the use by one individual person only and sharing an account is contrary to policy. Also, the standard procedure is that only the person who writes the original content can upload the content. Nobody else. If your assistant has access to your account, then you must change your password and keep it confidential. Your assistant must set up their own account if that person is going to be contributing, and file a Paid editing disclosure. If you are paying a third person for a rewrite, then that person must also have their own account and file the paid editing disclosure as well. These policies are mandatory and non-negotiable. If any of these accounts violate these policies, the account will be blocked. Read and study Your first article. Wikipedia has a very strong volunteer ethos and the work of paid editors is subject to heightened scrutiny. Volunteer editors and administrators expect excellence and complete compliance with all policies and guidelines from paid editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:55, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Keep up the good work!

The Special Barnstar
Cullen, I see your name almost everywhere whether its creating content, resolving disputes and handling various types of issues here on Wikipedia. Keep up the good work! TheGeneralUser (talk) 09:32, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, TheGeneralUser. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Manoj Verma (IPS) needs more references

Hello sir, please help me to learn the concept of giving more references and details about this article as it is needed to know more information about this article. Please solve my doubt.
Regards,
Dibyojyoti RC (talk) 07:51, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Dibyojyoti RC. I suggest that you read Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ilhan_Omar

Hi Jim,

I am not sure if I should respond to you here or back on the edit page. I just started editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk • contribs) 01:20, 1 October 2020 (UTC) Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 01:22, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d. Please continue that conversation at Talk:Ilhan Omar. If you want to ask more general questions, feel free to ask here or at the Teahouse. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

added Ajpolino • LuK3
readded Jackmcbarn
removed Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
renamed There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Coincidence

So when I reported sock puppetry of User:Deacon Vorbes with out knowing that they had already been blocked for similar username.Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Organic compounds) 13:55, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Acid Of Carbon: This comment explains the background. Favonian (talk) 15:40, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Enola Homosexual for Deletion

Not sure why this page exists, and has a redirect to Northwest Herald, please consider deleting the page. I have shared my view with the author (Scott) too on their talk page.

PS: Found you on the list of active admininstrators. Amit Dash (talk) 07:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) At the time the redirect was created, the target article included a sentence, later expanded into a separate section, about a copyeditor using a style manual blindly and changing the name of the bomber Enola Gay to Enola Homosexual in a headline. The section was removed from the article years ago [4]. --bonadea contributions talk 07:57, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
That's mildly amusing. Not being an expert in redirects, I will say nothing further. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:22, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
This look like it could wait for an RfD to reach the right decision. But if an expert is needed, Rosguill would be the one. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
My guess is that an RfD would almost certainly close as delete, unless someone feels that the content that bonadea found is due for inclusion and the article and reinstates it. signed, Rosguill talk 17:41, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Added this request to the RfD page. Amit Dash (talk) 17:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Amit Dash, you did nothing of the sort. Softlavender (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Softlavender Wiki servers are a bit slower today, please check the RfD page now. Amit Dash (talk) 17:39, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
You did that incorrectly, in addition to doing it after I posted here; you certainly did not do it before you claimed you had (the timestamp of the RfD is 12 minutes after your claim). Please correct the RfD, and also tag the redirect. See the instructions at WP:RFD#HOWTO. --Softlavender (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Softlavender wow I have never met such a cheerful person, it is a pleasure talking to you! And thanks for pointing out the instructions page, I will check it out, no more responses here to save Cullen328 some trouble. PS: When I said the servers are slow I meant it, if I have to spell it out over here my save on the page failed on the first attempt and thus I retried saving it 12 mins later which you calculated so accurately. Amit Dash (talk) 18:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328/Archive_71&oldid=1142947787"