Here because I deleted your article? Read through this first to find out why..
If you do leave me a message I will generally respond here, unless you want me to reply elsewhere.
I would like to make a request for banning the following IPs permenantly. He/she did added or duplicated request section for musical genre seven or eight times with multiple IPs 18.104.22.168, 22.214.171.124, 126.96.36.199, 188.8.131.52, 184.108.40.206, 220.127.116.11 and 18.104.22.168 (three are 86.138 IPs has been blocked by Kww and Tiptoety, respectively). 22.214.171.124 (talk) 06:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
- This is not something that I can do without community backing. Permanant blocks or bans on unregistered IP addresses is something that has to be investigated fully, as other users may use the computers and would ultimately be adversely affected. I would suggest taking this to WP:SPI. Stephen! Coming... 06:57, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 July 2014
- Special report: $10 million lawsuit against Wikipedia editors withdrawn, but plaintiff intends to refile
- Wikimedia in education: Serbia takes the stage with Filip Maljkovic
- News and notes: Bot-created Wikipedia articles covered in the Wall Street Journal, push Cebuano over one million articles
- Traffic report: World Cup dominates for another week
- Featured content: The Island with the Golden Gun
Hey Mr. Buxton,
Sorry to bother you, I just had a short question about a deletion tag that you removed a few days ago.
I applied the tag, but actually I'm really new to Wikipedia and don't really understand much about the process of getting an article removed, so I was wondering if you might be able to help?
I am a theology student recently tasked with studying Modern East Asian religion. I came across the Wikipedia article on the Providence Religious Group (official name is actually Christian Gospel Mission). This is a very controversial group in Korea and the rest of East Asia as it has had many serious allegations levied against it yet continues to sustain a high volume of members.
Though the allegations against this group are quite serious, I know it is the standard of an encyclopedia to accurately represent the subject. I had to do a lot of painstaking research for my class, but based on my research of primary sources, the Wikipedia article does not offer a neutral, complete presentation of the subject from an academic perspective. It is misinformed in places, engages in the debate in others, and is not professional in its tone. Even the title of the group is incorrect.
So, I created an account to try to delete this article. Sorry this is probably a big inconvenience for you, but I saw on the reviews that people said you were friendly and helpful--would you be able to help?
- If an article isn't neutral in tone, and you have carried out research such that you can see what is missing, then Be Bold and add it! Wikipedia is there for absolutely anyone to edit. Sure, you might make a few mistakes, but these are always very easy to correct.
- One thing I would say though is that if you are editing a topic that is highly contraversial, or is on something that people are very opiniated about, it is all to easy to unwittingly enter into an Edit War. So what I suggest is make the edits, and post your reasoning on the talk page of the topic.
- If something is inaccurately represented on the article, then edit it and explain why on the talk page. HOWEVER - if what is written in the article is an accurate representation of what is in the referenced source, then don't remove it but instead find a source that offers a counterpoint, and add that to balance the article.
- Good luck with your editing, and if you have any problems, then please don't hesitate to ask me. You can always get a quicker responce on the Help Desk if you need a rapid reply. Hope this helps. Stephen! Coming... 06:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Reply: Providence(Religious Movement)
Hey Stephen, thanks for responding! Actually I wanted to ask about that--I reviewed the editing history for the Providence(religious movement) page and it seems as if it has already undergone a series of edit wars (between the authors of the page and possibly members of the religious group)and is now semi-protected... for any edits that are made, the original authors have just re-edited it with the original format. I would of course be happy to provide information I have found for the page, but I'm certainly not interested in getting involved in an edit war!
So my question is, should I try editing it anyway?? Because many of the sources for the article are in Chinese and Japanese, and because the language and structure are one-sided for the majority of the article, it might take a lot of editing to balance it out... I'm not sure if a rewrite wouldn't be better? Idk please let me know what you think on how to proceed! Thanks so much for your help GIOSCali (talk) 19:44, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
- Absolutely you should try editing it... that's one of the 5 Pillars of Wikipedia - so be bold and edit away! As I mentioned above, just be careful not to remove referenced text. The other thing is not to put undue weight on any particular viewpoint; see WP:WEIGHT. Always explain your activities in the talk area.
- What you might want to consider is copying all the source text and create a User page to edit it to try and balance it out. The text can then be merged with the main article when it's in a better condition. I would suggest that you let people know on the talk page that this is what you are planning on doing, should you choose this avenue. Stephen! Coming... 06:30, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Awesome! Yes I will definitely inform the authors on their talk pages. For material that is sourced, but has a tone that is non-academic/ is not neutral, are we allowed to just change the tone of the information provided? Also, what about references in foreign languages? Are translations supposed to be provided? GIOSCali (talk) 19:23, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not too sure about translations; I suspect you're on your own that way, or find someone who can translate it for you if you need it. By all means change the tone, so long as it is to a more neutral manner. The Manual of Style should be able to help you with there, if you need it. Stephen! Coming... 06:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 July 2014
- Wikimedia in education: Education program gaining momentum in Israel
- News and notes: Institutional media uploads to Commons get a bit easier
- Traffic report: The World Cup hangs on, though tragedies seek to replace it
- Featured content: Why, they're plum identical!