User talk:Patapsco913

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Levivich (talk | contribs) at 06:15, 3 March 2020 (→‎BLP concerns on Bradley S. Jacobs: Maurice Kremer isn't a BLP). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome

User:Patapsco913/EditCounterOptIn.js
Hello, Patapsco913! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Jesstalk|edits 18:10, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

April 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Tea bag (disambiguation) with this edit, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jsharpminor (talk) 02:51, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2nd warning. See the talk page and start discussing.04:51, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

SSM

Hi there,

I notice that a few edits I've corrected for NPOV recently all happen to have been by you; specifically, would you mind not using the scare quotes when you write about same-sex marriage? It just makes it so much harder to track down the edits and fix them, since I can't search on the term in scare quotes without getting a lot of results for the term not in scare quotes. ;)

Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:35, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi Roscelese. I made a couple edits to Jaime Soto. Point taken on the scare quotes; sorry i was quoting the article.

1. Soto is against abortion and contraception so should we call it as such. Reproductive rights is not an easily defined term and can mean a lot of things. Why go to the non-specific when we have specific defined terms. Is Soto against all the items included as "reproductive rights" listed below?

The wiki entry on "reproductive Rights" states: "Reproductive rights may include some or all of the following: the right to legal or safe abortion, the right to birth control, the right to access quality reproductive healthcare, and the right to education and access in order to make reproductive choices free from coercion, discrimination, and violence.[7] Reproductive rights may also include the right to receive education about contraception and sexually transmitted infections, and freedom from coerced sterilization, abortion, and contraception, and protection from gender-based practices such as female genital cutting (FGC) and male genital mutilation (MGM)."

2. Soto has spoken against the homosexual lifestyle as a sin and not homosexuality. This is a very important distinction and standard doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Catechism of the Catholic Church: Chastity and homosexuality 2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

1. Since it mentioned both abortion and contraception, my change to "reproductive rights" was mostly to shorten the laundry list rather than for POV reasons; however, we would still have to say "abortion rights" and "contraception rights" because the groups do not actually advocate abortions or contraception, they just think people should be able to use them if they want to.
2. The "homosexual lifestyle" is a term used pretty much solely by opponents of gay rights that we should avoid in encyclopedic prose. Can we either put it in a quote (eg. "Soto said, 'the homosexual lifestyle is sinful and therefore no civil rights for you'") or find a neutral way of conveying the information?
Would you mind implementing some of these compromises, or should I?
cheers, Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 10:51, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I changed it a little more, hope it looks good. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple citizenship article

I made this edit today, which involved cite-supported material contributed by you. Separately, I exampled that edit in a response here in a discussion on WT:NPOV. I hope that is not too cryptic; you'll need to look at the wikilinks to get a feel for what I'm on about.

Anyhow, my response and the responded-to point at WT:NPOV were pretty off-topic for the discussion there. I'm afraid, though, that my response came off as quite critical of your insertion (more critical, I see on re-reading, than I initially thought it to be). if you have followon discussion re my edit to the Multiple citizenship, I'd appreciate it if you would place it on the article talk page or, alternatively, on one of our two talk pages to avoid defocusing the discussion at WT:NPOV where I made my response to the mostly offtopic comment there. Cheers. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:39, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Following RSs

By all means, report whatever the RSs say. I think that was done, but see that one of the refs cannot now be read, and others are further down in the para--so I've added some more. You can answer here if you have any comments/questions. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can answer here if you have any comments/questions. The article says precisely what the refs say. That is how wiki operates. I'll look at the article more tomorrow--but if I deleted a ref that he was not religious that was sourced, I'll revert that. You are engaging in OR ... we follow the sources ... and please note that one used later in the para even has a habit of asking the player or his rep if he wants to be reflected as such, and only reflects them if they say yes.
BTW ... you can post here if you want to discuss further. I will watch your page.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Carl Kruger, Leonardo DiCaprio and List of Jewish American politicians. Thank you. Jayjg (talk) 16:30, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the same token, please don't delete relevant RS-supported information regarding people being Jewish, as you did here.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see you did it again. A few points. First, the article is about him -- not his parents. For you to delete that he is Jewish, because we discuss that his parents are Jewish, is bass ackwards. Second, it is OR on your point that because his parents are Jewish, so is he. Third, we have a source identifying him as Jewish -- please stop deleting what it supports. Fourth, some people are born Jewish, but choose not to be Jewish any longer, and convert out, so it is of relevance not just what he was born (if we accept your OR as acceptable, which it isn't). Fifth, coupled with the above comment by a sysop, I'm concerned that you seem to not "get it" with the subject being people being Jewish -- yet again.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:13, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
wow, you do not need to get so angry. First, please folow protocol and start a new topic on someon'e talk page and not link to something nearly two year's old; also list the name of the article at issue (Nelson Peltz. My edit was because the sentence you wrote was awkward: "Peltz is Jewish and was raised in a Jewish family" If someone's parents are ethnically Jewish than of course, their child is ethnically Jewish (this is not OR). There is nothing that indicates that he is religiously Jewish (and to assert requires such requires strong proof per wikipedia guidelines) so would you not be doing OR to claim as much. However, being ethnically Jewish does not require such proof. Anyhow, I am fine with your new edit but please, there is no need to get so hostile and vulgar. I am not sure what you mean about sysop. JayJ corrected me when I assumed an article referring to someone as "Jewish" did not mean that his religion was Judaism since it could mean that his ethnicity was Jewish.Patapsco913 (talk) 16:16, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm disturbed when I see such edits following similarly disturbing edits. And I see the focus of the sysop's warning and my concern as related. Hence, my post of my comment in the same section. Also, I already linked to the article -- there is no need for me to in addition to the link indicate its name, as that is easily known by following the link. Third, if you find that RS-supported text is, in your personal view, awkward, I believe that it would be better for you to retain the RS-supported text and smooth out the awkwardness, through normal copy-editing, rather than (twice) deleted the RS-supported text. Furthermore, the text states that he is Jewish. And the article is about him. First order of business is to reflect that. That is what is needed, for example, to put him in the "Jewish" cat. It is absurd IMHO to focus on whether his parents are Jewish, and delete the RS-supported fact that he is Jewish. I apologize if you found my comment vulgar. I admit I was concerned by what I saw as a similarly questionable edit, again, with the focus being on Jews. But fyi, I did hold back and seek to discuss the matter, rather than simply leave a template warning. Many thanks for discussing it.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Your addition to Joseph Komonochak has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. StarM 04:38, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daniel M. Ziff for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel M. Ziff is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel M. Ziff until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Max Viwe | Viwe The Max 15:00, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012

Your addition to Al-Azhar University has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 17:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Ben Maddow has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 17:40, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Mohamed Ahmed el-Tayeb has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 17:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Walter Lowenfels has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 17:57, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Samuel Irving Newhouse, Sr. has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 18:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as on Talk:Walter Lowenfels, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 11:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Edward Lampert has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 11:44, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Armando Xavier Ochoa has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. RolandR (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CCI Notice

Hello, Patapsco913. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. For some suggestions on responding, please see Responding to a CCI case. Thank you. RolandR (talk) 12:11, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Maddow

Hello Patapsco913. The new reference by Jim Burns that you added to the Ben Maddow article is a good one. While the text you copied from the Burns article has been deleted, of course, I have added the citation itself to a "Further reading" section. Regards, Easchiff (talk) 12:38, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Deletion discussion about Mary Elizabeth Butt

Hello, Patapsco913,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Mary Elizabeth Butt should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Elizabeth Butt .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Go Phightins! 23:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Article Feedback deployment

Hey Patapsco913; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Speyer

Hello, what are your sources for the birth years of Jerry Speyer's children? Graham87 06:19, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I used their age at the time of their wedding notification in the NY TimesPatapsco913 (talk)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Nick Woodman may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandal edit at Bethenny Frankel. The IP has made that same edit multiple times and I've reported them to WP:AIV. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 02:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rodger Krouse

The article Rodger Krouse has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no indication of WP:Notability. While the sources given do mention him they do not establish him as a notable person in his own right. The first reference is a small mention of political contributions, the second is about the company, the third is not independent and the fourth is just a wedding notice.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. noq (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rodger Krouse for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rodger Krouse is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodger Krouse until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. noq (talk) 23:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Wilma Tisch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wilma Tisch is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilma Tisch until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bbb23 (talk) 14:50, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

James M. Nederlander and Robert Nederlander

Dear Patapsco913,

It struck me that James M. Nederlander has the intro and infobox of Robert Nederlander. Surely, that's a mistake, right? I added a {{disputed}} tag for this; if it's fixed, feel free to remove that. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I had a little mix-up there between the father James M. and son James L. Patapsco913 (talk)
The intro still seems incorrect; it says Robert E. Nederlander (trivial to fix) and the birth date contradicts the infobox (less trivial, so I'll leave it to you). QVVERTYVS (hm?) 17:21, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to James L. Nederlander may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • com/blog/134/margo-macnabb-nederlander Great Performances: Margo MacNabb Nederlander] By Rob Arango] April 14, 2011</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jennifer N. Pritzker

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jennifer N. Pritzker requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. reddogsix (talk) 01:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing

Do not inappropriately canvass other editors. Plot Spoiler (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What changes are you opposed to? I didn't make any major changes, just tweaked some of the text. Please don't do a blanket revert, because I think a lot of the changes improve the page. Plot Spoiler (talk) 03:37, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
well perhaps others disagree. that is why we have a talk page. Everything you took out has a citation. Why would you take out the reference to Avi Tiomkin where he got his start? or that he started out by analyzing Israeli companies; or that his wife's mother introduced him to Avi. These are all important facts to show how he started out.Patapsco913 (talk)


Numbers of Spanish Americans

Thanks for the explanation on the numbers of Spanish-Americans. I think there are problems with that number, though. I've posted to the talk page on Talk:Hispanic–Latino naming dispute to explain. Please see what I've posted there and comment if you have any thoughts. Thanks.Goodsdrew (talk) 00:00, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hi, would you mind if I nominated Steven Roth for DYK? Thanks, Matty.007 19:09, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problemPatapsco913 (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The nom is at this page. Thanks, Matty.007 19:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind if I also nominated Joseph Chetrit for DYK? Thanks, Matty.007 11:46, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion & thank you

Hi Patapsco913 and thank for your work on Wikipedia! I've noticed that you frequently edit pages of many Jews, and therefore I thought I should recommend you this: The website jinfo.org provides "an online resource that accurately describes the Jewish contribution to the cultural, scientific, and technological evolution of civilization." However, the wiki articles of a lot of Jews from these lists don't even mention the that the person is Jewish. So if you have time and like to do it, you could go over the names their and add the proper Jewish categories or Jewish connection in their articles, unless it's already there of course. I'm not sure if jinfo.org itself can be used as a reliable source, but it cites other sources and there're plenty of other websites on the web that confirm these people's Jewishness. Regards, Shalom11111 (talk) 07:04, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Gert Boyle

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Nice article at Seymour Milstein. Bearian (talk) 22:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Remember edit summary! Suggestion

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary with every edit. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history.

The edit summary appears in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesixthstaff (talk • contribs) 00:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nick Loeb for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nick Loeb is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Loeb until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lankiveil (speak to me) 06:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Henry Moskowitz (real estate investor)

The article Henry Moskowitz (real estate investor) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Nothing here suggests that this individual passes notability requirements as outlined in WP:BIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 22:31, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two minor things

Hi and thank you for your contribution. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia does allow deleting material from one's talk page, which I didn't know before and may have misled you to think otherwise, so I'd like to let you know that you can do it now.. Also, I see that sometimes you don't insert citations the proper way in articles you edit, so in case you haven't found this option yet, the easiest way to do it is by clicking on "cite", then "template", then choosing the correct option and finishing it up. Regards, Shalom11111 (talk) 19:01, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Henry Moskowitz (real estate investor) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Henry Moskowitz (real estate investor) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Moskowitz (real estate investor) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Kurt Rappaport

Hi, I have removed the mention of a marriage from the article for two reasons. First and foremost, the source that you are providing does not make any reference to their relationship, nor does it provide proof that they are married. Thus, the inclusion of this material does not meet our BLP policy. Second, through OTRS ticket # 2014011010001121 we have received sufficient proof that Kurt is not married to Juliette. (If you wish to verify this information, you may make a request at the OTRS noticeboard.) Because of the nature of the proof, it cannot be posted to Wikipedia. I have tried to look for reliable third party sources that mention his marriage and/or his divorce and was not able to find anything credible. Thus, I removed the mention of marriage in the article and did not address the divorce in the article due to a lack of the proper sources. If you have any questions, please let me know. Mike V • Talk 20:59, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Matthew Karatz

Hi, I removed the statement that he is Jewish because you didn't provide a source and I didn't see one in the body of the article that supports it. —rybec 00:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Jerrold Wexler

Your sources do not support the content that you have included at Jerrold Wexler. Please find a better source. Also please use the {{cite web}} template like the other WP:ICs.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


A page you started (Jack Rudin) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Jack Rudin, Patapsco913!

Wikipedia editor Missionedit just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on Missionedit's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

June 2014

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Christian Serratos. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:30, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the other person is using sockpuppets does not excuse you from 3RR. See WP:NOT3RR for valid exceptions; while you call it vandalism, removal of content is not inherently vandalism, especially when it is selective in nature. The sockpuppetry rule only kicks in if the master is blocked, and there is a good reason for this: enforcement of WP:CSD#G5. Otherwise, the only difference between an opponent who uses socks and one who doesn't is that they are trying to evade 3RR, but in both cases, both you and the other user have violated 3RR. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:30, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Removing legitimate "citation needed" tags; Catholic category

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. 107.15.192.226 (talk) 14:31, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia a person must self-identify with a particular denomination before being categorized; and the only way to know if they self-identify is a source indicating that the person is currently Catholic (or Baptist, or atheist, or whatever). That is what is unsourced in the article. If someone grows up an atheist but is now a Christian (see William J. Murray), do we put that person in the "Atheists" category?" MANY people grow up in a particular denomination (or lack thereof in Murray's case) but do not end up claiming that perspective when they are adults. This is a simple matter of following one of the very cornerstones of Wikipedia: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." Bill Hudson (singer) may very well be a Catholic right now, but the article doesn't provide a reliable source for that. If you want to restore the category, please find a sourced statement to that effect. And remember, the responsibility for sourcing is on the person who adds or restores information. 107.15.192.226 (talk) 14:31, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Benjamin Winter, Sr.

