User talk:Tomwsulcer

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

Contributions by Tomwsulcer to:
User talks · Article talks · Wikipedia talks

Please add new discussions at the BOTTOM of the page. Older discussions have been moved to my talk page archives.

It is The Reader that we should consider on every edit we make to Wikipedia.

(Thanks to Alan Liefting)


Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share[edit]

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop in Manhattan's Greenwich Village.

6:30pm–8pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Afterwards at 8pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Met Opera[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your message. I reverted the edit you added mainly because it didn't belong in the lead, opening paragraphs. This section is intended to serve as an introduction and brief summary of the main points of the article. Speculation regarding ticket sales in recent years really doesn't fit here. I think new text in the Gelb section discussing the financial problems of the Met in the post-2001 era would be a welcome addition. This item could fit there well as an opinion about one factor contributing to the problem. There are many others of course. The source of the comment being a film historian to me makes it less compelling in an article about opera, than from an expert about the Met or about opera. Especially as a standalone item. But as one one comment among many it could have its place. You are absolutely right that the article is woefully undersourced and I'm as much to blame for that as anyone. I'm hoping to start adding more sources and weeding out some errors soon as I have time and I hope others will do so as well. I hope this helps. If you have time to research and write a summary of the Met's recent financial woes that would be tremendous! Best wishes, Markhh (talk) 00:38, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

You make a good point about irrelevant stuff in lede paragraphs (which should be trimmed further). Still not clear why you simply reverted my sourced addition instead of moving it to another section. About 2/3 of Metropolitan Opera is unsourced and really needs to be trimmed.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I know what you're saying. I always hate it when editors just delete something rather than make whatever correction they think is needed. Improve rather than delete. I probably should have done that. But at the moment, it didn't seem substantial enough to stand on its own elsewhere. That's why I wrote such a lengthy edit summary. Thanks for the new edit. Best, Markhh (talk) 02:00, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I agree with you in general. There's a lot that could be trimmed, I think 2/3's is a bit extreme. But length isn't the main problem. I think the content is okay, as far as it goes, but it cries out for sources and improvements in the style and clarity of the writing. I especially dislike the lengthy lists of names and titles. Stronger sourced writing and organization will help keep those from accruing. Markhh (talk) 02:24, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Then maybe it's a good idea that when other contributors try to add sources, that you don't revert them.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 02:27, 29 November 2014 (UTC)


Hi, I realise it's been a few years since you created the article & others have added to it, but the bulk of the content & wording is still as added by yourself. My issue is that the article is relentlessly positive with absolutely nothing that could be regarded as critical of the band...not really balanced is it? Why is trivial fluff needed on how many hundred or so albums they press & the colour of the vinyl? I'm sure the record company/band/sponsor/donor was well pleased with such a quality looking puff piece! (talk) 05:22, 1 December 2014 (UTC) PS I wrote this on the article talk page first before I realised I could edit here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:23, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Note, the "bulk of the content & wording" was not contributed by myself. I floated an initial version, but since then, I have not been watching this article for years, and numerous people have added to it, contributing much fluff, and if you wish to fix these problems, there's nothing stopping you.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Citation Barnstar Hires.png The Citation Barnstar
Nice work on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiffany Houghton czar  04:29, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! I used to routinely revamp articles on the chopping block, but even despite my revamps, some got deleted, so now I usually have a wait-and-see approach, so if it gets kept, then maybe I'll do a revamp.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:55, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Straw Poll[edit]

There is a straw poll that may interest you regarding the proper use of "Religion =" in infoboxes of atheists.

The straw poll is at Template talk:Infobox person#Straw poll.

--Guy Macon (talk) 09:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

thanks, but I have kind of become sincerely bored with this subject weeks ago.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:47, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Samira Samii[edit]

Current sources in article sufficient to meet the..... This is you massage in Delectation of SAMIRA SAMII page... You can not believe how you and other users can brake the image for someone... If you don't know a person and just make it for fun.. stop it please...

