Jump to content

User talk:Seraphimblade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hhbowie (talk | contribs) at 16:27, 20 March 2023 (→‎Notenik:draft: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive
Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

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 are here to discuss edits made to an article, please use the article talk page, not this talk page, to discuss them. If I made the edit and the question is specifically directed at me, you are welcome to ping me.
  • 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.
  • 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.

Charlie Morgan (entrepreneur)

@Seraphimblade:, Would you please be able to draftifty my page you deleted, Charlie Morgan (entrepreneur) so I can improve it? Based on the deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlie Morgan (entrepreneur), there was clearly no consensus that the article should be deleted, especially if you look et the end of the "discussion". If you look at the end of the discussion, you will see that another editor besides myself debunked a pro-deletion editor's claims, to which the pro-deletion editor merely responded with "yawn".

On top of that, the last thing on the discussion was my statement that, "All the pro-deletion editors' main arguments are: Charlie Morgan is rich only because of his father (his father has not died yet), he is still a "nudnik" (one editor's actual words), and that his company is only known by 9+ people (one editors said "number of people who have heard of it into double figures") all of which they have supplied no actual evidence to back up. As evidence against the latter "argument", Au Vodka has 313000+ followers on Instagram alone. For comparison, of all the vodka brands that have a Wikipedia page, the one with by far the most followers is Crystal Head Vodka, which has 60k, less than 1/5 of the amount Au Vodka has. On top of that, there are many sources about the company (see [1] and [2] as an example, among many more sources online). He also has sufficient coverage from reliable secondary sources (see [3], which goes into his background, [4], [5], and [6], among the other sources in the article and more sources online".

Literally the only thing TheLongTone said in response to my statement was that Charlie Morgan was "clearly a nudnik", which he said on my talk page here. I find it very frustrating that my article I worked so hard on has been deleted completely based on assumptions without concrete evidence from editors who insult others. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 23:57, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Das osmnezz, it depends what you're trying to do. If you want to copy it somewhere else, or to improve it in order to perhaps consult with some of the editors who argued to delete it and see if your improvements sway them, I would do that. If you intend to unilaterally return it to mainspace in contravention of the AfD result, then I won't do that. Regarding the arguments, certainly "yawn" was not an argument worth any consideration at all, but it was hardly the only one for deletion, and many of the "keep" arguments were tepid at best. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seraphimblade:, What do you mean by "copy it somewhere else"? Also, regarding the arguments, my point was that the delete arguments cited no evidence for their poor deletion claims (Charlie Morgan is rich only because of his father, he is still a "nudnik", and that his company is only known by 9+ people), while at least a few of the keep argument provided cited evidence of his notability (see my previous statement). On top of that, even if that were not the case, there was definitely no consensus to delete. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there was. That aside, I have already told you what I would and wouldn't do, and you didn't clarify what your intentions were. Once you do, we'll go on from there. Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seraphimblade:, My intention is to take a lot of time to improve the article in draftspace before moving it back into main space after a significant period of time after possibly consulting other editors. That aside, I don't understand why you couldn't have closed the discussion as no consensus or relisted it, since I dont understand how 1 more delete vote than keep vote (6 delete 5 keep) with the last two comments by two different users objecting to deletion could be seen as consensus to delete. For comparison, deletion discussions I have participated in with even as many as 2x as many keep votes as delete votes (e.g. 5 keep 2 delete) have all been relisted due to "no consensus". Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 05:38, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to ping me on my own talk page; people get a notice whenever their talk page is edited automatically. That said, AfD is a discussion, not a vote. When I close an AfD, I'm reading the discussion, not just counting hands. In this case, many of the "keep" arguments were very tepid and ambivalent, while those who argued to delete were generally substantially more certain in their position. I'll set it to draft at Draft:Charlie Morgan (entrepreneur). Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:a Pot for Pot

@Seraphimblade: Hey SeraphimBlade, I'm sorry as I'm a new editor, but I was paid for that article and honestly meant to signal that I was in fact paid. I think you guys flagged me while the article was still a draft? I apologize for the confusion. Regardless, the article is neutral in tone and has some decent sources, but I'd be happy to delete some if it's possible to even have a page called 'a Pot for Pot'. Really, I'd be happy to make the article only about how they are empowering individual cannabis users by providing growing advice and kits. Let me know. Thanks so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kennedyjacob94 (talk • contribs)

