User talk:Cullen328

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
I don't live on Cullen Ct, but I like the street sign

Welcome to my talk page I use the name Cullen328 on Wikipedia, but you can call me "Jim" because that's my real first name. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the old comments from July and August of 2009 that follow the "Contents" here, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome when I first started editing Wikipedia.

The importance of a friendly greeting

Hello and welcome to my talk page. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the comments that follow from July and August of 2009 readily visible, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome here on Wikipedia when I first started editing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:38, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Please offer your thoughts

I would appreciate comments and suggestions on any contributions I make. I am learning.Cullen328 (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice work on Jules Eichorn. He's been needing an article for a while.   Will Beback  talk  06:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
If I may suggest, now that you've posted the Eichorn article the draft below might be deleted. It's your talk page to do with as you like, but it's a bit hard to edit around.
As for formatting and pictures, a good way to learn is to look around at other articles to see what you think looks best. It can be helpful to break up long blocks of text into subsections. Perhaps it'd be possible to split the biography into two or three eras. Other than that, the formatting is usually kept fairly plain. As for photos, it's easy to upload them: the trick is in finding photos with appropriate licensing. If you have any personal photos then those'd be fine. There are might be pictures of the peaks he did first ascents on in the Wikicommons. File:Cathedral Peak.png is a so-so pic of Eichorn Pinnacle.
As before, feel free to ask if you have any questions. There are several editors here who are mountaineers or just admirers of the Sierra, so you're in good company.   Will Beback  talk  21:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
PS: Many editors create "sandbox" pages for drafting articles. For example, User talk:Cullen328/Sandbox.   Will Beback  talk  00:17, 1 August 2009

Your climber biographies

Hey Jim, just wanted to say welcome and thanks for your contributions to the Sierra Nevada climbing history articles. You're filling a niche that's been missing here, I look forward to working with you. --Justin (talk) 11:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll second that. Nice work on Allen Steck and welcome to Wikipedia. I don't know who you are planning to write up next but if your taking requests I think Peter Croft (climber) could really use a page. If you ever have any questions please ask. Thanks again for your great additions.--OMCV (talk) 02:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Justin and OMCV. I am beginning work on Tom Frost and Glen Dawson. Comments on Norman Clyde would be welcomed. I will defintely read up on Peter Croft, OMCV. I am still "learning the ropes" in Wikipedia, to use a climbing analogy, and have all sorts of things in mind. My biggest challenge right now is getting permission to use images. My next biggest challenge is hiking to the top of Mt. Whitney with my wife in ten days - she's never been above 12,000 feet except for the train ride up Pikes Peak. As she's 56 and developing arthritis in her toes, it will be an accomplishment if she (and I) complete the Class 1 feat. Jim Heaphy (talk) 02:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Debra and I made it to the summit of Mt. Whitney at 2:20 PM on Friday, September 11. Jim Heaphy (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

2009 Archive

2010 Archive

2011 Archive

2012 Archive (first six months)

Automatic Archive 1Automatic Archive 2Automatic Archive 3

Message[edit]

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at Center for HIV Law and Policy's talk page.

Amy Tan Award[edit]

Amy Tan.jpg Amy Tan Award
Thank you for participating in the First Annual Litquake Edit-a-thon on October 11, 2014 in parallel with Litquake, the San Francisco Bay Area's annual literature festival. Your content contributions and community collaboration helped make the event a success, and are appreciated! Rosiestep (talk) 22:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, Rosiestep. It was wonderful, as always, to see you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:10, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Imran Khan[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Imran Khan. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Engineering Institute of Technology - Submission declined due to referencing issues[edit]

Jim,

Firstly; thank you for making yourself known and available for guidance regarding the above mentioned draft page.

As per the subject line, the 'Engineering Institute of Technology' article was denied due to referencing issues. Unfortunately, the reference provided has been deemed invalid and I would therefore appreciate any help to rectify this issue to ensure the EIT page is successfully published.

I look forward to hearing back from you at your earliest convenience.

Regards, OJCASK (talk) 02:19, 1 December 2014 (UTC) (Oliver)

Hello OJCASK. I took a look at your draft, which has many problems. First, it has only a single reference to an Australian newspaper article which is behind a pay wall. We expect multiple references to significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Much of the content of the article consists of long lists of educational programs, linked to external websites. There should be no external links in the body of the article, although an external link to the school's website at the end of the article in its own section is OK. Your article should be written primarily as a well referenced narrative, not as a long list. What narrative material you have is largely unreferenced.
The sections on accreditation are way too long, and describe the accreditation programs in excessive detail rather than describing the accreditation of the school.
I suspect that you will find many reviewers to be skeptical about the notability of an online technical school. You need to show this through solid evidence of accreditation cited to independent sources. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:42, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
When I read through your draft, OJCASK, and then read through the school's website, it appears likely that much of your content is copied from that website, which has a copyright notice. We do not allow copyright protected content on Wikipedia, except for brief excerpts in quotation marks, cited to the source. You must immediately remove all copyrighted material from your draft, and it must be written in your own words, properly referenced to your sources. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:56, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

thank you, jim ... it is very helpful. again my thanks for your kind cooperation. yes, and i will follow your directions and let me see what i can do.("Cyrusrobati" 20:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrusrobati (talkcontribs)

