User talk:Cullen328

I don't live on Cullen Ct, but I like the street sign

If you have any interest in editing Wikipedia by smartphone, I encourage you to read my essay, Smartphone editing. Thank you.

Welcome to my talk page I use the name Cullen328 on Wikipedia, but you can call me "Jim" because that's my real first name. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the old comments from July and August of 2009 that follow the "Contents" here, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome when I first started editing Wikipedia.

The importance of a friendly greeting

Hello and welcome to my talk page. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the comments that follow from July and August of 2009 readily visible, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome here on Wikipedia when I first started editing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:38, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Raihanchowdhury421 (talk) 09:42, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Please offer your thoughts

I would appreciate comments and suggestions on any contributions I make. I am learning.Cullen328 (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice work on Jules Eichorn. He's been needing an article for a while.   Will Beback  talk  06:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

If I may suggest, now that you've posted the Eichorn article the draft below might be deleted. It's your talk page to do with as you like, but it's a bit hard to edit around.

As for formatting and pictures, a good way to learn is to look around at other articles to see what you think looks best. It can be helpful to break up long blocks of text into subsections. Perhaps it'd be possible to split the biography into two or three eras. Other than that, the formatting is usually kept fairly plain. As for photos, it's easy to upload them: the trick is in finding photos with appropriate licensing. If you have any personal photos then those'd be fine. There are might be pictures of the peaks he did first ascents on in the Wikicommons. File:Cathedral Peak.png is a so-so pic of Eichorn Pinnacle.

As before, feel free to ask if you have any questions. There are several editors here who are mountaineers or just admirers of the Sierra, so you're in good company.   Will Beback  talk  21:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

PS: Many editors create "sandbox" pages for drafting articles. For example, User talk:Cullen328/Sandbox.   Will Beback  talk  00:17, 1 August 2009

Your climber biographies

Hey Jim, just wanted to say welcome and thanks for your contributions to the Sierra Nevada climbing history articles. You're filling a niche that's been missing here, I look forward to working with you. --Justin (talk) 11:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll second that. Nice work on Allen Steck and welcome to Wikipedia. I don't know who you are planning to write up next but if your taking requests I think Peter Croft (climber) could really use a page. If you ever have any questions please ask. Thanks again for your great additions.--OMCV (talk) 02:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Justin and OMCV. I am beginning work on Tom Frost and Glen Dawson. Comments on Norman Clyde would be welcomed. I will defintely read up on Peter Croft, OMCV. I am still "learning the ropes" in Wikipedia, to use a climbing analogy, and have all sorts of things in mind. My biggest challenge right now is getting permission to use images. My next biggest challenge is hiking to the top of Mt. Whitney with my wife in ten days - she's never been above 12,000 feet except for the train ride up Pikes Peak. As she's 56 and developing arthritis in her toes, it will be an accomplishment if she (and I) complete the Class 1 feat. Jim Heaphy (talk) 02:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Debra and I made it to the summit of Mt. Whitney at 2:20 PM on Friday, September 11. Jim Heaphy (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

2012 Archive (first six months)

Automatic Archive 1Automatic Archive 2Automatic Archive 3

Happy New Year

Happy New Year 2021 I hope your New Year holiday is enjoyable and the coming year is much better than the one we are leaving behind. Best wishes from Los Angeles.   // Timothy :: talk

working on a new page

hello jim, hope you are doing well. i am a beginner on wikipedia but i am auto correction user. i want to write an article on a ngo which is working very good in there respective field. a friend of mine wrote a article on that topic but it got deleted due to less third party source. can you suggest me something how to write an article which won't get deleted, also i have some credible third party source so i want to ask how can i mention them because they are external links. Devanshusharma569 (talk)devanshusharma569

Happy St. Patrick's Day

Happy St. Patrick's Day! I hope your St. Patrick's Day is enjoyable and safe. Hopefully next year there will be more festive celebrations. Best wishes from Los Angeles.   // Timothy :: talk

(personal attack removed)

(Personal attack removed)

Request of Help on "Just the Facts" Tone

Hi Jim,

I am very new to Wikipedia. I got your feedback on the draft article located under PhoCoHaNoi. Thanks so much for your comments. I would greatly appreciate if you would spare some valuable time to highlight those parts from the draft that I need to pay close attentions to regarding the aspect that you raised. I know it would be a long shot to ask if you would even consider providing specific examples by directly editing them on the draft.

Lastly, I still do not know on how to submit the revision for review. I do not see any obvious buttons or pull-down menus from the Sandbox setting that would be able to allow to submit the article for review.

Thank you so much.

PhoCoHaNoi

Hello, PhoCoHaNoi. I am not going to edit the draft myself, because I want this to be a learning exercise for you. Here are a few examples of unacceptable wording:

• "celebrating the 73-year history of outstanding men and women"

• "pioneering contributions"

• "sustained leadership and strategic vision"

• "Exceptional services to innovation ecosystem"

• "stimulating small business innovation, meeting the Air Force and DoD R&D needs, broadening participation in innovation and entrepreneurship, and boosting commercialization"

• " So, as Dr. Pham looked back now, he brought systems-theoretic science and control engineering principles, together with teamwork and interdisciplinary to bear fruition in solving warfighter engineering problems, various areas of specific focus for increased activities in space control autonomy and space domain awareness."

It is not the job of a Wikipedia editor (you) to praise a person. Every trace of this non-neutral language must be removed. A Wikipedia article should never say "Person A is great!" Instead, it should say "Reliable source C reports that Expert B says that Person A is great", along with a reference to Reliable source C.

