User talk:Doug Weller
The current date and time is 18 August 2024 T 14:35 UTC.
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Coming here to ask why I reverted your edit? Read this page first... |
| Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Wikipedia. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia. If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click here to start a new topic.
|
| First, please remember that I am not trying to attack you, demean you, or hurt you in any way. I am only trying to protect the integrity of this project. If I did something wrong, let me know, but remember that I am human, and I do make mistakes. Please keep your comments civil. If you vandalize this page or swear at me, you will not only decrease the likelihood of a response, your edits could get you blocked. (see WP:NPA) When posting, do not assume I know which article you are talking about. If you leave a message saying "Why did you revert me?", I will not know what you mean. If you want a response consisting of something other than "What are you talking about", please include links and, if possible, diffs in your message. At the very least, mention the name of the article or user you are concerned with. If you are blocked from editing, you cannot post here, but your talk page is most likely open for you to edit. To request a review of your block, add Administrators: If you see me do something that you think is wrong, I will not consider it wheel-warring if you undo my actions. I would, however, appreciate it if you let me know what I did wrong, so that I can avoid doing it in the future. |
You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise. Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.
Hide IP address ASAP
Hi please hide my Ip address: without removing content added if possible — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantom122 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Quantom122:, but next time email Oversight, don't put your IP address on someone's page.
Edit War Notice
You were a bit late to the party, Doug, it had already stopped. Rorix the White (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the information. Rorix the White (talk) 22:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Your thoughts?
Reliable source?
- Williams, Henry Smith, ed. (1904). "The historians' history of the world".
According to what Wikipedia has on Henry Smith Williams, he was a medical doctor. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:30, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- The Historians' History of the World. So each article should have its own author. Depends on who they are and how it's being used, but I don't like using encyclopedias. Doug Weller talk 20:54, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- No one is specifically indicated as the author of chapter V of Volume IX. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:55, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)
- Outdated, and Williams doesn't seem to have the right credentials. In my opinion, the only situations where Williams could be used is:
- 1) when we're dealing with other outdated sources written by authors without credentials and/or reputation as "expert"
- 2) when he's cited by a proper WP:RS
- Best practice remains: avoid, remove and replace with a solid WP:RS. - LouisAragon (talk) 00:23, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Message in my talk page
Kol Khara Ya Akho Asharmutta — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C400:149D:ADC8:A44:84B9:9645 (talk) 06:29, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
ED link
I'm afraid posting that ED link was probably a bad idea. I don't know this case, but in general the site celebrates trolling and misinformation, even if there is some truth mixed in on occasion, and using it when there's a lawsuit, even one somebody says is unlikely to win, seems too daring at least in terms of BLP. I worry someone could use it as a test-case to introduce worse censorship policy here, because it's less defensible than, say, citing their copy of the NZ shooting video on the article talk page, and there's an outstanding threat to block people if they do that. It might be better to remove it or at least clarify it's only an example of the online trolling and not to be trusted for any facts. Wnt (talk) 16:35, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Master's Thesis as a Source
On the Five Percent Nation page you removed a citation from a Georgia State University Masters Thesis. Your concluding comment was that either the usage of such a source or the thesis itself (the reference is not specified) constitutes a "fail". Wikipedia states that dissertations and theses may be used as sources and also provides the method for citing them (Please see: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cite_thesis>). Georgia State University is a recognized university capable of awarding degrees. According to Wikipedia, this citation/source is valid. If there is no other criteria to justify the decree of "fail[ure]" and the removal of the source, it appears this reference should be restored.OjogbonIjinle (talk) 19:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) The existence of a template doesn't mean that a thesis is considered reliable. From WP:SCHOLARSHIP, Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence. Unless you have evidence of that "significant scholarly influence" you can't use a master's thesis as a source. --regentspark (comment) 19:43, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)In general, theses and dissertations are not accepted as sources, no matter how respected the university, or at least are regarded as lesser-quality references. "Completed dissertations or theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate, and which are publicly available ... , can be used but care should be exercised, as they are often, in part, primary sources." "Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence." The existence of a template doesn't alter that. Acroterion (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
WP's statement which follows: "Completed dissertations or theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate, and which are publicly available (most via interlibrary loan or from Proquest), can be used but care should be exercised, as they are often, in part, primary sources. Some of them will have gone through a process of academic peer reviewing, of varying levels of rigor, but some will not. If possible, use theses that have been cited in the literature; supervised by recognized specialists in the field; or reviewed by third parties. Dissertations in progress have not been vetted and are not regarded as published and are thus not reliable sources as a rule. Some theses are later published in the form of scholarly monographs or peer reviewed articles, and, if available, these are usually preferable to the original thesis as sources. Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence." The Master's Thesis in question is "Voices of the earth: A phenomenological study of women in the nation of gods and earths" by A.J. Keiler-Bradshaw. The thesis in question is cited by Feminista Jones in the book Reclaiming Our Space (Beacon Press). Keiler-Bradshaw's work is also quoted in other theses and dissertations and is included in a list of "Black Islam Resources." Keiler-Bradshaw's thesis is not the only source used in an in-line citation in WP: it is one of three. But it is not difficult to make the argument that Keiler-Bradshaw's thesis does have significant scholarly influence, as it is cited by post-graduate scholars, an established author, and cited as a source for scholars of "Black Islam". Further, Keiler-Bradshaw's committee members are all specialists in the field of African/African-American Studies.OjogbonIjinle (talk) 03:04, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).
|
|
|
Technical news
- In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.
Miscellaneous
- Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
- As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
- LouisAragon (talk) 23:51, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Mikemikev
[1] Mikemikev did not do that. You should be aware of impersonation socking as a means to frame people. A person known to engage in this is Oliver D. Smith. Samantha Priss (talk) 07:49, 9 April 2019 (UTC)