Jump to content

User talk:Cullen328/Archive 35

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37→Archive 40

A recently deleted AfD you participated in

Hey Cullen. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zen Cho was created by a sock of what I imagine is a banned user, who I have blocked and flushed as many of his contributions as I could. I didn't see that you had participated until after I had already deleted the discussion. Because it technically wasn't speediable, in my opinion, I'd be happy to undelete the discussion and close it if you'd rather it be preserved, and I especially didn't want to give the impression that your contributions were unvalued or unwanted. All the best. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:25, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Bongwarrior, I appreciate your inquiry, but I have no problem with your actions in this case. I believe the author is notable and as long as the article about her is being kept, I am happy with the outcome. Fight the socks, trolls and vandals, and let's keep building this encyclopedia. Nothing you have done here gives me any negative impression at all. Thanks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:34, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, good to know. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:37, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Cullen328/Archive 35. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 18:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Hi Cullen,

I trust you're fine.

During my article cleanup, I discovered some of the link I added to articles as sources when the article was created are now dead. I want to avoid that problem in the future, so I want to use web.archive.org. I don't want to lose where these sources are archived in case the links go dead in the future. How is the use of archived sources usually done on Wikipedia? Can I place the links to the archived sources on the talk page of each article so they can be easily found when needed? Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 16:16, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Wikicology. Please read Wikipedia:Using WebCite and WP:LINKROT for some good instructions. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:36, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Cullen. Appreciate you giving Wc a more precise answer than mine. Just checking in with you, and confirming my assistance in helping out regarding Wikicology. In addition I suggest the assistance of Monochrome_Monitor, a successful mentoree who is highly capable and I believe would be willing to assist. Wikicology has been very pro-active in revisiting his previous work, and I am more and more convinced that he is of GF and is here to help the project. Please keep in touch. Regards, Simon, aka Irondome (talk) 02:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Irondome. Thanks for checking in. If ArbCom agrees to allow Wikicology to clean up his articles under a mentorship, then it will be great to have a team of three (or more) mentors working with him. I hope that Monochrome_Monitor will make their willingness to help with this known to ArbCom. Like you, I am grateful that Wikicology is already working to clean things up. I am always willing to answer any questions he has, both on and off Wikipedia. In all my recent off-Wikipedia communications with him (we are Facebook friends), I have encouraged honesty, forthrightness and contrition. I will be ready to begin active mentoring when ArbCom makes its decision. Until then, I feel it best for me to respond to any inquiries but not to actively engage in mentoring. I truly wish our friend Wikicology well, whatever the outcome. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:41, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
I would definitely help in any way I could. But I'd need to know exactly what I would be helping with, since my powers of telepathy don't work at a distance. --Monochrome_Monitor 13:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Dont be sarky MM and read the ANI links on my T/P. The stuff near the bottom Irondome (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much Cullen. I will read Wikipedia:Using WebCite and WP:LINKROT tonight. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 20:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Marlon Brando

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Marlon Brando. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

West African College of Surgeons

Hi Cullen,

I trust your fine. There is a concern about close paraphrasing here but I address the concern here. Please help to review if there are still instances of close paraphrasing. Thank you. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 10:27, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

IP's and what not...

Hello, Sorry if that came across as whining. I have been learning the ropes for the last few months quite extensively. As I'm currently in a physical condition were all I can do most of the time is sit at the PC. As a result I've had a very quick baptism of fire about various WP issues, debates, consensus, etc; and this is something that I've come across. That is really painstaking to deal with I've noticed. I've learnt my lesson from hard experiences about editing a page. Especially without consensus first. So yeah, frustrating.