As for how to submit your draft, I will explain that when the draft complies with the neutral point of view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

Sending Messages to Other Editors

Hi Jim. I will deeply appreciate anything that you can do to help. How can I find out about other editors and send them messages? I recently looked for an article about The Italian Coffee Company that I had read years ago. However, I could not find it. I believe that this article should be available. I am a new editor and I have a big learning curve ahead of me. Maybe you can post to my talk page. I am user Mojosa17. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Thoughts on this

Hey, Cullen. I see you're active at the moment, could you give me your thoughts please on Readisten? There appears to be a somewhat good-faith reason for them being here, wanting to develop text-to-speech recordings, but there's no indication that's directly in the interest of Wikipedia. I've engaged them on their talk page but illicited no response yet. I'm finding it a little hard to gauge the next move. Obviously WP:UAA came to mind but i don't think a block is immediately warranted, but as i said i'm not entirely sure. Zindor (talk)

Boushaki cosmological operator

Hello Cullen328.

This article relates to the research undertaken by Professor Mustapha Ishak Boushaki on the expansion of the universe, and it is listed in the scientific literature under the name Index of Inconsistency (IOI).

The professor's research team at the University of Texas at Dallas is working rigorously on this subject, which has captured the attention of astrophysicists and cosmologists.

If there are third parties or people who are bothered by the highlighting of these results that have been sponsored by NASA and other institutions, it is not acceptable to please and accept their request for deleted article which was noted as being of high importance for the development of scientific research in the United States and around the world.

Sincerely and warmly.--Authentise (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Authentise. Why do you think that "Boushaki cosmological operator" is the best title for this article? Cullen328 (talk) 16:31, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

This editor is a now globally blocked sockpuppet of an editor who focuses on promoting the Wikipedia profiles of all folks in the Algerian family Boushaki, everything they are connected to and other accomplished Algerians. Just a head's up if you see this very specific pattern in the future. It's interesting that an account identifying itself as Mustapha Ishak Boushaki, who is credited with this discovery, blanked the article and wanted it deleted.

From what I've seen from looking at their work, the sockpuppets are educated and seem to know Wikipedia well. It's just that WMF keeps blocking them soon after they show up for cross-wiki sockpuppetry.

Hope you are well, Jim! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Yes, that whole situation is quite strange. Speaking broadly, there are a lot of very intelligent people in the world with a screw or or two loose. In this case, although I am not a physicist, I suspect that the article seriously misrepresented the professor's work.

I am just fine with the exception of the usual aches and pains that come along with being 70 years old. I hope that you are doing well. Cullen328 (talk) 01:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Stacey Pickering

I know you are an active editor at WP:BLP. Could I get your opinion at Stacey Pickering? A few editors have been reverting a very negative incident which occurred recently, and has been added repeatedly to the article. It has only been covered by one media outlet, which described the incident as an "accusation". Please look at the edit history of the article. I also left a message at User talk:John.yossarian222222#Stacey Pickering. Should this be posted at WP:BLP, or is it pretty obvious one way or the other. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Magnolia677. I do not have strong feelings on this one either way. I notice that the Laurel Leader-Call is also running the story with a small amount of additional reporting. I recommend keeping an eye on the local news, and if either party issues a denial, that should of course be added. You are welcome to get other opinions at WP:BLPN. Cullen328 (talk) 16:56, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Magnolia677 (talk) 18:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

May I ask one more BLP question? How would I go about closing this discussion? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Magnolia677, since I participated in that discussion, I do not think that I should be giving advice about how to close it. Cullen328 (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

How could I request someone to close it? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Magnolia677, please see Wikipedia:Closure requests. Cullen328 (talk) 18:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Return of the DarkShineMan

Hi Cullen328, I hope you are well. I noticed you had previously banned DarkShineMan. I think he has resurfaced as Restless9, who appeared shortly after DarkShineMan was banned, his edits follow the same pattern and there is a slight focus on Greek football teams again. I would hazard a guess this is the same person so I thought I would drop you a quick note. Kind Regards Footballgy (talk) 15:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Footballgy. I have indefinitely blocked that obvious sockpuppet. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 15:47, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

excessive vandalism

excessive vandalism in List of most-streamed songs on Spotify Tirso Gutiérrez (talk) 22:59, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Tirso Gutiérrez. Please file a report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Cullen328 (talk) 23:20, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Question from SawonMirza (04:55, 20 June 2022)

Hello. How Can I write a article in Wikipedia? --SawonMirza (talk) 04:55, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SawonMirza. I recommend that you get some experience editing existing articles before writing a new article. It can be very difficult for a new editor to write an acceptable article. Please read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 16:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Your opinion

Hi, Cullen - since you spend time at The Teahouse, I was wondering what you thought about Template:Skip to top and bottom. I find it to be very useful, but others may not. I can't image what could possibly be considered inconvenient or annoying to the point that one would not make use of the template, especially on long discussion pages, such as my UTP or project talk pages that can, at times, be quite lengthy. Atsme 💬 📧 14:25, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Atsme. After all these years of editing, I was not familiar with that template. My first reaction is that the icons are very subtle. I certainly would not have any objection to anybody using it appropriately. Cullen328 (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

help desk question

I asked a question at the help desk twice before but I didn't get an answer either time. Can you help maybe? what should I do? [1] 67.21.154.193 (talk) 13:26, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. I answered at the Help desk. Cullen328 (talk) 15:28, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy summer/winter