You are welcome, Cyrusrobati. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Reply to your message on Talk:Missing Links Volume Two[edit]

I wondered if you saw my recent reply to your message on the Missing Links Volume Two talk page. -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 23:36, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I have commented on that talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:03, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

woo[edit]

Cullen, I appreciate your note on ANI, but I think it's time that somebody tell me what "woo" is. Please? Drmies (talk) 04:06, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

What am I here, the Oxford English Dictionary, or just a guy like you, only less educated, and who takes more naps, and makes curmudgeonly observations about the evolution of the language? You could check the Urban Dictionary or some other impeccable, reliable source, you know? OK, I have qualified my opinion adequately, I hope.
When you visit your cousins in Montana, and Randy in the trailer park down the street notices the twelve pack on your cousin's porch, and stops by for a beer, and tells you how the space aliens took him up to "outer space" for a "probe", then you might sarcastically say "that's woo woo". OK, I agree, it is about on the same linguistic level as The Flintstones when I was a kid, where there was a toddler named "Bam Bam". But you didn't come here for a critique of Kant and Hegel, did you? You are the one who asked.
So, intelligent skeptics, who worship at the Las Vegas cathedral of the Amazing Randi and the voluble half of Penn and Teller, have boiled the whole concept down to three letters: "woo". It is a signifier. "We hate all forms of pseudoscience and will do anything to discredit every one of them." Great elsewhere, and useful, if harnessed properly, here on Wikipedia. Unfettered, it is another POV push. That's how I see it, Drmies because I truly support NPOV here. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:35, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, I'm glad someone cleared that up! Thanks. Also, YGM, in a minute. Drmies (talk) 05:33, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
You are, it ought to go without saying, welcome, Drmies..Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:36, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Co-op: Pre-pilot discussion for mentors[edit]

Hey Cullen. I've posted some initial information and discussions points about the space for mentors here. Give it a read, ask questions on what's not clear, and feel free to add suggestions to the topics I've brought up about mentoring so far. I just pinged a bunch of people at once for this; I understand that sometimes it doesn't go through, so I wanted to make sure you were aware. Thanks, I, JethroBT drop me a line 22:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I JethroBT. I have read over the material and will think about it in days to come. I wish we had a better place to discuss perceptions of harassment then ANI, with its "pack of wolves" reputation. Perhaps there could be a simple, basic structure with graphics encouraging collaboration, where the mentor could act as a mediator, getting both parties to state their concern in "100 words or less" and the mentor could suggest a solution going forward. This is just quick brainstorming. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:24, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree that ANI is not an ideal atmosphere to address conduct issues during the course of mentorship. I think mentors acting as mediators would be a great idea. I, JethroBT drop me a line 02:45, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hedwig of Holstein[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hedwig of Holstein. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Editor of the Week[edit]

Editor of the week barnstar.svg Editor of the Week
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for Teahouse-related work. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:SuperHamster submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Cullen328 as Editor of the Week for their extensive work with helping the editing community at the Teahouse. The Teahouse serves as a haven of sorts for newer editors to ask questions and get friendly answers from other editors, namely the Teahouse "hosts". To anyone who frequents the Teahouse, Cullen has become a familiar face. He has constantly been one of the top contributors of answers at the Teahouse, always providing helpful, insightful, and patient answers - and when he's not sure of an answer, he isn't afraid to say so and call on others for help. There's a reason why Cullen's most edited page on Wikipedia is the Teahouse, clocking in at over 1,800 edits while helping hundreds of new editors get accustomed to the ins-and-outs of Wikipedia's system. I'm always confident when I see an answer ending with Cullen328 Let's discuss it.~SuperHamster

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}
Project editor retention.svg
Editor of the week.svg
WP teahouse logo.png
Cullen328
WP:Teahouse
 
Editor of the Week
for the week beginning December 7, 2014
Concentrates on content creation, referencing and expanding mediocre articles, the "Articles for deletion" process, and welcoming and mentoring new editors.
Recognized for
Assisting New Editors
Nomination page

Thanks again for your efforts! Go Phightins! 18:15, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, SuperHamster and Go Phightins!. I am honored. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:08, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Congrats, Cullen, very well deserved! MelanieN (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts on behalf of new editors. ```Buster Seven Talk 19:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
You've earned it.  :) I, JethroBT drop me a line 05:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, MelanieN, Buster7 and I JethroBT. The respect of colleagues I also respect means so much to me. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:52, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