Nürö G'DÄŸ MÄTË 05:39, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Nuro Dragonfly. This is a collaborative project based on consensus. Every editor including IP editors is free to edit the 99+% of unprotected articles. That's simply how it is. I wish you improved health and satisfying editing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Nice job at AfC

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Just wanted to say thank you for helping out the new editor on their draft, Draft:Romeo Mancini. Onel5969 TT me 13:37, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Romeo Mancini

Hi Jim,

I have writing you about the draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Romeo_Mancini

Thank you very much for helping me out with the "citation need" which I have done and even more in the other parts. I have been told, as you read as well, that the entire tone it is not ok,starting from the first phrase that is not formal enough, like a story. "In the years before the outbreak of the Second World War, Mancini attended the Accademia di Belle Arti di Perugia. There, Mancini studied and met another student who also became an artist, Leoncillo Leonardi." I guess I need help to get through this, because I can't really see where the informal tone here is. Could you please help me? Thank you very much Anna Lisa --Anna Lisa33 (talk) 09:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jim, Thank you so so much for helping me out with the editing. I have now followed all your advises where was written citation needed I have filled it in. About the artworks names I have translated them into English. There is just one sentence that I would like to take out at the very beginning "at the end of the war Mancini returned to Perugia". I have read a script that he wrote about it, about being in the mountains that I have mentioned on the notes, but he actually doesn't mention how long he stayed, and wouldn't be correct to say that at the end of the war he went back, they stayed for a while, he doesn't say how long and I have problems to mention it since I do not have the correct months of 1943 or beginning of 1944, but it is sure that he went, as it is mentioned as well on the catalogue on him.

Could you please have a look into it and tell me if it is ok for you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Romeo_Mancini

Thank you very much Anna Lisa Anna Lisa33 (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Looking for some pointers..

Hi Jim,

I recently got the notification of "Proposed for deletion" and would like your thoughts on what I should add. It is an article on my grandfather who is on his last few days... I have more than adequate material on him and I feel that he is a true military hero and grew up listening and watching soldiers come and thank him for saving their life and being an amazing commander. I added what I could from a few links but wonder where to go next, be it family be it that he was literally the model for the 1945-1950s USMC recruiting poster or what.

Any and all direction would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Mike

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

Hello, Mikeweiland. It is difficult for a grandson to write a neutral Wikipedia article about his grandfather. Here are a few things to keep in mind: There is a strong presumption that generals and Medal of Honor winners are notable. That presumption does not exist for colonels and Silver Star winners. If an article is to stay, it must summarize what reliable, independent, secondary sources have written about your grandfather. The medal citations are primary sourcea which by themselves do not establish notabity. You cannot include any personal anecdotes or information you have learned as a family member. That material is not verifiable, even if it may be true in the abstract. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:51, 19 April 2016 (UTC)|

(talk page stalker)Hello, Mikeweiland. I noticed this discussion here on Jim's page and wanted to offer a suggestion. I'm so sorry to here of Colonel Steadman's declining health and as a Christian, I offer up my prayers for him and your family for a peaceful passage. The suggestion I am about to offer in no way reflects on my admiration and amazement at your grandfather's legacy. You have every right to be extremely proud to be his grandson.

My suggestion would be to move the article out of the encyclopedia itself immediately. It can be moved to Draft:Henry W Steadman so you can work on it at your leasure. As it stands right now, it could be subject to speedy deletion at any time, both as not making any claim to notability (in Wikipedia's usage of that term) and for being promotional (a read of WP:NOTMEMORIAL may clarify why I am saying that).

I think you may be able to find enough reliable secondary sources to build an acceptable article on him. The only secondary source you have now, the American Legion Magazine, has a poor reputation for reliability as it is thought of here (See WP:RS). However, I am betting you could find numerous good journalistic sources from hometown newspapers and possibly from newspapers serving his stateside billets. There is no requirement that sources be available online.

I cannot do any research for you, but I would be honored to help you with the technical steps. I'll be happy to take care of moving the article for you, as I am sure Jim would be. If I can help in any way, just message me on my talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 20:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week : nominations needed!