		Sunshine!
		Hello Cullen328! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 22:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy first day of summer (or winter) wherever you live. Interstellarity (talk) 22:08, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Seeking opinion

Hi Cullen, hope you are well. I recall seeing you in discussions on related topics, so: Is the Noah Schnapp article going into to much detail on what kind of Jew he is? Also removed some categories, [2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Although I get your point, it seems that his Jewish identity is important to him and affects his acting career. He speaks clearly about that. So, I think it is OK. Cullen328 (talk) 16:41, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough and thanks. If you feel like it, you're welcome to comment on the include-name-of-parents edits/discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Draft review

I have submitted draft article having title draft:prithiraj rava Please do a review Baruah ranuj (talk) 04:35, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Baruah ranuj. I am not here to help you jump ahead of the AfC queue. I am willing though to make an unofficial comment about your draft. I guess that this is about Draft:Dimpu Baruah. Your draft includes links to unreliable sources and it fails to make the case that the topic is notable. Please read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 05:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

What are the websites which shows an article's notability? Are there any list ? Baruah ranuj (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Baruah ranuj, please consult Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Cullen328 (talk) 16:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration Notice

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Issues with the Operation of ANI and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Carter00000 (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Regarding activity on "Robb Elementary School shooting"

Hi Cullen, I'm not exactly sure if I understand your reasoning in regards to revision 1095171380 on Robb Elementary School shooting. I made the revert as I assumed the intention of the editor was to do what they did immediately after your edit, which was to remove all references to the perpetrator. However, even just for the lead sentence, I'm not sure why their name should have been removed. By my understanding, I would consider the fact that it had already been there as suitable consensus, hence why I am asking here. Apologies for the hassle. Closingbrackettalk 21:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Closingbracket, please discuss the matter on the article talk page. No hassle. Cullen328 (talk) 21:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022

Hello, I'm Le Marteau. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Harrison, Arkansas, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Le Marteau (talk) 01:53, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Le Marteau. You have things wrong. I removed some unreferenced trivia about a non-notable rapper. I do not need to "provide a source" when removing obvious junk. Cullen328 (talk) 01:56, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Misclick. My apologies. Le Marteau (talk) 01:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Le Marteau, thanks for the explanation. We all make mistakes. Cullen328 (talk) 02:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

overt disruption

Please clarify. dif's? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Deepfriedokra, JoJo Anthrax provided a list of diffs. Cullen328 (talk) 15:09, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Allegations of "Overt Disruption"

Given that you have recently made allegations on me causing "overt disruption" please take your concerns to an appropriate venue such as WP:ANI. Otherwise, please cease making such allegations. Carter00000 (talk) 10:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Carter00000, stay off my talk page unless you are required by policy to post here. Cullen328 (talk) 15:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

It must be said

From the young man in the twenty second row, permit me to write here that you deserve neither the bullshit or the fact that NO ONE hasn't already shown that editor the door. And by "showing that editor the door" I mean lift, walk, throw. Some of us here understand your value to the project, although we might not write it often enough. Permit me this advice: Oban is the finest kind of medicine. Here's to you. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 14:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

JoJo Anthrax, thank you very much. Cullen328 (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Arbitration request declined

The recent request for Arbitration to which you were listed as a party has been declined, as the Committee felt it was premature. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 15:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Some references for you.

Jim, I was surprised by your comment that "The notion that "The District" is the proper way to refer to this topic is so bizarre that it leaves me scratching my head in bewilderment."

I'm not commenting on the talk page for DC because one person there _is_ up to ad hominem attacks, replying to my request to resolve WP:DONTREVERT with "As long as you never change..." But I wanted to give you some sources, because you were not dismissive or angry, and so impress me as receptive to seeing some style guides in action.

Here's the first article I found in The Washington Post in the "The District" section. If you're in the USA, you know The Post and know that it's very well-recognized. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/24/dc-primary-vote-count/ Search the page for "Washington" and you won't find it anywhere in the article except in the name "Washington Post". you will find "D.C." about ten times.

Doing the same with the second article on the page right now, https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/23/dc-council-new-members-legislation/ , my word search counts 17 "D.C."s and zero "Washington"s outside of the name of the newspaper. We can keep going down the "The District" page and I assure you you're going to see the same treatment throughout.

I alluded to a style guide that explicitly required D.C.; it was the Washington City Paper. Here's the first link on the City Desk page right now: https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/555691/how-city-desk-reporters-found-their-niche/ and the only use of the W word in the main text is "Washington Monument" (named for George W, of course)

Here's https://dcist.com/ , and I invite you to just scroll the front page. Before it was driven to bankruptcy, DCist was part of the Gawker Network, one of the at-the-time largest online media networks around.

So, there are two nationally-recognized sources and one local paper that deem "D.C." to be the proper way to refer to the area and the W word never proper. [If you're specifically asking about the term 'The District' instead of D.C., you'll find a smattering of "The District"s in those page, probably for variety. [PS: I edited this parenthetical after posting.]]