Most of information in page are wrong and the picture is not a right picture for her page.. many thanks for ur understanding — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasmin-Shams (talkcontribs) 12:24, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

What??? The deletion discussion is about whether this subject, Samira Samii, is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, not about the current content of the article, not whether a photo in the article is the right one. If you feel that content or photo are incorrect, you are free to change them just like any contributor can. Regarding whether the subject is worthy of inclusion, I voted Keep since I think there are sufficient sources to justify inclusion. About your allegation that somehow I and others are "(making) it up for fun", I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:47, 13 January 2015 (UTC)


Should I NPOV template you? Your edits to the talk page were bad. Your edits to the article are borderline vandalism IMO. Different POVs I guess. Please take it back to the talkpage, but without the obvious bias and silly premise. --Onorem (talk) 02:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I've responded on the talk page of Budweiser. You have removed not only referenced content but removed commentary on the talk page. While I in good faith will try to trust that your motives are good, that you wish the best for the encyclopedia, that you wish to be impartial, can you see how others here at Wikipedia might think that your deletions of referenced content here and your deletion of commentary on the talk page here might lead others to suspect that you have an agenda of promoting Anheuser-Busch or Budweiser, or might possibly work for one of their publicity or marketing agencies?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon[edit]

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join us at New York Public Library's Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of the Black WikiHistory Month campaign (which also includes events in Brooklyn and Westchester!).

12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St

The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

degenerative disc diseases[edit]

Hello my name is Margaret. I was just informed That I have degenerative disc disease. My Question is. Is this something that will come and go? Or will the pain stay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Not sure why you're asking me this question. I'm not a doctor. Best to see one. There is information in Wikipedia about this subject here. Best wishes.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:05, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Merging Coffee nap into Power nap[edit]

My sense is these are two different (although related) terms. Still, a decision to merge one article into another, like you did here, is a major one requiring community consensus. If you wish to pursue merging the article, place a merge proposal tag on both articles and see what happens in discussion.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Don't revert due solely to "no consensus". I gave appropriate policy related reasons in the edit summary. This was a standard merge. You are welcome, of course, to seek consensus for splitting the article. See Wikipedia:Splitting. SilkTork ✔Tea time 11:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cyrille Aimée, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jazz singer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Your support is key[edit]

Hello. Please support me in creating an article on brotein. The article will be surely nominated for deletion, but I will feel better once I am assured of your Keep vote. I have found the following sources that reference the term:




Perhaps one or more of these will make it for you!

--IO Device (talk) 03:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

IO Device, I go by Wikipedia's rules, so if the article brotein gets written, and I come across it up for deletion, I'll go by what the rules say.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:47, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Jonathan Palfrey's role as chair of the Knight Foundation board[edit]

Hello. I added a well-sourced item to the page on John Palfrey referencing his role as chair of the Knight Foundation. You removed it, indicating (reasonably) that his mere chairmanship of an organization may not be important enough to merit inclusion. I would argue that the Knight Foundation is a large enough ($2.3B in assets) and widely-spread enough (operations in 26 U.S. cities) organization that its inclusion is merited. I undid the edit and would appreciate your support.Juggernautco (talk) 00:08, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Knight Foundation not a WP:RS; but Philippian is; moved the information out of lede paragraph since his being chair of the KF is not in the same league as his work with Harvard Law and being Andover HofS.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Makes sense. Perhaps as time goes by someone will congregate other minor-league items as this and create a new section for it under "Career" -- Juggernautco (talk) 23:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

April 29: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday April 29, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our inaugural evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities.

After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Featuring a keynote talk this month on Lady Librarians & Feminist Epistemologies! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Julie Strauss-Gabel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Green (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


I can see that privately published, pirated youtube episodes are not a reliable source, but I fail to understand where it is defined that an official youtube channel, published by HBO itself, is not a reliable source. Can you give a citation for that? This is not social media, this is just a one of several commercial distribution channels. --Gregor Hagedorn (talk) 19:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