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of living Medal of Honor recipients

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of living Medal of Honor recipients. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

LED wallpaper as neologism

Dear Jim, I am pretty new to Wikipedia and I have recently submitted a new article that was declined as considered neologism. I am an expert on LED technology and in recent years I have been especially researching into the field of innovative use of light-emitting diodes for interior decoration. I have recently submitted an article on LED wallpaper for review, but unfortunately it was declined as it constitutes a neologism and the reviser felt the references I have been using don't prove the notability of the subject. Of course the use of LEDs applied to wall covering substrates is a fairly recent development and the literature on the topic is still scarce. However, many important companies and designers have been exploring these possibilities and some have turned it into an actual product available for commercial purchase. My question is, would this topic be more suitable as a sub-section of the wider Wallpaper topic? Do you have any advise at this regard? I hope this is the right place to ask for your advise, if not please accept my apologies. Tenko82 (talk) 10:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Tenko82. How extensive is the discussion of "LED wallpaper" in reliable sources unconnected with companies developing such a product? That determines whether the topic is notable. As for adding a section to Wallpaper, how important is this niche product idea to the entire history of wallpaper? If it is a narrow niche development, then discussing it there might be an issue of undue weight. Do general books about wallpaper published recently discuss it? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
I see that Meystyle is already discussed in Wallpaper. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply Cullen328! The topic of "LED wallpaper" is mentioned in many recent books regarding contemporary developments in the wallpaper industry, like Blackely L. (2006) "Wallpaper"; Brittain-Catlin T.y, Audas J., Stuckey, C. (2006) "The Cutting Edge of Wallpaper"; Cole D. (2007) "Patterns", to name a few. It is also mentioned in many blog articles about LED technology and Interior decoration. The concept of integrating light-emitting sources into wall covering substrates has been developed by different designers and makers such as Meystyle, Ingo Maurer, Philips, Lomox, etc. Not everybody uses the expression of "LED wallpaper" though. I was wondering if the topic of "Light-emitting walls" would be more appropriate? Tenko82 (talk) 09:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Colorado Progressive Party

This is almost your neck of the woods. Drmies (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, a thousand miles is a pretty long neck, and the article about this brand new party is already gone, Drmies. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Oh, well... The claim was that this party was already there in the 1910s, I believe, and was now being rebooted or something. Plus, what's a thousand miles for a Westerner? Nothing but an opportunity, I imagine! Drmies (talk) 18:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Maybe. It was a seriously underdeveloped article. :) Hey, I'm watching Donald T. And Ted C.! And Carly Fiorina has a new suit! Ted C. does not, nor does he have a new speechwriter yet. Drmies (talk) 00:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Hey, Drmies, don't you know that our Manual of style requires the use of surnames, not initials? And any observations I might make about the crowd that you alluded to would be BLP violations, so I will vent on Facebook instead. As for the underdeveloped article, it is tough to build one based on a six week old Facebook page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:17, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:GoodWeave logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:GoodWeave logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Comment I put it back into use. Someone uploaded one to commons and swapped it in making yours unused nonfree.. I speedy tagged the commons one as a copyvio and non-simple pd text logo at commons and restored yours into the article. You can disregard the above message. End of story. Hope you're well. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
I am well, Anna Frodesiak, with the exception of some relatively minor but irritating eye problems common among guys who are 64. I hope that you are also well, and appreciate your assistance with this matter. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I am sorry to hear about your eyes. Happy to help with the matter. Best wishes to you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Warmest wishes to you, Anna Frodesiak, because I am always happy to hear from a highly trusted colleague. I will continue trying to edit productively as long as I am able, which I hope will be for decades to come. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the kind words. You are a wonderful editor and I trust you will be here for ages. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Krista Franklin

Hi @Cullen328: I was refered to you by @Softlavender: due to your being familiar with articles about artists and was hoping that you could give your thoughts about the Krista Franklin article. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 11:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Picomtn. I read the article and the talk page, and commented at the AfD debate, supporting keeping the article. Some of the comments there are unfortunate, but it seems that a consensus to keep is developing. If you have any more specific questions, either now or later, I will do my best to assist you. Thank you for your efforts to improve our coverage of notable African-American woman artists and other under-represented people. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Cullen328. Thank you for reviewing this article and your support of it too. And if you’d be so kind, could you please take a look at the Mr. Lambu article? This is a very perplexing case as I can’t understand how a notable movie such as this was nominated for deletion, and the nominating editor has yet to respond to any queries. I’ve done some work to improve the article, but with a 1956 Bollywood movie I’m not really show where to go without some guidance. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 07:45, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Google doesn't index Indian news sources properly, so it's harder to find sources on Indian subjects. MichaelQSchmidt can show you a tool/template/filter to use that brings up Indian news sources only, in a Google search (I used to have it but I lost it and have forgotten the keyword to find in on Wikipedia). Softlavender (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Jozef De Vroey