I put all that here because I hope that was useful to you, and that you're now a little more familiar with the topic. It's not to argue the WP:DONTREVERT issue on the DC talk page, which I am conceding and no longer engaging with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B k (talk • contribs) 15:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Question from Gharps on Wikipedia:Help desk (06:42, 28 June 2022)

How do I change the spelling of my Great Great Great grandmother's surname, Mere Harpur (Pakinui) on the Wikipedia page it has been spelt Harper which is incorrect. --Gharps (talk) has:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Gharps. Wikipedia reports what reliable sources say. In this case, it looks to me like reliable sources disagree on her surname. Some sources say "Harper" and others say "Harpur". I suggest that you discuss the matter at Talk:Mere Harper. Cullen328 (talk) 06:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm new to this and not sure how I send on photo proof to you privately, my last name is also Harpur, I have register documents for my children through our iwi ngai tahu but dont want them on a public forum Gharps (talk) 07:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Gharps, Wikipedia uses published reliable sources, and government documents for great great great great grandchildren are of zero value for the surname of woman who died 98 years ago. The article says that she married William Harper in 1863, an Englishman and a former captain. Do you contest that? Cullen328 (talk) 07:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Gharps, what do you have to say about this source? Cullen328 (talk)

Yes I do contest it but I will need to get it corrected through the government files that have spelt it wrong first, then once that is sorted I will try again on Wikipedia. Thank you for your help. Gharps (talk) 07:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Again, Gharps, we do not use unpublished "government files" on Wikipedia. Was her husband's name "William Harper" or not? Cullen328 (talk) 07:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)6

No, it was Harpur Gharps (talk) 09:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Question from Johdæhfæyfup (00:30, 29 June 2022)

Hello i am frome india and i Will like to give People’s tech support Can i do that here? --Johdæhfæyfup (talk) 00:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Johdæhfæyfup. Any type of self-promotional activity is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. The answer is "no". Cullen328 (talk) 01:06, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

From EyesWhyde (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2022 (UTC) re. Death threats on Bob Avakian made by User:Makewaluigigreatagain

Jim,

I'm writing you because I strongly feel that further action is needed in response to death threats on Bob Avakian made on June 19th by User:Makewaluigigreatagain. These threats were made in three successive comments in the revisions on the View History page for the Bob Avakian article. Good on you for quickly taking action on these threats. But I think that you will agree, after reflecting on the issues involved here, that a 1 month block on User:Makewaluigigreatagain is in no way sufficient or commensurate with the seriousness and gravity of this act. There is no act more egregious on Wikipedia than using it as a platform to threaten someone's life. These threats are not just uncivil discourse, but are very dangerous (and illegal) acts with the potential for bringing serious harm. Posting death threats is a criminal act and Wikipedia should have absolutely zero tolerance for this. Clearly the maximum swift action is required to remedy the situation and prevent further threats. The User:Makewaluigigreatagain should be permanently blocked from editing, their account removed, and the three revisions on the History page for the Bob Avakian entry immediately deleted so as to remove the threats from Wikipedia. The three revisions were made on 00:07, 19 June 2022, 00:08, 19 June 2022, and 00:11, 19 June 2022 on the View History page for Bob Avakian. It is my understanding that as an Administrator you have the ability to take these important steps. I very much appreciate your attention to this matter.EyesWhyde (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, EyesWhyde. I have just revision deleted the two edit summaries that had objectionable content, including the implicit death threat. The actual edits to the encyclopedia consisted of changing Avakian's date of birth, so I left those visible for review. Most initial blocks are much shorter than one month, so that is a pretty significant sanction. This particular editor has been active on and off for about four years and appears to have been mostly productive until this incident. That is why I chose to give them a second chance with a very stern warning. I do not feel comfortable modifying the block ten days later without new misconduct. Please be assured that I will block them indefinitely without hesitation if they resume this type of misbehavior. There is no way to "remove" an account, since the past edits by blocked editors need to be attributed. Cullen328 (talk) 01:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Jim,

Thanks again for your rapid action in response to the death threats that were posted on the View History comments on the Bob Avakian entry. I also want to thank you for your very quick response to my note to you, for removing the threats from the View History comments, and for taking the time to explain the actions you took and are prepared to take should the user post any further threats. As I am sure you are aware, in today’s climate, these kinds of online threats can encourage assorted elements to engage in actual physical attacks. Your ongoing vigilance in monitoring this entry–which is a biographical entry of a living person that has been subject to repeated vandalism –is very much appreciated. EyesWhyde (talk) 22:15, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Jim,

After my reply above I saw that there had been another death threat. Thanks for your monitoring and swift deletion. It sounds like this could be the same person(User:Makewaluigigreatagain), but now posting anonymously since they were blocked. Is there any action that can be taken to stop this person (or someone else doing the same) from continuing these threats? EyesWhyde (talk) 22:50, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, EyesWhyde. The frequency of vandalism at this point, in my judgment, is not at the level that would require the article to be protected. I did revision delete the most recent bad edit. If the frequency of vandalism increases, I will definitely semi-protect the article. Feel free to contact me at any time. Cullen328 (talk) 23:18, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your action and continued attention to this! EyesWhyde (talk) 23:27, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Jim,

I'm writing about more vandalism on the Bob Avakian article. Earlier today an anonymous user (68.197.145.224) added the following to the first paragraph of the article: "Avakian has been accused of being a confidential informant, snitch, and stealing funds from activist fundraising groups." I have reverted this edit. I'm not sure why the vandalism bots etc. did not quickly revert this dangerous smear. This is ad hominem and libelous. And, as you may know, this kind of attack on a political leader can have serious consequences, including being part of and lead to actual physical attacks on them by assorted elements. Given the recent death threats and now this I am concerned that more such attempts may be coming. Do you think that semi-protection of the Bob Avakian article is warranted now?

To add to the picture, on July 8th there were 3 vandalism attempts on the article for the Revolutionary Communist Party which Bob Avakian is the leader of. Three times the same anonymous user wrote in the first sentence that the party is a "terrorist group" . These edits were quickly reverted by the user SunDawn and SunDawn warned the user that any further vandalism would result in the user being blocked. But I do think that this adds to a pattern of recent vandalism.

