User talk:RayWyman

Welcome! I have been at this work as a volunteer editor long enough to be considered fairly handy. Please feel free to contact me if you are having trouble with editing or even creating a new article. Let me know if you need help with a big project. I'll do my best. RWyman^t@lk 00:51, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Kirby

I understand you're a new editor and you may be unaware of the myriad Wikipedia policies and guidelines. We operate on a consensus basis centered on discussion on articles' talk pages. We don't unilaterally change long-stable infobox images without first discussing it on a talk page and gaining consensus. Sometimes that happens quickly, often it can take two weeks or a month — there's no deadline. We also do not use Wikipedia as a promotional platform, as you, I'm sure inadvertently, did by captioning the photo with the photographer's credit and a plug for a book. That information goes only on the image-file page. The Kirby Museum images are quite nice, and it's nice the Museum allows them freely licensed use. But let's do this the right way, because our actions don't affect just this one article. Please begin by bringing this up at Talk:Jack Kirby. With thanks, Tenebrae (talk) 04:55, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is better and a lot nicer (than accusing me of being a puppet). First - this photo change WAS a request from one of the Kirby Museum curators; in fact, we'd all like to see a nicer photo of Jack there. We're a bit tired of this one - it's not very good. The new photo was professionally taken and clearly more flattering of Jack. I believe that the family would prefer it as well (I could ask, if you want verification). As for the "promotion" - I followed the guidelines for naming photos in Wiki-commons; I do not see filename restrictions that you mentioned and would have followed such rules if they were clearly explained. As point of fact, the photographer mentioned is not commercially active. The book mentioned has been out of print for about 20 years. I'll do as you ask and bring it up on talk. I have my own request - please, next time, dispense with the blind accusations. I'm a volunteer too.Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 05:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't accuse you of being a sock puppet, so perhaps throwing stones of "blind accusations" is ill-advised: I wrote (emphasis added), "I'm not sure if this is a puppet situation technically, since it links to the right place, but the user just above who's calling himself TheNewGuy is actually User:RayWyman." There's not a single inaccurate, nonfactual word in that sentence. You were the one who chose not to use your user name. Because there's no good reason for that, it needs to be pointed out.

Neither the Kirby Museum nor the family gets to approve or prefer which photo Wikipedia uses, so " verification" of their approval is irrelevant.

I didn't say "filename restrictions"; I wrote, "We leave credits on the image file page" and that we "don't put photographer credits on the article page to promote the photographer or the book." Whether the photographer is commercially active or whether the book is out of print is irrelevant; self-promotion or reputation burnishing is just as disallowed as commercial promotion under WP:ADVERTISING.

In any event, I'm glad to see the issue being discussed at Talk:Jack Kirby. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:46, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And again...those naming/labeling guidelines are not posted with WikiCommons. But I thank you for pointing it out.

I also see that you just requested Rand to change his signature to realname. I think a rule about using real names is a great idea. I can't tell you how many Wiki editors I have met that use a variety of avatars, logos, and nom de plume. I hope it becomes Wiki-Wide accepted practice. By the way... what's your real name?— Preceding unsigned comment added by RayWyman (talk • contribs)

You're being snide. If you want to be a productive member of the community, please try to behave civily. No one requested anyone use his or her real name — only the name under which they've registered. Anything else is misleading. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the civility issue goes both ways. We're all volunteers, after all. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 17:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. You've been here a week and you're lecturing? I never said anything that wasn't factual and well-explained. You, on the other hand, made a snide remark about "what's your real name," as if it were unusual or shady to contribute anonymously. That was unnecessary and makes an untoward and inaccurate intimation. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand, these semi-private talk pages allow editors to sort out their differences and come to agreement privately. I have done that. And if asking for your real name is an intimidation - I apologize. Frankly... all I wanted was an apology from you for being bossy and harsh. If that's not possible for you, so be it. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 17:31, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not "intimidation." I said "intimating" as in the verb "to intimate" — to hint at or suggest something in an indirect way. Not "to intimidate." And if my saying politely, "I understand you're a new editor and you may be unaware of the myriad Wikipedia policies and guidelines" and "as you, I'm sure inadvertently, did" is bossy and harsh, I'd have to respectfully disagree.--Tenebrae (talk) 17:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. Ray Wyman Jr (talk) 17:51, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC LGarde was accepted

LGarde, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Arthur goes shopping (talk) 13:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited LGarde, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DoD (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) 09:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, RayWyman. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Chamith (talk) 14:37, 19 November 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Draft:Thinkers 50

Hi, RayWyman. I just wanted to be sure you were aware that drafts which are not edited for six months may be deleted. You have plenty of time to work on the article — there is no deadline — but housekeeping might mistake it for abandoned if you don't work on it at least every so often.

Good luck improving Draft:Thinkers 50, and don't hesitate to ask here, at the Teahouse, or on my talk page if you need any more help. If you do ask here, please include [[User:GrammarFascist|GrammarFascist]] in your posting, which will make Wikipedia's software alert me to your question; otherwise quite a long time might pass before I stop by of my own accord and see your question. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 00:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Grants:IEG/Wikipedia likes Galactic Exploration for Posterity 2015

Dear Fellow Wikipedians,

I JethroBT (WMF) suggested that I consult with fellow Wikipedians to get feedback and help to improve my idea about "As an unparalleled way to raise awareness of the Wikimedia projects, I propose to create a tremendous media opportunity presented by launching Wikipedia via space travel."

Please see the idea at meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Wikipedia_likes_Galactic_Exploration_for_Posterity_2015. Please post your suggestions on the talk page and please feel free to edit the idea and join the project.

Thank you for your time and attention in this matter. I appreciate it.

My best regards, Geraldshields11 (talk) 22:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, RayWyman. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, RayWyman. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]