Hi Cullen328. I'f you'd be so kind, and have the time, can you please review the Jozef De Vroey article I've written? Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 12:11, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

The first sentence runs about 70 words and is extremely convoluted. Similar problems occur throughout the article. I recommend copy editing for clarity and using a more concise and direct sentence structure. I am a bit uncomfortable with using the phrase "the rape of Belgium" in Wikipedia's voice and instead recommend something like "Germany's 1914 atrocities against Belgian civilians". The lede should summarize the body of the article and should not contain intricate details not present in the body. The body is the place for details. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Johnson Bamidele Olawumi

Hi Cullen,

I trust you're fine. I worked on the above article I created last year. I discovered that almost all the sources I added then are now dead. I fixed the article here. Could you please take a look at the latest version of the article? Thank you. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 10:11, 29 April 2016 (UTC) Thanks for pointing me to WP:LINKROT. I plan to use the wayback machine to archiving those sources to prevent such dead link in the future. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 10:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Wikicology. The references look solid and back the content. Please be sure to include author names and publication dates. The Sun reference went to spam ads after a while. I do not know what you can do about that. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much Cullen. I don't know why Nigerian websites are poorly managed. I will do it like this. What do you think about this idea? Warm regards. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 23:45, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
You are ahead of me in archiving of sources, which is wise in the current situation. Well done, Wikicology. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you from my heart. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 00:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Chris Olukolade

Hi Cullen,

I trust you're fine. I fixed the above article yesterday. See this. I don't know how "hail from" is been used in places like US or UK. In Nigeria, it means our origin I.e where our parents originated from. I have asked on the article's talk page if anyone could help find sources to verify this. Could you please take a look at the article? Thank you. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 07:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

In the U.S., "hail from" is not everyday usage, but as far as I know, it means a person's home town, not their parent's home towns. For example, my mother was born in Idaho but I was born in Michigan, and now live in California. So, I might say that I "hail from" Michigan, but not from Idaho. I am tired and it is late, but I will take a closer look at the article tomorrow. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
I am thinking "hail from" comes directly from the cited source, whose structure that entire paragraph closely follows. For convenience, this is the source in question.
I think it is also somewhat unfair to the living subject of that biography, to detail his undergraduate degree and then completely omit any mention of his postgraduate degree. MPS1992 (talk) 11:35, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MPS1992 and Wikicology. The original source uses "hail from" in the same sense as we use it in the United States but I changed to "were from". Problems with close paraphrasing can be solved by rewriting so that the content is summarized in original language. An incomplete article is not "unfair" to the subject unless the exclusion of information is deliberate. Simply add the postgraduate degree, cited to a reliable source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:36, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes I agree, both of those actions would be necessary to bring this article to an acceptable level. MPS1992 (talk) 16:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Sera Khandro

Hi Jim.

Thanks for the very useful addition to my Teahouse conversation about my learning curve as a new editor on the Sera Khandro page. I'm especially grateful for the link to the page on reliable sources.

This is just a brief thanks for the support and pointing me in the right direction.

Onwards to better and better editing and articles.

AD64 (talk) 02:59, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

We were all beginners at one time, and the learning curve here is pretty steep. I suggest that you learn a bit about our basic principles, and follow a lot of the links there. Thank you for the kind words, and feel free to ask editing questions at the Teahouse at any time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:16, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

I will refrain from commenting on that issue. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:43, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello my dear friend!

I'm kind of back, but not quite. I'm currently working on something , I just found a really good article, but I'm having a hard time rewording it. I could use your help. Thanks a lot in advance! Let me know. Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 15:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

It is a delight to see you back on Wikipedia, Miss Bono. I also consider you a dear friend. I did a little copy editing on your draft article today, and will take a closer look later. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I hope I can finish it someday. It's one of my favourite songs in the album. Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 14:44, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Pepi Litman

Hi Jim, Many thanks for getting back to me so swiftly about CD citation. As ever, your answer opens up more questions: 1) Where did the nowiki code come from? The text I copied looked like this: (Media notes). {{cite AV media notes}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

but on the (unsaved) sandbox page where i pasted it, i can see it now looks like this: {{Cite AV media notes |title=Wandering Stars: Songs From Gimpel's Lemberg Yiddish Theater, 1906-1910 |year=2013 |first=Michael|last=Aylward |first2=Jacob |last2=Futter |publisher=Reno |id=128 |ref=}}

2) What is nowiki code anyway?