The article Benjamin Winter, Sr. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Benjamin Winter, Sr. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Benjamin Winter, Sr. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Winter, Sr. until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion nomination of Robert J. Ivanhoe

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Robert J. Ivanhoe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. reddogsix (talk) 02:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Rocco Palmo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.114.32.65 (talk) 13:19, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!!

I wanted to appreciate you for your work on creating brother rachid's page I could not find it anywhere, by the way do you know his full name??Live gono (talk) 13:22, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hijab may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ] (protective jealousy) and enforcing the wearing of the hijab preserves a Muslim man's honor) and helps to fulfill his requirement to be the protector of his womanfolk.<ref>[http://www.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question on Sources

Re: a living person's Wikipedia bio - I have multiple newspaper clippings from reliable sources saved as PDFs, can I upload them and reference them in an article? [1] seems to suggest the answer is yes, but I'd like to know if there are any details I should consider. Thank you in advance RyLaughlin (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of text from Paul Warburg

Hi, I went too far with " ...that has vast power over the lives of millions of people not just in America but around the world". That's clearly pov I admit - I was just tempted to see how long a view that is very widely held (and presumably logical i.e: if you can change a countries interest rates and money supply, how is that not having vast power over millions?) .. would stay in the article. Ok.. but let's be serious. Isn't the main legacy of Paul Warburg his pivotal and instrumental role in the creation of the Federal Reserve System? Surely you don't want readers to think that it's more important that he was the inspiration for 'Daddy Warbucks' !!!! In which case the first part of my addition is more relevant - "However, his chief legacy is his role in the creation of a private, quasi-governmental, unelected body (the Federal Reserve)" We can debate about the wording and I'm happy to do so, (you'll notice I changed 'pseudo-governmental' to 'quasi-governmental'), but at the very least 'Legacy' should refer to his major contributions. I would have thought the 'Daddy Warbucks' reference would be better in a sub section 'cultural legacy' or something.Jabberwock359 (talk) 00:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Chaim Schochet

Hello Patapsco913,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Chaim Schochet for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. TheLongTone (talk) 14:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Information icon Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! DSCrowned(talk) 10:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is important. Please help out your fellow editors by making some kind of note as to what you're doing. — Brianhe (talk) 05:08, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 2015 Baltimore protests

Materialscientist (talk) 01:21, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sheldon Solow

Hi, why did you delete my contribution? The source for Sheldon Solow's DOB meets Wiki standards re: verifiabilty. Please explain and revert. Worc63 (talk) 20:00, 14 August 2015 (UTC)\[reply]

DoB is still in there. I just adjusted the infobox so it automatically updates his age. I also restored the Jewish Business News Article which you removed for some reason; and I restored the NY Times article to the body where it belongs.Patapsco913 (talk) 20:16, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted JBN b/c, IMHO, it was redundant, per info from JBN that was being cited in the article. I was more perplexed by DOB removal. Thanks. Worc63 (talk) 22:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
DOB remained in the article. The Jewish Business News article in supporting five different statements.Patapsco913 (talk) 22:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

references

If you are going to add the same book to a tonne of articles, please do the references correctly. For example, in John M. Stahl

It's not: Erens, Patricia The Jew in American Cinema ISBN-13: 978-0-253-20493-6 | ISBN-10: 0253204933 | Publisher: Indiana University Press | Publish Date: August 1988
It's: Erens, Patricia (August 1988). The Jew in American Cinema. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-20493-6.

See a difference with the ISBNs? You also don't need two identical ISBNs either, only use the 13 digit one. Correct ref uses a template for a proper ref, same template already used in the articles. Bgwhite (talk) 06:43, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Silent Running

If you think that Michael Gruskoff is significant enough to have an article about him, then write the article, then you can link his name. Until then, he shouldn't be redlinked, as very few producers have articles, only the most well-known of them, and that's not Gruskoff. BMK (talk) 01:15, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Inmate Listing of the McLennan Country Jail as of May 19, 2015.pdf

A tag has been placed on File:Inmate Listing of the McLennan Country Jail as of May 19, 2015.pdf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 13:58, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Douglas W. Shorenstein

The article Douglas W. Shorenstein has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:12, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert J. Ivanhoe for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert J. Ivanhoe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert J. Ivanhoe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:20, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Miguel de Poblete Casasola

Hi, I'm AirCombat. Patapsco913, thanks for creating Miguel de Poblete Casasola!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hi there! I wanted to thank you for starting a new article -- it looks good! However, it's best not to rely on a single source. Once you've added more than one source, feel free to remove the tag I added. Thanks!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Air ♠ Combat What'sup, dog? 00:01, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion nomination of Felix Siauw

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Felix Siauw requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. The StormCatcher (talk) (contribs) 05:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Felix Siauw

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Felix Siauw, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another Wikimedia project, or was transwikied out to another project. Please see Wikipedia:Translation to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from foreign-language Wikipedias into English.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. The StormCatcher (talk) (contribs) 05:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Patapsco913. You have new messages at CatcherStorm's talk page.
Message added 05:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The StormCatcher (talk) (contribs) 05:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Pedro Luis Manso Zuñiga) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Pedro Luis Manso Zuñiga, Patapsco913!

Wikipedia editor MB298 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Good article. MB298 (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on MB298's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.


Unreliable sources added

Hello. I noticed you have added some reference links to gcatholic.org and catholic-hierarchy.org. These are not acceptable sources under Wikipedia policy. They are WP:USERG and WP:SPS and therefore cannot be considered reliable for use as a reference. They may possibly be acceptable only as "external links" in that section of an article. Please do not re-add them to any article as I remove them from the ones you have already created. JoeHebda (talk · contribs) might want to comment further on this issue. Elizium23 (talk) 17:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was wondering where it was determined that these sources are unreliable. Sandro Magister lists it as a recommended website (http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/chiesa_web?refresh_ce Diocesi e vescovi. Il chi è della gerarchia cattolica nel mondo. A cura di David M. Cheney, in inglese) I look on the the wikipages for other languages and both Catholic Hierarchy and GCatholic are being used everywhere. Anyhow, I can understand the self-published designation and I notice that JoeHebda did not remove the references to Catholic Hierarchy but just designated them as self-published (and he did not add such designation to GCatholic).Patapsco913 (talk) 17:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For starters, catholic-hierarchy.org lists the date of appointment as when a bishop took possession of a see, and that's a clear violation of Canon Law; bishops take possession when they are installed, not appointed. So we have a clear example of systemic error. catholic-hierarchy is a website run by one guy, Dcheney (talk · contribs) (David Cheney), and there is no "editorial oversight or reputation for fact-checking" which is required by WP:RS policy. Essentially, GCatholic just parrots whatever is found on catholic-hierarchy, so it's even worse. You can go to WP:RSN if you wish to debate the issue, I'd be happy to have a decision made once and for all so that we can get rid of these bad sources. Elizium23 (talk) 18:14, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like your mind is already made up. Anyhow, I am not sure what you mean. I look at the website and its states different dates for when they were appointed, installed, and ordained. Many academic books use catholic.hierarchy.org as a reference for Church statistics, many churches and even some dioceses list it as a recommended website, and church commentators such as John L. Allen, Jr., Rocco Palmo, and Sandro Magister also name it.Patapsco913 (talk) 22:19, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Use correct apostophe

In Juan d'Espinar, you use the incorrect apostrophe. This is the 2nd article in a week. Per MOS:PUNCT, one should you straight or typewriter apostrophes. I've already moved and corrected the article. Bgwhite (talk) 09:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kanthapuram A. P. Aboobacker Musalyar

Please report IP 117.219.129.30 for vandalizing the above page. --Prof TPMS (talk) 00:59, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Have you considered WP:Autopatrolled?

Information icon I notice that you create a large number of new articles. Have you considered requesting the autopatrolled userright? This permission would cause all your new articles to be automatically be marked as "patrolled" on the new pages feed, saving new page patrollers considerable work. If you are interested, you can request the userright at WP:RFP/A. Thanks, IagoQnsi (talk) 01:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Patapsco913, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Swarm ♠ 22:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


About catholic-hierarchy.org

Sorry,that I missed your post about the site.What did actually happen after the discussion? Is it reliable or not? These people are crazy. The Catholic church itself does not maintain any source about the matter of the hierarchy, so there are not many choices as sources about the past events. We can use this site or GigaCatholic only. For the present events we can cite the daily bulletin of the Holly See, but for the past.... Sorry if my message is off-topic. Drjmarkov (talk) 20:31, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drjmarkov. The vast majority deemed the site to be as reliable as the original sources that it uses; although if there are biographical articles that are specific to the subject, we should emphasize those. The biggest concern was that they are self-published; but given their high levels of accuracy (which was the consensus of the posters) and use by many outside entities (including many Catholic entities), they fall under the expert content exception. Generally, I use both of them to start the wiki article and then the idea is that we can later flesh it out with additional information if available.Patapsco913 (talk) 13:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Links

Hi, I just wanted to explain why I deleted those links: Do you think that it is good to put direct links to ISIS propaganda in encyclopedic articles? Regards, 18:12, 1 May 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)

Wikipedia reports the facts. If ISIS is stating an opinion that is relevant to the article, then we need to include it in the article with the citation. The readers can read the source and decide for themselves. The last thing Wikipedia needs to do is to start to censor sources.Patapsco913 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Patapsco913: No, I didn't say that WP shouldn't report the facts, or that we should censor them (in this case, the facts are that ISIS considers X to be an apostate), rather I said that we shouldn't give a link to the Dabiq magazine since 1) it isn't necessary, 2) that would help propagate ISIS propaganda and WP isn't a propaganda website 3) here the quote is already sufficient for the reader "to decide for himself". 18:56, 1 May 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)[reply]
We have the link so we should use it. That is the only way that people can verify the exact assertion made. The detailed quotes I previously added provided their reasoning but you removed them. Wikipedia is not in the business of picking and choosing what is propaganda. We are not using Dabiq to support facts but solely to represent their opinion and that is why it is necessary.Patapsco913 (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Patapsco913: "That is the only way that people can verify the exact assertion made" [emphasis added], this is unquestionably erroneous, people can search for themselves the relevant issue of the Dabiq mag if they really wanted to verify that, providing the Dabiq link is in itself redundant, just as one does not ought to provide a link to a PDF of any peer-reviewed paper that was cited in a given article.
19:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)
I am not sure what you are saying. If we have the link, we should provide it; that is Wikipedia policy. Facts that are added need to be verified and providing the link easily allows one to do so. Why else would Wikipedia have links in their citations?Patapsco913 (talk) 19:52, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Patapsco913: Could you provide a link to a page where the WP policy that says "links should be included as much as possible and in all circumstances" is mentioned therein?
20:10, 1 May 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)
Could you provide a link to a page where the WP policy states that even if we have an online link, that we should not provide it? It goes to verifiability. ISIS made an assertion; I included the assertion with a quote explaining their rationale. You removed the quote and removed the wikilink. Without the link, you make it harder for viewers to verify. Verification is the key to what makes Wikipedia work. Patapsco913 (talk) 20:16, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Patapsco913: I didn't remove the quote, I only shortened it. The quote in itself is enough for verification purposes, one may do more search to find the PDF version of that magazine, but including it directly is what is objectionable, recall my 3 points above. 20:31, 1 May 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)[reply]

You should probably start up a discussion on the talk page for say Hamza Yusuf and see what others have to say. Just because we do not like the content in Dabiq magazine does not mean that we should exclude it especially as it refers to its opinion. I would argue that the purpose of Wikipedia is to provide all viewpoints, even those we disagree with; which requires that they be verifiable.Patapsco913 (talk) 20:47, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Patapsco913: As I said times and times again, my point was not to censor information, or to not include all relevant viewpoints, rather I was arguing that a link to the Dabiq magazine shouldn't be added there. Okay, I'll post it in the talk to see what others have to say. Thanks for your patience. 20:49, 1 May 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)[reply]

Kyle Bass

Greetings- I am reaching out based on your recent edits to hedge fund and hedge fund-related pages. I have a few suggested edits to help improve the content of Kyle Bass BLP page and wanted to see if you would be able to assist.

My name is Steele and I work at Hayman Capital Management, L.P., which was founded by J. Kyle Bass in 2005. My goal is to serve as a resource in support of Wikipedia’s three core content policies. I will not be making edits, but rather participating in the community discussions. SteeleatHaymanCapitalManagementLP (talk) 03:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Frederick P. Rose into Daniel Rose (real estate developer). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Will do. cheersPatapsco913 (talk) 16:03, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment/editing: Bruce Heyman

Hey there Patapsco913 - I recently posted some cited information about U.S. Ambassador to Canada Bruce Heyman on his article's talk page, with the hope that an editor might want to look it over/incorporate some it into the article. I do work for the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, which is why I do not wish to simply add the info to the article myself (we do want to honor Wikipedia's guidelines about conflict of interest/bias). Having noticed that you've edited his page in the past, I'm wondering if you'd be willing pop over there and give it a look? Even just a comment or some recommendations on how to proceed would be very helpful, as I am new to Wikipedia and know that there are sensitivities around credible editing. Thanks! ThorneEA613 (talk) 14:23, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

3RR on Islamic Online University

It looks you're close to hitting WP:3RR on Islamic Online University. You're in a content dispute, work it out on the talk page. shoy (reactions) 19:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped at 2 edits but he went on to do 4; and does not really want to talk on the talk page.Patapsco913 (talk) 21:53, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]


O.A.R.