BTW Cullen - a year or two ago you issued a kind of challenge or dare to me.[1] This is to put you on notice that I am seriously thinking about taking the plunge early next year. If I do, I intend to remind you of that comment and call your bluff. So you'd better be giving it some serious thought! 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 06:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

My memory still works, MelanieN, and I read much more than I comment on. Instead of being a big mouth, I prefer to think and ponder before speaking. I have certainly noticed that you are considering the "big plunge". I had some family issues involving a disabled child that prevented me from considering a run, but I am working on wrapping those up. So perhaps there will be "good news" for both of us. If dealing with messes with mops is good news, that is. In any event, it is good to hear from you, as always. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:56, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Good, Gaston, I'm glad to know you remember - and maybe have my back. History does not record what would happen if one of them actually went through the door. Would the other one go too? Would it still be funny? Maybe the world will find out. Maybe. Or maybe not. --Alphonse (talk) 15:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Oh no, the Alphonse sockpuppet has appeared on my talk page! Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:18, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Oops... --Alphonse (talk) 04:47, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Dalai Lama is primary or secondary source?[edit]

Dalai Lama is primary or secondary source?VictoriaGraysonTalk 01:10, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello, VictoriaGrayson. That depends on context. If he is writing about himself or contemporary events he is a participant in, then he is a primary source. If he is writing a scholarly discussion of some aspect of Buddhist history from before his birth, then that may be a secondary source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:05, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Dalai Lama and computers[edit]

He said he has never used one in an interview, I think with CNN on YouTube. In the same video he said he does not even have an interest in music. The article currently gives the misleading impression that he would go on Twitter and think of what his hashtag is going to be. 74.133.104.185 (talk) 20:54, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

We need to cite a specific reliable source that says that, instead of your recollection of what you think was on CNN. That's how Wikipedia works. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:04, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I already knew that my vague recollection does not make for a reliable source; the fact that I was conversing rather humanely does not imply I was unaware of Wikipedia's binding guidelines. I am not unfamiliar with the policies of Wikipedia, although I see that like so many active Wikipedia editors, you are quite anal-retentive and possibly have high-functioning autism, and so flaunt both your intellectual prowess/correctness and your familiarity with the Wikiprocess, love rescinding unregistered edits instead of being kind to them, talk down to newbies, and are a secular Jew. Yes, I know full well that any outstanding claim on Wikipedia must be cited, but what I am far less familiar with is how to do so.
Will the actual video of the interview qualify as a reliable source for WP? 74.133.104.185 (talk) 04:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Answering your final question first, if the video is on an official CNN channel, then it is an acceptable reference to use. If, on the other hand, it was uploaded randomly, it can't be used.
As for your comments about my character, I am not a "secular Jew", as that term is commonly understood. I have been a synagogue member continuously for decades, served as board president of my synagogue in 1998 and 1999, keep kosher and observe all the major Jewish holidays. I am not orthodox, though.
I can't refute your other accusations so easily since they are so subjective, but I will say that you are the first person in my 62 years of life who has accused me of being anal retentive and possibly autistic of some kind. So, I have to conclude that your charges say more about you than they do about me, since you don't know me at all.
With a simple click of my edit history button, you can easily verify that a very small percentage of my edits have to do with reverting the contributions of others. I reverted yours because it was an unsourced addition to an article I watch closely because other people have made far more pernicious changes than yours. I judge edits by their compliance with policies and guidelines, and not by whether they are by an unregistered IP editor. But I do check the edits of IP editors more carefully than those of well known, experienced editors, because my experience Is that they are far more likely to be problematic.
If you read a couple of sections above, you will find that I am one of the most active hosts at the Teahouse, a place for new editors to ask questions. I enjoy helping new editors, and have been thanked by dozens of them there. But every so often, one of my good faith actions or answers rubs someone the wrong way. So it goes. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I need some help with my page - Camp Stone[edit]

Hi,

I am not new to reading Wikipedia, but I am brand new to editing. I need help with my page "Camp Stone." I work for Camp Stone and I don't know how to make certain changes that my organization wants to make. Can we speak over the phone? If so, what is the best way to reach you?

Thanks, Yakov Fleischmann --Yakfleisch (talk) 19:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Yakfleisch. For reasons of transparency, I prefer to discuss article content right here on Wikipedia. You should start by reading about conflict of interest on Wikipedia. Camp Stone has problems. It lacks references to significant coverage in reliable, independent sources needed to show notability. You should not edit the article yourself, but should furnish references and propose changes on the talk page. Let me know and I will review your proposed changes, and add them to the article, if they comply with our policies and guidelines. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
After reading the comments you left on two other editor's talk pages, you seem to have a serious misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Your organization does not control our article Camp Stone. This is not LinkedIn or Facebook. That is an encyclopedia article about the camp. It is not a promotional piece for the camp. Anyone can edit Wikipedia in compliance with our policies and guidelines, and they don't need the camp's permission. If the camp is in Pennsylvania, then it will be categorized as a camp in Pennsylvania. Explain all that to the camp leadership, and please declare your conflict of interest on your user page, which is currently blank. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Camp Stone - (con't)[edit]

Thank you for your response. I understand how Wikipedia works, but the problem is that someone posted mis-information about the institution and the leadership wanted it cleaned up. the text edits I made are accurate and the text on the page now appropriately represents accurate information about the institution. Now, with respect to cross references that I wanted to deleted for safety purposes, i understand that such isn't up to me and that there is a separate forum for that on another page. I will do some research into that.

as a separate matter, who was editing our page? Does that individual have knowledge of camp stone? Whoever it was is missing information and perhaps I should speak to that person directly.