3) When you say you fixed it...does that mean you edited & saved it in my sandbox? i ask because i can still see the "nowiki" version in the sandbox, open in another tab. should i save? should i just close?

4) What should I have done to cite a CD without all this fuss? Please answer at your leisure, i am done for the day! Best, Nadnie (talk) 01:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Nadnie,
1. Most likely, instead of copying and pasting the template wikicode from the displayed page, you copied and pasted it from the underlying wikicode that generates that page. It is the underlying code that has the nowiki tags, not the displayed page.
Please take a look at how your message to me above displays. The first example without the nowiki tags displays the error message for an empty active template. The second example displays the wikicode, which is exactly what the nowiki tags do. In other words, the first template is working but doesn't have the input data it needs, so it spits out an error message. The second template is passive and is just displayed as raw code.
2. The purpose of the nowiki tags is to allow raw wikicode to be displayed on a regular page without "doing its thing", and this is for teaching purposes. If the raw template code wasn't surrounded by nowiki tags, it would kick into action and generate template output, instead of sitting there unimplemented for people to see and study and copy. Nowiki tags in effect "turn off" the operation of the computer code.
3. Yes, I corrected the problem and I no longer see that raw template code displayed in your draft. If you still see it, try refreshing your browser. There is some raw template code at the very end of the article.
4. Simply be sure that your references are surrounded by properly formatted opening and closing ref tags, and edit out any stray nowiki tags.
I hope this helps. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:36, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Alex Gilbert

In commenting on the OP's comments, did you mean to delete his reply that sort of apologized to me for his harshness, or was that an accident? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

That must have been the result of an edit conflict or some other inadvertent screwup on my part. I will try to fix it and I apologize, Robert McClenon. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:20, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Alain Reza Yavari

Alain Reza Yavari and its creator, User talk:Keihann.Yavari, a newbie, is beyond my time or ability to assist. I came across this situation as a GoCE member, and I prefer to keep my efforts there and elsewhere. Can you help, or refer this to somewhere else?--DThomsen8 (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

I left them a message on their talk page, Dthomsen8. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:05, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Tevfik Arif

Thanks for your insight on Tevfik_Arif. Regarding the violation of WP:BLP policy and WP:PERP guideline for the alleged criminal charges that he was acquitted, would you recommend removal of those references while the article is still under discussion, or wait for AfD resolution? thanks for your help Singhaarav52 (talk) 16:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Singhaarav52. I do not intend to make any changes to that article at this time. You can do as you choose, but my hunch in this case is to let the debate play out for at least a week. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:44, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Steel-cut oats

All I am trying to say, why do you need to read an entire other article on a specialized word, if you are barely trying to get a handle on the topic which was original reason for your inquiry , when one sentence will do. If you have ever looked up a word in a dictionary, to find out it is define by another $10 word, then you can understand my frustration. It is a question of an economy of time and words. Isn't Wikipedia about making knowledge easily accessible to all. How exactly are you accomplishing this if you have to follow the wiki-links like a trail of breadcrumbs.

Besides are you going to remember that entire article when you get back to your original inquiry?

PS: I am not trying to chastise the use of wiki-links, at times if I want more information, this is a good way of going about it. If it is an introductory article, try not to overwhelm me with a vocabulary list. By the way, I was referred to the teahouse by someone at the administrator's board. Also, I did not say the wiki-link was not sufficient, it should be complementary to a small statement about a word. If a person want's more info, by all means use the wiki-link. But, if for a person who does not want a "whole biography" how about something smaller. Moreover,It is easy to say its trivial when it does not matter to you.

