User talk:Augurone

Welcome!

Hello, Augurone. I saw your contributions and want to welcome to you the free encyclopedia anyone can edit.

Thank you for joining our community and becoming a Wikipedian. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

If you need help, see Wikipedia:Questions or our tutorial. Last but not least, the five pillars of Wikipedia explain what we're all here to do.

Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 19:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

Hello! I'm a bot created by another Wikipedia editor. I wanted to let you know that I removed a link that you recently added to the page James A. Eshelman here. I did this because http://www.meetup.com/Aiwass-Study-Group/members/2293223/ is probably inappropriate for an encyclopedia.

We appreciate your help in making Wikipedia better for everyone. If I made a mistake, feel free to undo my edit. If you have any questions, you can ask at the Help desk.

Thank you! --XLinkBot (talk) 19:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome! I'm a bot created by another Wikipedia editor. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more of the external links you added to the page James A. Eshelman, because they did not seem to meet our definition of appropriate links. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before adding it again.  
I did this because http://unusmundus-melie.blogspot.com/2011/10/article-meditations-on-liber-al-by-jim.html, http://skepticaltheurgist.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2011/12/5/4952937.html is probably inappropriate for an encyclopedia. We usually avoid linking to blogs, forums, and social media sites.

We appreciate your help in making Wikipedia better for everyone. If I made a mistake, feel free to undo my edit. If you have any questions, you can ask at the Help desk.

Thank you! --XLinkBot (talk) 21:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Please read our reliable sources and external links policies. Do not use unreliable sources or add links which do not meet our policies. They will simply be removed. Yworo (talk) 22:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Also, all information added to biographies of living people must be supported with reliable third-party sources. Text may not be added without supporting sources. You added a whole paragraph without sources, which I've removed. Yworo (talk) 22:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not include unsupported or inaccurate statements. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to James A. Eshelman, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for guidelines. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 22:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Answering your question and asking a question in return

You wrote elsewhere "Do you have a problem with Jim?":

I don't know Eshelman, so no. But you are apparently on a first name basis with him? Would you happen to be a member of one of his organizations? A friend of his? Because if so, you should also be aware of our conflict of interest policy. If you have a conflict of interest, you should refrain from editing the article and only make suggestions for sourced additions on the article talk page. Yworo (talk) 23:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

In response to your question

Anyone who studies Thelema and/or Sidereal Astrology knows who he is. He is alive and gives regular lectures and book signings. So no I do not see it as a conflict of interest.

I read the requirements and dropped the blogs even though they are relevant. Industry Sites for publishing should considered legitimate. And other sites publishing his work, or quotes by him, establish his notability. Should I post all the places that steal his books on SCRIBD or on Torrent sites, would that be more legitimate? Why do you get to be the judge?

It is not permitted to link to copyright violations of his works. We know he has written books. Our notability policy is that he has to have been noticed and written about in high-quality sources that are in no way affiliated with him. I also note that you did not answer my questions. Are you a member of one of his organizations? We see it as a conflict of interest if you are. And if you are and don't disclose it as described in the conflict of interest policy, it could earn you a block. It's a very easy yes/no answer, are you affiliated or a close friend? You must disclose it if this is the case. Yworo (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

What precisely do you mean by "Industry Sites for publishing". You added Goodreads and LibraryThing. These are not publishing industry sites, they are "social cataloging" sites with user-submitted content. You added this Velvet Books link. That's not a publishing industry site, it's a blog (click on the "Contact" link to see their non-existent editorial process), and the entry is question was plagiarized from a previous version of the Wikipedia article, removing the ref tags but leaving the text of the references inline. Do you find that readable? Under Wikipedia rules, Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources and sourcing something to an old version of a Wikipedia article is circular sourcing.

Publishing industry sites would be sites like Publishers Weekly. Reviews in reliable sources such as The New York Times, The New York Review of Books, or any newspaper or magazine that you can reliably pick up at your local Barnes & Noble, which certainly includes a number of mainstream astrological magazines (like The Mountain Astrologer) and spiritual magazines (not sure which ones are current). More obscure sources would need to be available in libraries to fulfill our verifiability requirements. Books cited should have ISBNs, journals should have ISSNs. You can't cite a private publication, a review in a homemade 'zine, a self-published website, etc. Hope this helps. Yworo (talk) 01:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)