A couple of observations on O.A.R. - first, there is already a disambiguation page at OAR. Second, please see WP:FIXDABLINKS. Third, it looks likely to me that the band is the primary topic for the form of the abbreviation with periods. I don't see any evidence that this is a common form of referring to the religious order at all. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:37, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was reverting the disambiguation links for O.A.R.; I though that is what I was supposed to do.Patapsco913 (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the dablinks (I fixed most of them). But O.A.R. with the periods (postnominals) is the formal means of referring to the religious order which has been around since the 1500s. If you look at Order of Preachers, Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mercy...etc or at List of Catholic religious institutes you'll see they use the periods. There are numerous wikipages using O.A.R. in the religious order sense which you can see if you extend the search term to 500 count and search for the word bishop (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=O.A.R.&searchToken=dhbb54zpdbh759fs5vkg1vse7) There is also a wiki template

Vatican:

GCatholic

Catholic Hierarchy

US Conference of Catholic Bishops

Catholic New York:

Catholic Net

http://blog.cancaonova.com/padrejoaozinho/2010/12/09/conheca-as-siglas-das-congregacoes-religiosas/

www.provinciasannicolas.org/docs/9874.pdf

I can get more support if needed.Patapsco913 (talk) 22:19, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Linda Greenhouse

Sorry, I still think it's not good enough. (She was quoted about a Jewish school organisation in what is basically a primary source. The context and content of the quote suggest that she is Jewish, but I think making that link ourselves amounts to synthesis.) I did a bit of Googling the first time you added the claim, and couldn't find any major source saying she is Jewish. Given the above and the fact that whether she is Jewish has basically no bearing on the work she is known for, can we just leave it out? Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 06:48, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Categorising categories

Hello. You're obviously working hard on the bishops. Can I just ask you to do one thing - make sure that when you create a category, you make sure to apply categories to it in turn. A category can only be found by other people if it is slotted into the hierarchy of other categories, here's an example. Cheers. Le Deluge (talk) 08:32, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PS I've just come across Category:Oratorian bishops. The article at Oratorian is a disambiguation page to several different kinds, which suggests the category should be renamed (via a Speedy rename) to something more specific. Le Deluge (talk) 08:36, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Please stop

Please stop adding Catholic-Hierarchy.org and GCatholic as "sources". They are self-published without editorial oversight or a reputation for fact-checking, and as such, are not usable as reliable secondary sources. Elizium23 (talk) 04:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

why did you not make your case when catholic hierarchy was being discussed on the reliable sources noticeboard. The consensus was that it was reliable as evidenced by its use by countless Catholic organizations as such even the Vatican. You never followed up with specific examples of why it was unreliable. The reason I brought up the discussion was because of your concerns and you gave up talking when the consensus went against you.Patapsco913 (talk) 08:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion was as follows.

catholic-hierarchy.org

Hi, I added some information to a website and provided a source to www.catholic-hierarchy.org. I was told do not re-add the references since it was unreliable and if I disagree to make my case here. all the entries were either biographies of long deceased Roman Catholic bishops or listings of bishops on the diocese/archdiocese wikipage. This website has been used for years on English Wikipedia and has not been questioned by its contributors; and there are literally 1000s of Wikipedia articles using the reference. It is also heavily used by Wikipedia in other languages.

The reason for the removal is non-reliable source which I disagree with as there is ample support on the internet that it is reliable. It is also self-published but as I read it " Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." So I went out to get a variety of sources that cite the website which I would include sufficient third party publications. Thanks for your consideration.

catholic-hierarchy.org is recommended by several archdioceses and archdioceses and referenced by Vatican Radio

Several prominent Catholic church watchers and journalists have used catholic-hierarchy.org as a reference including:

Various libraries and similar organizations list catholic-hierarchy.org as a reference

Mainstream newspapers cite catholic-hierarchy.org as a resource

Catholic newspapers list catholic-hierarchy.org as a reference

Numerous books cite catholic-hierarchy.org in their bibliography

  • [6] The Next Pope By Anura Guruge
  • [7] The Virgin Mary and Catholic Identities in Chinese History By Jeremy Clarke
  • [8] Religions of the World: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Beliefs and Practices : Six Volumes by J. Gordon Melton and Martin Baumann
  • [9] Two Texts By Edward Everett Hale by Edward Everett Hale, Hsuan L. Hsu, Susan Kalter
  • [10] Uncertain Honor: Modern Motherhood in an African Crisis By Jennifer Johnson-Hanks
  • [11] Religion and Post-Conflict Statebuilding: Roman Catholic and Sunni Islamic Perspectives (Palgrave Studies in Compromise) Mar 4, 2015 by Denis Dragovi
  • [12] Imagining the Creole City : The Rise of Literary Culture in Nineteenth-Century New Orleans by Rien Fertel
  • [13] Church Confronts Modernity: Catholicism since 1950 in the United States, Ireland, and Quebec / Edition 1 - by Leslie Woodcock Tentler
  • [14] The Encyclopedia of Caribbean Religions: Volume 1: A-L; Volume 2: M-Z by Patrick Taylor
  • [15] Charity and the Great Hunger in Ireland: The Kindness of Strangers by Christine Kinealy
  • [16] Democracy, Culture, Catholicism: Voices from Four Continents edited by Michael Schuck, John Crowley-Buck
  • [17] Mission, Communion and Relationship: A Roman Catholic Response to the Crisis of Male Youths in Africa Mission, Communion and Relationship: A Roman Catholic Response to the Crisis of Male Youths in Africa by Peter Addai-Mensah
  • PLOS
  • [18] Diplomatic Missions of the Holy See in Hungary and East-Central Europe after theSecond World War by Margit BALOGH
  • [19] University of Southern California: "WHY IS THE NUMBER OF CATHOLIC PRIESTS DIMINISHING IN PORTUGAL? ANALYSIS OF THE PERIOD 1960-2002 MOURAO, Paulo R.
  • [20] Light a Candle. Encounters and Friendship with China. Festschrift in Honour of Angelo S. Lazzarotto P.I.M.E. Edited by Roman MALEK and Gianni CRIVELLER. (Collectanea Serica). Sankt Augustin, Institut Monumenta Serica; Nettetal, Steyler Verlag, 2010. viii+564 pp.
  • [21] To Whom Does Christianity Belong?: Critical Issues in World Christianity By Dyron B. Daughrity
  • [22] The Changing World Religion Map: Sacred Places, Identities, Practices and Politics Feb 3, 2015 by Stanley D. Brunn
  • [23] Eine Marienerscheinung in Zeiten der Diktatur: der Konflikt um Peñablanca By Oliver Grasmück

Numerous Catholic churches and schools cite catholic-hierarchy.org as a resource

  • [24] Archdiocese of Washington uses it as a resource for student assignments
  • [25] Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Westminister: "Obtaining Proof of Membership of the Catholic Church – Guidance for Schools"
  • [26] RC Church of Christ the King recommended websites
  • [27] Catholic Family News: "Dangerous Synod Proposal: New Language” for Natural Law" by John Vennari
  • [28] St Brendan the Navigator Parish recommended websites
  • [29] St Mary of the Desert Catholic Church recommended websites
  • Catholic Parish of St Gregory the Great recommended websites
  • [30] St Paul the Apostle Catholic Church recommended websites
  • [31] Our Lady of Mercy Church recommended websites
  • [32] St Pascal Church recommended websites
  • [33] St Paul Catholic Church recommended websites
  • [34] St Thomas Benedictine Abbey Kappadu recommended websites
  • [35] Sacred hearts of Jesus and Mary recommended websites
  • [36] Carmelites of Mary Immaculate recommended websites
  • [37] Holy Family Parish in Poland Ohio recommended websites
  • [38] St Mary of the Immaculate Conception Greenville recommended websites
  • [39] Blessed Sacrament Church of Buffalo recommended websites
  • [40] St Alphonsa Catholic Church recommended websites
  • [41] St Charles Borromeo Parish and School recommended websites
  • [42] Good Shepherd Parish recommended websites
  • [43] Claretian Missionaires Sri Lanka recommended websites
  • [44] Catholic Parish of Ivanhoe recommended websites
  • [45] The Catholic Community of Our Lady of Fatima recommended websites
  • [46] RC Church of Christ the King
  • [47] St Pius Parish bulletin
  • [48] St Francis Cathedral bulletin
  • [49] St Christopher Church recommended websites
  • [50] St Mary's Parish - Navan Ireland recommended websites
  • [51] Saint John Neuman Sunbury recommended websites
  • [52] Diocese of Plymouth: "Churches in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Plymouth An Architectural and Historical Review"
  • [53] St Joseph de Clairval Abbey in Flavigny Links
  • [54] St Hugh of Lincoln references it in a biography
  • [55] St William Catholic Church spiritual links
The website is actually named catholic-hierarchy.org. I have changed the topic thread to match. The reasons it is not acceptable on Wikipedia, as I have told Patapsco913, are manifold: (1) it is WP:USERG user-generated content. (2) it is a WP:SPS run by one guy, Dcheney (talk · contribs), with no "editorial oversight or reputation for fact-checking." (3) it has been proven inaccurate on many occasions, as it puts bishops in their sees after appointment rather than upon installation, in violation of Canon Law procedure. Elizium23 (talk) 02:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, Elizium, that is not a violation of canon law. Instead, it is a difference between appointment and possession, which is rightly illustrated on the website. The Holy See website (http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino.html) announces the appointment of the new bishop, and the diocese announces the date of the ceremonies of canonical possession and installation. This is true from the smallest diocese to the Diocese of Rome.Vlaams243 (talk) 23:54, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot believe that all these Catholic churches and dioceses would use a webpage that is so horribly unreliable. The Archdiocese of Chicago lists it as one of four references on the page above. If it is seen as a good reference by the Catholic Church about the Catholic Church then we should use it on Wikipedia. It by and large only lists the names and terms of long-deceased bishops, the time line of various dioceses, and Catholic populations in those dioceses. John L. Allen, Jr. and Sandro Magister are top journalists regarding the Catholic church. I would think that they would investigate it before using it as a reference. The rule says "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." There seem to be enough reliable third party publications. Anyhow, where has it been proven false in a reliable third party source?Patapsco913 (talk) 02:39, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't really matter, it fails the RS tests. Guy (Help!) 11:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Catholic-Hierarchy.org is reliable and has a reputation for fact-checking based on the opinion of 1) the Catholic Church (as evidenced by all Archdiocese, Dioceses, and parishes that recommend it as a reliable source - and Vatican Radio even uses it); 2) the academic community (as evidenced by the numerous books and publications that use it as a reference); 3) the mainstream news community (Washington Post, Boston Globe) who use it as a reference; 4) prominent Catholic commentators (John L. Allen, Jr., Sandro Magister, Rocco Palmo) and canon lawyer (Edward N. Peters) who use it as a reference; and 5) Catholic institutions (Society of St Pius the X), university libraries (Stanford), and Catholic newspapers (The Tablet, National Catholic Reporter) who use it as a reference. So how does it fail?Patapsco913 (talk) 13:27, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A source might be incredibly factually accurate, but that doesn't necessarily make it a reliable source for wikipedia. For instance, the WP articles about high-concept physics subjects tend to be extremely accurate and very detailed, but we can't use them as a source for other pages, because it's user generated content. It's a matter of verifiability, not truth. If that website provides its sources, however, you can probably use those. Don't just copy their citations though, check them out and verify them , first. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 13:48, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Patapsco913 (talk · contribs) has been busy making mass-postings to user talk pages to garner discussion on this thread. Patapsco, please limit your postings. Also, the text you have been using is not entirely neutral in tone. Elizium23 (talk) 23:42, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are somewhere between 3,500 and 4,000 wikipages that will be affected by this change - many that have been around for a long time - so I think it prudent that we should have as wide a discussion as possible. It should not be decided by five or six people.Patapsco913 (talk) 00:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe it is accurate to describe catholic-hierarchy.org as unreliable or user-generated content. It is the reporting of facts from other sources, organized in a convenient and hyperlinked manner. Furthermore, if you were to look at the Sources/Bibliography section of the website ([56]), you would notice sources such as the Annuario Pontificio Collection from 1914, 1921, 1924, 1927-1928, 1931, 1933, 1937-1938, 1941, 1949, 1950-1953, and 1955-2015. The Annuario Pontificio is the ultimate source for pages such as this, and cannot be considered unreliable. Vlaams243 (talk) 23:54, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So I can start a blogspot site and use the New York Times and Washington Post as sources, that doesn't make my blog a reliable source by Wikipedia's definition. I think that's important to note here that we're not talking about YOUR definition of "reliable" but WIKIPEDIA's definition. Elizium23 (talk) 00:02, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Catholic-Hierarchy would fit Wikipedia's definition based on Wikipedia's Scholarship, Self-published sources, and Usage by other sources policies. Vlaams243 (talk) 00:16, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a problem with the reliability of the site, since it's just a bunch of lists anyway. It is simple and convenient, as Vlaams says. The same is true for GigaCatholic, which is often used as a source here (and which I actually find more useful than Catholic-Hierarchy). Is it literally unreliable? Are there mistakes in it? If it's accurately reporting the information from its own sources, what does it matter? We could use those sources instead, I suppose, but why? What is a reliable source in this case? Adam Bishop (talk) 02:05, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it makes chronic mistakes, as I explained above. It can't be trusted for the time a bishop takes possession of a diocese. Elizium23 (talk) 02:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but is that a mistake introduced by Catholic-Hierarchy, or is the same information in its sources (whatever they may be?) Adam Bishop (talk) 02:15, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Even though this discussion is whether or not Catholic Hierarchy is reliable, I would like to report my activites for WikiProject Catholicism articles. Since I joined Wikipedia in April 2014, I have completed assessments on thousands of WikiProject Catholicism articles. Here's what I have been doing:

  • If Catholic Hierarchy is in the References section, I add the Self-published source template.
  • If the CH entry is in the External links section, the article is a Stub, I add the Self-published source template, hoping this may help another editor to find reliable sources elsewhere.
  • If the CH entry is in the External links section, the article is not a Stub, I delete the CH External link line.

* Opinion: From the perspective of a Wikipedia reader, it's my opinion that leaving this Self-published source template in place serves as a cautionary alert that the reference is not held to the same higher standard of a Reliable source. What would be helpful is a BOT that tags articles for every CH Reference with the Self-published source template. Regards,  JoeHebda (talk)  02:12, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thought - I have read, studied and used the Catholic hierarchy website for many years, and I have no doubt it is a reliable source. In fact, I know the information it contains is reliable because it all comes from the Catholic Statistical yearbook Annuario Pontificio published by the Roman Catholic Church itself. I own several copies of this yearbook for various years, and the data is accurate. The trouble comes from the fact that the Vatican sells the yearbook and as far as I know there is no open source for this data, or even an online, easily accessible version of it for data crunching or easy access. Thus a vacuum is formed and people use this website instead of the yearbook itself, which cost 60$ and is printed in Italian paperback only. I am too close to this to render a definitive opinion about the website, but for this to be a Reliable Source for Wikipedia, we must at the least have strict assurances that all the facts and data are straight from the yearbook the church itself publishes. Otherwise, we must rely on those who have copies of the yearbook for reliable sourcing. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to acknowledge that I am the author/owner/whatever of the website in question and I would be happy to answer any questions in that regard. I have no opinion whether or not it should be cited in Wikipedia - that is for others to decide.--Dcheney (talk) 04:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I take the Catholic Hierarchy site to be a "reliable source" under our normal usage of that term. The description of its publishing process doesn't make me shift that opinion. It has been pointed out that it provides reference material, rather than "original research", and from an authoritative source. If, in effect, it is an online version of a print publication that we would accept, this discussion seems overblown. Charles Matthews (talk) 06:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is a reliable source. It has a reputation for accuracy and attention to detail. Some people seek to apply the term too narrowly. We need to use it broadly so that Wikipedia can reflect the understandings of a large swath of the population not just those of jet set yuppies living in lofts in NYC and avoiding flyover country and distaining the political goals of people in Uganda and Nigeria.