MrX2077 (talk) 08:38, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

All I can say is that I am in disagreement with you about this point, and I think a large majority of other experienced editors would disagree as well I encourage you to drop the matter and move on. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:45, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Stanley Milgram

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Stanley Milgram. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the Bay Area WikiSalon series on May 25

Please join us in downtown San Francisco!
A Wikipedia panel discussion about journalism

The last Wednesday evening of every month, wiki enthusiasts gather at Bay Area WikiSalon to collaborate, mingle, and learn about new projects and ideas.

We allow time for informal conversation and working on articles. Newcomers and experienced wiki users are encouraged to attend. We will have beverages and light snacks.

Please note: You must register here, and bring a photo ID that matches your registration name. The building policy is strict on this point.

For further details, see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, May 2016

See you soon! Pete F, Ben Creasy, and Checkingfax via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 9 May 2016 (UTC) | Subscribe/Unsubscribe to the SF Meetups notice.

Thank you

Hi Cullen328 Thank you for defending me in the AfD about the Tevfik Arif article. What I fail to understand, though, is why editor 80.168.175.26 made this accusation against me in the first place as the evidence shows that at 08:30 I queried you, and others more experieced than me, requesting WP guidance as to how to proceed. At 13:29, I substantially replied to Zigzig20s regarding the process of evaluation I use in stopping to edit an article when I'm unsure about WP policies and that leads me to request others help. After all of that, at 14:38, this editor makes this accusation. Why? Lastly, and for reasons I don't understand, and as Checkingfax can attest to, this editor keeps popping up in my WP 'life' to make accusations against me, and with no way to ask them why, I remain at a loss to understand their motive for doing so. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 10:43, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Picomtn. I appreciate the work you are doing here recently, and you show every sign of developing into an outstanding editor. You have made a few mistakes and seem to have learned from them, and I am sure that there other such learning experiences in your future. I do not think that you have been canvassing but when you ping several people in an AfD, it may resemble canvassing in suspicious minds, who perceive that you are calling in experienced allies to bolster your view of things. As for the IP editor in question, I am very weak as an "IP detective" and am drawing no conclusions. Some IP editors are productive and pose few problems. There are legitimate IPs who are cranks and there are tendentious, disruptive IPs who are violating policy by evading blocks or bans. And these types fall on a very broad continuum of related behaviors.
I encourage you to read WP:ACADEMIC and especially its talk page where you can see a disruptive IP in action, who believes we have far too many articles about academics. It seems they also disrupt articles about scientific and mathematical topics tbough I haven't read into that. Perhaps you have encountered this person or someone much like them. Now I stray from your original question to related matters that I hope will be of interest to you.
The notability of most academics depends to a large extent on the reputation of the journals where they publish, and especially how often their work is cited by other scholars. The notion that we require published "personality profiles" of academics is a common misconception. Not every notable scientist is a Steven Hawking or a Jane Goodall. There is a certain amount of subjectivity involved in interpreting the guideline, and expertise in the field is helpful. A chemist is in a better position than an English lit professor to evaluate the influence of another chemist, but anyone can edit Wikipedia and the input of a thoughtful bank teller familiar with policies and guidelines is more useful than the input of an opinionated chemist with an axe to grind.
I am not an academic but rather a licensed construction contractor with a bachelor's degree. Accordingly, I usually feel constrained in expressing my opinion about academics of borderline notability, as I feel that I lack the deep competence. I have no problem advocating the deletion of biographies of freshly minted community college instructors, or supporting keeping, as I have done today, a biography of an elected fellow of the Indian National Science Academy who is also a fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, and who is named Rabindranath Mukherjee. I know my limitations and am happy to be seen as slightly above average in intelligence though I falsely assumed that I was a genius when I was a youth and a young adult. You may be much better prepared for these borderline debates than I am.
I like and respect Wikipedia editors who are collaborative, humble, willing to compromise, enthusiastic to learn new things about the world, eager to learn and implement our policies and guidelines, devoted to and proud of the good things this project has accomplished, familiar with its shortcomings, and willing to speak out in favor of reasonable reforms. Bullheadeness of various types is one of our greatest obstacles. I wish you well, and thank you for asking for my input. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:00, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328 Thank you for your kind words of encouragement and advice, however, here's what I just posted on the AfD for the Gary Cziko article that expresses my present feelings:

