User talk:Seraphimblade

Archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Please do be nice.

Please read before posting

• Post all new sections under a new header at the bottom of this page, not at random. If you make it clear you ignored these instructions by placing it elsewhere, I am likely to ignore your request in turn.

• If you leave me a message here, I will respond to it here, as fragmented discussions are confusing. I may or may not leave you a notice that I've responded on your talk page. If you specifically request that I do (or do not) give you such a notice when I respond, I'll honor that request. If I contact you on your talk page, I will watchlist it so that I can respond there. If you'd like to leave me a notice when you respond (a ping will also suffice), it would be appreciated, and you'll probably receive a faster followup.
• If you are an admin here to ask me about someone I blocked for vandalism or spamming/advertising, they've agreed to stop it, and you believe they intend to edit productively, go ahead and unblock them. If you still want my opinion please feel free to ask, but there's no obligation. For more complex cases I would appreciate a heads-up, but please go ahead with your best judgment if I don't seem to be online. I would appreciate it if you'd let me know after you do.
• If you email me a question or request, and do not indicate why the matter is sensitive and must be handled privately (and such is not immediately obvious), I may ignore it or respond on your talk page rather than by return email. Talk pages are open to other editors to read, and so are the preferred method of communication for matters involving Wikipedia. If the matter you are speaking to me about is Wikipedia-related and would not violate anyone's privacy by being posted publicly, please use my talk page instead of email. This does not, of course, apply to editors who are blocked from editing, though I still may respond on your talk page rather than by return email. Also, if you are contacting me for a matter related to the Arbitration Committee, please specifically indicate this in your email. All correspondence of this nature will be treated as confidential, though I am likely to forward it to the Committee as a whole, or any appropriate subcommittee, for consideration.
• If you are here to ask a question regarding deletion of any kind, please read this before asking, and ask only if you need further clarification or still disagree after reading. If you ask a question answered there, I'll just refer you to it anyway.
• While I will generally leave any personal attacks or uncivil comments you may make about me here, that does not mean that I find them acceptable, nor that I will not seek action against attacks that are severe or persistent.
• I reserve the right to remove, revert, or immediately archive any material on this page, but will do so only in extreme circumstances, generally that of personal attacks or outing attempts against others. I will only revision delete material on this page in accordance with the revision deletion policy, and will clearly denote the reason why.

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

• Discussion report: A constitutional crisis hits English Wikipedia

• News and notes: Mysterious ban, admin resignations, Wikimedia Thailand rising

• In the media: The disinformation age

• On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?

• Traffic report: Juneteenth, Beauty Revealed, and more nuclear disasters

• Technology report: Actors and Bots

• Gallery: Unlike the North Face, Wiki Loves Earth

• Special report: Did Fram harass other editors?

• Recent research: What do editors do after being blocked?; the top mathematicians, universities and cancers according to Wikipedia

• From the archives: Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching

• Opinion: Why the Terms of Use change didn't curtail undisclosed paid editing—and what might

• In focus: WikiJournals: A sister project proposal

• Community view: A CEO biography, paid for with taxes

• Op-Ed: 2019 Wikimedia Affiliate Selected Board Seats Election Results

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:53, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

I have just read at User talk:Katherine (WMF) the message written by Guettarda, but copied to that page by you. It says things which for years I have been convinced are obviously true, but which in my experience most people don't see at all. Thanks for attempting to pass on an understanding of those important points. (Whether the attempt succeeds or not is another matter.) JamesBWatson (talk) 13:28, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

@JamesBWatson: Well, I think more thanks due to Guettarda, for putting it so well. But hopefully, that helps to get across why they're seeing such an uproar over what they've done. Katherine has seemed willing to engage (and, as some folks brought up at the discussion, the seriousness of the situation may have been getting lost as it got passed up the chain at WMF, until she started to hear directly from a bunch of people), so hopefully that works to bring some clarity. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I hope so too. And of course you are right that most of the thanks are due to Guettarda, but thanks are also due to you for your action in bringing it directly to Katherine's attention, rather than relying on her to notice it amidst the vast walls of text that have been posted about this. And finally, I agree with you about Guettarda "putting it so well": she or he expressed it more clearly than I think I would have done. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, definitely, thanks for putting on Katherine Maher's page. I was thinking about turning it into an email, as someone suggested on the FRAMBAN page, but this was a much better idea. Guettarda (talk) 17:44, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

More thanks

I know there has been a lot of raised temperature during the ongoing Fram saga, but I feel like I owe it to you to thank you for the leadership that you have provided during those discussions. I really do appreciate it. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:02, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Staysure

Hi there,

You deleted the page for Staysure on 28th June, due to 'advertising.' The page includes citations, examples and sources and is not advertising the brand. Instead, it aims to be factual and everything stated is according to facts alone. If you could explain in what way the page's content is subjective or 'advertising', that would be appreciated.

Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JellyYo (talk • contribs) 09:22, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

JellyYo, as the page was removed as promotional and shows hallmarks of paid work, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit this subject, including being asked or expected to edit as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we continue. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:21, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. How do I make a disclosure if the page has been deleted? I do need to disclose and didn't realise I needed to do that, my mistake. If you could point me in the right direction with this, and hopefully retrieve the page back once I've disclosed this, that would be brilliant. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JellyYo (talk • contribs) 15:30, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

JellyYo, the disclosure is made on your user page, not the article itself. The instructions for how to do so are at WP:PAID. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:36, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I've now added the disclosure to my talk page. Does this mean that Staysure's article page will now be reinstated? Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JellyYo (talk • contribs) 15:51, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

JellyYo Well, you've been straightforward with me, and it's not the worst I've seen, so I'll restore it as a draft, as it looks like Staysure itself might actually be notable. Please keep a few things in mind. First, since the conflict of interest exists, we editors in that situation should not create or edit articles in the main encyclopedia (including making ten edits and waiting four days to duck around the autoconfirmed requirement). Instead, the article should be created and edited as a draft, at Draft:Staysure (in this case I'll do that shortly with the material that was deleted). Once you believe the article is ready, you can have it reviewed by a disinterested editor (I'll put a template on the article that you can just click a button on to request the review). If they approve it, they'll take care of moving it to the encyclopedia; otherwise they'll let you know of any issues. Secondly, we're generally looking for information from reliable sources. It's not particularly appropriate to include an entire section about a company's advertising campaign based just upon promotional material from the ad agencies. While occasionally ad campaigns become extensively noted by disinterested sources (take Where's the beef? or the GEICO ad campaigns as examples), that's an exception rather than the rule, and we normally wouldn't have any material recapping ads or promoting the ad companies. That was the primary issue with the article. Finally, sources like "Builtvisible" or "Founded" should be avoided; we would be looking for sources that don't have an interest in promoting the company. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:01, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes Issue 34, May – June 2019

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019

• Partnerships
• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Coservapedia reversion

Your reversions were undone because while you might think the references are adequate, WP:Attribution and WP:NPOV Are clear that Opinion references must be directly attributed. Particluarly interviews must be qualified where the interview material isn't presented in the form of a source transcript or isn't otherwise verifiable outside of the source presenting the material. Remember that it is opinion until and unless there is evidence that proves someone said something, otherwise you have to say "According to X, Y said...". 24.155.244.245 (talk) 02:51, 27 July 2019 (UTC)