User talk: Spintendo

seeking clarification

Hi Spintendo You have been helping me in relation to the Noble Group article, for which many thanks. I would like to try to understand something. I am trying to be a good citizen and putting up my edit request on the talk page, following the wikipedia rules to the best of my ability. But whilst I have been going back and forth with you, it seems that others have been amending the article (often with no references and incorrect information) and removing sections or rewriting them (for example they have removed the reference to Goldilocks which I was seeking to amend - so now I no longer need to make that change). Could you explain two things: (1) what is the benefit to me in following the process I am following - will my edits be "locked" in some way once you approve them or will others simply be able to rewrite or delete anything we agree? (2) can anyone simply edit an article without going through the "request edit" system and the talk page? If so why, should anyone bother with that process? I am not being rude or angry, just trying to understand. Any explanation would be greatly appreciated. Timothy Ferdinand (talk) 03:21, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

@Timothy Ferdinand: Thank you for your questions. I'll answer them in the order you asked them.

1. The benefit to you in using the edit request system is that it is in accordance with the generally established, community-approved way of COI editors making changes to an article. However, the edits that are made through edit requests are not "locked in" because anyone is open to edit, for that is the nature of Wikipedia. Those edits which follow approved suggestive guidelines for how to make edit requests are seen by the community as having more merit in the long run, but they have no superior status over any other edits which are made (and which follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines). For example, the edits made by the other editor to the article that you mentioned will likely be seen as having less merit, and might be reverted (more on that below).
2. Anyone can edit an article, as there is no prohibition on editing for those with a COI. The only requirement is that all edits to Wikipedia must follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. There is a policy which states that editors who use a username that implies they are affiliated with a company cannot make edits to articles. This means that the edits you referred to in your post by the editor WeAreNoble run the risk of being reverted and that user runs the risk of being blocked because their username implies that they are a part of the company. So in this case, relying on their edits may not work out in the end, demonstrating that your best chance for having the changes you want made in the long run still rests with having a neutral third party (be it myself, or any other editor who is not affiliated with Noble Group) make the edits for you by using the edit request system.

I would like to add that my ability to implement well written and well formatted edits is only as good as the completeness of the edit requests which I receive. If there are issues with the wording or the formatting, then those issues can cause delays in getting the edits made, if they are made at all. But working together to solve the issues is easily done, and I'm more than happy to work with you on the issues which your request presents. Regards,  Spintendo  04:45, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Fully understood, many thanks, I'll stick with the task and hopefully we can get there. Timothy Ferdinand (talk) 06:13, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

/* Some proposed changes */ Follow-up on Beacon College proposed edits

Spintendo: I left this response on the Beacon College talk page, but since I had not seen a response I wasn't sure I followed the procedure correctly, hence this direct follow-up.

Thank you for your feedback.

Unfortunately, your proposed remedy places an unachievable burden on Beacon College.

Beacon College is a tiny niche school founded 30 years ago by a group of parents for students with learning disabilities. Situated in a small city in Lake County, and with fewer than 200 students just a mere six years ago, the school, by and large, has not been on the radar of the breed of non-parochial publications that would lack the “homer” bias that you imply the sources cited in this edit request would have.

Thus, the suggested sources you provided to search through for Beacon College content is largely moot. We searched those databases and found less than a handful of articles that we could swap with the Orlando Sentinel articles [they would simply repeat the same factual data that we footnoted with the Orlando Sentinel articles]. But we are certainly happy to do this. Still, without the articles in The Orlando Sentinel, a Pulitzer-Prize-winning newspaper that until recently positioned itself among its competition as a Southeastern regional newspaper based in Orlando, the history of the college will be mostly bones without flesh.

The fact of the matter is few national publications/outlets have covered the history and important events of Beacon College in the granular fashion required to provide the robust chronicling that this Wikipedia article entry edit request does.

The articles written by outfits outside our geographical orbit that were not cited in this edit speak generally and in a macro fashion about the college's concept and mission if that.