  • Comment I'm going to be a little bold here, but someone, anyone, has REALLY got to explain why a teenage high school football player, Rashan Gary, and an NFL rookie who hasn't played a single professional game, Ezekiel Elliott, are not having their articles debated for deletion, but an over 60-year-old professor emeritus who is an acknowledged leader in a new and cutting edge field that is, and will continue to, change our ideas about human perception no one will even think about supporting. I will freely acknowledge that my local newspaper hasn't covered this person, but its sports page is the largest section of the paper so I don't expect it to. And if anyone wants to fully understand where we're at today, just read what Ben Rhodes (he's the guy that runs the White House and is President Obama's right-hand person) told the NYT times last week: "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing."[1] With the WP criteria everyone loves to cite here, and elsewhere, I would think a new discussion should be undertaken not just to delete this article, but to change the name of Wikipedia too--how about Sportsapedia? Seriously though, and finally, when something is wrong it must be changed, and if this isn't wrong I don't know what is. Thanks for listening.

ThanksPicomtn (talk) 10:16, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Picomtn. The point you make about the young athletes is a classic WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, which is completely unpersuasive to experienced editors. I feel confident in saying that 99.99% of high school athletes are not notable, but in the case of Rashan Gary, we learn that he was the #1 football prospect for the year and "the first player to be named the top player in the country unanimously by all four major recruiting networks". The reason why the article about him is not being discussed for deletion is because no one has nominated it and that is because he is clearly notable based on the claims in the article which are backed by reliable sources. In other words, this is an encyclopedia of over five million articles and we have room for biographies of both Gary Cziko and Rashan Gary, as we are not constrained by shortages of paper and ink. Far better to argue persuasively that Cziko meets WP:ACADEMIC than to point out that Wikipedia contains articles about topics which are not your personal cup of tea. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:40, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Cullen328 I agree with you that it's "better to argue persuasively that Cziko meets WP:ACADEMIC", however, even you as an experienced editor are having to rely on subjective interpretations of WP policies (e.g. libraries), so what chance do those like me have? And yes, again, I agree that parts of my argument may be "completely unpersuasive to experienced editors", but, and this is what's important (at least to me), the central issue is there aren't that many of these experienced editors overlooking these types of issues in the first place, and it's rare that someone of your experience actually gets involved. Thanks.Picomtn (talk) 09:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Newness, Editing and Copyrights

Hello Jim,

Thanks for responding to my Teahouse query. FYI, I'm a professional editor and signed up here specifically on the request of two colleagues to edit or publish. Both provided me with the material that Wiki finds in violation of copyrights.

I've responded to fuggedabouit accordingly.

I'm new but also find Wiki unbelievably unwieldy. My hat is off to those of you who are at home here and do the great job that you do1

Thanks, wordmasternewyork Wordmasternewyork (talk) 17:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello and welcome, Wordmasternewyork. I can certainly understand your concerns about things being "unbelievably unwieldy" here, but look at it this way: A group of volunteers working without bosses or assignments has created a completely free encyclopedia in English and hundreds of other languages. The English version has over five million articles, and Wikipedia is either the #6 or #7 website in the world. It wouldn't be reasonable to think that such a venture could be created without significant complexities, would it? Feel free to ask questions here or at the Teahouse at any time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Really Stumped--Need Help!