I can make some general observations about Catholic Hierarchy, as well as GCatholic. They both are reliable as long as they are based on reliable sources. Not all their sources are reliable. They are certainly very useful and highly reliable with regard to the recent appointments (I mean recent two centuries or so). They clearly base their data on official sources such as Annuario Pontificio. But deeper in the past, the things go worse. Miranda's website is a source for many data about cardinals in Catholic Hierarchy and GCatholic. Miranda's website, for 20th and 21 century is based mainly on the official reports of the Holy See, the best possible sources. For the centuries 13th to 19th it is based mainly on the nine volumes of Hierarchia Catholica by Eubel, Ritzler and Gauchat, which is generally a good source, but its earliest volumes (13th to 16th century) contain many errors. And for the period before 13th century, Miranda's website is completely unreliable (basing on outdated sources and contradicting modern prosopographies of the cardinals). Since Miranda is a source also for Catholic Hierarchy and GCatholic, the same can be told about them. In conclusion, all three websites are reliable for the most recent centuries, but with every earlier century, they became less and less reliable. CarlosPn (talk) 18:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to agree with this - Giga Catholic seems to be better for older stuff, earlier than (say) the 17th century, but only as good as its sources, like Eubel, which is itself only as good as its sources (Gams, Lequien, whoever else). The Vatican doesn't actually keep lists of bishops of all its dioceses, so they don't really know anything more than we do, using the same sources. There are often academic works which will have more up-to-date lists for medieval bishops, and I suppose the same is true for other eras. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • This seems a far, far more reliable source on most of the articles that it references than anything else we have and discussions over the publishing process are interesting but beside the point. SPS is a sound guideline, but it shouldn't be dogma. I'd prefer that we'd refer to the sources underneath the site, but until then the site should be sufficient. JASpencer (talk) 07:20, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • One other note of clarification, although the Annuario Pontificio (AP) is a good resource, the lag in its publication means that it is not a good source for recent changes. For example, changes that occurred in 2015 will be included in AP 2016 - which will be published in the next month or two. Other official sources such as Acta Apostolicae Sedis can have an even longer lag time. --Dcheney (talk) 10:13, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've used it for years and found it more accurate than many other blue-chip sources. JoeHebda makes a good observation; it's reliable but it may be worthwhile to note that it's a self-published source. Majoreditor (talk) 13:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable Source does not mean 100%, 100% of the time; it means well-researched and non-self-referential source. All sources for most bishops before 1300 are pretty uncertain; every modern iteration has to pick one. If he picked 2nd best, argue he isn't reliable for bishops before 1300 or something like that. For 1600 on, all he's done is collect various divergent sources such as the Annuario Pontificio into an accessible format. I'm not a good enough Church history expert to know sourcing for ancient bishops so I leave this aside. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 14:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are several things to consider here. 1st, the number of references to it by experts of various types in the field seem to overcome the issue of WP:SPS. For a large part it isn't WP:SPS in the sense of WP:NOR as he is more of an editor/compiler of existing content than an originator. Tons of web content relies on a single editor and making all single-editor content fall under WP:SPS seems extreme. 2nd, it is, for most of it's content, a more accessible version of the source, the Annuario Pontificio which is a costly offline source. Even though, WP:SOURCEACCESS & WP:OFFLINE says offline sources are acceptable, I think the policy of WP:VERIFY would prefer an online version or reference were the content the same (for example, give me a link to a magazine article, not just the page number). Thus, I would argue to include at least the relatively modern content as reliable. I add 2 caveats: 1. someone mentioned issues with pre-1300 content here and I didn't study up on that enough. 2. If an error is found, I suggest posting on the talk page of that article to indicate that it is not reliable FOR THAT ARTICLE, and User_talk:Dcheney since he's indicated he's the editor and willing to fix issues. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 15:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added a discussion on the WP:VERIFY talk page in relation to this. I suggest a variation to the expert exemption for WP:SPS so it includes pages extensively used as references by 3rd parties as I think the 1st post in this change demonstrates. Link: Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#.22Self-published.22_when_online_compilation_of_offline_sources. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 15:22, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"A source might be incredibly factually accurate, but that doesn't necessarily make it a reliable source for Wikipedia". In this case, it's easy enough to establish verifiability. Does the content on the wiki match that in the Annuario Pontificado? Yes? Then it is up to Elizum to demonstrate instances in which the currently posted content is at variance. I've not seen any citations by Elizum where there is a discreprency, and I encourage him to take the time to do his homework. Benkenobi18 (talk) 13:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot about how that discussion went. I thought we had decided the opposite. Sorry. Elizium23 (talk) 18:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Begging the point

Those of you who are arguing for the reliability of C-H and GC because you have found it generally reliable, are asking Wikipedia readers to trust the information because you vouch for it, generally speaking. That is not an argument for citation reliability; it is a subjective criterion that is unverifiable. Also, 'generally reliable' begs the question; there must be some material which is unreliable (and many, including myself, are prepared to testify personally, though anecdotally that this is true). But without references, how can the reader of C-H and GC know or check? No, IMHO, these two on-line sources are not valid references.

The appeal to a cumulation of instances in which others use C-H and GC is an 'appeal to authority'. Who knows why individuals choose to cite these two web pages?? And the fact that they do cite them, does not lend them validity or authority. It merely testifies to usage. --Vicedomino (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

David Brooks

Your recent addition to the David Brooks article strikes me as repetitive. The article states only a few sentences later that his family is Jewish. Would you mind re-reading the first few lines of the article and considering reverting your changes? Sondra.kinsey (talk) 00:25, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Hierarchy

You recently posted a message on my Talk Page:

Notability of bishops and the use of Catholic-hierarchy.org

Thanks for your addition of useful sources. As far as the notability of bishops, the guidelines state that nearly all Catholic bishops are notable. Please refer to the notability guidelines WP:CCWMOS on WikiProject Catholicism. I brought up Catholic-hierarchy.org to the reliable sources noticeboard. (see [Reliable Sources Noticeboard: catholic-hierarchy.org] My argument was that even though it is self-published WP:SPS, the fact that it is used as a resource by numerous dioceses, news organizations, as a reference in academic works, and Vatican watchers, allows it to be used as "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." It is widely used on Wikipedia in other languages. The consensus was that it is a reliable source. Its author, User:Dcheney, is available for any questions you might have. Note also that Catholic-hierarchy shows the actual source at the very bottom of each bishop's page (not on the diocese page). WikiProject Catholicism has even developed a template Catholic-hierarchy.org. Anyhow, my approach has been to get the bishop's pages developed (there are several other people working on earlier bishops) and then develop a more detailed history later; that is why I list each entry as a stub.Patapsco913 (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I have read the material you cited, and I have read your Talk page. It seems that I am not the only person who has problems with your mass creation of pages of doubtful notability. Nor am I the only person who has problems with your exclusive use of Catholic-Hierarchy and G-Catholic to document your efforts. I note that on the WikipediaProject Biography page, the advice on Catholic bishops, which you seem to have had a hand in formulating, is only Advice, not Policy.

My tagging of your pages is based partly on the likelihood that none of these articles you create is going to be developed because there is no information from which to develop it (I have been tagging pages that have not been touched in six months). Let me make an analogy. There are many Branch Managers of the Wells Fargo bank chain (or if you prefer, Barclays Bank, or Deutsche Bank); these managers have all done the junior management training courses, and they go to all the regional management meetings. That does not, however, make them notable. My local branch manager is not notable, even if he is found in a list of Branch Managers, even if the list gives the dates of his service and his promotions. If he becomes a vice-president or a member of the Board of Directors, he may end up being mentioned in a history of the Company, and that becomes a different matter. But his training courses and regional meetings are still not notable.

Your article pages mostly give only the steps in a prelate's career, and little or no biographical matter, though you claim the protection of the WikipediaProject Biography. If I were to want to pursue the material in the article, I can't do it from your external links, because they cite no sources. Catholic-Hierarchy and G-Catholic not infrequently contradict one another, and I have myself found numbers of errors in both, of every date, not just "before the 13th century". I discover these errors by reading books, often in Latin, French and Italian. This is necessary because the subject of an article is French or Italian, or lived at a time when Latin was the lingua franca, or because Latin was the standard choice for conveying information (as for example in Ughelli or Eubel, or Cappelletti). I also find additional information, which I am happy to post on a Wikipedia article, with appropriate references to books and articles.

Your statement that the author of Catholic-Hierarchy, David M. Cheney, is available for questions is quite irrelevant. What if I put up an an article and put up a reference that said "If you have any questions, just e-mail me"? That would not be acceptable on Wikipedia, and it does not give authority to an externally linked web page. You consider David M. Cheney an "established expert". Why?

I should say, by the way, that I do not object to the inclusion of the two web sites under discussion when they are accompanied by genuine verifiable sources which validate and/or add to their content (the better source criterion).

All that said, I still want to thank you for your work. I have deleted nothing, nor have I asked for a notability review for any of the pages you have created. Nor will I. But I will still tag articles that need development, and will not exclude those which rely exclusively on G-Catholic and Catholic-Hierarchy. -- Vicedomino (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Patapsco913. 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]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Robert McClenon. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Giovanni Tommaso Perrone, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Robert McClenon (talk) 05:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Annibale Bentivoglio (archbishop)
added a link pointing to Sabina
Cristoforo Giacobazzi
added a link pointing to Robert de Lénoncourt
Diego Soria
added a link pointing to Nueva Segovia
Diego de Gorospe y Irala
added a link pointing to Nueva Segovia
Elizabeth Cohen
added a link pointing to Columbia College
Giuseppe de Lazzara
added a link pointing to Alife
Jeffrey Blitz
added a link pointing to Ridgewood
Juan Rentería
added a link pointing to Nueva Segovia
Rodrigo Cárdenas
added a link pointing to Nueva Segovia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirection

Hi, it appears that you tried to create a redirect at WTMX-FM, but didn't do it correctly. The correct redirect syntax is: 

#REDIRECT [[target page name]]

Good luck.

Disambiguation link notification for March 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Giovanni Paolo Meniconi
added links pointing to Perouse and San Marcello
Alessandro Strozzi
added a link pointing to Neri Corsini
Cardinal de Bouillon
added a link pointing to Albano
Carlo Loffredo
added a link pointing to Sant'Onofrio
Domenico Belisario de Bellis
added a link pointing to Turi
Filippo Lenti
added a link pointing to San Marcello
Giovanni Battista del Tinto
added a link pointing to Alvito
Jerónimo Albornoz
added a link pointing to Córdoba
Leone Strozzi (archbishop)
added a link pointing to Sabina
Marco Agrippa Dandini
added a link pointing to Santi Giovanni e Paolo
Melchor Maldonado y Saavedra
added a link pointing to Bishop of Paraguay
Raimondo Ferretti
added a link pointing to Sabina
Roman Catholic Diocese of Recanati
added a link pointing to Titular Patriarch of Alexandria

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Capua
added links pointing to Albano, Juan López and Juan de Borja Lanzol de Romaní
Antonio Spinelli
added a link pointing to C.R.
Francesco Casati
added a link pointing to Albano
Giambattista Isnardi de Castello
added a link pointing to Mondovi
Giuseppe Migliaccio
added a link pointing to Montemaggiore
Nicolò Nardini
added a link pointing to Capranica
Roman Catholic Diocese of Bayuna
added a link pointing to Roman Catholic Diocese of Santo Domingo
Tommaso d'Aquino (bishop of Sessa Aurunca)
added a link pointing to Francesco Barberini

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Alfonso Basilio Ghetaldo
added a link pointing to Ragusa
Roman Catholic Diocese of Carpi
added a link pointing to C.S.S.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Fraydun Manocherian
added a link pointing to Unitarian
Hudson River Blues
added a link pointing to Neil Cox

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Albert Laboz
added a link pointing to 34th Street
Ascanio Castagna
added a link pointing to Isola
Marcel Adams
added a link pointing to Tanner

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Ben Tobin
added a link pointing to Mount Sinai Hospital
Ildefonso Vargas y Abarca
added a link pointing to Toledo
Pedro Reyes de los Ríos de Lamadrid
added a link pointing to Mérida

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Don Gregory
added links pointing to Mary Chase and Copperfield
Giovanni Cito
added a link pointing to San Marcello
Roman Catholic Diocese of San Miniato
added a link pointing to O.S.M.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Henry H. Minskoff
added a link pointing to Palm Beach
Jordon Perlmutter
added a link pointing to Rose Hill Cemetery

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roman Catholic Diocese of Ferentino, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page O.S.M.. 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) 10:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Walter J. Haas listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Walter J. Haas. Since you had some involvement with the Walter J. Haas redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. אבגמד (talk) 13:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Newbie seeking guidance on an edit of Daniel M. Ziff

Hello Patapasco913! I am new to Wikipedia and looking for some help on a page that I believe you are the original author of. As you are aware, recent attempts to edit the page were reverted but I remain interested in trying to get them properly implemented (i.e. according to Wikipedia's guidelines) because the desired edit is factual and is being pursued with only good intentions. To begin with, the citation supporting the edit is an official, public, government-issued marriage certificate, so I am unclear how the citation is inadequate support for the edit. Your suggestion that "we need a better source and it doesn't change the fact of his first marriage" is greatly appreciated but for this newbie, but I am still not sure what to do next. Thank you in advance for your help! SpartanLion (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spartan, are you able to find a news source or public notice of the marriage? I see her name as Brianne Noelle Garcia but the name does not turn up on the internet other that college records. A marriage license is not going to be sufficient especially for living people. Sometimes we have to wait for something out there before we can edit; otherwise people would be editing what they know to be true rather than what they can demonstrate to be true. Often we are waiting for Ziff or Brianne to say something in an interview. Perhaps there is a notice of the wedding in a local paper?Patapsco913 (talk) 20:09, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Patapsco913. Your clarification about the insufficiency of a marriage certificate for a living person is very helpful. It led me to find this page that further supports your guidance. At this point, I am considering two other options and would appreciate any perspective you have to offer. The first option is what you suggested: a published source, such as a news article or interview. If the news article mentions the marriage of Ziff and Brianne, I assume that will be sufficient support for updating Ziff's page with the fact that Brianne is Ziff's spouse, but will this also provide sufficient support for addressing the status of his first marriage, even if the news article does not explicitly mention the first marriage? The second option is a self-published source by the subject, with the publishing "subject" being Brianne. The guidelines lead me to believe this could be a viable path but its criteria are, understandably, subjective. Is there anything in particular that you would emphasize or caution to me about using self-published sources by the subject? Beyond these two options, if you have any other suggestions, I will gladly take them for consideration. Thank you for your help! SpartanLion (talk) 02:16, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The best route is to find a newspaper article mentioning the marriage. Sometimes there is an interview with the subject (in this case Daniel Ziff) mentioning his marriage but as he does not seem to give a lot of interviews and what we know about him is second hand, you probably won't find any. Self-published sources are a little trickier and generally are not used for biographies (they are seen as less reliable as one might tell one's own story as they want it to be told) although they can be allowed in certain circumstances (1. when you can show that the site is authored by the subject and 2. when you use it to support the opinions of the subject and not facts or opinions of others). There are all sorts of opinions on Wikipedia about when a self-published article can be used and it is a constant battle. The best path is to find a news article. If all you have is a self-published source, put up your opinion on the talk page with the source and see what others say.Patapsco913 (talk) 15:29, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About your userpage

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user page may not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline. If you believe that your user page does not violate our guideline, please leave a note on this page. Alternatively you may add {{Db-u1}} to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it, or you can simply edit the page so that it meets Wikipedia's user page guideline. Thank you. May I suggest that you create articles in your sandbox instead? - Bri (talk) 02:17, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Discalced Augustinian bishops has been nominated for discussion

Category:Discalced Augustinian bishops, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. —swpbT 21:40, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Griggin article

Hi,

I noticed you're doing some updates to the Phil Griffin article. Just wanted to be sure you saw the Talk page, where I recently posted a proposed expanded version of the article. Talk:Phil_Griffin As a consultant to NBC News, I need to have someone independent review and approve proposed changes. Would be very appreciative if you could check it out. Happy to respond to any requests.

