User talk:Jadeslair
Your submission at Articles for creation: The Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills has been accepted
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 .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Sulfurboy (talk) 19:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Jadeslair. 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)
Conflict of interest?
Hi Jadeslair. I'm extremely concerned that you have a conflict of interest with at least some of your editing. Should we discuss it here or maybe at WP:COIN? --Ronz (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- I have not even been editing that much. Mostly when I get a notification. What are you talking about? Is this because I created that company page... the page was deleted last time I knew. I did not even contest it or anything Jadeslair (talk)
- Thanks for the quick response. I've not looked at your article creations at this point. I noticed that your addition here to Acoustic foam was reverted earlier today. I did some cleanup to the article and noticed that unlike the other editors, you've been editing for some time now, making substantial and valuable contributions to Wikipedia. I thought you'd be familiar with WP:COI at this point. I'm assuming you have a great deal of expertise in many of the topics that you edit, and I'm surprised that you're still adding such sources. --Ronz (talk) 22:25, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
A commercial source does not mean it is a bad source. Often they are the best source because of their expertise. I also link to studies but they lack real world information. I do not link to product pages or anything like that even if it has the information I am looking for. You removed the link, now the article is almost unsourced. That is the opposite end of the spectrum. With only one source we do not know if the article is even partially true. I think you have made the page worse. That is just my opinion. It takes may types of people to make wikipedia. Jadeslair (talk)
- The problem is that commercial sources are usually very bad sources. They are self-published. They are biased. While you personally may have the expertise to identify the quality of the information in such sources, to any observer you're just picking and choosing from sources that all look like WP:REFSPAM.
- Sorry to press you on this, but I was hoping you'd make some comment on any conflict of interest you may have. I'd like to get past any coi problems if possible. --Ronz (talk) 18:43, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
I don't have ant conflictsJadeslair (talk) 23:57, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Iam not an expert either. I did not know that was required now. Is it? Jadeslair (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2017 (UTC)