You ask a reasonable question so let me try to explain why I think what I think. I've been contributing to Wikipedia for five years now, and am fairly sure that it is general policy not to use YouTube as an official source for content in an article. It is not the New York Times or Boston Globe or another encyclopedia or a respected author or study; rather, YouTube is essentially a medium for entertainment, videos; it is a great medium, no doubt about that, but generally unsuitable for Wikipedia. If you try to find other articles where YouTube is used as a source, please show me; I suspect that they may be difficult to find. What is more often the case is that YouTube is included as an external link (which is what I did with Civil forfeiture in the United States; I feel the link to John Oliver's show is properly posted there, in the external links; here is a policy about using YouTube for external links. Generally, what Wikipedia wants are secondary sources, ideally news-related or academic-related, impartial, neutral, objective, looking at a subject from a distance slightly removed. Now, what about comedian John Oliver as a source? His show is primarily entertainment, and while I trusted the facts in his broadcast about civil forfeiture to be correct, Oliver's piece was essentially satirical in nature. Oliver's show presented only one side of the argument, so it was not really neutral. Oliver's show on YouTube, by the way, prompted me to write the article for Wikipedia. So I agree Oliver needs to be included (his photo is prominent on the page), as an external link, fine, just not as a reference, that's all.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
The official YouTube channel of a generally reliable news organization is (depending on context) just as reliable as a newspaper, a TV broadcast, a magazine, or an online news website from the same organization. All bets are off with unofficial random YouTube videos. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:55, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no problem with an official YouTube broadcast of a television news broadcast, since the source would be, say, NBC News possibly. But that's just it -- is John Oliver's show Last Week Tonight a "generally reliable news organization"? I loved the show, but I just don't think it qualifies as a reliable source, that's all.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
The issue of the reliability of John Oliver as a source for a given claim is entirely unrelated to the fact that the show is archived officially on YouTube. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Well I think there is a relation, in the sense that accepted news channels, TV, newspapers, journals, tend to have their own websites, and entertainment media may have their own websites, but much of entertainment-related television is accessed through intermediary channels such as YouTube. In Wikipedia, generally, media sites such as YouTube are generally not used as references, why, because they tend to have lots of entertainment (such as John Oliver's Last Week Tonight segments). But is it really necessary to make such a big deal about this? Oliver is clearly represented in the article, via the external links, and in a photo; we're leaving the text in; all we're doing here is quibbling about a reference; I am simply trying to follow the accepted procedures here, which is not using YouTube stuff as a reference.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Julie Strauss-Gabel and John Green[edit]

Hey Tom, I saw your message over at Talk:John Green (author). I don't own an image, but I did do a quick search on Flickr and found these:

Maybe one of these will do the trick? I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Hey thanks Jethro. I'll try to follow up with these; I have had mixed results trying to use photos from Flickr but will get around to this when I can.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Not an admin yet??[edit]

Hey there. :) Any interest in trying out an WP:RfA? I think you have a good chance at success. -- œ 02:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Hey thanks for considering me. Yes I've been around here a while; used to be more contentious, now I've mellowed considerably. At present, I'm kind of happy contributing stuff, writing or revamping articles, contributing to AfD discussions, and think the current admins are doing a good job. I guess I have two questions (1) does the community need more admins? (2) how much more of my time would it take? I am not sure if I am admin material since I am not always patient, still make mistakes, don't know much about sockpuppets or the internal workings of Wikipedia, so I don't know whether I'd be a good admin. But I am willing to consider it; thanks again for thinking of me.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:47, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
(1) The community definitely needs more admins! (2) It would only take as much time as you choose to put into it. You could only make a few administrative actions here and there and it would still be a benefit. In my opinion, all it takes to be admin material is to have common sense and a good knowledge of policy. You don't have to wade into sockpuppet territory, there are plenty of easier admin areas to work in, CAT:CSD for instance, which is consistently backlogged. -- œ 12:45, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Ok, you sold me; how do I apply?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:07, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
On second thought, I started to look through the instructions and got bored. If the community really needs me to become an admin, it will say so, until then I'm happy just being a revamper.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 22:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Okay, no problem. If you decide to change your mind I would be happy to write up a nomination for you. -- œ 01:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thanks.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Funeral strippers[edit]

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Cool! Thanx--Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)