The only coverage that a small, niche college like Beacon naturally would expect came courtesy of the local community newspaper (The Daily Commercial) and the regional metropolitan daily, the twice-Pulitzer-Prize-winning, The Orlando Sentinel (for the record, Beacon College is more than an hour away from the Orlando Sentinel office, and thus, in the strictest sense, doesn’t seem to qualify as its "neighborhood school").

Moreover, as you know, journalists are not at our beck and call (no matter how often we may reach out). Therefore, it is only reasonable that most of the granular history and facts — particularly the mundane bits — would find a home not in an outside editorial outlets but rather the college's own publications and website.

Indeed, that is the case with another college who operates in the LD space, Curry College (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry_College), whose Wikipedia page posts a relatively long article with five footnotes (three of which are sourced from the school's website). Likewise, Elon University's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_University) posting contains 44 footnotes, most of which are Elon-sourced. And there there's Rollins College (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollins_College), another Orlando-area school, whose Wikipedia page stands sans editor's notes, yet features in the lion's share of its 104 footnotes Orlando-based or Rollins-college-generated sources (i.e. The Orlando Sentinel, The Sandspur [Rollins College student newspaper], the Rollins' website, The Winter Park Chronicles (Rollins College is based in Winter Park), Rollins Magazine, local TV and radio outlets, etc.). We're can't understand what appears to be defacto inconsistency.

Certainly, we understand and honor the need for protocols and have labored to satisfy yours (including beefing up secondary sources and disclosing my conflict of interest, etc.). And certainly, our intent is not to instigate a virtual screaming match.

Nevertheless, your panacea for Beacon College is all but a Sisyphean task — one that we're undertaking because not only have our stakeholders suggested it was time, but because we are cognizant that increasingly everyone (from students to lending organizations) turn first to Wikipedia for a quick read on colleges.

We realize that placement in Wikipedia is a privilege not a right. However, it seems rather an unnecessarily exclusionary practice for an information portal meant to democratize and broadcast information to compel an organization to produce as alternative substantiation sources that simply don’t exist — especially when unadulterated facts reported under journalistic ethics already has been presented in this edit request.

We look to a second look and reconsideration of this matter.

Darrylowens312 (talk) 17:32, 23 May 2019 (UTC) Darrylowens312 (talk) 16:18, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

 Response given on the article's talk page.  Spintendo  05:44, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Did I ever thank you for the amount of time you're spending on answering edit requests, detailledly, clearing a backlog that few other editors would be able to keep empty? I am amazed by your work. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the recognition, it's much appreciated. Warm regards,  Spintendo  08:06, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

requested edit for Victor Vescovo has been updated

Hello Spintendo, on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Victor_Vescovo updated request from your feedback with a different citation with the dive date for confirmation. Thank you, it is "Deepest Ever Submarine Dive Made by Five Deeps Expedition". The Maritime Executive. 2019-05-14. Retrieved 3 June 2019.--177.67.80.61 (talk) 02:47, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response given on the article's talk page.  Spintendo  08:06, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

Dear Spintendo, I was unaware of the errors you pointed out and will now address them in the draft. Thank you for your politeness too.MrMistral (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Wyss Foundation

Hello. Earlier last month, I noticed you removed an entire section about the Wyss Campaign for Nature from the Wyss Foundation article. I asked for clarification at Talk:Wyss Foundation, but haven’t received any feedback yet. I understand a standalone subsection may not necessary, but since the campaign is ongoing and has received plenty of coverage, I’m wondering if mention of the Wyss Campaign for Nature should be added back in a reduced or present-tense form. Thanks. Inkian Jason (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response given on the article's talk page.  Spintendo  08:06, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Based on your feedback, and given the amount of coverage received, I've proposed adding back a short mention of the campaign on the article's talk page. Inkian Jason (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

/* Some proposed changes */ Follow-up on Beacon College proposed edits

Good morning, Spintendo:

As before, this message previously appears on the Beacon College talk page.

Again, I appreciate your gracious response.

You ponder the reason why the Orlando Sentinel would "devote a substantial portion of its reporting to Beacon."

First of all, any major metropolitan newspaper worth its salt boasts a higher education reporter, and sometimes more than one (a large metropolitan area like Boston, with the embarrassment of riches it enjoys in institutions of higher learning, might task several reporters to cover the higher education beat).