Thanks for your help as I get introduced further to the world of editing on Wikipedia.

All the best, Yakov --Yakfleisch (talk) 22:05, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello again Yakfleisch. No need to start a new thread. Just continue the old one. You can click on the edit history tab on the article and see every single edit to the article since it was created in 2007, by an editor who hasn't been active since later in 2007. There is no need to try chasing down individual editors. Post your concerns in detail on the talk page, along with links to independent reliable sources verifying the information. Let me tell you about one of Wikipedia's cultural norms: When someone says an article contains misinformation, they are expected to identify the inaccuracies precisely, and furnish a citation to a reliable source that has the accurate information. Generalized non-specific complaining is usually ignored or discounted. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:22, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

That's helpful. Thank you again for everything. I will do some more reading on how certain things on the page work and try to suggest appropriate edits. So if i suggest edits on the talk page, who is going to make the edits on the wikipedia side? --Yakfleisch (talk) 22:51, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I will make the edits unless another editor comes along first, Yakfleisch. I will make some additional edits on my own. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:02, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

excellent. thank you. looking forward to working together. --108.254.114.1 (talk) 04:03, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Jim - Thank you for taking the time to be the editor on this page. A few comments about your edits.

  1. 1 - our camp motto was altered so that it doesn't match what is on our website. Our motto is : "To cultivate within every child that walks through the gates of Camp Stone an unwavering lifelong commitment to Am Yisrael, Eretz Yisrael, and Torat Yisrael. We encourage our campers to develop their own individual leadership potential, enable them to become self-reliant, and encourage them to become a contributing and functional member of the group or “kvutza.” We aim to provide a safe, nurturing, and family-like environment in which we care for our campers’ physical, emotional, spiritual, and educational needs."

"Am Yisrael, Eretz Yisrael, and Torat Yisrael" is an expression that means "The Nation of Israel, the Land of Israel, and the Torah of Israel" -- which is the motto of Bnei Akiva, the youth group organization we are affiliated with. That is what is written in Hebrew in the info box on the page. That should not be changed on wikipedia. it seems...

  1. 2 - the info box is for a "university" or something like that. This is a summer camp. It creates confusion on Facebook.
  1. 3 - Speaking of facebook, is there a way for it not to pick up this page and instead to pick up our official camp stone Facebook page, so that there aren't multiple facebook pages.
  1. 4 - I have a new image for you to put up on wikipedia if you want it for our page. How do I send that to you?
  1. 5 - while we do have a cattle car replica in our camp, it is but one tiny piece of a much larger incredible summer camp featuring all sorts of things. Shouldn't we reference other things in the camp? Why does that have to be on there?
  1. 6 - I have a lot of accurate information for you about the history of the organization, etc. Should I send that to you to post in a history section?
  1. 7 - I can tell you more about the camp in general. Should I send you that info to post?
  1. 8 - We have concerns about our camp being linked to a specific spot in Pennsylvania. There are other camps I know of that are not on that list, so it begs the question as to why we were included.

That's it for now. Thanks. Yakfleisch (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Yakfleisch. A couple of points: You are welcome to discuss general things about editing Wikipedia here at any time. However, detailed discussion of article content should take place on the article's talk page going forward. I will copy this material to that talk page and respond in detail later today. I am busy with "real world" work right now. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:16, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Jim, I posted some information for you on the camp stone page. Not sure how to make sure you get a message that i posted it, so I'm telling you here on your page. Thanks, Yakov Yakfleisch (talk) 15:45, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Jim - one more thing. Any chance the page can be edited so that it is categorized as a summer camp and not as a university/school. The infobox was for university and somehow it still carries that designation. Thanks! Yakov Yakfleisch (talk) 17:42, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Hanukkah, Yakov. I removed all traces of "university" or "school" categorization a few days ago. The article now uses the "organization" infobox, and is categorized as a camp and as a religious institution. It may take a few days for Google to notice the changes. As for Facebook, who knows? But eventually, their computers will notice as well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!! Yakfleisch (talk) 21:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grey2K USA[edit]

