User talk:K.e.coffman

Max Valentiner

I reverted a 2008 IP edit which replaced "branded a war criminal" with "listed as a war criminal" at Max Valentiner. List of most successful U-boat commanders had similar language which I also reverted. –dlthewave ☎ 20:11, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: Thank you; a good one! I added this example to the showcase, in the User:K.e.coffman#Investigative Sub-committee on Abuses of Victor's Justice section. If you come across any others, please let me know. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:49, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

It's a rabbithole: [1] [2] [3]. There seems to be a legend of "honorable" "Aces of the Deep" who allowed crews to evacuate to lifeboats and gave directions to the nearest port before destroying the vessel. –dlthewave ☎ 05:10, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

See also badassoftheweek.com which was used as a source. –dlthewave ☎ 05:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: "badassoftheweek.com" is pretty good! K.e.coffman (talk) 04:30, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Coloured pictures

See this discussion: Template:Nl: nl:Wikipedia:De kroeg#Historische foto's: zwart-wit of ingekleurd The Banner talk 18:23, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@The Banner: Thank you for letting me know; I commented on the thread. FYI, there's a somewhat related discussion on de.wiki: Colorierung historischer NS-Bilder vom Bundesarchiv auf Commons; (permalink). --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:17, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I can't read the Dutch (or German) but if you need help with this abomination on English wikipedia, let me know. I'm not one to see Nazis under every bit of furniture, but even I think someone with that user name doing only colorizations of nazi images is a bit of a red flag! Ealdgyth - Talk 13:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@Ealdgyth: I compiled the cliff notes from the three discussions, on English, Dutch and German Wikipedias:

• User:K.e.coffman/Colourised photograhs

English Wikipedia does not seem to be an issue, along with the other two wikis. It was the reaction on Commons that I found surprising, along with people following me to other wikis to reintroduce the fakes into articles. The links to the Commons discussions are included in the "See also" section. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CL, October 2018

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at the use of so-called "substandard" manpower in armies Interview: On the Bugle turning 150 (issues that is!) Op-ed: TomStar81 on the collapse of empires at the close of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Johann Rattenhuber and the RSD

K.e. - I remember reading sometime ago about Rattenhuber being in charge of security during the build out of Wolf's Lair and how foreign workers on the site were shot in the name of "security". I looked in my library this past weekend, but cannot find the RS book where I read that now. I wanted to add some RS citing for it. If you have or come across anything in relation to the above, let me know. Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 16:41, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

@Kierzek: I found some information in Smersh: Stalin's Secret Weapon, by Vadim Birstein. The book does not list the number of victims, but otherwise confirms RSD's role in the events: [4]. Hope this helps. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:25, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi K.e.coffman. After reviewing your request at the Afc desk, I have additionally enabled rollback on your account. Happy editing! Lourdes 06:18, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

@Lourdes: thank you; I appreciate it. --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:02, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Congrats! Strike the earth! –♠Vami_IV†♠ 06:42, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it's a big deal really. WP:TWINKLE already gives you the "Rollback (Vandal)" option, so it's not much of change. --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:03, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Vami IV: --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:04, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh. See, I'm not so much an admin as I am a cave dragon and have no knowledge of these things. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 03:27, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Vami IV: Anybody can use Twinkle. It's useful for semi-automated edits, such as nominating articles for deletion; welcoming new users; etc. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:54, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

True, the official "Rollback" is a obtained right; and a fast and easy, through a one clink step, to deal with vandalism. Kierzek (talk) 13:50, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ernst Klink

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ernst Klink you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Catrìona -- Catrìona (talk) 08:41, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Felix Römer

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Felix Römer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Catrìona -- Catrìona (talk) 08:41, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ernst Klink

The article Ernst Klink you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ernst Klink for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Catrìona -- Catrìona (talk) 01:01, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Felix Römer

The article Felix Römer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Felix Römer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Catrìona -- Catrìona (talk) 01:41, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Catrìona: Thank you for the reviews. Much appreciated. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:58, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Bandenbekämpfung

Hope you are well. Since I had a free couple of hours, I worked on the Bandenbekämpfung page you created. In the process, I deleted a couple things that were not substantiated or not a proper reflection of the original (added by other editors I am sure). Not that I did a lot, but it's enough that a good copy-edit, content review, is in order as I was working very quickly. As you know, my substantial library can be used to great effect in strengthening this page--if I had but more time. Maybe over the holidays or if I get a free moment here or there. Servus --Obenritter (talk) 06:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

@Obenritter: thank you for expanding the article. I actually own Blood's Hitler's Bandit Hunters that you used, and I've been thinking of working on the article since forever. However, I find the book to be a difficult read, both because of the author's writing style and the subject matter. (I've found Westermann's Hitler's Police Battalions to be correspondingly blood-curling in places.) But I'll see if I can get back to it. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:39, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