Consequently, a higher education reporter writes articles about the higher education institutions within the newspaper's geographic coverage area.

In the case of the Orlando Sentinel, these institutions would include Rollins College, the University of Central Florida, Seminole State College, Valencia College, Stetson University, (sometimes Florida A&M and Bethune-Cookman), Lake-Sumter College, and, when warranted, Beacon College.

As such, this charge of "regional bias" doesn't compute. Obviously, a newspaper that covers higher education would cover news of the institutions of higher education in its regional coverage area. That would not be classified as bias. That would be classified as the newspaper doing its job.

Moreover, Beacon College received coverage by the Orlando Sentinel because of the school's novelty — Beacon College is one of only two colleges in the United States dedicated to educating students with learning disabilities, ADHD, and other learning differences. These are students who before 1989 when the school was founded had few options in pursuing postsecondary education.

Novelty is news. Therefore, of course, any newspaper — including The Orlando Sentinel — would cover novel news in its geographic area. That is the function of a standard newspaper operation — not evidence of regional bias.

Moreover, the chart that you included MAKES the argument I advanced.

Your chart rightly shows that the institutions noted have existed far longer than Beacon College. Yet, despite their maturity, their Wikipedia articles still rely on a preponderance of regional news coverage and self-generated sources.

Your argument suggests that given their longer operating lives that these schools should have been able to produce far more "non-regional/independent" and "non-biased" sources than their Wikipedia articles contain.

And yet they don't.

Yet, their articles pass muster.

So, returning to my main point, regarding the "dearth of independent sources," there was no way 30 years ago when the school was founded nor anyway today to compel news outlets outside the region to write articles about a small niche school outside their coverage areas. Nor is there any way Beacon College can jump into Dr. Who's Tardis and return to the past and compel or cajole news outlets, book authors, think tanks and others to pen articles about the Beacon College-related happenings that the Orlando Sentinel rightly chronicled.

The historical coverage of Beacon College to this point is what it is. There are no other sources to be found in the countless databases we search. You can't turn up what doesn't exist.

Given the reliance that many people across the globe now have with using Wikipedia articles as their go-to source for information about a subject, we recognize the importance, value, and desperate need for Beacon College to have a comprehensive — and accurate — Wikipedia article available for individuals researching the college. What currently exists is woefully out-of-date and woefully inadequate.

What recourse does Beacon College have in this matter?

Darrylowens312 (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Need some help responding to your question

Greetings Spintendo. I tried to respond to your last question on Talk:Kai Staats but for some reason my response doesn't show up on that page. It's there in the edit history but doesn't show on the page unless I'm logged in. I checked all the shortcodes and cannot figure out what I'm doing wrong. You've been kind enough to provide a lot of help on this article already, but this has me stumped. What am I doing wrong? Thanks.

EDIT: I can see my last edit now that you've responded (thanks) but I'm still curious why I couldn't see it (unless logged in) earlier. Any ideas?

Astro3.142 (talk) 20:01, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your work with COI editors. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Valereee submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Spintendo to be Editor of the Week for tireless work with COI editors making edit requests. Almost by definition these are not edits or articles Spintendo is interested in, and yet his contributions history has many instances of responses to this kind of help request. This kind of work is often tedious, as many COI editors aren't experienced enough to follow the instructions that make the work easier for the responding editor. This is in general pretty thankless work -- the COI editors in question are often not happy with the outcome, and many other editors are actively hostile to COI editors so don't appreciate the time and effort. But this is important work and helps protect those articles from being affected by the COI, and I appreciate all the instances I've seen Spintendo respond politely and with laudable patience to these requests, both on the article talk pages and on Spintendo's own talk page.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

Extended content

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}} Editor Spintendo Spintendo   Editor of the Week for the week beginning June 9, 2019 Does important work protecting articles from "Conflict of Interest" editors while responding politely and with patience. Many editors can be actively hostile to COI editors and so they don't appreciate the time and effort that is required to communicate solutions. Recognized for Assisting and training COI editors Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 12:07, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dhivya Suryadevara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fortune (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 17:30, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Question re feedback on Bloomin Brands Talk page