Best,

Ed

BC1278BC1278 (talk) 17:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons deletion request

Just to let you know about c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Panamá Viejo recreation at Museum.JPG. Green Giant (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
...to thank you for putting the article Jeffrey S. Buchanan into proper military shape, within hours of its creation. Not being familiar with military style I had created it hastily as I would any other biography. I was then going to post a note at the appropriate WikiProject, asking for someone to add the proper military touches, and lo and behold, you had already done it! Well done! MelanieN (talk) 05:13, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roman Catholic Diocese of Acqui, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page O.S.I. (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) 10:44, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Tornado chaser. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Lester Cole, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Tornado chaser (talk) 22:01, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to La La Land (film) does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → check Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Peaceray (talk) 17:55, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Judah Miller for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Judah Miller is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judah Miller until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 19:19, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Template:Z33 Woodroar (talk) 05:42, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, pages created, banner incorrect

Greetings, Last night I noticed that pages with {{WPBS|1- have the "-" (dash) parameter instead of the "=" (equal sign). Going forward if you can use the "=" that would be great. Thanks. P.S. I started going back thru pages that need this change but have not yet finished. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 15:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe, I am not sure what you mean. Does this refer to the use of "-" verses "–" for dates? Patapsco913 (talk) 17:26, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, the first line of talk page banners with {{WPBS|1- create a display error.
Example with error, Talk:Giacomo Della Ratta
The first line of talk page banners should be written as {{WPBS|1=
Example, corrected, Talk:Francesco Peroschi
Sorry for any confusion. — JoeHebda • (talk) 21:49, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
cool thanks! Patapsco913 (talk) 21:53, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Goodday Patapsco913 - following up from November, 2017 today I updated these article talk pages listed below. If there are more, it would be good for you to update.

  • Francesco Peroschi
  • Giacomo Della Ratta
  • Giovanni Battista Spiriti
  • Giovanni Chinugi
  • Giovanni Dominico Giaconi
  • Giovanni Linati
  • Giuliano de' Medici (archbishop)
  • Giuseppe de Rossi (archbishop)
  • Ippolito Borghese (bishop)
  • Leonardo Grifo
  • Lorenzo Campeggi (bishop)
  • Marco Quinto Vigerio della Rovere
  • Michael Atul D'Rozario
  • Niccolò Piccolomini
  • Pietro Menzi
  • Tommaso della Testa Piccolomini

Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 19:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Patapsco913. 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]

Invitation to join Women in Red

Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past few weeks. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota.
You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap.
If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.25% of English Wikipedia's biographies).
  • Our priorities for December:

[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/61|Seasonal celebrations]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/62|First ladies]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/63|Go local]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 12:14, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marian Salzman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stamford (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) 18:34, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I see that you are very active in dioceses articles. Could you please help me with this? Thank you! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 17:45, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red

I'm glad to see you've become a member of Women in Red and that you would like to create articles on women in business. With all your experience writing articles on bishops, etc., you certainly have a huge amount of experience. If ever you need any help or run into problems, let me know or drop a line on the WiR talk page. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 12:54, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Women in Red's December 2017 worldwide online editathons.


New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/61|"Seasonal celebrations"]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/62|"First Ladies"]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/63|"Go local!"]]


Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 12:54, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Divorce

The article for Craig hatkoff and Jane rosenthal said they filled for divorce that does not mean it actually happened find proof of final divorce then change it they may have reconciled or divorce but proof is needed oftherwise speculation Flamingoflorida (talk) 00:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added a source that mentioned Hatkoff as her ex-husband. I included the quote.Patapsco913 (talk) 00:26, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Real deal is a blog and not well researched for personal details not reliable except about direct real estate transactions Flamingoflorida (talk) 00:32, 25 December 2017 (UTC) https://therealdeal.com/2017/05/04/and-cut-tribeca-film-festival-founders-drop-dakota-co-op-ask-to-29m/[reply]

Neither party said anything directly about divorce Flamingoflorida (talk) 00:34, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Real Deal (magazine) is not a blog and is subject to the same libel laws as every other newspaper/magazine. How about we leave it at this: "Rosenthal and Hatkoff announced their divorce in 2014 after 19 years of marriage."Gould Keil, Jennifer (May 4, 2017). "Tribeca Film Fest founders slash price on Dakota pad by $10M". New York Daily News. That way it reflects the source and leaves it open enough that perhaps they reconciled.Patapsco913 (talk) 00:51, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fine that is neutral Flamingoflorida (talk) 00:54, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Things in common

It seems we like the same articles any articles you want help on

This article is a conflict of interest for me Michael Recanati I left several links on the talk page can you add the info into the article

BestFlamingoflorida (talk) 07:01, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Year's resolution: Write more articles for Women in Red!

Welcome to Women in Red's January 2018 worldwide online editathons.



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/64|"Prisoners"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/65|"Fashion designers"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/66|"Geofocus: Great Britain and Ireland"]]


Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)



--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jane Goldman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page King Alfred School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You created a duplicate and unnecessary page

On 25 November 2017, you created the page Astorgio Agnesi and populated it. The correct spelling of the name is Astorgio Agnensi, and there is already a more extensive page in existence (2012) than yours. His name is spelled AGNENSI in his funeral inscription in Santa Maria sopra Minerva, Vincenzo Forcelli, Le inscrizioni delle chiese di Roma Volume I (Roma 1869), p. 417 no 1587.


You should delete your incorrect page immediately.

--Vicedomino (talk) 04:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Immediately" I think you need to check your attitude. Anyhow, there are plenty of sources that list his name as Astorgio Agnesi or maybe you do not even look because you are always right. I can add more but I think this is enough to demonstrate my point.Patapsco913 (talk) 05:08, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]


The point, dear friend, is that there are two pages on the same person, and yours is the latecomer. As to the word 'immediate', which seems to have raised your hackles, please check: WP:SPEEDY, where criterion A10 seems to fit the situation. As to your long list, what it in fact demonstrates is that many people can be careless or wrong. I repeat that his heirs spelled the name AGNENSI on his tombstone. They should know. And, by the way, I never claimed that I am always right. --Vicedomino (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Astorgio Agnesi

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Astorgio Agnesi. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Astorgio Agnensi. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Astorgio Agnensi. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Woodroar (talk) 02:14, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Woodroar, I redirected the page to Astorgio Agnesi based on the above sources which use that name including the top encyclopedia in Italy, Treccani.Patapsco913 (talk) 02:22, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nate Bloom for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nate Bloom is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nate Bloom until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Anmccaff (talk) 06:12, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jon Feltheimer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pacific Palisades (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feburary 2018 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's February 2018 worldwide online editathons.

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/67|"Black women"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/68|"Mathematicians and statisticians"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/69|"Geofocus: Island women"]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women's History Month 2018 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's March 2018 worldwide online editathons.


Historically, our March event has been one of the biggest offerings of the year. This year, we are collaborating with two other wiki communities. Our article campaign is the official on-line/virtual node for Art+Feminism. Our image campaign supports the Whose Knowledge? initiative. [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/70|Women's History Month 2018]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

- instead of –

Hi!! I found that you created hundreds or thousands of articles with this problem. Would you help me fix them? Thanks! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 01:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no problem. How do I locate the one’s needing fixing?Patapsco913 (talk) 05:59, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again! Thanks for your answer. I prepared a batch for you, you just have to go to [57] and check one by one. The problem is easy to find, as it is consistently present in the lead paragraph, in the info box to the right, and in the navbox at the end of each new biographical article. Every time you correct one, you just have to press "Back" three times in your navigator and you'll be back at the batch list. I have already corrected a few scattered articles in your batch but the great majority still need correction. Let me know. Thank you! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 16:45, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So did you have a chance to look at it? Regards. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 00:18, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I started at the bottom. I am fixing the - as well as doing a general cleanup. These were all early articles of mine.Patapsco913 (talk) 04:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know. Thank you so much! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 18:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DonePatapsco913 (talk) 09:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 15

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Josh Levs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Albany and New York
Lauren Lyster (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to World News Tonight

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's April 2018 worldwide online editathons.


Focus on: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/71|April+Further with Art+Feminism]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/72|Archaeology]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/73|Military history (contest)]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/74|Geofocus: Indian subcontinent]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or Women in Red/international list. To unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred --Rosiestep (talk) 12:05, 29 March 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Solvay Process Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eugene Meyer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018 at Women in Red

Welcome to Women in Red's May 2018 worldwide online editathons.
File:Soraya Aghaee4.jpg



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/75|"Women of the Sea"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/76|"Villains"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/77|"Women in Sports"]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/78|"Central Eastern European women"]]


Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Proposed deletion of John James (businessman)

The article John James (businessman) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NPOL

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. John from Idegon (talk) 02:48, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John James (businessman), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Food

Curd Rice
Curd Rice

Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John James (businessman) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John James (businessman) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John James (businessman) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 00:30, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm John from Idegon. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Walter Bell (businessman), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

John from Idegon (talk) 04:24, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Walter Bell (businessman)

Hello Patapsco913,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Walter Bell (businessman) for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

John from Idegon (talk) 04:24, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kahane Cooperman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bethesda (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in study

Hello,

I am E. Whittaker, an intern working with the Scoring Team to create a labeled dataset, and potentially a tool, to help editors deal with incivility when they encounter it on talk pages. We are currently recruiting editors to be interviewed about their experiences with incivility on talk pages. Would you be interested in being interviewed? The interviews should take ~1 hour, and will be conducted over BlueJeans (which does allow interviews to be recorded). If, so, please reply to this message or email me at ewhit@umich.edu in order to schedule an interview. .

Thank you Ewitch51 (talk) 15:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring on Candace Owens

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Article shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one edit-warring. You posted. I reverted and now there needs to be consensus before you revert. Anyhow it is laughable that the person who is edit-warring is posting a warning on my page.Patapsco913 (talk) 13:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's a complete and utter misuse of WP:BRD. You're mass-removing all kinds of content and changes to the Candace Owens page, which are unrelated to the reasons you present on the talk page. Furthermore, your actual reasons for removing the content have shifted, which suggests that you're not editing in good faith. You originally removed the content because you disputed the accuracy of two RS, yet it has been proven conclusively to you that what's written in the RS is 100% correct and yet you immediately reverted the text again after this was proven to you. Your edits are at this point just straight-up vandalism. You have at no point suggested tweaks to the text or even just identified parts of the text that you disagree with. You just mass-remove the whole text. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:56, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bunk. you are restoring the disputed text, adding new text, and re-arranging it so as to make it difficult to decipher. Why don't you bring up the text step-by-step on the talk page instead of shot-gunning it out there.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:01, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing wrong with anything in the text, so it's a complete and utter waste of time to bring every sentence up for review on the talk page. If you have a specific problem with a sentence, bring it up on the talk page yourself. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:03, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please raise your concerns on the talk page.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Joan Walsh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red June Editathons

Welcome to Women in Red's June 2018 worldwide online editathons.



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/79|WiR Loves Pride]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/80|Singers and Songwriters]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/81|Women in GLAM]]

New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/82|Geofocus: Russia/USSR]]


Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Berthold Hochschild, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bolivian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sonny Kahn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Real Deal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

small tags missing end tag

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You made a series of edits (and article creations) in which you added two bullet points beginning *<small>... without a closing </small> tag, which in each article caused Multiple unclosed formatting tags and two Missing end tag lint errors. Worse than that, under the new Linter software that Wikipedia installed a few weeks ago, unclosed tags "leak" all the way to the end of the article, so everything after the two unclosed <small> tags is double-small. I am confident that this is not what you intended to contribute to Wikipedia. Would you please go to your editing history and re-edit these articles, inserting a closing </small> on each affected line? —Anomalocaris (talk) 04:22, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you for taking care of this! —Anomalocaris (talk) 17:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. My mistake. CheersPatapsco913 (talk) 17:54, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Alessandro Cesarini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Albano
Giacopo Antonio Venier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Juan de Torquemada
Juan de Cervantes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Antonio Correr

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018 at Women in Red

Hello again from Women in Red!


July 2018 worldwide online editathons:
New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/83|Sub-Saharan Africa]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/84|Film + stage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/85|20th-century]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/86|Women Rock]]
Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00|Notable women, broadly-construed!]]


Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

A page you started (Bill Miller (impresario)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Bill Miller (impresario), Patapsco913!

Wikipedia editor Kudpung just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I've done some minor formatting and a slight change to the prose to accommodate it.

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Corinne Cole, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vanity Fair and Desert Sun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ennio Filonardi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albano (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About "External links and additional sources"

Greetings, Today I noticed for WP Catholicism articles that entires are set to "small" wikicode. For better accessability it is better to use something like the following.

[[Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources|{{sup|{{small|[''self-published'']}}}}]]

so that the entry is larger, and the self-published is the small portion. See article Gabriele Fiamma as an example.

