User talk:Seraphimblade

; Archives
	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ;

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Seraphimblade.

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, 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 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. Also, if you are contacting me for a matter related to the Arbitration Committee, please specifically indicate this in your email. All correspondence of this nature will be treated as confidential, though I am likely to forward it to the Committee as a whole, or any appropriate subcommittee, for consideration.
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.

Notability

Ye of the brutal blade: Since every lord on high editor here in Wikiworld has a different definition of "notable" and uses his/her own definition to make final determinations about whether articles live or die I'm curious what level of notability passes your bar? You've noted to other poor souls pleading with you that one citation from an outside source is not enough and awards, etc from outside organizations are of no consequence to you. So for a company with hundreds of clients and at least some recordable search traffic seeking information, how many independent citations would you need? Two? Five? Just curious since the guidelines are broad enough to sail the red giant through. Thanks much.Ysplanti420 (talk) 22:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citing anything would certainly help. There is indeed not a single "magic number". Rather, we're looking for a sufficient quantity and depth of reference material to write a full article. Regardless, however, even if an article were appropriate, it could not be written as a marketing brochure. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:31, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Direct Drive

Hello Seraphimblade This is Thisiswhatwefind. Have been searching for ages to see how I contact you. This seems to be it? I was confused as to your reason for the exclusion of the article but have since found that placed at the end was a link to a site which not only had some background on the band but also has a compilation of music for sale. This was added without my knowledge by another person whom I gave access of Thisiswhatwefind to in order to add anything that I did not know. And their addition must have been added just after i sent the article for inclusion on Wikipedia. I know that Wikipedia is an information site and not a 'shop window' and apologise for what happened. I fully appreciate why you declined the page. Was there anything else apart from that inclusion that you had a problem with? I was trying to do a plain and simple history of the band Direct Drive and being new to and unfamiliar with how one adds content was not and still am not fully conversant with how one adds references and was proposing to add them later. For your information here are some of the links http://www.whatmusic.com/info/productinfo.php?menulevel=home&productid=153&returnurl=http://www.whatmusic.com/home/index.php http://www.discogs.com/artist/87235-Direct-Drive-3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Hardcastle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Rogers http://www.soulchoonzradio.com/featured_artists.php?FID=47 Thanks for your time and look forward to hearing from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisiswhatwefind (talk • contribs) 22:20, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Thisiswhatwefind: You're certainly correct that the sales link was inappropriate, but that wasn't really all. The entire piece was full of fluffy, promotional language ("Promising though they were...", "...the effervescent Paul Hardcastle and the Philip Bailey tones of...", "...beautiful and expressive voice...", as a few examples but hardly the only ones). Also, please do note that, while not required while drafting in userspace, in order for the subject to be an acceptable one for an article, it would need to be covered reasonably extensively in reliable sources not having an interest in promoting the band. If that type of referencing doesn't exist, I'm afraid we could not accept an article on that subject, regardless of any other considerations. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:21, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re Direct Drive.

Thanks for the feedback. I wish to nail the problem here. Are adjectives not permitted? Is an attempt to describe something not permitted? If you listen to the voice of Derek Green anyone with a cursory knowledge of the band Earth Wind And Fire and their singer Philip Bailey would be hard pressed not to note the similarity and relative unusual nature of the voice. This is in no way an attempt to compare the music or the bands merely descriptive. Anyone who knows Paul Hardcastle would agree with 'effervescent'. I could use other words but 'effervescent' covers it. I do not consider this praise of any kind merely an adjective to describe his personality. This does not imply any reference to his abilities or otherwise and/or kudos for the band. I absolutely agree that in hind sight "...beautiful and expressive voice..."for Helen Rogers was close to praise. But non was intended... merely an attempt to describe her voice. The reason for doing so being because the nature of the different singers used in the journey of the band was very different and it was an attempt to show this. Another way would clearly be better. Do you consider the links which I attached to that which I posted on your site inadequate for the band to be included in Wikipedia? They are independant of anything within the control of the band. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisiswhatwefind (talk • contribs) 16:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Thisiswhatwefind: Alright, that's a common source of confusion. I'll try to provide some clarification, and I do know it's a very different style of writing from what most people are used to. Let me give you an attempt to show you what I mean. In one that I wrote, Kelli Scarr, note the feedback from NPR. First, I don't put that "in Wikipedia's voice", and no, peacock terms like that normally shouldn't be done that way. If no reliable source had ever expressed that view, it would be inappropriate for me to have included that in the article, even if I were really sure it were so.