Thanks for your feedback on my latest edit request. Citations 1, 4 and 6 in the current article can be removed as text was updated and cited using other works in my edit request. Is this all that is needed to bring this to resolution and have edits approved? Thank you. AmyPGPR (talk) 16:57, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response given at the article's talk page.  Spintendo  17:24, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Your reversion of my edits to Proteus Airlines Flight 706

I am bewildered by your justification for totally reverting my edit being that I "removed sourced information". I did nothing of the sort. It appears that that you have only skimmed the edit record and have missed that fact that I combined two paragraphs (one of which was only one sentence long), in order to unify the point about the Cessna's transponder not being turned on. I would appreciate it if you would check what I actually did and then undo your reversion.

Tullyvallin (talk) 01:01, 14 June 2019 (UTC)Tullyvallin

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Since you're easily the most productive editor handling edit requests I figured you deserved some recognition; thank you for working so hard to keep the requested edit queue down to a minimum. Yunshui 雲水 07:32, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Halsey Minor

Hi there. As you have previouly commented I want to bring this section to your attention so you can comment if you desire, thanks Talk:Halsey_Minor#request_for_draft_article_replacment - Govindaharihari (talk) 14:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response made on the article's talk page. Regards,  Spintendo  20:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Changed Citations for Ansell Proposed Changes to citation style 1

Thank you for considering my proposed edits on Talk:Ansell. I apologize for the incorrect citation style I initially used. I edited my initial request to reflect citation style 1 and published the changes. Will editors now be able to view my proposed changes again? Or will it still say unable to review due to the citations, even though I have changed them?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.121.247.195 (talk) 15:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

144.121.247.195 (talk) 15:47, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response given at the article's talk page.  Spintendo  16:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Some proposed changes: Please place edit requests on the talk pages where changes are requested to be made.

I cannot do that owing to COI. You can see that is what I am responding to and have nowhere else to put that. You have the free time, could you please put that on the talk page for Danielle Cadena Deulen? Thank you. --MinimumMax (talk) 16:52, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

@MinimumMax: "have nowhere else to put that." Actually there is, Talk:Danielle Cadena Deulen has been provided as the perfect location for requests to be made. Regards,  Spintendo  17:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

@Spintendo That worked. Thank you! --MinimumMax (talk) 17:33, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

 Spintendo  17:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Halsey Minor

HI there, many thanks for your review. If there is anything you could help to address your concerns that would be appreciated. I see you are a good article contributor and many thanks for your contributions. Govindaharihari (talk) 18:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

please check my revisions of katherine hoover

Hello Spintendo, while i am defined as having a COI, I have added references, hopefully corrected errors and chronologically sorted her selected works all with a neutral pov. inactivity on the talk page is the only reason for my actions. It is important that my edits follow acceptable protocol. thank you , Mkoronowski (talk) 04:04, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response given at the article's talk page.  Spintendo  20:24, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Brahma_Kumaris -Restore_blanked_sections_and_logo

Hi there. I have redrafted the deleted sections and found a new reference for them. I would also appreciate if you could explain why the deleted logo can't be restored at this present time and how to resolve that.

Relevant talk page : Talk:Brahma_Kumaris#Restore_blanked_sections_and_logo_v2

Thanks Bksimonb (talk) 08:07, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

I did not remove any logos from that article, so I can't explain why they cannot be restored. Your request did not include a filename to be added to the article, so that is the reason why no logo was added in my edit request review. Regards,  Spintendo  17:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

The IP editor had removed the logo. It seems that the logo PNG was deleted anyway as a non-free media file about a month ago making the edit request for the logo redundant.

Are the other two new edit proposals on the article talk page OK?

Thanks Bksimonb (talk) 19:41, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response given at the article's talk page.  Spintendo  20:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Dave Butler

A heads up I tagged you in a note at Talk:Dave_Butler_(basketball,_born_1964/1965). NinaSpezz (talk) 20:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

 Response given at the article's talk page.  Spintendo  23:27, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Strawberries are a delicious thank you gift.

Your efforts are very appreciated! Tuuzi (talk) 03:18, 27 June 2019 (UTC)