Jump to content

User talk:Guillaume2303/Archive 15

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Guillaume2303

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Guillaume2303 (talk | contribs) at 08:56, 29 November 2012 (noindex). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Archive 10 ← Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert S. Coleman

Guillaume, when you have a moment, would you mind looking at this AfD? Oh, this reminds me: did I get back to you on the topic of ice cream? If not, forgive me. What I meant to tell you was that it looks fine to me, and there is no need to worry about tone and invalshoek. Drmies (talk) 19:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

  • I actually am looking for good reasons to keep myself... I got a bit irritated this afternoon, wading through these edits while preparing an ANI post, not one of my more favorite things. So I got irritated with this one, too, and took it to AfD. I don't think the few citations that you found contribute to notability, but the 1.5 page discussion probably will do. I'm watching a movie right now, I'll have a look at it later and if it is sufficient, I'll withdraw the nom. Or it may have to wait till tomorrow, as I may get some more red wine (which I buy from a winery 100 m from my house) because my wife is visiting friends in Paris, the cats are asleep, and there's nothing else to do (Oh, wait, yes, there is, a good book... Rule 34; you may remember -or perhaps I didn't tell you yet- that I'm a science fiction fan - 36 m of books last time I measured, one third of the way to the winery... No Kindle for me... :-) --Guillaume2303 (talk) 20:12, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oh yes, Euroflux. That reminds me I meant to stop at ANI to leave some comments. Later--I'm watching Silver and Gold, a Neil Young video, trying to play along. A la votre, Drmies (talk) 21:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Civility Barnstar
Awarded for being a really nice and generous editor, besides a kick-ass critic. Drmies (talk) 20:27, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
-) Thanks! --Guillaume2303 (talk) 20:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Do you ever have this--you're sitting at home with a sick kid playing a Bob Dylan album you should have been listening to 30 years ago? Fall greetings from Alabama, Drmies (talk) 14:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Not really. Remember years ago people used to talk about "dinkies" (double income, no kids), well, we're sinkies (single income, no kids). We do have two cats, though... :-) Apart from that little detail, I understand the feeling... --Guillaume2303 (talk) 22:22, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Inventiones

Could you please let me finish with the references?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lojano (talk • contribs) 08:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Society for Occupational Health Psychology

Thank you for all your work on the footnotes on SOHP web site. I was busy updating the URLs, which changed since I first placed them on the Wikipedia entry. I had wanted to place each link to the external web site at the end of the footnote rather than in the middle of the footnote. That was why I edited them the way I did. I am not as familiar as you with the format you used. Would it be possible for you to arrange the footnotes you edited such that the link would be at the end of the footnote rather than in the middle of the citation? Thanks. Iss246 (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

  • If you use the template, the whole title of an article will be linked, not just a little number at the end of the line. This is clearer and more convenient for readers. This is, indeed, the recommended way to format references (see WP:CITE). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I preferred to have the entire citation precede the link to the paper. But I will leave the page as it is.Iss246 (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

My last edition

Hello Guillaume2303,

I just saw the changes you made to my recent edition to the Latindex article, I will review your comments and recommended sections and wil back to you. I made this last edition thinking that what was required to solve the previous comments to the article was more information and linking to all the participating institutions.

With respect to the comment that the article is written as an advertisement I do not agree because this is a nonprofit academic system and the only intention in having a Wikipedia article is to provide information to potential users and give all the details we consider relevant.

On the other issue about the close connection of one of the contributors I would say that in my opinion is better to have an informed and authorized person within the institution writing the article with the only intention of informing in a clear way not seeking to self promoting in any way.

I appreciate your work and your comments and hope to improve the article in a way that satisfies Wikipedia standards. Any other comment or recommendation from you will be greatly appreciated. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by FRRE (talk • contribs) 18:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Hi, well, "advert" does not necessarily mean that someone is out to make some money. It applies to non-profits as much as to companies and such. Please read WP:COI and WP:POV. Any subject has to be described in a neutral manner and somebody associated directly with an organization will naturally have more difficulty remaining neutral than someone uninvolved. AS for all the other issues, long lists of external links are undesirable. If the organizations are notable, perhaps there are already articles on them or there ought to be articles oin them and in that case they should have internal links ("wikilinks"). Have a look at some articles on similar organizations that have a good rating (like at least C or better even B-class) to get an idea of what is needed. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:46, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Guy Lebègue

Bonjour, J'aimerais que vous m'expliquiez pourquoi avoir supprimé le paragraphe "Speaker" ?