If a critic favorably reviewed a band, movie, game, etc., we might note that in the article, but would attribute that to the critic, not say it in our own editorial voice. But articles aren't for publishing our own thoughts about what something sounds like. An article isn't a music review, and it certainly should never be one by the editor writing it. I shouldn't even be able to tell someone's personal opinion when they write about something, it should be based solely upon summarizing verifiable and already published material. Even if you're absolutely certain that anyone listening to it would come to the same conclusion, if reliable sources haven't actually said it, we can't have that in an article. If a reliable reference has expressed that opinion, we can include that as appropriate in the article, but in their voice, not Wikipedia's. Does that make more sense? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:49, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re Direct Drive Thanks very much for the clarification in the different styles of writing. I think the penny has dropped. And the value of Wikipedia has been well outlined by you. I will go through the piece again with this in mind. It is good that persons such as yourself are looking after the integrity of Wikipedia. Could you send what I wrote to my 'sandbox' so that I can go through it with my present understanding in mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisiswhatwefind (talk • contribs) 16:55, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Thisiswhatwefind: Appreciate your willingness to discuss it. I've undeleted the sandbox material, minus the sales link. If you'd like me to help you review it at some point, feel free to ask here. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:27, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re Direct Drive Thanks for your offer to review it after I've given it a rewrite. Much appreciated. It appears though that now my restored sandbox has been deleted by somebody else v soon after you restored it ....

18:50, 27 December 2015 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page User:Thisiswhatwefind/sandbox (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) Should I contact RHanworth or can you notify him of our discussions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisiswhatwefind (talk • contribs)

The Signpost: 30 December 2015

News and notes: WMF Board dismisses community-elected trustee

Arbitration report: Second Arbitration Enforcement case concludes as another case is suspended

Featured content: The post-Christmas edition

Traffic report: The Force we expected

Year in review: The top ten Wikipedia stories of 2015

In the media: Wikipedia plagued by a "Basket of Deception"

Gallery: It's that time of year again

Signpost Arbitration interview request

Excuse me. I am lead writer for the Signpost's "Arbitration Report" and am wondering if you would be interested in answering some interviews questions as an outgoing Arbitrator. The questions will be asked through email, unless answering them here would be a more suitable choice. GamerPro64 18:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GamerPro64: I would be happy to answer the questions (within the bounds of confidentiality, of course). I would prefer to answer them here on my talk page. Could you post them here, or are they available at a central location? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can post them here. Just need to finish writing them up. GamerPro64 19:37, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

1. First off, thank you for your work as an Arbitrator.

Appreciated.

2. What would you say was the biggest challenge while being an Arbitrator?

Being an arbitrator means handling difficult and often sensitive issues that take a great variety of types, and probably don't have an easy to see good outcome. The greatest challenge was having to choose between several options when all the options were terrible and the only possible goal was to choose the least bad.

3. Has there been any cases or motions you thought could have been handled differently while on the Committee?

The reason we have several people on the Committee is to check and balance one another, and we certainly did that. I don't, however, recall any time that I had a glaring, absolute disagreement with the rest of the Committee. In the end, we were generally able to come to solutions that, even if they were not any one arbitrator's ideal, we could come to agreement on and live with. I do wish that more was able to be done with the Arbitration Enforcement 2 case, but I don't fault the drafters or anyone else for that. It was very challenging to come up with anything that wasn't just going to add fuel to the fire and make the whole mess worse.

4. Do you feel that you did enough during your time on the panel? If not, what were you hoping to accomplish during your time?

Depends on the definition of "enough", I suppose. I certainly spent a great deal of time doing it, but it is a volunteer position and we all have real lives too. I did hope to work with the Committee to get a better system of task management set up, as right now a great deal comes in through email and it's easy to lose track of things that way. Unfortunately, though, and perhaps ironically, there was never time. I'd certainly encourage the 2016 Committee to give it some thought.

