User talk:New Media Theorist

I'm happy to hear your thoughts on my edits...

Simon Penny

Thanks for you work on this bio. Have you any thoughts on adding a portrait of him or a illustration of his work? Cheers Castlemate (talk) 09:49, 31 August 2015 (UTlC)

Thanks. I had a look on Wikimedia but could not find anything useful for an image. If you can find something with the right license, feel free to add it, of course! New Media Theorist (talk) 16:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

edits to Patchblocks

hi, first off, thank you for your contributions to this article. i appreciate having a second opinion on the text. but, i did want to make two points. first, Facebook is not automatically an unreliable source. please see WP:SELFPUB, which explicitly says "This policy also applies to pages on social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook". the citation i used fit the criteria listed there, as saying that a run of a product was available is not "exceptional", it was the subject of the article discussing itself, and the article certainly did not rely heavily on that single point. second, again, while i do appreciate your contributions, i felt that some of your edit summaries were a bit impolite...calling the content "copy", really? that implies a certain level of deliberateness, and i resent that implication. it just seemed a little condescending to me, and i don't see why it was necessary. moreover, i am not sure why you removed some text that was directly cited or quoted, but perhaps that's more a discussion for the talk page of the article. Boomur [☎] 17:27, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

This article is under discussion on AfD. I can see your comments on Talk:Patchblocks, and on the AfD page, and above. Noted. See my comments on the AfD page and perhaps reply there. New Media Theorist (talk) 17:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

PS: I am sorry if you are offended, but you might want to consider not taking things so personally. I try to be civil, and any edit comments were not directed to you, they were directed to my objective reading of the article in question.New Media Theorist (talk) 17:34, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

edit summaries are a tool to communicate with other editors, not the article. perhaps you would do well to keep that in mind. Boomur [☎] 17:47, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Nothing personal was intended, and I apologize if you were offended.New Media Theorist (talk) 18:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Maple Messenger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macon County (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) 11:30, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Dani Ploeger entry

Hi! Thanks for your help editing/formatting the article. I do indeed know Dani Ploeger very well (I am a curator), as the commentary on top of the page suggests. However, I am wondering if you could give me some suggestions as to which particular aspects of the article would require adjustment to meet the requirements of the content policies? Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DX ArtMedia (talk • contribs) 00:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

• Hi, thanks for your edits and welcome to Wikipedia. I put a comment on the article talk page, but since as you say, you know him very well, then you should probably not edit the article per WP:COI. This is so as to keep a WP:NPV in the article. I'd never heard of him before this, but I'm in the field and recognize the venues in the references. My take is that he's just notable enough for an article, based in WP:GNG. Someone else might disagree. My advice is to stop editing now and let the very capable masses take it from here.New Media Theorist (talk) 00:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

PS: it is completely OK to put the template { {request edit} } (without the spaces between the parentheses) on the talk page for the article. That way you can ask for editors with a neutral point of view to add material for you. It's an additional layer of process to try to make the article as neutral as possible in terms of point of view. New Media Theorist (talk) 00:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

• Hi, yes, I have made a few small edits on other pages already: Dutch artists Tinkebell (that entry needs some more thorough work I think...) and Jan van Munster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DX ArtMedia (talk • contribs) 01:15, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
• Excellent, hope you hang around! We are always in need of people with the knowledge. Also, if you stay long enough, I know a lot of good curator jokes.New Media Theorist (talk) 01:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 14 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Margarete Gallinat page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Charvériat et al

I don't know if you had plans to pursue this but I thought I'd let you know I'm working on a case for WP:COIN. Vrac (talk) 22:23, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I think that is a good idea. I was not sure if it was serious enough for WP:COIN, but if you are working on it, I appreciate that. There's something strange going on. I assume good faith for all users. However, in general terms these things would concern me of any user: a) removing an article notability tag without declaring as connected user, b) dragging out the admission that one is connected to an article subject, c) trying to disclose one's conflict privately, d) participating in an AfD without first declaring connected user, and of course e) magical references that pop up out of nowhere, and appear to possibly be coordinated. The last item is on the list at WP:MEATSIGNS: "Knowledge that an obscure article exists". Let me know if I can do anything to help, as I think it's important to maintain WP:NPV, as what else would we have without that?New Media Theorist (talk) 23:09, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to add all that to the case, here is the link: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Island6. It's kind of bare bones for the moment, just getting it started so people can take a look. Vrac (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

thank you, very nicely done indeed. I hope this gets sorted out.New Media Theorist (talk) 01:29, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I hope it gets sorted as well; this situation doesn't sit well with me. Admin boards can be unpredictable though. We'll just have to wait and see what happens... Vrac (talk) 02:21, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