Again, my concern is that more vandalism could be in the offing and semi-protection of the Bob Avakian article should be an appropriate action. I appreciate your thoughts on this and your continued attention to this problem. EyesWhyde (talk) 00:53, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, EyesWhyde. I have semi-protected the article for one month. My practice is to double the protection if the disruption continues. So, next time it would be two months, then four months and so on. The antivandalism bots are pretty good at reverting obvious vandalism but this wording is a bit more complex. I am not familiar with the inner working of the bots but to me the word "snitch" ought to be an indicator. Maybe it is rarely used in Wikipedia vandalism. Cullen328 (talk) 01:25, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Jim,

Thanks very much for acting quickly on this! And thanks for your explanation of your semi-protection practices. I appreciate the work you are doing very much. EyesWhyde (talk) 01:34, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

In re Galowiki21

The article as written had a massive amount of information in it that could be used to locate her, and so I sent it to Oversight to be suppressed; another admin (Writ Keeper) deleted it afterwards to make sure it wasn't publicly-viewable while waiting for a responce from Oversight. They were told these precise issues via IRC and seemed genuinely bewildered as to why we would consider the amount of information in the article unacceptable, while at the same time refusing to listen to myself or Dragonfly67 when we explained that even barring the child-protection concerns, the sourcing was not going to be enough for us to have an article on them. They would come back on IRC after their article was deleted (but before the Teahouse post) to verbally abuse us for deleting their article.

I should note that Galowiki has some sort of connexion to the subject (they've claimed they're their teacher; I believe a parent or relative is far more likely), and so I regard this as a high conflict-of-interest situation due to the extreme amount of WP:IDHT here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 03:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

And as an addendum, WP:Teahouse#Redirecting has all the sources Galowiki has proffered thus far (both on-wiki and on IRC). While I did not personally do any source searches, Dragonfly did, and indicated what they found was not sufficient. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 04:01, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano, in no way do I contest the deletion as I made clear at the Teahouse, and which I agree was necessary and proper. What I did ask you to clarify was your specific claim of doxxing since this person's identity is easily available online, and your thinking that dropping the f-bomb at the Teahouse was a good idea, especially in a thread that might be read by a 10 year old child. So, please address those two specific points, instead of matters where I did not disagree with you. Cullen328 (talk) 04:27, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Is all the information that was in the article available in one source, or a handful of other sources with maybe one data point apiece? Given Wikipedia's outsized search engine treatment, my concern is that having one Wikipedia article for all this information absent both an excellent reason to include it and ironclad sourcing for it is functionally tantamount to doxxing, as it makes the information much easier to find. And again, we're dealing with someone connected to the subject, not the subject themselves, and someone who has refused to listen to softer responces. We should not be expected to continue to lob softballs to people who clearly aren't otherwise listening. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 04:41, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

The draft contained considerably more information about the child than could reasonably be found online (I will not be providing examples, for obvious reasons). Although it's true that "doxxing" tends to be malicious, and this was apparently done with the best of intentions, it was still highly inappropriate. DS (talk) 04:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano, I notice that you still refuse to respond to my inquiry about your use of the f-bomb at the Teahouse, especially in a thread that may well be read by a 10 year old child. Duly noted. "Functionally tantamount to doxxing" is baloney in this case, since the information is widely available online, in connection with obvious promotion of this child performer's career. Doxxing, after all, is defined as is the act of publicly revealing previously private personal information about an individual or organization. Again, I support the removal of this content from the encyclopedia, so repeatedly saying that Wikipedia should not host it is a red herring. I am asking you two specific very narrowly tailored questions, and so far, you have addressed neither head on. Cullen328 (talk) 04:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Then no explanation I give is ever going to satisfy you. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:03, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

To the contrary, Jéské Couriano. An explanation that directly addresses rather than evades my questions will satisfy me. Increasingly, though, it seems clear that you are determined to evade my very simple questions. You haven't even alluded to or hinted at a response to my f-bomb question. On the other question, it seems to me that you are trying to redefine "doxxing" to a meaning which is not used in reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 05:15, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Cullen, you didn't read the content. I did. Trust me, it was much, much more than was available within public sources. Jeske's use of the term "Doxxing" may have been non-optimal, but there's a time for prescriptivism and there's a time for descriptivism. The meaning was clear.

I would also say that your concern about profanity is close to tone policing. We make it clear that Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of children (or, at least, not in the sense you mean - this whole mess is because of the other interpretation). DS (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. At the most, it's an infraction of WP:CIVIL, but there are times when profanity is appropriate for emphasis, and we are not censored for anyone's benefit. Given the background Jéské Couriano described, I don't see the use of a single profane word as being out of line. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:15, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

DragonflySixtyseven, (and Anachronist), we are all in agreement that the content should have been removed, so that is not the point. The actual point is decorum at the Teahouse. There are specific expectations of people who answer questions at the Teahouse, among them that people are expected to be welcoming, friendly, polite and patient. I do not believe that the phrasing of Jéské Couriano's answer met those expectations. Cullen328 (talk) 19:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Chris Keates wiki edit by @ Warofdreams