Hey Cullen, I just ran into that AfD after an edit war at Greyhound racing. I reverted the Grey2K article to its post-AfD and pre-COI state; perhaps you and your dogloving friends (including Sagaciousphil and Hafspajen) can help that article along a bit? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:01, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, now we are useful, we work our asses of with those articles. But of course none of us is an ADMIN. Hafspajen (talk) 20:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Wow, my elderly brain had completely forgotten my epic "Googlehits" takedown of three years ago. Yes, Hafspajen, an "admin" is an exalted one who has the powers to instruct us mere mortals to fix up a "dog" of an article. I will get right on it, boss, if I am not washed away first by the December 2014 West Coast storm, now in progress. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Corp and I have done a pretty thorough job of gutting, but the foundation is there for you (a title and a "reflist" thingy). Good luck. And yes, I hope record wind and rain is not endangering you, Mrs. Cullen, and your flock of greyhounds. Drmies (talk) 23:37, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Hm. Elderly admin, you know, there are no admins working on dog articles. They just occasionally happens to own some dog and then go on rule-making on that article. the rest, the boring part - they leave to us, poor workers. Hafspajen (talk) 20:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
You're right. I wish I knew how to create content. Drmies (talk) 23:37, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Drmies, I just left a message on the Grey2K USA employee's talk page. We are surviving the storm so far, and my only strange little greyhound looks exactly like a Boston Terrier, poor fellow. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:42, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Following up to fix the article and submit correctly[edit]

Thank you SO much, Jim, for your kind and specific responses to my Teahouse query (on Nov 8, 2014) about submitting a new article for composer Norman Cazden. Although I strongly believe my integrity as a professional editor led me to create an expanded article that does not present COI issues, I shall of course do everything I can to follow Wikipedia's rules. I am reading the pages you cited, and figuring out how to write the COI disclaimer/statement.
If I understand you correctly -- and please advise me if the following is in error -- you are telling me to submit the significantly expanded article as an EDIT to the existing article? Staying in integrity with such things is pivotal for me, which is also why I want to be able to digest the references about COI you cited.
Thank you for your previous help and, I hope, for the wisdom to come! Stasmaam (talk) 21:53, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Stasmaam. Let me restate things clearly: If you are being paid by the composer's estate, then you most certainly do have a conflict of interest and as I requested five weeks ago, you should declare that on your (now blank) user page, and on the article's talk page. So far, you haven't. We do not write a new article about a topic when an existing article Norman Cazden already exists, unless the existing article is a hoax. Instead, we edit the existing article to improve it, expand it and better reference it. This is a collaborative project, and we don't just toss out the work of other good faith editors who have developed the article to date. In your case, though, you are not permitted to edit the article yourself, because you are a paid editor with a conflict of interest. What you should do instead is to propose changes, incrementally, providing appropriate references to independent, reliable sources for each change or addition you want to make. Those proposed changes should be posted to Talk: Norman Cazden. Volunteer editors (perhaps me) will review those changes and add them to the article if they comply with our policies and guidelines. Please feel free to leave a note here when you need something reviewed. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

The clarification is MUCH appreciated. I have just written a COI disclaimer. I had hoped to include it as part of my signature but it's too long, so I've included it on my User page as you suggest. In no way did I mean for anyone to "toss out" anyone else's work! That crosses the boundaries of professional courtesy and I don't do that. I am still treading water furiously to understand what's required of me. Where/how can I submit the article I wrote for review, please? It's ready for that.Stasmaam (talk) 22:35, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Take a look at the menu bar at the top of the page and click the link called "Sandbox". That is the perfect place for content you are working on, Stasmaam. But stop thinking about a new article to review because we already have an article. Think, instead, of improvements to the existing article. Perhaps you can critique the shortcomings of the existing article. The biggest problem I see is lack of references, so providing good references should be your first priority. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