Car depuis son départ en retraite, il y a 13 ans, Guy Lebègue s'est beaucoup investi dans la vulgarisation scientifique sur les activités satellites ; et cette conférence, il la prononce plusieurs fois chaque année, dont une fois pour l'Association Aéronautique et Astronautique de France. Elle avait d'ailleurs fait l'objet de publications écrites : Un satellite de télécom : A quoi ça sert?, Comment ça marche?, Combien ça coûte?  », dans Nouvelle Revue Aéronautique & Astronautique, Dunod juin 1994, (ISBN 1247-5793); repris dans la même année, dans la Revue des anciens éléves de l'Ecole Centrale de Paris.

Par ailleurs :

Friendly, --Sosak fr (talk) 14:12, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I have re-reviewed the deleted section and still think that it cannot be maintained. To start with, the image is taken from a website and therefore a potential copyvio. The reference given for the image caption is taken from a blog, which is not a reliable source. All other information in that section is sourced to Lebègue's own website. What is needed here are sources independent of the subject, showing that these presentations are important. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 19:52, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
La photo a été prise par Francoise Lebegue (c'est dans le panneau d'information de la photo), l'épouse de Guy Lebegue, et chargée dans les commons sous licence libre, donc pas de copyvio.
Le blog n'est pas celui de Lebegue mais de l'Association Aéronautique et Astronautique de France, groupe régional Côte d'Azur, une société savante, produisant de nombreuses conférences sur de nombreux sujets des domaines aéronautique et astronautique, et des conférenciers célèbres.
--Sosak fr (talk) 22:00, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
I see that the photo has indeed gone through the OTRS system, so the copyright situation is OK. But apart from that, the other problems remain: above I didn't say that the blog was Lebègue's, I said that all other sources in that section were to his own website. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 22:08, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
C'est bien de faire amende honorable! Mais que pensez-vous de remettre en place les paragraphes que vous avez supprimés et aller en discuter dans la page de discussion associée à l'article lui-même, où d'ailleurs un début de discussion y a été ouvert?
Je pratique très peu WP anglophone, car assez peu calée pour écrire dans la langue de Shakespeare (rire). Dans WP francophone, c'est la pratique courante que cette discussion au plus près de l'article.
--Sosak fr (talk) 08:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Mena Report

Hi, I have been trying to put back relevant information on this news source. Please do not remove it. The publisher's location, access volumes etc. are entirely relevant. My goal is to provide information that our readers may be interested in. There are other forums for discussing merge or deletion. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 19:23, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Actually, this stuff is not relevant. The article is about the Mena Report, not about the publisher. If the publisher is notable, then this info could go into an article on them, but not here. As another example, we do not give large descriptions of Elsevier in every article on every single journal this company publishes, either. This is not a merge/deletion issue either, unless you want to propose mergin an article on the publisher into the Mena article? --Guillaume2303 (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Irving Gottesman GAed

Yay! Now for an FA. I am actually in touch with Gottesman. But I don't think we can get a photo; the problem is WikiCommons requires the photographer to upload an image, not the subject. Too complicated to push through. The references have to be changed to the {{sfn}} template, but I have done that for a couple of articles before, so should be okay. Also need to add more stuff about his books, since FA requires "full" coverage. Churn and change (talk) 03:58, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giora Ram

You may be interested, as you previously worked on this article , and I mentioned you at the AfD. See also Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Imexco General Ltd. and my comments on User talk:Yesikan DGG ( talk ) 04:24, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Precious

professional science
Thank you for quality articles and contributions on scientific articles, especially neuroscience, on a professional level with a focus on science in Europe, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Note

I was going to email but it is disabled. You have been a great editor and an asset to wikipedia. You could try and create a new account by notifying arbcom and by not linking it to this account. IRWolfie- (talk) 00:22, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Support!. —MistyMorn (talk) 10:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Why is Guillaume2303 retiring?