@cullen I added reference included the link to the Certification Office decision and these were removed by @Warofdreams Whistling Dragonslayer (talk) 21:39, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Whistling Dragonslayer, you have not included any inline references. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 (talk) 21:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Breach of Statute decision: Parlour v NASUWT (PDF format) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

there is the reference Whistling Dragonslayer (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

it is now included, and I would like to include the relevant newspaper links to TES and Schoolsweek also. Whistling Dragonslayer (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Whistling Dragonslayer, your attempt at an inline reference was not successful. It lacks opening and closing reference tags. You do not add reference numbers manually. The software does it for you when you format a reference properly. Bare URLs are not good practice. You need to add bibliographic information on the source. Cullen328 (talk) 22:35, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I'm sorry for the inconvenience i have made. Please take this. Thank you. Ryj430 (talk) 06:05, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Ryj430, the barnstar is nice, but it does not affect in any way my notice that you must comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines,. Cullen328 (talk) 06:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I'm new to wikipedia and i appreciate this comment. I will read it. Thank you. Ryj430 (talk) 13:07, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

A Quick Favor

Hey Cullen! Can you do me a favor and please block User:Time2023? They keep on inserting fake information about fighting games, video game companies, etc. See their contribs. Thank you! ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 23:45, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, JCW555. There is no discussion and no warnings on their talk page. Please warn them first, and let me know if they persist. Cullen328 (talk) 23:51, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Have warned, will let you know if they persist. Thank you! ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 23:55, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Hey Cullen, they've just done it again. ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 17:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

JCW555, I am not familiar with that game, so it is not clear to me that this is vandalism. Cullen328 (talk) 18:08, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

There is no hidden boss with that name in The King of Fighters XIII at all. ♠JCW555 (talk)♠ 18:17, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

That may well be true, JCW555, but I can't block an editor for vandalism unless I know myself that it is vandalism. I can't take someone else's word for it. Cullen328 (talk) 18:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Reversion

Hey, thanks for the reversion of my edit. My internet has been playing up, and somehow that lead to me deleting a chunk of information without realising when making a simple edit... So sorry for that, and thanks again, Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 21:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

No problem, Joe Vitale 5. Mistakes happen. Cullen328 (talk) 21:22, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Happy July 4th!

Colman2000 (talk) is wishing you a Happy 4th of July! On this day, we recognize our independence from Great Britain with the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, which ultimately paved the way to our freedom. Celebrate this day in many different ways, such as hosting a barbecue, watching baseball games, or even attending a fireworks show! Happy Independence Day, fellow American!  
 

Share this message by adding {{subst:Independence Day}} to a fellow American's talk page.

4 (talk) 05:08, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Colman2000. I am the kind of American guy who unapologetically flies the red, white and blue, even though I am deeply concerned about the future of American democratic self governance. In my opion, it is a mistake for those Amerericans who oppose authoritarianism to cede the American flag to the Ultra MAGA cult. That's just my personal opinionCullen328 (talk) 06:17, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome, sir. Have a great 4th of July from another unapologetic American. Colman2000 (talk) 13:24, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Draft:Ancient Jaws

Hello Cullen328. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Draft:Ancient Jaws, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article is not in the userspace. Thank you. BangJan1999 21:09, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

You are correct, BangJan1999. I tagged it as G11 instead. Cullen328 (talk) 21:24, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Sock

Thanks for blocking Eunavformedia 2021. However, looking at the page history of Operation Atalanta, it looks like this is actually a sock of the more prolific account Eunavformedia. It's stale now but I wonder if it's worth blocking anyway. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:09, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Drm310. I blocked that account as well. Cullen328 (talk) 21:24, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Alida Goubitz

Hello, Cullen328,

Just a head's up, when you restore a draft or user page that has been deleted due to CSD G13 criteria, you need to make an edit to the page or it becomes immediately eligible for CSD G13 again. I don't know if this tip is written anywhere on a policy page but it's something you learn when you patrol WP:REFUND, where you are always restoring expiring drafts. Thanks and I hope you are having a pleasant summer! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, Liz. I was not aware of that. I rarely respond to requests on that particular noticeboard and have a lot to learn there. Yes, I can now see that a bot would tag the restored version unless an edit has been made. Thanks again. Cullen328 (talk) 03:16, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Otto von Bismarck on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

User

Hello! I noticed you were applying soft blocks to usernames with obvious implied shared use. I left a message on this users talk page, and didn't send it to UAA because sometimes when I do, there's another admin who turns it away based on whether their edits are promotional or not. In this case, you'll see the username and the article they edited on clearly shows implied shared use. If I am interpreting anything wrong, let me know, but I figured I would reach out. Thank you!! SPF121188 ^{(talk this way) (contribs)} 18:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Spf121188. I do not consider that username to indicate shared use based on the single edit to date. It could just be an individual who is interested in athletics at that college. Cullen328 (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Understood, I just wanted to inquire. I'll keep this in mind moving forward. Thank you! SPF121188 ^{(talk this way) (contribs)} 18:56, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Apparent block evasion

At The Posies and Ken Stringfellow. Cheers, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:3AA4 (talk) 21:23, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I am busy with various things off Wikipedia right now. Please file a report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. Cullen328 (talk) 22:14, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Administrator changes

AA • Gwalla • Ioeth • Laurascudder • Moriori (deceased) • Nat • Rfl

Drilnoth → AFigureOfBlue

Bureaucrat changes

Lee Vilenski

Interface administrator changes

Nihiltres

Technical news

• user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case regarding conduct in deletion-related editing has been opened.

Miscellaneous

• The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Can I reply?

No. I was interpreting the username policy. It's your call, I just brought it to light. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Admin is being rude and personal

Greetings! I need your advice on a following issue. One of the admins is being rude to me personally about our discussion on cultural appropriation of Russian Empire of Ukrainian art. Unfortunately, he or she decided not to discuss the issue, rather attack me personally. I am new to Wikipedia and don't know how to deal with that issue. Could you please advise me?