you know, I have only been a registered user for less than a month. Since Then I have been repeatedly impressed by how straightforward and genuine the approach of most editors is, and by how they are willing to lend a hand when needed to newer editors.New Media Theorist (talk) 03:24, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I am glad you started that COIN. Look at this: See the userboxes at the top and the userboxes at the bottom. Added to the COIN discussion. New Media Theorist (talk) 04:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Less than a month and you're already at COIN, welcome to the party! I think you'll find a bit of everything here, plenty of good people but plenty of sketchy behavior as well. It's all part of the fun. Vrac (talk) 17:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

do you think those talk pages should be taken to WP:SPI? there are edit overlaps as well.New Media Theorist (talk) 19:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Drmies pinged a checkuser to the COIN conversation, let's see if he shows up and takes care of it. If not then I would say yes. Why specifically the talk pages and what do you mean by edit overlaps? Vrac (talk) 21:06, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

ah, I did not realize that when he said CU that it would ping a Checkuser. I opened an SPI here. The odds are too high for two people to have independent accounts with 14 identical userboxes in the same sequence! Links are on the SPI.New Media Theorist (talk) 22:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Vrac, the clerk rearranged the checkuser request and it is being run.

Disambiguation link notification for September 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Margaux Williamson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pittsburg (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) 14:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

And now some entertaining comments of welcome from fellow Wikipedians

I know that you stated on your user page: "I think it is a great open-source resource of information! Great resources deserve attention from their users. Having used it for a decade or more, I figured it was time to pony up some effort."

But do you mean that you never had a registered Wikipedia account? Did you edit as an IP? If it's not clear why I'm asking, it's because I just saw you at the Seedfeeder article/talk page, looked at your contributions, and saw that your editing style is not the usual editing style of a WP:Newbie; it's experienced. Flyer22 (talk) 06:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome and nice to meet you! I did type up a nice answer before I realized that it is not really any of your business :) But thank you for the compliment on my editing skills. Have a nice day. New Media Theorist (talk) 08:25, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

PS: I would not waste any brain space theorizing who I might be, or whether I edited here under some account in the past. I am just a nice, highly educated, highly skilled, pretty (or handsome) whip-smart person with a lot of life experience and highly valuable critical skills who decided to make a contribution for the good of the project.New Media Theorist (talk) 08:31, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Your response, and this change of my section heading, is all that I needed to know. You are not a WP:Newbie in the least, and that you are not one is indeed my business; it's the business of the entire Wikipedia community. That is, unless it's a valid WP:Clean start. You know, a new start without any past blocks or sanctions. But, yes, I'll see you around. Flyer22 (talk) 08:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

I too find it highly dubious that you began editing Wikipedia in August 2015, with citation needed tags, editing citation syntax, removing external links, adding article for deletion tags, voting "delete" at AfD for a variety of articles, and participating with over 420 edits at AfD between 20 August and 25 September: edits uncharacteristic of a new user. Coldcreation (talk) 09:39, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

• Gentlemen, I am serious. I learned it all here. Hard to believe? Look on my user page. I have two degrees. I have spent over two decades in universities and I know how to research. For god's sake, all of the instructions are online and accessible in a click. Voting Delete? look at my stats. I also vote keep frequently, around 19% of the time to be precise. I defend articles I have zero association with. I spent a couple hours improving Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, and I have never been to church. I used the Internet for the first time in the late 1980's: my roommate brought how a terminal that connected to a late version of DarpaNet. I had a VT-100 in my room in university. I know stuff, so don't be surprised when someone comes along and quickly masters a twelve-year old CMS! Run a CU or an SPI or a whatever, you have my permission! I have zero conflicts and am wholly in line with the Wikipedia terms of use.

I don't know if you notice this, but your claims all boil down to "you're really good at this. therefore you must be doing something bad.", which is a weak overall argument.

Re: the section header, after the first welcoming post, I found a page on "how to deal with difficult Wikipedians", and it suggested changing the section title. It also mentions that there's nothing at stake here, so I'll post this and make my coffee, and can't wait to see what you guys come up with. It's like watching cats play with a ball of wool. I guess you you've got nothing better to do. Thanks you in any case for all the compliments on my abilities. But you could have just sent a Barnstar. New Media Theorist (talk) 17:48, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

PS: I've also been writing high-end code for fifteen or twenty years, so knowing simple markup like  Done, which I learned from Coldcreation, is not exactly the mark of a power user. It's four parentheses and four letters. Cool! New Media Theorist (talk) 17:48, 26 September 2015 (UTC)