No worries brother. I know you are busy fighting Nazi mythologizing all over Wikipedia, which is an honorable task. Yeah Blood's prose is not the easiest to get through, but the book is very informative. I haven't picked up Westerman's work, but based on what I've heard about it I should. Keep up the good fight.--Obenritter (talk) 18:44, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Obenritter: Yes, Westermann is a good resource. The book has a detailed discussion of the activities of the police battalions in 1941-42 in the Soviet Union, along with 1939-1940 in Poland. There are also chapters on the pre-war history of the Ornungspolizei, to explain the development of its doctrine and organisation. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:34, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Case made. I'll be ordering a copy.--Obenritter (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obsidi (talk • contribs)

Permalinks:

• Talk:Deep state in the United States#Recent edit.
• Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Deep state in the United States

--K.e.coffman (talk) 01:06, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Wolfram Wette

I copyedited it, but it's my first GOCE copyedit, so if you'd like another editor to look at it, feel free to leave it up on the Req page. Catrìona (talk) 07:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

It looks good. I made a pass at it, just now and only did some minor ce. Although I have been a member of the GOCE for a long time, I generally just do copy edit work where I see a need or upon request. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 14:24, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@Catrìona and Kierzek: thank you both. Catrìona, please feel free to mark as "done" in the GOCE queue; I was mostly looking for another set of eyes. This works for me! --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:43, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:43:52, 17 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Ourielw

• Ourielw (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Monday (software) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi There,

Thanks for your review.

I got your message about the rejection of my page "monday (software)". You wrote "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia" I invested a lot of time to make this page as neutral as possible, including 37 (neutral) references, so I was wondering what else I should do in order to allow the page to be published. Yes, this article is about a commercial company and product, but so are lots of others articles, including companies similar to monday. I actually tried to keep a similar structure and type of content like those pages for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asana_(software), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airtable

I'd really like to have your assistance on how to make it even more neutral to allow it go live.

Thank you for your help! Ourie

l

Ourielw (talk) 17:43, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Ourielw: the article uses non-neutral language, which makes it read like an advertisement / sales brochure. Let's take the lead for example:

... is a team management platform designed to help teams collaborate and build transparency in the workplace.re: "transparency" -- what does this mean exactly? this is not an NGO. The SaaS tool is used by a varied customer base,this is wp:peacock; avoid including startups to Fortune 500 companies, such as Carlsberg Group, Frost & Sullivan, McDonald's, WeWork, and Wix.com.name dropping monday.com can be used by any team peacock working together, from two freelancers collaborating on a project to thousands collaborating across the globe.sales brochure The non-tech segment of monday.com’s user base now consists of more than 70% of their paying accounts.bragging; probably originating from the company itself.

Re: content: generally, reviews help -- what are the product's strengths? what are its weaknesses? Instead of: the company raised an A round; then it raised a B round; then a C round. Here are all of their investors, including their names and here's how much they each invested. Etc. This reads like an investment prospectus. Hope this helps. Lastly, do you happen to be affiliated with the company in any way? K.e.coffman (talk) 01:39, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Wilhelm Krüger

The article Wilhelm Krüger has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

It appears that this is a fake article, because that person never existed : he was confused with Friedrich-Wilhelm Krüger at the time of his creation. It has just been deleted from French Wikipedia where it had been copied from English Wikipedia. Please see that discussion page : [5]. Best regards. Gkml

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gkml (talk) 17:01, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

@Gkml: Thank you for letting me know. I agree with the proposed deletion. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Felix Römer

Hello! Your submission of Felix Römer at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Turismond (talk) 04:08, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Medicare cost report

You moved the article about Medicare cost reports to Draft:Medicare cost report. I was not sure what the protocol is for responding. I tried responding on my talk page, and am responding here, as well.

Below is a quote from WP:ADVOCACY "Don't use Wikipedia articles to advocate your cause. Advocacy is the use of Wikipedia to promote personal beliefs or agendas at the expense of Wikipedia's goals and core content policies, including verifiability and neutral point of view."

Medicare cost reports are neither anyone's personal beliefs nor agendas. There is an entire division at CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) whose sole job is to oversee the cost reports. Though I do not have one, relationship to any of the providers would be irrelevant, since filing Medicare cost reports is a requirement for Medicare participation, not a way to enrich providers. The aim of the article is to assist those providers in finding the information they need regarding Medicare Cost Reports and how and when to file them, so that they will remain compliant with Medicare regulations. I do have a relationship with https://blog.ppsassistant.com/, and quote it due to the dearth, lack of reliability, or lack of clarity of much of the other material about cost reports found on the web. Since this is a very specific topic, there are few experts in this area, and an even greater lack of information for providers who need it. Taking the article out of circulation will leave many who need the information in the dark. --TemiU (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@TemiU: Since you have a WP:COI in re this topic, you should declare it on your user page. The page was linking excessively to https://blog.ppsassistant.com/, that's why I called it advocacy (i.e. you are promoting your blog by linking to it and citing it from Wikipedia). Re: I quote it due to the dearth, lack of reliability, or lack of clarity of much of the other material about cost reports found on the web, this means that the topic is likely to be non-notable and is not suitable for inclusion here. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:34, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