Thank you! Elmo1111 (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Elmo1111. I have no idea how you found your way to my talk page on your fourth edit to Wikipedia, but whatever. Your first edit was to ascribe a Ukrainian identity to a 19th century artist of Armenian ancestry who was born in Crimea in the Russian Empire. As I am sure you know, Crimea was part of the Russian Empire from 1783 to 1917, and had no significant Ukrainian identity at that time. Accordingly, it is not appropriate in any way to describe this artist who died 122 years ago as "Ukrainian" unless multiple reliable sources explicitly call him Ukrainian and explain why. Do you have any such reliable sources to offer?

Now, on to your gripe with Ymblanter. You take exception to his use of the term "trash talking". I might instead have used terms like "soapboxing" and "POV pushing". It is simply not encyclopedic to insert allusions to 21st century geopolitical conflicts into the biography of a 19th century artist. You asked Ymblanter I can't help but think that you must be non-objective in this matter. Are you Russian by any chance? Please read Assume good faith and conduct yourself accordingly going forward.

As for your intrusive question about Ymblanter's citizenship, please be aware that every editor has an absolute right to anonymity or to reveal or conceal whatever personal information that they wish. It is considered very rude and utterly inappropriate to interrogate any editor about their citizenship, race, ethnicity, religion, personal ideology, formal education, gender identity or anything similar. I choose to disclose a lot of personal information on my userpage but many editors do not, and that is their free choice. In this particular case, it is clear that Ymblanter speaks Russian and is knowledgeable about Russia. He says on his userpage that he is a Dutch citizen living in the Netherlands. In real life, I am a theoretical physicist specializing in condensed matter physics and quantum nanoscience. That is all the personal information that you are entitled to know. I happen to know that his statements are accurate. Cullen328 (talk) 02:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

The Red Paintings

Unidentified ISPs and/or single-purpose accounts are again disrupting this article. They are deleting content similar to that deleted during/after the article's two AfDs back in March 2022. Could you have a look?

Hello, Shaidar cuebiyar. I have semi-protected that article for six months. Thanks for the report. Cullen328 (talk) 21:45, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response: much appreciated.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Lock on Red paintings wiki page

Hello, I am wondering why you locked a page I am trying to add unbiased revisions on? It looked like the one editor was adding personal bias information and not credible sources. I was making a case that all the bands Publishing stated MCSWEENEY as writer not “Barrtt” even tho “shadier” claimed that was not the case. I tried to discuss in TALK but he refused to listen. How does that Warrant a 6 month page lock? 46.135.7.225 (talk) 23:29, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

This article has long been subject to disruptive editing. You removed well referenced content with a vague edit summary, which is part of the ongoing pattern of disruption. You are free to make formal edit requests at Talk:The Red Paintings. You can also ask for the protection to be lifted at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection in the section "Current requests for reduction in protection level". Cullen328 (talk) 23:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Also, your comment above is rambling and borderline incoherent. You have made no edits to the article talk page with this IP address. Cullen328 (talk) 23:59, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Uaa

Maybe this will give you some insight as to your queries on the report I posted. Hope this clears things up. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) 01:07, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, FlightTime. I fail to see how my comments about User:SouthernCaliforniaExploration have any connection to the block of User: Cape Marine Engineering, an account that states they are located in South Africa. As a Californian, I can attest that California is a very, very long way from South Africa. Can you please clarify? Cullen328 (talk) 01:28, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad, wrong block. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

It's all good, FlightTime. Cullen328 (talk) 02:34, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:HD § add photo to my page

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:HD § add photo to my page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:31, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jim. Just a courtesy notification about this since you actually added the file in question to William Benton (writer) the writer. FWIW, I did tag the file with c:Template:npd to give the uploader a chance to verify it's licensing, but another Commons user subsequently tagged it as a copyvio and copyvios can be deleted asap. So, if the image is gone by time you see this post, then that probably explains why. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:36, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

No problem, Marchjuly. Thanks for the heads up. Cullen328 (talk) 23:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Blocked galtgroup

Why am I blocked? It said something about being a group I’m not a group it’s just a name there is no group there’s no reason to block me just because of the word group you didn’t even check on anything and I have no idea how to get to you to tell you this so I’m putting it here there’s no instructions in how to talk to you. 2600:1702:32A0:9230:4EC:A531:26BA:B6D2 (talk) 06:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Follow the instructions at User talk:Galtgroup. Cullen328 (talk) 15:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for your good work! Andrevan@ 07:11, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Credible editing

I am Tim Wilson (Australian politician). I feel the page about me relies too heavily on columns, op-eds, primary sources and other weak sources to add erroneous or bias information. A lot of the page was written by Playlet, who was recently blocked again as a prior sockpuppet user and was involved in a political opponent's campaign. I am not allowed to explain the details, due to the rules against "outing".

I have complained about the page about me a few times, however I have no way of knowing which editors that respond are impartial, or which may be another Playlet account or members of his political advocacy group. Sometimes editor(s) with similar interests as Playlet respond within hours. I was hoping you might be willing to review the page with BLP in mind, because I know with confidence that you are a random, impartial editor with no affiliation to Playlet, his advocacy group, or Australian politics in general, so I can trust whatever feedback you give.

Thank you for your time and considering my request. Stay well. TimWilsonMP (talk) 00:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TimWilsonMP. I am sorry about your recent election loss. I have worked as a volunteer in many election campaigns over the years, and once worked as a (poorly) paid campaign manager for an insurgent mayoral candidate who did much better than local pundits predicted, but still lost. So it goes.