THANK YOU for your feedback. I so appreciate that I learn something every time I follow your guidelines! For instance, I had no idea I was supposed to have a user page to do what I've done. I do not mean to be obstructionist, but because I'm new at this and because I was asked to write an entirely new article, I do not know how to backtrack to follow your suggestions; I concentrated so exquisitely on details and references and flow when I compiled and wrote about Norman Cazden, how do I do what you ask? It feels like "cherry-picking," if you know what I mean; there is easily three to four times as mu;ch information, as well as an opus list, I was going to submit for review. BTW, my name is Claudia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stasmaam (talkcontribs) 23:50, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello again Claudia. Remove the user page material you drafted from your sandbox and paste the text of your draft article into the sandbox instead. I will be happy to read it and comment on it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:58, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I have copied my draft article into my Sandbox for your review, or for review by whomever you designate. Much, much appreciated!Stasmaam (talk) 02:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Claudia. I do not have time right now for a detailed analysis, but I feel obligated to make a few preliminary remarks. Let me begin by saying that Wikipedia is very strict about excessive use of copyrighted material. You must understand that Wikipedia content is freely licensed for reuse and adaptation by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose including commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that the Wikipedia article must be credited. This means that we keep use of copyrighted material to an absolute minimum, for very real legal reasons. My personal rule of thumb is that an attributed two sentence quote is pretty much OK, and maybe three sentences might be OK. But you have incorporated massive blocks of copyrighted material into your draft. See WP:COPYVIO. Please remove this copyrighted material from Wikipedia immediately. You can keep it offline, but not here.
The next major issue I see is that many paragraphs are unreferenced. Every single substantive claim in the article needs a reference. Every paragraph should have at least one reference, assuming all the content of that paragraph comes from that reference. Two or more references are required if the content in that paragraph comes from multiple sources.
I also see signs of original research and synthesis. These are not alllowed on Wikipedia. Our job is to summarize and paraphrase what the sources say. Wikipedia writers are not supposed to express their own judgments, analyses or conclusions of the sources. We simply recapitulate the sources.
Some of your references are bare URLs. Flesh them out.
Your article is entirely lacking in Wikilinks, which are the backbone of navigation on Wikipedia. Please wikify your draft.
I see many other problems that are more minor, such as calling him Dr. Cazden. Our Manual of style (which you should study) says that a person should be referred to by surname only after first mention. There are other such minor problems. But address the major ones first. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:06, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Wow, I thought I'd done far better than your notes indicate. This is a far more complex endeavor than it appears! I'll go back in and do as much as I can. I've read page after page on Wikipedia, seeking guidance; from your review, it's obvious I missed some key requirements. Dang. I had thought that Herbert Haufrecht's article was so rare it would be permissible to quote it extensively. And by "wikify" you mean adding links to other wikis? I put quite a few of those in the article, perhaps the encoding didn't work. I'll definitely recheck.

I'll work on it tomorrow, and have requested as much info as is available from my contact with Cazden's estate as they can provide. Disappointed at this state of affairs, but game to continue to deliver a worthy outcome for all readers. Stasmaam (talk) 00:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong. There is much in your draft that is very good and appropriate for another venue, but not quite right for Wikipedia. Rarity of the source does not justify extensive quotation of a copyrighted source. Instead, we paraphrase and summarize the source. To add a wikilink to an article , add double square brackets immediately before and immediately after a word or words which are the exact name of another Wikipedia article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:18, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Lucia![edit]

How could I be perplexed when I didn't even know about it? But now I know, and I appreciate both the information and the sentiment, W.carter. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

New Article Submitted for Review : Need assistance at your convenience[edit]

Hi there. The feedback you gave for my article under review, Draft:Ed DeCosta, was very helpful. I am continually improving the content in respect to NPOV standards and proper citation parameters. I was hoping to check if you would have any availability to check on my article and tell me if you think it will pass the wiki standards for approval (I am still checking the contents for holes). I really appreciate your assistance and hoping to hear back from you soon.Pmanz2014 (talk) 00:49, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Pmanz2014.Your article still has lots of problems. I am truly not sure that this person is notable, but there are aspects of the article that will raise red flags for reviewers:
  • The local small business award does not belong in the lead. It is not a notable award, as such awards are given out in large numbers everywhere.
  • Describing Maxwell as "best selling" is inappropriate since the article is about DeCosta not Maxwell.
  • "End user product roadmap" is promotional jargon and all such fluff should be ruthlessly stripped from the draft. Write concisely and neutrally.
  • Capitalizing "Sales and Marketing" is inappropriate as is excessive italicization. Put all quotes in quotation marks and reference them. Comply with the Manual of Style.
  • The facts about Crespillo do not belong as this is an article about DeCosta not her.
  • Do not question the reader as you did in the DVD story. I don't really think that story belongs.
  • Phrases like "challenges one's mind" and "provocative insights" and "intriguing insights" are overtly promotional and should be removed without exception.
  • There is no need to mention the other authors in the book series, as that is not relevant to DeCosta, and comes off as name-dropping.
  • The facts about the early history of the Boston Latin School do not belong as they have nothing to do with DeCosta who was not yet born. Any interested reader can read Boston Latin School.
  • Links to external websites should be removed from the body of the article although wikilinks are fine.

I recommend that the draft article be rewritten in the dry, factual style of the WVU faculty profile. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:35, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

  • @Cullen328: Hi there. Your feedback is always appreciated. Thanks for taking the time to help me out. As I am researching about DeCosta, I'm becoming intrigue with the constitution of notability for a person in his field of study. Though DeCosta did not receive a noble prize in his line of expertise, both his competence and his teachings have been widely cited by multiple publishers, each independent of each other - But I do understand, that being said, does not necessarily deem him notable.