K.e.coffman, I do understand that many have not heard about Medicare cost reports, however for many it is essential information. I actually am in the process of looking for other sources of information for the article and was in the process of editing it as you reverted the changes. Since it was suggested that it be merged with "Medicare" by a different user, that is what I did. TemiU (talk) 06:43, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@TemiU: Since you have COI in this area, it would be best that you don't edit the articles related to cost reports directly. Please review the information I left on your Talk page: User talk:TemiU#Managing a conflict of interest. You can still propose changes on related Talk pages. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:48, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

AfC submission by Michellebrownboynton

• Michellebrownboynton (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear K.e.coffman,

I am very confused by this article being declined citing that it "appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia". There is currently an article about the Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art in Swedish (Göteborg Internationella konstbiennal), but there is not one in English, hence this article being created. Here is the Swedish article: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6teborgs_Internationella_Konstbiennal

In my opinion, this article couldn't be more objective, as it simply stated the title of each edition, the theme, the curator, the artists and the venues. This is the format used by the Liverpool Biennial. Is it just that the sources are mostly from GIBCA's website?

Can you please explain exactly why this article has been declined, given that an article for this same topic already exists in Swedish. And please can you let me know which specific things need to be edited in order for it to be published?

Thank you, Michelle

Michellebrownboynton (talk) 03:55, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

• Michellebrownboynton, I agree with coffman. That it "simply" lists facts doesn't mean it's not promotional--this listing itself (a kind of namedropping) is promotional. An encyclopedic article would describe the project, its history, its importance, and would verify that with secondary sources. That something exists on the Swedish wiki is immaterial here; their standards may differ. It might be instructive to look at documenta, which isn't great, but it's a lot more like a real article. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:58, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

• Drmies, Thank you for your feedback, however, listing exhibited artists isn't namedropping or promotional, it is purely informative. Providing a list of artists is one of the most important pieces of information with regard to communicating about a Biennial. It is the same as listing artists in an exhibition. This isn't promotional in the slightest. :If you look at Munster Skulptur Projekte, the Istanbul Biennial, Desert X, the Whitney Biennial (just to name a few) each of these list their exhibiting artists that isn't a problem:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skulptur_Projekte_M%C3%BCnster

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_Biennial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_X

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitney_Biennial

(all English articles)

Can either of you please consider this and please advise how to proceed. There really needs to be an article about the Göteborg International Biennial for Contemporary Art as it has been around for almost 20 years now, and have had many non Swedish Speaking curators, artists, partners, and institutions involved. Thank you, Michelle

Michellebrownboynton (talk) 04:18, 23 October 2018

@Michellebrownboynton: Generally agree with Drmies. There are several reasons why the page came across as an advertisement: a. use of the org's own web site as source: http://www.gibca.se/en/2017/artists-gibca-2017 ; b. excessive listing of exhibition venues and artists, many of whom are non-notable. This is covered under WP:NOT. What would be relevant and encyclopedic is the reviews by critics and / or information on how it fits into the bigger trends of contemporary art, based on independent, third-party sources. Merely providing "factual" listings is the job of the org's own website. There's no need to duplicate them in the encyclopedia. Separately, are you affiliated with the organisation in any way? K.e.coffman (talk) 04:45, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, what coffman says. "Providing a list of artists is one of the most important pieces of information with regard to communicating about a Biennial"--no, it is not, at least not in an encyclopedic article. All that information is already available on the organization's website. You know art exhibits, it seems--that's great, but this is an encyclopedia, and it's not the same thing. Drmies (talk) 14:29, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Joseph Ngozi Nkoro‎

My article on Joseph Ngozi Nkoro was declined on the grounds that it sounded like an advert..

Kindly assist me to fish out those sections or line that sounded like an advert.. I wish this article to be as neutral as neutral can be..

Meanwhile I am already working to reduce any line that tends towards the advert..

Thank you Capt Jack Sparrow (talk) 10:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

@Capt Jack Sparrow: the subject does not meet notability guidelines and is an advertisement. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:44, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Roman Töppel on Franz Kurowski

The paper by Roman Töppel on Franz Kurowski has recently been published. doi:10.15500/akm12022018. I thought you might want to take a look. There is an abstract in English. Let me know if you need further help with the language. Regards, --Assayer (talk) 18:06, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 08:09:07, 24 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by 164.215.104.169

• 164.215.104.169 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mark Mosimann (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi,

I have had the Draft: Mark Mosimann page reviewed and denied, but I don't really understand why. There are plenty of external references, from independent bodies and the content is neither of advertising nature nor one-sided? Please can you advise?

Many thanks 164.215.104.169 (talk) 08:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Atayants, Maxim

Hi, Could you explain me more detailed why this page declined and advise me what shall I do to improve it? What part of article seems like advertising? What part needs more references? Лев Усыскин (talk) 08:59, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Re: Draft: Jet Setting Jasmine Article Deletion". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 31 October 2018.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 10:47, 24 October 2018 (UTC)