This is a Wikipediauser 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 Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia.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:Topcipher.
This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject. The comment the reviewer left was:
This is, of course annoying, since my purpose was essentially to give the English speaking reader an opportunity to read something about one of the few (along with Christopher Lasch) commentators of George Orwell's thought whose analysis of the social and political situation of our days seems to me to be rather useful.
Of course, I translated the French article for that, but I'm a bit baffled that my point of view should have been deemed partial, in that occurrence.
I would also be grateful to you if you could point out to me where (at least one example) the tone would have been too informal. Or, for that matter, where I would have used any "peacock terms".
Whatever you could indicate to me as to what was not an encyclopædic format would be greatly appreciated.
You said my page already esisxt but that worldwide this is domestic? So it doesn't already esisxt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.157.176 (talk) 19:47, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
@82.38.157.176: Thank you for reaching out and for pointing the difference. In that case, I recommend that we incorporate the distinction within the existing article itself as the information is almost exactly the same. Also, please read through other comments and reasons provided by various other editors for reasons to having the draft declined. Thanks. TopCipher (talk) 03:06, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
I have reed through other comments yet I do not know what they maen I also ask for some help but no one wants to?82.38.157.176 (talk) 10:43, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
@82.38.157.176: Sorry to hear that but please be assured that it is not because of any intentional regard that either me (or others too, maybe) haven't been able to help contribute towards adding / rectifying any content for the subject matter, but simply because we may not be too well connected with the knowledge or have any expertise over the same (although, I cannot speak on everyone's behalf but this is what I assume); however, might I suggest you reach out to the community via a film related portal (ex: Portal:Animation) to see if someone could assist with your queries over the same? Appreciate you writing back and my apologies for not being able to much assist with your tasks. Thanks. TopCipher (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Article Turned Down for copyright infringement.
I've redone the article on Norman Cooling which was hit for too much copyrighted material. I added new sources and rewrote the main section that had come from the newspaper. I pretty much left the small paragraph on Cooling's personal awards alone as this is the style used for listing personal awards in order of priority. The awards need to be accurately named, and they need to be listed from the highest to lowest award. There really isn't another appropirate way to list them.
I hope this suffices. There are other Wiki articles that mention Cooling, and he should be listed in the Wiki pages of general officers.
@Coloneljon: Thank you for reaching out and having me notified. I've shared my comments over the draft accordingly. TopCipher (talk) 17:32, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I've added more sources from the San Diego Union Tribune, the LA Times, the Naval Institute, and a book published by Random House. For some rason, reference # 7 is also #13. I can't merge them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coloneljon (talk • contribs) 18:26, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
@Coloneljon: Trust that this link here has been cited thrice; hope its okay that I updated it to a manner in whcih it is supposed to be. Will further review the draft and share my thoughts over the same, shortly. Thanks. TopCipher (talk) 18:34, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Should I just delete the section on the awards? The Legion of Merit is a high award, but the rest are not as high. This is the standard method that the military uses when reporting on an individual. It will be essentially word for word as this is a set pattern.Coloneljon (talk) 19:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
@Coloneljon: No, no. Please don't delete the section - as they do definitely count! For this, all we need is a credible source to justify claim of significance i.e. about subject winning the Legion of Merit. That should do. Thanks. TopCipher (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
I did reference two sources that mention the LOM. This award is pretty high, above the Silver Star, but it is not normally reported in the press. I can try and contact the general to ask for the date of the citation, then find out how AP references them, if that is necessary. I can also reference his official Marine Corps bilography on the usmc.mil page, but that section is now restricted to the general populace.
Another editor, TheSandDoctor, turned down the article today simply posting "fix the above," but I hadn't resubmitted it yet waiting to hear from you.
@Coloneljon: Reaching out to the subject directly for reference would not be of much help as it would be considered as primary research itself and would still require secondary & tertiary sources. I suppose the other editor may have declined it so as to reduce the backlog in the task - no worries about that and once we have said resources available to verify the claim, then we should be good to resubmit the draft for review. Thanks. TopCipher (talk) 04:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Request on 18:14:02, 6 April 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Bluetele
You highlighted a section that you believe is a copyright infringement since it was cut and pasted. I assure you that nothing was cut and pasted. The text in the article is all original and nothing on the referenced website is similar text except the name of the internship. The reference to the website was to confirm the veracity of the statement that an internship exists. I can remove that reference if it makes a difference.
@Bluetele: Thank you for reaching out. The copyright material is very little, yet they do exist. I was referring to this statement here - "permits a qualified student working in architecture, planning, design, or a similar field to gain hands-on experience in the theory and practice of preservation by working with foundation board members and staff" - which is available as a direct copy-paste from this website here and a report towards the same is available via this link here (statement highlighted in Red). Hope this clarifies. TopCipher (talk) 18:21, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
19:40:04, 6 April 2017 review of submission by Danielnoamwarner
My name is Dan Warner, Ph.D. and I am the executive director of the nonprofit organization, Community Data Roundtable (www.communitydataroundtable.org). Our organization implements what are called "outcomes systems" in social services environments. This means I help large systems measure the clinical impact occurring in the system. This is a large and established field in health care. The particular science that I use for this approach is called "communimetrics." It is a well established approach used across the country by governments (Massachusetts, Wisconsin, California, Oregon ... to name just a few), insurance companies (AmeriHealth Caritas, Magellan, and others), and private providers for measuring care, and also distributing care in new ways due to the analytics made possible by the approach. Certainly a capitization of communimetrics at this point would have it a field that is worth millions - with software vendors, academics, insurance companies, private providers and government all investing in it significantly (As stated, this is my organization's main topic, and we are just one of several players in the field).
I am noting all of this in order to stress that communimetrics is a very relevant topic in today's world, and is worthy of a Wikipedia entry. I would like guidance as to what we need to demonstrate in putting this entry up into Wikipedia, as well as the many ancillary pages that are connected (such as the tools one builds with communimetric science, the analytic models generated by it, etc..) I assure you that there is sufficient documentation to speak to the significance of the field, and that this is not a passion project of a few eccentrics. If we are not demonstrating this sufficiently, please help us, otherwise I truly think this entry deserves place in Wikipedia.
Thank you for the consideration,
Dan Warner Ph.D. Danielnoamwarner (talk) 19:40, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
@Danielnoamwarner: Thank you for reaching out and for sharing your insight. Please note that I have declined the submission based on copyright violations, as per which please refer WP:COPYRIGHT. It states that "If you want to import text that you have found elsewhere or that you have co-authored with others, you can only do so if it is available under terms that are compatible with the CC BY-SA license". Hope this helps and you may refer to a full evaluation on content here (highlighted in Red). TopCipher (talk) 06:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
keep up the great work ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.71.72.53 (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
A cast iron barnstar
not a real barnstar ! why code that in and be nice---great job on keeping an eye on the page of___________________ /Fairfield_Greenwich_Group
they get the Cast-iron barnstar award !
Please be more specific.Xx236 (talk) 09:51, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
@Xx236: Sorry, I only have information as much as it was provided with the reference with which it came. You are, however, free to add as you wish. Thanks for taking time and reaching out! TopCipher (talk) 11:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Done I have shared a few insights (via comments) over the draft page. Hope that helps. Thanks.