The note above says that this user was getting off-wiki harassment. What happened? Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Actually, the off-wiki stuff was already a while ago: I received phone calls and one person whose bio I had taken to AfD (closed as a "delete") actually emailed colleagues of mine that he thought were in an authority position over me. The most recent happenings was harassment including the Dutch, German, and Italian WPs and that was the last drop... I'm still wrapping up some loose ends, but that won't be much any more (couple of dozen edits at most). Thanks for the interest :-) --Guillaume2303 (talk) 22:46, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
I really wish that you could close your account with some suggestions for what you want changed to prevent this from happening to anyone else, or otherwise for what kind of community support you think would be useful for other people to have if what happened to you ever happens to anyone else. Blue Rasberry (talk) 23:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
There is a process for renaming an account as well, maybe that would be helpful in putting off attempted doxing or whatever. IRWolfie- (talk) 01:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Too bad - I think the only solution is to have a truly anonymous account that nobody can tie to a real person. Otherwise this type of harassment is all too easy. For those who tuned in late, the most recent harassment was due to wildly out of proportion anger from now banned User:Euroflux. And we end up losing an exceptionally good-hearted and productive editor. Best of luck and regards to you, Guillaume2303. First Light (talk) 04:05, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The User:Euroflux count has been blocked définitivly on the French WP--Sosak fr (talk) 07:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
  • In response to the above comments: When the conflict with Euroflux started, he had already been banned on the French WP. Due to his attacks on me, he is now also indeffed on the German WP and clocked for a week on the Dutch WP. On the Italian WP, his attacks have been ignored and that seems to have been an effective strategy, too. So in all, the community has been quite responsive in defending an editor from undue harassment. Nevertheless, these things cause stress (and time). In the almost six years that I have been editing here, I have been attacked several times. I originally edited under my own name, because I stand to what I do here and felt that I have no reason to hide. I was mistaken, because unfortunately, not all people coming here are reasonable. So after the off-wiki harassment referred to above, I had my account renamed, as IRWolfie also suggested above. This reduced the problems a bit: your run-of-the-mill IP vandal usually is not wiki-literate enough to find this out, so for them I was anonymous whereas the regulars here still were aware of my identity. But along came Euroflux, who got very upset that I didn't agree with his grand unification interwiki categorization scheme and his pointy attacks on several biographies here. Next thing I know, my own biography is being attacked on different WPs with Euroflux pasting long walls of (sometimes rather silly) accusations on article and user talk pages. At that point, I was already reducing my involvement in WP (pruning back my watchlist from about 7000 items to about 4000 in the space of a couple of weeks). Euroflux was just the last drop.
I'm not sure whether events like this can be avoided completely. One way would be to have everybody here edit under their real-life identity. If people are not anonymous any more, they will think twice before acting like a spoiled child. It wouldn't remove the problem, but certainly reduce it greatly. However, I see the problem with this solution, too: many people will be hesitant to use their real name if they are editing sensitive subjects (such as articles on sex-related themes or politics, especially if it concerns countries that have no free speech and/or totalitarian regimes). The only other solution is what First Light suggests: absolute anonymity for all. I don't like that, but if in the future I decide to come back to WP, that's what I'll do: choose a handle that cannot be traced back to my real life identity and carefully avoid ever giving any clue as to who I am, where I live, and what my profession is. For the moment, though, Euroflux has won and I'm going to take a break from editing. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 08:38, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I don't think I've ever encountered you before, and I haven't looked into the background of all this, but I want to say that if you're retiring primarily as a result of the cross-wiki behavior of another user who has been blocked for that behavior on multiple wikis, I think that indicates a systemic problem that the stewards should have been empowered to deal with globally. Rivertorch (talk) 20:18, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guillaume2303/Archive_15&oldid=525510669"