While making above changes, I also moved "Subject bar" up to be ahead of "Authority control" line. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 12:45, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll move the authority control down. I was trying to make the text for the additional sources the same size as the text for references (which is small). I think it is an anomaly that External Links and such have large text (basically since they are just headings). They should be the same size as the references don't you think? It definitely looks better and does not over-emphasize them relative to the references.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:09, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
After "External links" there may be a succession box (optional) then "S / A / D". Subject bar / Authority control / Default sort, followed by Categories / stub notices (optional). Size of text should default and not made smaller. It helps with mobile device small screen displays, especially for people with vision handicaps.
If you think the EL text is too large, it can be discussed at MOS for possible group consensus to change. I have my own custom WP larger fontsizes & there is no diff between Ref & EL sections. It all looks the same to me. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 18:56, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well there would be no way to decrease the text for External links since it is part of the body of the article and not part of the {reflist} (as "External links" or "Additional sources" are merely user-created headings just like "Biography" or "Personal life"). I still think it seems odd that the text for non-inline references is larger (viz. the main references are small and the supplemental references are large) and technically the diocese webs pages at CH and GC are there to provide the chronology for the vernacular names of the bishops. As you were putting "excessive citation" tags on many of the articles (which I get) I was trying to find an end-around and put the lists somewhere (technically they should be attached to the "before-after" area but that is not kosher. So my choices were to either put them as bullets under References or put them in a hybrid "External links and supplemental sources" section (as they are not external links since they are being used in the article for the chronology). So maybe the best route would be to have the reference text increased to the size of the text in the body of the paragraph?Patapsco913 (talk) 12:45, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also when we add [self-published source] it seems to do more than what we want (which is to notify the reader that it is self-published) as it generates a case to be reviewed (if you hover over it actually shows "this reference citation appears to be a self-published source" seeming to indicate that it is a question if it is self-published). As we have already discussed and determined that Catholic Hierarchy is reliable, don't we want to somehow notify the reader but not create a work item for someone to review? I guess this is another question: how to we mark references that have been deemed reliable as as self-published. That is why I brought Catholic Hierarchy up for discussion since people were removing citations (leaving articles completely bare) because CH was self-published.Patapsco913 (talk) 12:45, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think I will use this link> Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published works" like such self-published it is more specific than verifiabile sources Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources and also avoids the workload problem.Patapsco913 (talk) 13:25, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Check out this one Francesco Maria Scelloni. It will be my format going forward. What I am doing is only using the actual Latin source on top (Eubel...etc) with links to the actual page; moving the CH and GC bishop references into the body (GC only has references if a bishop has held two positions) relying more on CH since it provides the specific references it uses (which GC does not); move the diocese references to "external links and additional sources"; remove the small; and use self-published with a link to Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published works; and use the following order: Portals - Authority control - Stub notices. I am slowly going through all the bishops I created.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:05, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't Gcatholic self-published as well? Vicedomino deems it as such and is adding the tag.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering why the "[ ]" are missing around "self-published"? — JoeHebda • (talk) 16:13, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

for which one?Patapsco913 (talk) 16:19, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
almost all of your updates, I don't know how far back though...So I updated Francesco Maria Scelloni for you to look at & see how much better the self-pub looks with the leading space & brackets. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 19:14, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
why does it need brackets?Patapsco913 (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It needs brackets to indicate non-article wikilink, just like Refs & Notes.
If without brackets, use {{sup| [''self-published'']}} instead? Without the wikilink. — JoeHebda • (talk) 22:36, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also why are you adding [self-published source] to Catholic Hierarchy (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_self-published_sources_from_July_2018). You are creating a task for someone else and the last thing we need is somebody going around and deleting the references as self-published which happens (as I have created a lot of bishops). We already know it is self-published; we do not need someone to check it. They can go to the catholic-hierarchy wikipage and determine for themselves. I have created over a 1000 bishops and I can say that Cheney tracks almost perfectly with Eubel. And why remove the self-published from GCatholic like you did at Pietro Vecchia (bishop), Cesare Sperelli, Clemente Gera, Sebastiano Gentili? GCatholic is no different from Catholic Hierarchy (although Chow is a writer at Salt + Light Television).Patapsco913 (talk) 19:42, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I did not know. You are the first person to clearly explain this to me. Thanks. — JoeHebda • (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK . How about this. I'll put the brackets around self-published like this [self-published] with a space before it. It will link to the self-published section (I am using the shortcut Wikipedia:SPS; and we leave the self-published on GCatholic since it is the same as Catholic Hierarchy. That way we are on the same page going forward. (see Francesco Maria Scelloni What do you think?Patapsco913 (talk) 01:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - this looks like the best solution; using the same wikicode both in Ref and in EL sections, with the brackets, and for both CH and gCath. It's simpler & easier! Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 09:25, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ideally, you would not use self-published sources to create articles so it wouldn't need to be tagged at all. But, may I please ask that you use the proper template at least, which is {{self-published source}} If you use the proper tag it will automatically put the article into a maintenance category so it can be fixed. But the best thing would be not to use such sources to create lots and lots and lots of articles - they should be created with non-self-published sources.

Giuseppe Maria Feroni

I created a stub from one of your red links, Giuseppe Maria Feroni. Bearian (talk) 15:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good!Patapsco913 (talk) 15:30, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018 at Women in Red

An exciting new month for Women in Red!


August 2018 worldwide online editathons:
New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/87|Indigenous women]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/88|Women of marginalized populations]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/89|Women writers]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/90|Geofocus: Bottom 10]]
Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative
Notable women, broadly-construed!]]


For the first time, this month we are trying out our Monthly achievement initiative

  • All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards.
  • It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in August.
  • Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Francisco Mendoza, Patapsco913.

Unfortunately Kudpung has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Thank you for disambiguating this page. Please note that DAB pages must adhere to a specific format (WP:MOSDAB). I've done it for you this time.

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:19, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Francisco Mendoza) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Francisco Mendoza, Patapsco913!

Wikipedia editor Kudpung just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Write a helpful note for Patapsco913. It will be posted on their talk page.

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:19, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Giovanni Francesco Barbarigo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santi Marcellino e Pietro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Double article

Hey there, you wrote the article for Zacharias Ferrari. I noticed someone else wrote an article for Zacharias Ferreri a year earlier. They are clearly the same person, perhaps you could merge the two pages? Omegastar (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. Thanks! Done.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:38, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ndashes

Dear Patapsco913, I see you have fixed hundreds of articles that I had in my to-do list for replacing - with – in timeranges in your bishop articles. Do you think you covered it all, or you would like me to check any particular chunk of articles? Thanks! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 06:11, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EXP. I think I got to all of them that you sent over.Patapsco913 (talk) 08:05, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 9

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Latino Orsini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Santi Giovanni e Paolo
Mario Theodoli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Luigi Omodei

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fernando Niño de Guevara, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Camillo Borghese and Santi Giovanni e Paolo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Francesco Cennini de' Salamandri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page San Marcello (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018 at Women in Red

September is an exciting new month for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons!



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/91|Women currently in academics]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/92|Women + Law]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/93|Geofocus: Hispanic countries]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

Check it out: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Monthly achievement initiative: September 2018|Monthly achievement initiative]]

  • All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards.
  • It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in September.
  • Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Nomination of Matt Manfredi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matt Manfredi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Manfredi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 21:39, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 4

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Fulvio Giulio della Corgna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Francesco Gonzaga
Matt Manfredi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Phil Hay

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Massimo Franco

Notice

The article Massimo Franco has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  22:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andrew A. Lanyi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hungarian Revolution (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Bolduan: Why I took out religion

I see religion as private (if you follow one). That is why I took it out first place. The policy for info boxes is to leave it out. The parameter was explicitly deleted from the template, like ethnicity. 

Please note that in 2016, the |religion= and |ethnicity= parameters were removed from Infobox person as a result of the RfC: Religion in biographical infoboxes and the RfC: Ethnicity in infoboxes as clarified by this discussion.

Tlwm (talk) 13:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well. She is a newscaster and like politicians and judges, their religion is relevant. The problem with religion in the infobox was because people were putting a subject's religion in without a citation so it was decided to only mention religion in the body with a reliable citation. Anyhow, it is standard practice to mention religion in all biographies.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:07, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is an individual decision how much or if your religion is relevant (in a biography!). Kate said numerous times, that she tries to be neutral. That is how she works. Our interest doesn't make it more relevant. She has the same rights of protection of her privacy like anyone. Tlwm (talk) 14:19, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is bad practice of the wikipedia to put that in, I think. That is my personal opinion. Tlwm (talk) 14:20, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is what is the real policy. I heard her one time wishing a rabbi a happy new Jewish year, but that is not a public self identification. That is a general act of politeness. She doesn't wear religious signs, either. And she also works on Fridays. Tlwm (talk) 14:31, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well if you know her and are editing the page, I suggest that you disclose that on the talk page per policy.
Answer: No war. Also I will not pressure her into one or another direction. I do not write on her article to push or pull her in some kind of direction. I know, that she takes her job serious and loves it. And I like her approach of staying neutral and giving anyone a voice (as long it not completely gets out of hand by Trump filibustering, for example).
  • A cursory look at the Washington Hebrew Congregation suggests that it is a reform congregation and reform Jews work on Fridays; and most Jews do not wear outward signs of religiosity (like most Christians or Zoroastrians or Buddhists or Hindus).
Answer: I know, still she does not talked about it by herself. It is a source who speaks About her.
  • Anyhow, the policy refers to "categorization." I have no problem with you removing it until we have a better source.
Answer: The categorization has been done before by someone else. What else is it? Religion intrudes all aspects of life from birth to death. It's like being part of a soccer fan club. I also can not speak for her husband. It isn't that easy.
  • But think of this, was Einstein a Jew...well not religiously but ethnically...is that not relevant?
Answer: For his work in Physics, no. Not at all. Physics is not about god. Physics describe nature.
  • Is Wolf Blitzer a Jew, yes...both religiously and ethnically and he is a strong supporter of Israel...is that not relevant?
Answer: Yes he is, but he isn't Kate Bolduan. But, he also (like Kate Bolduan) supports an open discussion. Also on actual Israeli and/or Jewish politics. Benjamin Netanjahu tries to make Israel a synonym for being Jewish. That is one reason, why he is heavy critized by many others (Jews and non Jews, Israelis and non Israelis).
  • The president of Nigeria is a Muslim...is that not relevant?...and he is a Sufi as well.
Answer: What does that say about him? This is a categorization.
  • Is Brett Kavanaugh a Catholic...yes...is that not relevant?
Answer: Primary he seams to like to rub himself on women who do not appreciate that. I was born and raised catholic, too. Never believed in god and can not stand Kavanaugh at all (even before this scandals, because he is a justification "machine" for Trump and takes part in the destruction of checks and balances in the US).
  • Now is Richard Gere a Buddhist? Yes...relevant...maybe not.
Answer: I think he would agree.
  • But we mention birthdays, high school jobs, parents, spouses...all sorts of things that are not relevant but as a whole, they complete a biography. Otherwise, we may as well go to her linked in page and scuttle the entire project.
Answer: Religion is culture, an invention of humans and individual. I did not say that it is unimportant. I actually do not know how or if it is important to her. She also has two daughters. Maybe they do disagree with her moms views (I am pretty sure, they will do one day). I write her bio, not mine.
Questions: Patapsco913 (talk) 14:53, 24 September 2018 (UTC) 
Answers: Tlwm (talk) 18:07, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well...you should be arguing your case elsewhere. I think, that one's religious beliefs are foundational to their worldview and it would be silly to exclude them from a biography (which this is) if we have a reliable source. The source used was not reliable. If you don't get why it is important for the biography of the president of Nigeria to note that he is both Muslim and a Sufi then maybe the German education system needs a reboot. The way you spoke about Kavanaugh surely seems to indicate that you are not an unbiased wiki-editor, nay? Religion is much more than culture (maybe read the entry on religion). If we eliminate everything that one thinks is unimportant, we have nothing. Why do you think this is important "She is left-handed but plays all sports with her right hand. She loves ketchup, cereals and can waterski barefoot" Did you disclose on the talk page that you have a conflict of interest? Also when you remove information you need to provide a comment. Some of your English is not comprehensible. Please respond in prose and do not edit my talk page with bullet points.Patapsco913 (talk) 19:43, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am a CNN viewer, not more, not less.Tlwm (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was responding in a enumeration of your questions. Tlwm (talk) 21:06, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Religion is personal. Tlwm (talk) 21:06, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do not eliminate anything. Tlwm (talk) 21:06, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Facts, my friend, facts. She loves ketchup. Tlwm (talk) 21:07, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you would leave out religion, you wouldn't have to refer to that specific situation in Nigeria.Tlwm (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since I do not know her, I can not say if she see it maybe the same like you. You are telling me your opinion that religion is essential. Tlwm (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
From neutral point of view policy: objections and clarifications There's no such thing as objectivity. Everybody with any philosophical sophistication knows that we all have biases. So, how can we take the NPOV policy seriously? Tlwm (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes my English is shitty... Improve it :) Tlwm (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Kavanaugh - yes, I shouldn't write in his biography. Tlwm (talk) 21:40, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018 at Women in Red

Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October!



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/94|Clubs]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/95|Science fiction + fantasy]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96|STEM]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/97|The Mediterranean]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Debra Katz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Washingtonian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

You've been around long enough to know you need reliable sources for stuff like this. Toddst1 (talk) 15:57, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your edit. It is cited under personal life for "Great Jewish Women"Patapsco913 (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Arnold Kopelson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Deadline
Mount Sinai Memorial Park Cemetery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Deadline

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Red links worth turning into 'blue'

/fd

(bio: http://www.ediblegeography.com/a-cocktail-party-in-the-street-an-interview-with-alan-stillman/)

---

/rtl

Tnnnbm (talk) 10:34, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Marc Tracy (Oct 24, 2011). "T.G.I. Wedding!". Tablet. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  2. ^ Franz Lidz (March 1997). "This coach knows clothes -- David Beckerman, CEO of Starter, scores in sports apparel and High School Hoops". Sports Illustrated. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  3. ^ Jewish Federation of Greater New Haven (July 2018). "Tributes and Remembrances".

Article: Cubans (Wikipedia)

I made a mistake in my comments. For me Cubans are those born in Cuba (Cuban citizens or not), and persons who adquire Cuban Citizenship. Persons did not born in Cuba or without Cuban citizenship are not Cubans. Thanks. Cgx8253. 10/21/2018.

please discuss on talk page.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:43, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Get ready for November with Women in Red!

Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/98|Religion]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/99|Deceased politicians]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/96|Asia]]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Categories

Hello, Patapsco913,

I see you've already received an earlier message about this but when you create a new category, like Apostolic Nuncios, always remember to assign parent categories to it so that it isn't orphaned. There is little point in creating categories that are not linked to the category hierarchy. You can look at similar categories to see what the hierarchy is for a particular topic area. If you are stumped, going to an article talk page can also be a great place to ask for ideas. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 19:51, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Albie Hecht, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page HLN (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pie-charts in Miami-Dade County article

You have been participating in a slow edit war over placing population pie-charts in the Miami-Dade County, Florida article. Please stop edit warring and discuss whether those charts should be placed in the article at Talk:Miami-Dade County, Florida#Population pie-charts until a consensus is reached. - Donald Albury 13:15, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Patapsco913. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Simon Lazard

Thanks for creating Simon Lazard.

A New Page Patroller Boleyn just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

Please consider WP:INLINECITE-ing sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018 at Women in Red

The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone.



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/101|Photography]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/102|Laureates]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/103|Countries beginning with 'I']]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)
--Rosiestep (talk) 13:55, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

December 2018 at Women in Red

The WiR December editathons provide something for everyone.



New: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/101|Photography]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/102|Laureates]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/103|Countries beginning with 'I']]

Continuing: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/00/2018|#1day1woman Global Initiative]]

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

On ndashes

Dear Patapsco913, I have a list of hundreds of biographical articles created by you in 2015–2016 flagged because they used - instead of –, but now I see that many of them are already corrected. I wanted to ask you if you think that they were all corrected, so I can forget about them. Thank you! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 16:02, 18 December 2018 (UTC) Hi ExperienceArticleFixer. I went through them one-by-one so they should all be fixed. If I see any elsewhere, I also fix them.Patapsco913 (talk) 13:52, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thought so! Thanks! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 16:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019 at Women in Red

January 2019, Volume 5, Issue 1, Numbers 104-108


Happy New Year from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons.

January events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/104|Women of War and Peace]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/105|Play!]]

January geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/106|Caucasus]]

New, year-long initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]]

Continuing global initiative: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]]

Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]]

To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list
Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list
Image attribution: Nevit Dilmen (CC BY-SA 3.0)
--Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ben Smith (journalist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:50, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019 at Women in Red

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111


Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons.

February events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/109|Social Workers]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/110|Black Women]]

February geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/111|Ancient World]]

Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman2019]]

Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]]

Join the conversations on our talkpage:


Image attribution: Johntex (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]]
--Rosiestep (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]


March 2019 at Women in Red

March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 3, Numbers 107, 108, 112, 113


Happy Women's History Month from Women in Red!

Please join us for these virtual events:
March: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/112|Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen]]
Geofocus: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/113|Francophone Women]]
Continuing initiatives: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/107|Suffrage]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/108|#1day1woman]]


Other ways you can participate:
Help us plan our future events: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Ideas|Ideas Cafe]]
Join the conversations on our [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red|talkpage]]
Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred
Subscription options: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/List|English language opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/International list|International opt-in]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Outreach/Opt-out|Unsubscribe]]
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

April editathons at Women in Red

April 2019

April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117


Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red!

Please join us for these virtual events:


Other ways you can participate:


Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:01, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)


May you join this month's editathons from WiR!

May 2019, Volume 5, Issue 5, Numbers 107, 108, 118, 119, 120, 121


Hello and welcome to the May events of Women in Red!

Please join us for these virtual events:


Other ways you can participate:


Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]


David Brandes

You seem to have conflated David Brandes, the German-Swiss songwriter, with some random guy named David Brandes who lives in Los Angeles. Considering the songwriter lives in Germany, it seems highly unlikely they're the same person. I removed the Los Angeles references. Please do not re-add them unless you have a citation proving that they're the same person and not two men who happen to share a name. BeIsKr (talk) 19:44, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June events with WIR

June 2019, Volume 5, Issue 6, Numbers 107, 108, 122, 123, 124, 125


Check out what's happening in June at Women in Red:

Virtual events:


Other ways you can participate:


Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

July events from Women in Red!

July 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 127, 128


Check out what's happening in July at Women in Red...

Virtual events:


Initiatives we support:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maendeleo Ya Wanawake, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SDE (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:54, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 12

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Secretary of State Project (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Democratic Alliance and Scott Wallace
Pat Stryker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Scott Wallace

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alert and note about page restrictions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

The Donald Trump article has the restriction "If an edit you make is reverted you must discuss on the talk page and wait 24 hours before reinstating your edit.", as can be seen in the editnotice meaning you shouldn't have done this revert. Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:22, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 24

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Alfred S. Bloomingdale (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vanity Fair
List of Jewish American businesspeople (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vanity Fair

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019 at Women in Red

August 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 129, 130, 131


Check out what's happening in August at Women in Red...

Virtual events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Rosiestep (talk) 06:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leonard N. Stern, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Meadowlands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deletion discussion about Isaac Hager

Hello, Patapsco913,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Isaac Hager should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at [58].

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Nomination of David S. Blitzer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David S. Blitzer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David S. Blitzer until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Meeanaya (talk) 13:11, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

List of Jewish American businesspeople (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to The Jewish Journal
Stanley Black (businessman) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to The Jewish Journal

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:07, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Leshowitz

Hello. I see you created both H. Bert Mack and John J. Cali. Edward Leshowitz may be notable too?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:00, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019 at Women in Red

September 2019, Volume 5, Issue 9, Numbers 107, 108, 132, 133, 134, 135


Check out what's happening in September at Women in Red...

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Other business people you might be interested in

Sam Miller (businessman), Max Samuel Grifenhagen, Leo Steiner, Milton Parker, and Bernard London all look like the kind of individuals you might want to add to List of Jewish American businesspeople (assuming you can find sources). Jayjg (talk) 18:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Same goes for Eli M. Black, Mark Fields (businessman), Seth Goldman (businessman), and Adolf Rosenberger. For people like Miller, Goldman and Fields, you should probably link as Mark Fields etc.Jayjg (talk) 21:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No interest in these individuals? Jayjg (talk) 15:52, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I will get on them eventually. I have been doing some work on World War II Japanese warships. The issue with Coffee was exhausting and I am still trying to figure how to deal with all the reverts he made (probably 100). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Coffee&offset=20200116081915&target=Coffee Was it wrong for me to state that someone is from a "Jewish family" when all I have is that they are Jewish. I thought it was a less awkward way to state it but perhaps Coffee was correct since they may have converted.16:14, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
If the source says someone is Jewish, you should stick to indicating they are Jewish; stating they are "from a Jewish family" is OR. Coffee's requirements were stricter than is required, but most of Coffee's deletions from most of the "Jewish lists", were, in general, justified. That said, the List of Jewish American businesspeople and sub-lists are in better shape (in terms of sourcing and completeness) than most of the other Jewish lists, and that is due in no small part to your efforts. Jayjg (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited David Solinger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greenwich Time (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:07, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 18

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Letty Cottin Pogrebin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to New York
Robin Pogrebin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to New York

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:24, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October Events from Women in Red

October 2019, Volume 5, Issue 10, Numbers 107, 108, 137, 138, 139, 140


Check out what's happening in October at Women in Red...

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Benedetto Accolti the Younger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ranuccio Farnese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:08, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Owen Lewis (bishop), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Giulio Caracciolo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019 at Women in Red

November 2019, Volume 5, Issue 11, Numbers 107, 108, 140, 141, 142, 143


Check out what's happening in November at Women in Red...

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:59, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Jewish American businesspeople, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Austrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:34, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alvin Eicoff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arlington Heights (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leslie Sacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Jewish Journal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:43, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December events with WIR

December 2019, Volume 5, Issue 12, Numbers 107, 108, 144, 145, 146, 147


Check out what's happening in December at Women in Red...

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Bedford North Lawrence High School

Information icon Hello. Your recent edit to Bedford North Lawrence High School appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:16, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discontinue violations of BLP

OTRS note: I am currently in the process of going back through your entire edit history after we received a major complaint about your edits here via OTRS (that complaint was found valid by a four-way consensus of admins and OTRS members). I will be explaining everything I'm doing shortly, but our first priority is ensuring Wikipedia's very important policy on BLPs is not being violated. I have conferred with my associates about this move, so do not go back and re-add your edits without forming consensus. Additionally, do not continue using poor sourcing to add religious identifications to BLPs while I go through this process (nor continue to add violations of WP:BLPCAT). Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 12:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am not adding necessarily religious identifications as Jewish is also an ethnic identification. see Who is a Jew? "...Jewish identity is also commonly defined through ethnicity. Opinion polls have suggested that the majority of Jews see being Jewish as predominantly a matter of ancestry and culture, rather than religion" Patapsco913 (talk) 17:19, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am waiting on an explanation but I guess you feel like reverting without commenting. So very polite. Patapsco913 (talk) 07:22, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Given that you have over 95,000 edits, going through your "entire edit history" (as coffee put it) will take some time. It is unreasonable to expect this to have been done in under 24 hours. Additionally, edits like this after being warned is not a very good look. WP:BLPCAT violations are violation of the biographies of living persons policy. --TheSandDoctor Talk 08:32, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 09:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well Coffee said he would reply to me with more details but did not so I was waiting on his response. The first edit I see is to George Blumberg who died in 1938 and clearly has a solid reference that he is Jewish. And Jewish can mean more than religion (in fact Wikipedia defines it as such). The US government now looks at being Jewish as an ethnicity which most Jews do as well. As far as using "Jewish family"...that is what I was told to do long ago by several editors and I was told to read the page Who is a Jew? as a reference. Woody Allen is still Jewish even though an atheist; and Albert Einstein is still Jewish even though not religious (his Wikipedia page even states "The word God is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change anything about this. [...] For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstition. [...] I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them [the Jewish people]." ...but Einstein is still in Jewish category? It seems a lot of people have different understandings of what being Jewish means: it can be a religion, and ethnicity, or a cultural identity. A person does not need to state "I am a Jew" for one to be Jewish. Patapsco913 (talk) 12:52, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As my administrative colleagues here just told you: I'm still in the process of reviewing your edits. When that is complete, then and only then, will I be giving you an explanation for the changes that goes beyond what I've said already in the edit summaries. I simply do not have the time to drop by here after every edit I make when you've done this so broadly across so many articles (and majoritively in violation of policy) and when you have so many edits in your history (I've only combed through a few hundred so far, out of tens of thousands). I am putting together a giant explanation along with every relevant diff, but this will take days or weeks not hours (my use of the word shortly did not imply anything else). So, please be patient and perhaps try to find something else to do other than re-adding poorly sourced content (with original research) to biographical articles. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 13:41, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the synthesis argument/OR but I am not seeing the need for self-attestation and multiple references requirement "widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject". If I look at Wikipedia:ETHNICRACECAT it does not have that requirement and that was what I was following. The example they provide even states "For example, we do have Category:Jewish musicians, but we should not have Category:Semitic musicians." I have been told that if we have a reliable source that someone is Jewish, then that is sufficient to include them in the category.Patapsco913 (talk) 09:00, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you keep saying ethnicity allows you to do these additions, yet I already have compiled evidence that shows you knew how to refer to ethnic origins separately from religion, yet you continuously blended that line in your edits to Jewish biographies. Jewish ethnicity and religion is on its own a very blended category, so quite obviously you need to also follow the procedures at WP:CAT/R, WP:BLPCAT, WP:BLP, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:SYNTH, MOS:CONTEXTBIO, etc., when trying to add such controversial information (so controversial we have had multiple complaints at OTRS just this month regarding their additions). You simply do not get to choose on your own (or even among a small group of editors) whether someone is supposedly ethnically or religiously Jewish whenever it better suits your wish to include it in an article (an article subject being Jewish doesn't give you loopholes around our policies). Reliable sources determine this for us, as we do not conduct original research. Those sources need to be unquestionably reliable and, by consensus, say the subject is described in such ways. As it is also a religion you further need to provide proof that 1) the person publicly self-identifies as such, or 2) they have been described as such by multiple reliable sources and it has found to be part of their notability, or 3) that sources say the article subject is specifically ethnically Jewish. (If they are only ethnically Jewish, you need to specify that they are of Jewish descent not that they are just "Jewish" nor should you keep claiming entire families are Jewish without evidence and without specifying whether that is religious or ethnic.) It isn't just an "argument", it's our unquestionable policy which I'm simply enforcing. Furthermore, you really need to start abiding by all of our polices when you edit BLPs, if you don't know how you need to stop editing them. Full stop (you've been here long enough to know better). I am not at all happy with what I've uncovered so far, nor am I pleased with your lackadaisical attitude here regarding very serious policy violations. You "being told" something does not substitute our policies, and you should stop pretending at this point that it in any way does. As I've said before, you will be getting a full explanation when I'm actually done. So do try and stop trying to cherry pick your way out of this. Note: I will not be replying here again until this is complete; this isn't a discussion this is enforcement. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 10:37, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I get what you are saying. In order to document a subject as ethnically Jewish, I have to have at least 3 unquestionably reliable sources describing the subject as ethnically Jewish. In order to document a subject as religiously Jewish, I have to have at least 3 unquestionably reliable sources showing that they self-identify as a practitioner of Judaism and that the fact they practice Judaism is part of their notability. This would seem to preclude adding any Jewish designation on most biographies.Patapsco913 (talk) 11:55, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're on the right track here. But, I don't want to try to piecemeal explain it to you as I may miss something important you need to be doing. So, do understand I appreciate at least that you seem to be listening, and I appreciate your willingness to learn. I will reply in greater detail when I am through with the review. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 09:31, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK - when you find any that has sufficient sourcing to list them as Jewish, please post their name here so I can take a look. I know I have some where a pretty good source like the NY Times will say they are Jewish - but not identify whether it is ethnic or religious - and I doubt I have many with three sources identifying as such. For those who are living, i would expect that very few have being Jewish as part of their notability. This may be a good one to start up a discussion group on because there are many many people not using this standard even in the Jewish-focused wiki-projects.Patapsco913 (talk) 17:38, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello Patapsco913, I just was made aware of this edit you made today introducing text stating that Maurice Kremer is Jewish in violation of WP:CAT/R. Please cease this immediately. Further edits of this sort without previous consensus and in blatant disregard for the above will result in a block. This is your final warning. --TheSandDoctor Talk 19:32, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Maurice Kremer (1824–1907) - I just changed what was there from "Jewish family" to "Jewish" since Coffee has rightly objected to my use of "Jewish family" which I thought was softer terminology but I admit was wrong. Anyhow, the source says he founding member of Congregation B'nai B'rith (now the Wilshire Boulevard Temple) so how could he not be Jewish?