Kennedyjacob94, I note that while you state that you intend to disclose editing for pay, you still do not have the mandatory disclosure on your user page. You will need to do that before we proceed any further, or before you edit any further at all. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seraphimblade: I have posted that disclosure to my user page! Hoping we can work this out. Thank you!
Jacob Kennedyjacob94 (talk) 18:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As above, you do not need to ping me on my own talk page; I will automatically get a notice any time this page is edited. That aside, I'll first make sure you're aware of the conflict of interest guidelines—not a bad idea to read them, but chiefly, don't directly create or edit any article in mainspace where you have a COI; instead request review by someone who doesn't. In the case of a new article, that's via the draft and articles for creation process. With that aside, promotional material is not permitted on Wikipedia. There was needless use of puff adjectives (e.g., "innovative"), editorializing (responded to the high-pressure government regulations in places like Canada and California that favor larger, well-funded businesses over smaller, mid-level growers), and flat-out source misrepresentation (this source, [7], is used to source the statement The learning curve on growing marijuana has been addressed by aPotforPot's guides on how to grow cannabis, as well as their 'pen pal' model of ongoing support for customers as they go through the process of growing marijuana at home., but does not contain the words "pen pal", so the quotation is falsified, not to mention it doesn't really confirm the rest of that either, and it's quite puffy. I will warn you right now that misrepresenting a source is a big deal, and that had better never happen again.) So, if you try again, please make sure there's nothing like that. I'm also unclear on the notability of the subject, but that can always be addressed down the line. I would say probably the Chicago Tribune piece would be one potential source toward that, but the Los Angeles Times article is just a passing mention in an article about something else, and the rest of the sources don't look all that great (certainly, something like "Wikileaf" would not be appropriate for pretty much any purpose). Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:26, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HI Seraphim, I have indeed read those COI guidelines but was admittedly confused by the fact that there can still be paid editors, assuming that as long as we disclose ourselves, and follow the guidelines of significance and notability than it is okay. Essentially, if the company is notable enough, then it's fine as long as we have a neutral tone. I've logged your advice and will make sincere efforts to make it less praising.
Regardless, I just want to make the wikipedia page based on two sources really. The LA Times article, and the Herb.co article. The Herb.co article centers around the importance of autonomous home-growing and how it empowers people to have control over what they consume. This is what I connect a Pot for Pot to in the sense of cultural significance since they are mentioned in the article and their service directly coincides with this concept. The LA Times article mentions how growing at home can save money by avoiding the large tax, and as well is justified by 'sticking a green thumb in Johnny Law's eye after years of cannabis prohibition.'
If I write the article and make it very short, with only those two sources, will that be okay?
this time, based on what you've said, I'll just send it to another user to review. Are they then the ones who have to post it?
thanks for all your help! Kennedyjacob94 (talk) 01:07, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can create a draft, and have AfC review it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:44, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 55

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023

  • New bundle partners:
    • Newspapers.com
    • Fold3
  • 1Lib1Ref January report
  • Spotlight: EDS SmartText Searching

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Page Mobile Tyre Shop

Hi mate,

Hope you're well. Am writing to this re a G11 notice placed on the page.

I have tried to make the content as generic and non-promotional as possible, can I please get some feedback as to which sections that might violate the guidelines? Happy to remove any internal links and cut down more on information to make it more generic, or any suggestions/feedback you might have.

Let me know what the best move is in terms of next steps. Thank you so much for your time. KidderCart (talk) 09:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KidderCart, it appears that you are engaging in editing for pay, which would include being asked or expected to edit Wikipedia as a duty of employment or internship. However, you have not made the mandatory paid editing disclosures. You will need to do that before we proceed, or before you make any more edits at all. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Seraphimblade,
Thanks for the information and guide. I'm currently trying to reupload the page again, this time disclosing any information as per the guidelines. Will probably put it in draft and let you/anyone else review to see if it meets guidelines based on my understanding (or best I can). Hopefully it does not violate any guidelines, but do let me know and feel free to recommended changes as necessary! :) KidderCart (talk) 06:25, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
KidderCart, please be aware that as a paid editor, you must follow the conflict of interest guidelines. So, you are required to create the article as a draft, and request review from articles for creation, not like you did last time trying to repeatedly move it to mainspace yourself. This is not optional. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban appeal

I have made more than 500 edits since topic banned by you in September 2022.[8] Earlier you had thought that I should be given another chance but more admin/s intervened and I got topic banned. Nevertheless, I have been careful and haven't repeated any of the mistakes that got me topic banned. Can you lift the topic ban now? I will continue editing productively once the topic ban has been lifted. Thanks in advance Pranesh Ravikumar (talk) 10:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pranesh Ravikumar, I generally find "thanks in advance" to reflect an arrogant, entitled attitude that someone is going to do what you are asking. So, given that, I am not going to do what you are asking. Seraphimblade Talk to me 12:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notenik:draft

Could you please undo the deletion of the draft page for Notenik? This was tagged for speedy deletion, and then deleted before I had a chance to respond. Subsequent dialogue with the editor who tagged it for speedy deletion has made it clear that s/he was operating under some misapprehensions: namely, that I was trying to conceal my role as author of Notenik (which had been clearly disclosed much earlier, and which I had never tried to hide); and secondly, that I was being paid to author the article, or was somehow hoping to promote the app for my own financial gain. The truth is that the app is free and open-source, and I develop the app for fun, and as a way to give back to the community. This whole latest series of objections seems to be based on some of the text sounding too much like advertising. I was making an honest attempt to objectively summarize some of the positive comments that have been made by cited, neutral third parties about the app, but I can certainly reword into more neutral language and resubmit. And if you could post something on my talk page to inform me of your actions, that would be much appreciated. Thanks for your consideration. Hhbowie (talk) 16:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Seraphimblade&oldid=1145720656"