He does hit some of the bullets in the General Notability Guidelines, in my opinion.(and do correct me if I'm wrong). For instance, A significant coverage of (1)his proficiency in executive coaching in which I didn't have to go deep on research because multiple sources goes down to a common denominatot (2) his book is already cited by peers as the same. The book has been the subject of at least 2, as criteria relays, such as the in depth discussion of the book in WBNW (AM) Money Matters, Kirkus Review, and recognition from other notable peers and public media[1]And Book notability criteria does state to meet at least one to be honored and I believe his book did. I believe, the style of writing has a lot to do with it and I'll work on the feedback you gave on NPOV matters. Apologies no contention meant on this, I am just trying to understand better to meet the standards set accordingly. Thank you so much for your time, I sincerely appreciate itPmanz2014 (talk) 06:49, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Please note, Pmanz2014, that I haven't expressed the opinion that DeCosta is NOT notable, and that all of my bullet points have to do with how the draft article is written, rather than the key issue of notability. As I perceive things, those glaring shortcomings in the current version of the draft article may present an impediment to an objective review of notability, if the reviewer feels that they are wading through knee deep B.S. Please excuse my frankness. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:58, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • @Cullen328: Hello. Honestly, I like your frankness! It just goes to show the stress on the feedback you're giving and the efforts you're putting in to help out. Thanks a bunch! Thumbs up to you Cullen328! If all my digits are thumbs, I'll raise them all up!!! Thanks again! I'll work on the points you advised. =)Pmanz2014 (talk) 08:55, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ I understand that being recognized by a wiki-verified notable icon is not conclusive proof that the subject should be deem notable but I believe if cited multiple times referencing one and the same should still count

Nevermind[edit]

Never mind Confident468 (talk) 18:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Your self-portrait: Vandalised[edit]

Hello, Cullen. I am here to inform you that your self-portrait has been vandalised. The field has been vandalised with a picture of a penis at the "Summary" template. Thanks and fix it, DEW. Adrenaline (Nahnah4) 06:20, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. DEW. Adrenaline (Nahnah4) 06:25, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Nahnah4. I greatly appreciate your diligence. Though that childish vandalism doesn't bother me that much, I certainly don't want that image popping up at the Teahouse. The trolls are pitiful, aren't they? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:52, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I figured that out when I saw Guillaume Birindwa's question on the Teahouse, and wanted to use your picture as an example for his image which is a self-potrait, until I saw a weird image of hairy stuff (and penis) on the summary template, which disgusted me despite the fact that I am male. These kind of trolls are just so lame (and outdated). I have reverted the edits. As expected, it came from an IP address. Guess being popular in Wikipedia ain't a good thing. Cheers, DEW. Adrenaline (Nahnah4) 07:00, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:America: Imagine the World Without Her[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:America: Imagine the World Without Her. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jim -- Glenn Here. New to commenting. Can't seem to figure out how to put what where and when. Anyway, I thought I would pass along my thoughts on this to you. perhaps you can help direct me to the appropriate place? Thanks, Glenn Orignal comment I tried to put on the page. == Suggest Keep == Responding to the proposed for deletion. I found it to be a very well done article about a unique type of storm system; the storm type and this particular storm are both quite notable. A similar storms of tremendous magnitude have occurred in the past and will occur in the future, potentially affecting millions of people. I considered the description and detail quite good: This article is definitely worthy of keeping. Thanks, TimeOnTarget TimeOnTarget (talk) 01:42, 19 December 2014

Oops. Sorry about the lack of reference. It appears to have been renamed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2014_North_American_storm_complex

I guess it made it in a bit modified? That's cool. I thought it was a good description of a type of storm that can have potentially huge impacts. Best, Glenn TimeOnTarget (talk) 20:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year![edit]

Snow Scene at Shipka Pass 1.JPG Happy Holidays and Happy New Year!
Best wishes to you and your fam! Rosiestep (talk) 02:05, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Best holiday wishes to you, too, Rosiestep. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:20, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets![edit]

Wikipedia Happy New Year.png Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Cullen328, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing,
The Herald : here I am 11:37, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Holiday greetings to you, The Herald. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Disney University[edit]

You identified several sources for improving the Disney University article during the AFD but the article remains completely unsourced. Can you help improve this article?--RadioFan (talk) 15:04, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Best wishes for a happy holiday season[edit]

Simmons-Hermia and Lysander. A Midsummer Night's Dream.jpg
Happy Holiday CheerHerbert James Draper, Midsummer Eve.jpg
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Hafspajen (talk) 02:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Warmest holiday greetings to you, Hafspajen. It is wonderful to hear from you because I heard some rumors that you might be considering a retirement, and that saddened me greatly. So your kind sharing gives me a precious opportunity to encourage you to stay, to ignore the "negative influences" to the best of your ability, and to continue to contribute work about art and beauty to this wonderful resource for free learning. I enjoy seeing your plaintive requests on a certain user's talk page, but even more so, I appreciate your contributions to the encyclopedia. Please stick around in 2015. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:39, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Was rather angry. Since then I was listening to 7+6=13 tune all day and made feel a bit better, sigh... Being angry made me write a lot angry truth-telling on my talk, since I did made up my mind to leave - but it's too late now. Hafspajen (talk) 05:23, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
It is never too late, Hafspajen. My words stand. Please stick around. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:02, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

Christmas tree.jpg
P snowflake.svg

Dear Cullen328,
MERRY CHRISTMAS!!! Best wishes to you, your family and relatives this holiday season! Take this opportunity to bond with your loved ones, whether or not you are celebrating Christmas. This is a special time for everybody, and spread the holiday spirit to everybody out there! Face-smile.svg
From a fellow editor,
--Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook)

This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook).