5. What advice would you give to hopefuls who want to take part in the Committee?

You better have a thick skin and some free time. Like I said above, sometimes you're choosing the least bad of several terrible options. But since it is still terrible, well, it's going to be your fault (even though you're not the one who made the mess; much like the good old balloon joke). Also, no one's kidding about the amount of time it takes. Plan to spend at absolute minimum five to ten hours a week on it, more if you're drafting a case.

6. Would you consider running for Arbitrator again?

I didn't run again this year because I know 2016 will not be a year when I'd have the free time to devote to it, due to several factors in my own life. If at some point in the future I thought the next couple of years would suit doing it again, I would consider running again. Otherwise, no, it wouldn't be fair to anyone to accept the position when I wouldn't have the time to do it well.

7. Any additional comments?

There's been, for whatever reason, the idea that relations among the 2015 Committee were acrimonious. We disagreed at times, certainly, but reasonably amicably in every case I saw. The people I worked with were reasonable and open to changing their minds for a good reason. Quite realistically, if disagreements on Wikipedia were handled as peacefully and reasonably as those among the Committee, the Committee would have very little to do.

@GamerPro64: Please find the answers above. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fran Villalba Segarra article deleted

Hi Seraphimblade, the article "Fran Villalba Segarra" that I wrote was deleted for being promotional in tone. I was surprised by this, as I made several revisions when the promotional tag was first applied to remove language that might sound puffy or subjective, and for a while the page appeared with no "issues" box at the top. Apparently I didn't do a good enough job :-) I would greatly appreciate the chance to have the material again so I can make the tone of the article neutral (and add some additional references that I've been going through - they didn't go in the first time because they are in Spanish), and any feedback on improving the neutrality of the article would be very helpful of course. Would it be possible to restore the article to my sandbox or something similar? Thanks very much for your time and consideration, Ermcpeek (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ermcpeek: I'm afraid the entire article is at issue, as it was essentially a CV. And there was still puff ("...driven by a passion for ethics and making the most of his life..." as one example). LinkedIn is not a "reference". In fact, the article did not cite any sources that meet the criteria for reliability. Do reliable references unaffiliated and with no interest in the subject exist that have covered this individual in reasonable depth? If so, we'd need to stick to what those references have found, not puff like his CV and what languages he speaks. If not, I'm afraid we'd be unable to accept any article on this individual at all. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, to add, please feel free to point me toward references in Spanish. There is no requirement that references be in English, and I can speak decent enough Spanish to read and understand them. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:54, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphimblade: Thanks for your quick reply, here are some of the sources I would like to add, please let me know if you think a good article is possible taking these into consideration (the majority are about another hosting company the subject founded "2freehosting", he is named in the articles as founder and COO or CEO, depending on the time period).

http://www.redeszone.net/2015/03/31/2freehosting-es-un-hosting-web-gratuito-y-ademas-permite-crear-webs-facilmente/ http://campamentoweb.blogspot.com.es/2014/03/el-mejor-hosting-gratuito-de-2014.html#.VogyjVI7VDQ http://bloggertrucos.com/2freehosting-fran-villalba-segarra/ http://www.mundosaber.com/economia/fran-villalba-segarra.html https://www.2freehosting.com/blog/about-2freehosting/ https://www.hechosdetalento.es/en/candidaturas-2/?728 http://www.webpicked.com/2freehosting-review/ http://tecnogeek.net/2014/01/2freehosting-com-una-alternativa-gratis-para-montar-tu-proyecto-web/ Thanks for your help! Ermcpeek (talk) 20:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

KiLife Tech article deleted

Hi. We are new to Wikipedia. We have a startup company in Utah that is very prominent and have been featured by a lot of media. We have also closed the NASDAQ in NYC in October of 2015. I noticed that as soon as we published our wikipedia article it was immediately flagged for copyright (which isn't surprising since we took a lot of the content from our website) and it was also flagged as being advertising and not encyclopedic in nature. As we are new and don't really understand everything about how wikipedia works we quickly researched and edited the article to be neutral and re-wrote the copyrighted content from the website so it would not be flagged for that. However the article was still deleted. I am wondering what we can do to get it back up? We used a lot of sources within the article as requested. Our citations and sources are from very prominent reliable sources including Forbes, Business Week, Rice University, Brigham Young University, and local and national press. Can you provide us some guidance so we can get the article back up? Thank you so much for mentoring some Wikipedia newbies!