Although I know relatively little about Australian politics, I have a sense of the general contours and am aware that the Labor Party now has a narrow majority government. As for your campaign, I was already aware of some of the Wikipedia controversy about someone editing inappropriately in support of your opponent. I deeply dislike shenanigans (is that Australian English?) like that on Wikipedia concerning election campaigns, and it is to your credit that you are editing under your own name, disclosing your conflict of interest. Having a COI does not disqualify you from editing, although you need to tread carefully. I recommend that you refrain from editing your biography directly, except for reverting overt and obvious vandalism that any reasonable person would agree was vandalism.

As for your request for assistance, my activities here on Wikipedia fall into three "buckets" if you will. I am a content editor, I am an administrator and I am someone who offers guidance and advice to less experienced editors at places like the Help desk, the Teahouse and here on my talk page. Bucket 1 conflicts with bucket 2 at the article level. In other words, if I immerse myself with the content, adding certain things and deleting certain things and criticizing certain specific things about the content, then I am involved and cannot act as an administrator. So, since I have relatively little understanding of the nuances of Australian politics, but without bragging too much, pretty deep knowledge of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and behavioral and cultural norms, I think that it would be best for me to refrain from editing the article content. If it became necessary, I could then use my tools as an administrator. Those include blocking disruptive editors and protecting articles. The third bucket I can use at any time, as long as I give neutral and accurate advice about how Wikipedia works behind the scenes.

Your Wikipedia biography shows signs of what is often called civil POV pushing. Articles are supposed to be neutrally written but skilled biased editors can over time, gradually skew an article to reflect the subject in an overly negative (or overly positive) light. I see that especially in how your article discusses your political positions. A tactic called cherrypicking is not appropriate. I will say right now that, based on what is in the article currently, there seems to be an element of that in your biography. The list of political positions seems to be skewed towards a selection of "hot button" issues, subtly framed to make you look bad. Your stances on less divisive issues that maybe were more broadly popular with your electorate do not seem to be included. I do not know for sure and that comment is based on a hunch. I agree with some of your positions and disagree with others, but obviously I am not an Australian and have not studied these things in depth. I say that only to make it clear that I will not act as your political advocate. My goal, is as always to improve the encyclopedia and prevent unnecessary and inappropriate damage to the reputations of living people.

Ironically, and I hope that this does not hurt your feelings, but you may have an easier time of things in dealing with your Wikipedia biography at this time, because you lost the election. In other words, editors who were motivated to skew your biography because they wanted to see you defeated may be less motivated because you lost and their work is done. I hope that does not sound overly cynical.

So, how should you proceed? If you have not already done so, please carefully read Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. If there are any overt falsehoods or misrepresentations mow in the article, please identify them to me and I will give you very specific advice. Please also read about Edit requests, which is a procedure that has the advantage of drawing experienced uninvolved editors into the discussion. Edit requests should not be sweeping and broad. Instead, they should focus on a discrete chunk of well-referenced content change, since that will be easier for an uninvolved editor to evaluate. A long series of successful Edit requests can reshape a problematic article into a more neutral article. Keep neutrality in mind. If experienced editors perceive that you are trying to transform your biography into a promotional puff piece, they will not cooperate with you. The ultimate technique for dealing with an intractable dispute is the Request for comment process, which also draws in uninvolved, neutral editors. That requires a very carefully formulated request, accompanied by solid evidence.

It is late dinner time here in California where I live, so I need to cook for my wife and I. I could have written far more, but I will say that I am willing to discuss this article with you on an ongoing basis. I hope that what I have written is useful to you. Cullen328 (talk) 03:41, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Need help editing a template...

Hello Mr. Cullen,

I'm a relatively new user on Wikipedia & am trying to bring my contribution to a few articles here and there... unfortunately, this is where I got stuck recently.

I tried editing the Template:Infobox economy source, in order to add a new field: "Population at risk of poverty". I feel this is an important addition, bc I have seen important publications/institutions focus on the 'at risk' population, not just the one that is already below the poverty line... however, I was unsuccessful.

In order to try out this change, I added at the end of the label list (in the source code):

"label53 = {{longitem|Population at risk of poverty}}"

"data53 = {{{risk of poverty|}}}"

(Ofc, I would like to place it much higher up in the code, right under "Population under poverty line" -- so: label19=.... data19=... -- but this was just for test.)

Unfortunately nothing happened, the infobox fields didn't change after publishing. The page says it is semi-protected, so only 'autoconfirmed users can edit it' -- but I believe I am one of those, since I was logged in, over 4 days old + had more than 10 edits performed at the time...

Perhaps you can help me to figure this out,

Thank you!

Dhyana b (talk) 13:02, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dhyana b. In order to edit a template, your must have the Template editor user right, which is only granted to very experienced and trusted editors. I have been an editor for 13 years and have never once edited a template. An error could adversely affect thousands of articles. I suggest that you propose your change on the talk page for the template. Cullen328 (talk) 14:33, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Message on my talk page

A) was already warned, don't need to redundancy or admins ganging up for a favored user ; b) LittleJerry used just as bad as profanity and even worse personal attacks, yet no addressing the issue with him ; c) also does nothing to address the real issue at hand - out of control users on Wikipedia removing edits because they don't like them and ignoring other third party users when they are asked about the removal. But by all means admins - please continue to gang up on me over it, really nice work. (Jakobees (talk) 03:57, 19 July 2022 (UTC))