Thank you very much, and Happy Hanukkah to you, Nahnah4. The menorah candles for the final night are burning right now at my house. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:37, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Seen --Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 07:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you[edit]

Helping New Users Barnstar Hires.png The Helping Hand Barnstar
For the person who goes the extra mile, offers guidance, support and when necessary isn't afraid to say it how it is when that is what is needed. If I see your signature at the end of a Teahouse answer I know it will be the best answer there. Nthep (talk) 09:30, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, Nthep. You also do an excellent job at the Teahouse. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:31, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[edit]

Thank you Jakob, and Happy Holidays to you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:14, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Education[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Education. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Grandad?[edit]

Maurice Cullen - Winter Evening, Quebec....

Hafspajen (talk) 16:10, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the picture, Hafspajen, but he's not a relative. "Cullen" is a middle name in my family for at least four generations. One set of immigrant great-grandparents did live in Canada for a few years before coming to the U.S. around 1880, but that's a different branch than those who liked Cullen. I have several relatives who have been painters, too, but not this guy. I enjoyed reading about the fellow, though. Happy New Year! Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:38, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

I apologize[edit]

I apologize. I know you're just doing your job here and I've been difficult. It won't happen again.

Bohemian Gal (talk) 06:53, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the gracious message, and there is no need for an apology. I know that Wikipedia can be frustrating to newcomers, as I spend about half my time here assisting new editors. My offer to help write an article stands if you can furnish even two reliable independent sources that give significant coverage to the Oregon church. I wish you well, Bohemian Gal. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:58, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Lizard Squad[edit]

I don't think this was a very productive revert. I was attempting to improve some of the awkward wording that was introduced into the article such as: "On December 8, 2014, the PlayStation Network was again attacked, and once again Lizard Squad claimed responsibility." Your full revert of my edit reinstated the awkward wording. I have a made another edit which improves the wording of the article while attempting to have more WP:ALLEGED wording, which I believe it what you were trying to say in your edit summary. In the future though, I would be more careful when making reverts. An edit which expounded upon my improved wording would have been much more helpful than a blind revert. Thanks! Artichoker[talk] 00:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Artichoker. With all due respect, my revert was not "blind" but carefully considered. Though I agree that the wording was awkward, your edit removed doubt and ambiguity, and the text ended up stating definitively that Lizard Squad was responsible. In my judgment, the factual issues are more immediately important than the stylistic issues. I did not have time for more extensive editing. Today is my wife's birthday, and my sons are visiting us. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation. Though I'd just like to point out, if you did not have enough time to edit as you have stated, sometimes it is better to wait until you do have that time. Wikipedia is a work in progress, after all. There shouldn't be a rush to do a quick revert, when what is required is a more nuanced edit. Thanks! Artichoker[talk] 00:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
As for your edit summary remark "Please do not blindly revert and instead attempt to improve the article", Artichoker, why don't you take a careful look at the article's history? You will see that I made 24 edits yesterday, all of which improved the referencing. Then take a look at my contribution to the AfD debate about this article, and my post at WP:AN which motivated an administrator to "snow" close that debate. Please assume good faith of other editors. Thank you for your good faith efforts to improve the article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:50, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
I was simply talking about the action in question. I will admit that my edit summary was brief; but it is harder to express intonation via edit summary. That is why I wanted to leave you a more personalized message on your talk page to explain my reasoning. I maintain that I have always assumed good faith on your part, and apologize if my edit summary seems to indicate otherwise. Again, it was more meant to be a brief message and I made sure to come to your talk page to expound upon my reasoning with the hope that you could take this as a learning opportunity. Artichoker[talk] 00:56, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Your use of the word "blind" in this context expressed a negative intonation as I perceive things. Perhaps I am sensitive about use of words related to disabilities in this way, because my wife ChesPal is deaf, and I sometimes hear the word "deaf" used similarly. I am an editor who is very serious about this project in general and this topic in particular. I do not edit blindly or without careful consideration, whether I have five minutes to spare or two hours. I have spent a lot of time reading about Lizard Squad in recent days, and have every intention of helping to improve the article substantively. All that being said, why don't we both take this as a learning opportunity, Artichoker, and collaborate to improve the article? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:08, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
That is correct; it was meant to express a negative intonation (though not in anyway referring to disabilities). Not because I am assuming any bad faith on your part, but because I believed there was a better route to take in that situation than the one you chose. Regardless of this, I have never had doubts about your sincerity to this project and know that you have done great work in contributing to Wikipedia. I think your proposal sounds excellent, and that we can continue to improve Lizard Squad collaboratively. Artichoker[talk] 01:22, 28 December 2014 (UTC)