Other sources also say he was Jewish:

I look over the contributions by the various Jewish wikiprojects Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism, Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history, Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish Women, Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture and I do not see this standard being followed where you need to have three unequivocal sources specifically stating if the person is an ethnic or religious Jew or it cannot be included. I would imagine that there are 1000s of Jewish biographies that categorize people as Jewish that do not have sufficient support.Patapsco913 (talk) 20:18, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I specifically have not said that you need any particular number of sources, that was your own idea on how to solve the consensus issue. The fact that other people may have introduced similar errors in other articles is not an excuse for your continued additions in violation of policy you have been made aware of. And you knew full well before making the edit that got you the final warning that you needed more than one biased source to make this claim on a biography, so don't pretend you were following policy with this most recent change. Continually not getting the point and continually failing to take this issue seriously is simply going to result in a block. If you knew of additional sources to back up the claim in the article you should have added them before putting a controversial claim into an article not waited to present them here. You knowing of something does not constitute coverage in reliable sources and you already know that by now. I'm not going to keep wasting my time explaining things to you that you have already been told. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:42, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • So your excuse for once again violating policy by using a singular dubious source to back up a controversial claim in a biography, is that you thought you definitely needed at least 3 unquestionably reliable sources to follow policy? "At the time" was well after this discussion had concluded on my last reply and well after you were clearly aware of the need for a consensus of verified sources. So, you're either now being dishonest or there are competency issues here... either of which are grounds to sanction you from editing BLPs ever again (see WP:BLPDS). I suggest you stop trying to defend defenseless actions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 01:02, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not going to edit or re-edit anything regarding religion or ethnicity on BLPs (or on deceased people like Kremer). I am not trying to be difficult, I was just re-wording the statement because I used "Jewish family" rather than just "Jewish." You were going to get to the biography eventually. You will see that most of my edits will say "Jewish family".Patapsco913 (talk) 03:13, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is only using one source to back up this claim, as you were told before this isn't acceptable (multiple sources need to exist, or at the least [per the AN discussion] one general reference needs to be shown [such as an encyclopedia of Jewish people]). Do you have another source to add to the article that describes them as Jewish, or is there already one present that isn't being used inline? — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 02:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I added some sources to Sherman Block. Should not this be raised in the AN discussion since the biographies that are being added back to the lists are using only one source and letting "Jewish family" stay in the biography as sufficient wording? Otherwise everyone is going to be working against each other with you removing information and others adding information; and we will be right back where we started from. I think if we use the standard that being Jewish must be part of someone's notability and multiple reliable sources of self-identification, it will basically eliminate most Jewish biographies (and actually go against what the Jewish wikiprojects are striving) and if you apply it across the board, we would rarely mention the ethnicity of anyone. There are probably thousands of biographies mentioning the ethnic backgrounds of living people without self-identification. Patapsco913 (talk) 15:50, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for those sources! That is much better! Now if you can source every article you want to add such claims to like that, I would be truly appreciative. As to your other point, I will be continuing to focus on a review of your additions simply because how many weren't done correctly (I think you have seen in the edit summaries the many policy issues you presented). The unsourced lists that I did the removals from were mostly separate from your issues of synthesis, etc., so if people are working on those right now and aren't sourcing the articles or lists properly, I intend to work on that as well and assist in proper sourcing. (That will just be quite a bit from now given the delay the AN thread caused.) To your last point, Jewish is an ethnoreligious identification. That means it has to follow the standards of religious claims in biographies (self-identification, and a consensus of sourcing showing it part of their notability). With the only exception being if a source describes the person directly and explicitly as being of Jewish ethnicity, but not a follower or believer etc in the religious side of the ethnoreligion. That is what a literal interpretation of current policy is, and if you disagree with it I recommend (as I did at the now closed AN) you take it up in an RFC at the relevant talk page (such as the talk page for WP:BLPCAT). — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 00:11, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well the problem will continue to exist because other editors like User:Cullen328, User:Sir Joseph, User:Levivich, User:Sir Joseph, User:Debresser, User:Jayjg seem to apply a different standard. I assume that unless the citation specifically says religion (which is technically Judaism) then you assume it means ethnicity which just requires a reliable source that they are Jewish. So you are going to remove sources and others are going to add them back. This does not sound like a solution does it? There will not be any Jewish biographies of living people left if you require a consensus of sourcing showing 1) self-identification, 2) it is part of their notability, and 3) the sources used explicitly identify whether it is referring to religion or ethnicity. Most Jewish people are not notable because of their Jewishness; they are notable people who happen to be Jewish. This might be better to discuss on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Identifying who is Jewish so I will add it there. Patapsco913 (talk) 01:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Coffee seems to continue to misunderstand the difference between Judaism as a religion and Judaism as an ethnicity. His unilateral interpretation of what that means regarding Wikipedia policies and guidelines is becoming problematic. Attemps to explain this to him are failing. Various editors are suggesting that if he will continue in this way, he will have to be sanctioned. Please keep track of Coffee's edits for future reference. Debresser (talk) 11:36, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here's another issue: You should not be adding (in any manner) minor children's names to articles unless they are directly notable. I removed the names from Karatz's BLP, and I suggest you not add such information to articles in the future (and especially not when the source used is a newsletter). If you know of other articles you have added such data to, please go back and remove it so as to comply with our standards. The fact you did this after being warned several times about BLP violations, is an incrediblty worrying sign. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 01:10, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear to all, regarding Jews, one need not (and likely must not) differentiate between ethnicity or religion, if that were even possible. Jews are an ethnoreligious group, and there are not clear and easily defined boundaries between the ethnicity and religion. All one needs is to follow Wikipedia policy: that is, find a reliable source indicating that the individual is Jewish. Two or more sources would, of course, be better, particularly for living people. Jayjg (talk) 18:06, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of File:Inmate Listing of the McLennan Country Jail as of May 19, 2015.pdf

The page File:Inmate Listing of the McLennan Country Jail as of May 19, 2015.pdf has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it was a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Microsoft Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review Wikiacc () 06:51, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Giovanni Battista Deti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alessandro Orsini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:28, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020 at Women in Red

January 2020, Volume 6, Issue 1, Numbers 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153


Happy Holidays from all of us at Women in Red, and thank you for your support in 2019. We look forward to working with you in 2020!

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

BLP Discretionary Sanctions Advisement

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33--Cameron11598 (Talk) 20:43, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note while the template does indicate there isn't a problem with your edits in the area, I do have strong concerns over your editing and your continued tagging of articles despite the concerns of multiple editors. Please desist in these edits. --Cameron11598 (Talk) 20:47, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have not been editing much on living people since the start of the review; and I will stay away from the deceased people that are being reviewed.Patapsco913 (talk) 21:20, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly suggest you refrain from tagging living people by faith and ethnicity as well. At least until you are more familiar with the BLP policy. This particular group has a good reason to be upset when it looks like a list is being formed of members of their faith. Some sensitivity is required in this topic area. As such I strongly suggest you abide by both the letter and the spirit of the BLP policy or I'll be heading to Arbitration Enforcement to request an uninvolved party look into this. --Cameron11598 (Talk) 21:41, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update Jay Sures’ marital status

Hello! I work for Executive Writing, and as part of my consultancy work, I work with United Talent Agency. I noticed that you recently updated Jay Sures’ page to include his marriage to Molly Isaksen. However, the two are no longer married. While there was no press coverage of their divorce, you can view the primary source court documents here. I am hoping you would be willing to remove the reference to their marriage in both the info box, as well as the sentence in the “Personal Life” section of his page.

I believe I've disclosed my conflict of interest appropriately. Thank you in advance for your help. EWChristine (talk) 19:12, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How about we switch to "was married" and put your message on the talk page so future editors will see it.Patapsco913 (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February with Women in Red

February 2020, Volume 6, Issue 2, Numbers 150, 151, 152, 154, 155


Happy Valentine's Day from all of us at Women in Red.

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited USS YP-284, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Necker Island (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Subic Bay

Hi Patapsco913. Thanks for your additions of shipwrecks in Subic Bay. It seems you are doing some research on this. Can you add your sources as references to the article? Thanks again. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:15, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020 at Women in Red

March 2020, Volume 6, Issue 3, Numbers 150, 151, 156, 157, 158, 159


Happy Women's History Month from all of us at Women in Red.

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Japanese ships

Good work you're doing on these. I've amended Hayataka Maru as unusually wrecksite.eu is showing incorrect info. Miramar shows that she had a succession of civil owners and she was never part of the IJN Lyndaship (talk) 17:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! it is like detective work with some of them Patapsco913 (talk) 23:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BLP concerns on Bradley S. Jacobs

Hi Patapsco913. I have some concerns about your contributions to biographies of living people. Specifically, in this series of edits to Bradley S. Jacobs in July, it appears that you added the category Category:American Jews and added the claim that "Jacobs was born to a Jewish family in Providence, Rhode Island, the son of Charlotte Sybil (née Bander) and Albert Jordan Jacobs." You source this statement to two obituaries [59] [60] in legacy.com for his parents, neither of which even mentions anything about any of them being Jewish. When this content was removed, you vigorously and repeatedly reverted the removal with edit summaries such as "sorry you need this for the category he is in" (that's kind of putting the cart before the horse) and most strikingly "You do not have a source that he is not jewish" (this edit was made less than a week ago). WP:BLP is pretty explicit that the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete the disputed material. It's the burden of the person who wishes to retain or restore material to provide high-quality sources to verify the material; in this case, the sources didn't even mention anyone (much less the article subject) being Jewish. (Not to mention concerns about the quality of the source itself -- often obituaries in local newspapers are written by family members, not editorial staff, and legacy.com does not give sufficient information to determine who wrote a particular obituary. I personally spent a considerable amount of time trying to find these articles from another source, to no avail.)

I see that there have been several previous notes and warnings about BLP issues. In December, Coffee, TheSandDoctor, and Oshwah extensively wrote about the sourcing requirements for BLPs in the specific context of your edits inappropriately identifying a particular person as Jewish, and especially in categorization.[61] TheSandDoctor wrote, "I just was made aware of this edit you made today introducing text stating that Maurice Kremer is Jewish in violation of WP:CAT/R. Please cease this immediately. Further edits of this sort without previous consensus and in blatant disregard for the above will result in a block. This is your final warning." (emphasis in original). Furthermore, you were alerted to BLP DS in December by Cameron11598. [62]

Accordingly, I feel I have no choice but to impose a sanction. I'm sorry to do this, Patapsco913, but I am imposing the arbitration enforcement sanction described in the next section. I will look favorably upon a request to ease or lift this sanction with an acknowledgement of the BLP issues thus far and a commitment to avoid further issues in the future, after a record of contributions that shows a strong understanding of sourcing and verifiability requirements across Wikipedia. Please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

L235, I continue to be troubled by this issue – BLP violations for callings Jews, Jews. Can you explain why it was wrong to say that Jacobs was born into a Jewish family? Why aren't the family obituaries sufficient sources for the family's Jewish identity?
Same question for Maurice Kremer – reviewing the conversation that followed TheSandDoctor's warning, do you still think that saying Maurice Kremer is Jewish is a BLP violation?
I do not see this editor making BLP violations, and I really do not understand why a few administrators seem to think it's a BLP violation to add Jewish categories or text, even when the sources support the Jewish identity. What gives? Maurice Kremer was a French Jewish American, and Brad Jacobs grew up in a Jewish family. And the sources in the articles say so. Why is this at all controversial? Levivich [dubious – discuss] 04:34, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can't believe we're having this conversation, Levivich. The sources do not say the parents are Jews. At best, you could say that they tend to suggest/imply that the parents are Jewish; a far more fair interpretation of the sources is that they're likely-primary (and BLP-noncompliant) sources that simply do not state the parents are Jews. And even if the sources definitively and reliably established the parents were Jewish, it is a BLP violation to engage in NOR-style synthesis and categorize the son in "Category:American Jews". As for the question implicit in your tone, "why the hell are you wasting your time on this?" – those with access to the oversight OTRS queue can confirm that ticket:2020030210009186 provides ample evidence that these BLP violations have not been harmless error. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I likewise cannot believe we're having this conversation, Kevin. You referenced Maurice Kremer and Bradley S. Jacobs.
Maurice Kremer's article states that he is a founder of Congregation B'nai B'rith, now Wilshire Boulevard Temple, the oldest Jewish congregation in Los Angeles. There are two sources in Kremer's article: [63] [64]. How can you, or TheSandDoctor, or anyone, say that it's a BLP violation to say that Maurice Kremer was Jewish? This example seems beyond question; I really don't get how that was a valid "warning", when the guy was a founder of a Jewish congregation. Oh yeah, I didn't even realize until just now... Maurice Kremer isn't a BLP. He's been dead 100 years. So why is that article being brought up in relation to BLP concerns?
Let's talk about the parents of Bradley S. Jacobs, Charlotte Jacobs [65] and Albert Jacobs [66]. How can you say that those two obituaries don't say that Charlotte and Albert Jacobs were Jewish? For one thing, there's a Star of David right there on both obituaries. Second, it's a Jewish funeral home (hence the Star of David). Third, the obituary announces shiva time. Charlotte's obituary talks about how she sat shiva for her mother for a year. Her obituary was published in The Jewish Voice & Herald [67]. I mean, these are Jewish biographies of people who are receiving Jewish funeral rights from a Jewish funeral home, and we're not sure if they're Jewish?! Of course these sources establish that the parents were Jewish. You really think it's a BLP violation to say that Jacobs "was born to a Jewish family"? A more accurate construction would be to say, "He was born to Jewish parents" instead of "He was born to a Jewish family", but is there even really a difference? This is semantics, at most a content dispute, but not a BLP violation.
As for the category, Category:American Jews, is the son of American Jews an American Jew? Yeah, I would say yes. But whether Jacobs should be in Category:American Jews or in Category:American people of Jewish descent is a content dispute about categorization. At most, it's a mis-categorization, but it's not a BLP violation. Of course there's the argument that it's un-DUE to include the Jewish parents; if secondary sources don't talk about that, then it's not a significant part of his biography. And if the article didn't mention Jewish parents or Jewish family, then there'd be no basis for either category. But I would expect that this would be resolved with talk page discussion or an RFC for this particular biography–not with sanctions. It's a content dispute, it's not like he's that far off "the Jewish mark" (pun intended). Levivich [dubious – discuss] 06:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are indefinitely banned (WP:TBAN) from making edits related to living or recently deceased individuals (within the meaning of WP:BLP). Any administrator may grant an exception from this ban for you to edit a particular article.

You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in the preceding section.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Editing of Biographies of Living Persons#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Patapsco913&oldid=943664123"