User talk:Katieh5584

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

KFSR on Wikipedia[edit]


Thank you for being friendly in your communications. The "Red Pen of Doom" breaks all the Wikipedia policies I've read about effective communication, courtesy and consideration.

Information on the Wikipedia page about KFSR Radio is incorrect. Specifically, the current logo, the "Call Sign Meaning", and there are wide gaps in the history of the radio station. There is also some very basic information about current programming/formatting as well as delivery (online streaming) information that is completely missing. I am simply trying to provide that information as a reliable "source".

With that being said, I understand that Wikipedia requires source references. Wikipedia lists a "source" as an article or book, from a writer or journalist, or a publisher. It cites that authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject can also be considered reliable sources. Further, it states that the term "published" can also include materials that are broadcast. As the Program Director and on-air host of the station, I am a journalist, an authority in relation to the subject and this information is broadcast daily.

Please tell me how I can go about providing Wikipedia with a better source of information about this radio station than the very individuals who are considered "sources" and broadcast "publishers" of the product?

Please guide me in how, as a media entity, our "media sources" can be produced by a reliable third party and be properly cited.

I sincerely thank you for any help you can offer. Julie Logan KFSR (talk) 05:33, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi, I'm not Katieh5584 (I read her mail here).
Although it appears you've read some policies on Wikipedia such as WP:Civility or Help:Referencing, you seem to be missing TheRedPenOfDoom's attempts at following the core policy of WP:NPOV (neutral point-of-view), which is equally important.
The WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide might help you. Simply put, being an official representative (or the like) gives you less leeway here: it imparts a WP:Conflict of interest in your editing, and jeopardizes the neutrality of the writing; part of Wikipedia's mission is to achieve neutral synthesis about subjects, and we take one-sided editing very seriously here. Neither Katie, nor I, can help you any further, but wish you well in your goal to improve the accuracy of that article.
If you have a problem with the article, take it up with the WP:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard and explain what you want changed. If you explain that the logo and company history are factually inaccurate, they should be able to assist, and may help guide you to reliable sources to back those statements up.
More general questions (such as how to edit, technical aspects of editing, sourcing and the like) may be directed to the WP:Help Desk, a team of volunteers who answer questions. If you're stuck, it's always a good place to go.
Regards, meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 22:06, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Warped Tour[edit]

Please weigh in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warped Tour 2012 Encmetalhead (talk) 21:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Conflict of interest on Claudia Keelan[edit]

Hi Katieh, I'm writing to suggest that the editing of my page Claudia Keelan is not a conflict of interest, and the deletion of the new entry isn't appropriate, as the page is years out of date and does not show the current state of the author's career. I wonder if you could send me my edits, and suggest what in the entry is inappropriate for Wikipedia's guidelines. I understand that the link to the video from The Berlin Poetry festival which was posted on Youtube, may demonstrate a copyright problem with Wikipedia, though all rights reverted to me upon filming. I'd really appreciate your help in making an entry that will not violate any of Wikipedia's guidelines. Thanks for all you do!

Sincerely Yours, --Claudia.keelan (talk) 05:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (Not Katieh, just answering her mail) Still there? Sometimes I take awhile to get back to people.
Based on your username, I'm guessing you are the person you are writing about; hence, you are writing an autobiography. I must caution you that content guidelines state that it's never a good idea to change the biography of your page unless something is factually inaccurate (such as where you grew up, the year you were born, etc.)
Anything else is discouraged, because it's simply human nature to write about ourselves in a positive, promotional way—something that can upset the neutral tone Wikipedia is to be written in.
I don't think the problem is copyright or "fair use" so much I see you've added more external links, which already is pushing the guideline for external links (generally only one is permitted). We can leave the article where it is for now, but I don't think you should add any more links (that's not what the site is for). I also see you've been adding awards you've received recently. Wikipedia is not a resumé and should not be used as a means of promotion. I'm not sure that you should be editing your entry at all, really. It's definitely not recommended.

I wonder if you could send me my edits, and suggest what in the entry is inappropriate for Wikipedia's guidelines.

Your edits are located at the top of the Wikipedia editing window, under "contributions". You can view them at any time by clicking on the link. Also, clicking "View history" on any page will show you who edited what and when. (Help:Contributions)
I hope that answered your questions. Regards, meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 04:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Invitation: WikiProject Autism[edit]

Greetings! You are hereby invited to WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of autism, Asperger syndrome, and autistic culture on Wikipedia. As the project emphasizes contribution from autistic editors, it is especially interested in you, who have chosen to list yourself at Category:Wikipedians with autism. Muffinator (talk) 20:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

As someone who has edited the article Asian American this year, I am seeking your input on a proposed change to remove a reference to epicanthic eyefolds. This topic has prompted discussion in 2009, 2010 and most recently in 2013.

There's a fine line between being WP:BOLD and subverting WP:CONSENSUS. Given the history of this topic, I'm hoping that a robust discussion, for the record, would improve the article whether this reference stays or goes. Ishu (talk) 13:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi, i recently made a edit on your page but you then contacted me saying that my correction was wrong. I'd just like to inform you that antiziganism just doesn't mean hatred/discrimination towards Romani people but it also means discrimination towards Irish Travelers. If you disagree with the information above I invite you to contact me further.

Regards, William. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)