Hi Jim! I think we communicated briefly in the Teahouse (love their Chi Tea!) a few months ago. I too enjoy bringing articles up to speed by improving the syntax, grammar, etc. as well as content and citations. I'm stumped on the following issue: vanishing article. Yes, early this morning I created an article "Annabelle With Bells (Home Made Girl)" about a song on a 7" single recording. As you know, a lot of work went into writing, citing, etc. Now the article seems to have disappeared and when I search "Annabelle With Bells (Home Made Girl)" I am redirected to the artist, Lotti Golden, but the article is nowhere to be found. I really don't know how to correct this. Help! Thank you in advance.Magdalamar (talk) 15:20, 9 May 2016 (UTC) Jim, I just want to add, so you have all of the info, that I created the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sock_It_to_Me_Baby/It%27s_Your_Thing a few weeks ago, because Lotti Golden's 1969 single was reissued for Record Store Day 2016. The article I created this morning, that has now vanished, was regarding the B-side of the single in the aforementioned article, "Annabelle With Bells (Home Made Girl)," with information on the style and genre of the song, as well as what informs this song lyrically as well as the songs on Golden's LP Motor-Cycle (album).Magdalamar (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Magdalamar: (by talk page stalker) The article you created was redirected by TheLongTone with the edit summary "redirecting fancruft about nn recording to artist". You can revert this edit but I would recommend starting a discussion on Talk:Lotti Golden to determine consensus. The content you wrote wasn't very well-sourced and could face deletion if restored unilaterally. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:06, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I've replied to Magdalamar's post on my talk page.TheLongTone (talk) 12:49, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Chicago Boulevard System

Greetings Jim! How are you? Oh, and I just noticed for the first time that people may call you Jim as well, my apologizes! Anyway, should you have some time, perhaps you can have a quick look at the Chicago Boulevard System article? Before my edits (that shrunk the article to one sentence), the article looked like this. I tried to provide though, as clear Edit Summaries as possible, and they can be seen here. The rationale in brief:

  1. Some of the material was backed up by primary sources
  2. Some of the sources simply failed to verify the material in the article
  3. Some of the paragraphs were not connected with the article topic (i.e. none of the sources even referred to the material that was deleted)


Jim help me post my article on wikapedia.draft:dr. riaz ali shah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legends2016 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 10 May 2016 (UTC) So, as a result of the source-check, there is only one sentence left. I also searched for the "Chicago Boulevard System", but only ended up with two potential sources: "Villaire (2011): Best Bike Rides Chicago"[1], and "Thompson-Stahr (2001): The Burling Books: Ancestors and Descendants of Edward and Grace Burling, Quakers (1600-2000)"[2]. I am not satisfied with either one, and especially the latter is more of an memorial about the 1800's. Actually, the more I have dug into the topic, the less convinced I am that such a term as the "Chicago Boulevard System" would even exist established. Indeed, the terminology is quite diverse, and, many of the sources discuss like a) "Chicago Park Boulevard System Historic District", b) "Logan Square Boulevards Historic District", or c) "Chicago's historic Park Boulevard System", all of which have slightly different meaning.

Chicago is a city that consists of a lot of parks, boulevards, park districts, and boulevard districts. Some of them remain well-documented (such as the "Logan Square Boulevards Historic District" mentioned above), but I am not entirely convinced if this very term, the "Chicago Boulevard System" should merit its own article.

The article was created in 8 March 2016, which means that it is quite a new one. I'd love to hear your opinion Jim! Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 06:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Extended content
  1. ^ Villaire, Ted (2011). Best Bike Rides Chicago: The Greatest Recreational Rides In The Metro Area. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 22. ISBN 9781461746485.
  2. ^ Thompson-Stahr, Jane. The Burling Books: Ancestors and Descendants of Edward and Grace Burling, Quakers (1600-2000). p. 903. ISBN 9780961310400.
Hello, Jayaguru-Shishya. I apologize for being slow to respond. I have had some eye problems in recent days, which, after a couple of visits to a doctor, fortunately turned out to be less serious than I feared.
I do not know Chicago in detail since I have only visited there twice (other than changing planes), and both visits were brief. However, I see plenty of references in a Google search to the "Chicago boulevard system", including a map published by the city. It seems that 19th century Chicago city planners created a system of parks linked by a network of broad landscaped boulevards reminiscent of Paris. I think that it is likely that study of books about the history of Chicago city planning would allow a much more comprehensive article to be written. Maybe not all of this material would use the exact term but is still applicable to the article. This is not a project that I am willing to take on, since I have so little personal experience with Chicago. Sometimes it is best to be cautious about removing content unless you have good evidence that it is erroneous or misleading. Policy requires that contentious content be supported by reliable sources, not every single thing. It is always better to improve sourcing than to remove non-contentious content. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:08, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


Hi there, Jim! Oh, I am sorry to hear that... I hope you are getting alright by now! :-O
Anyway, I understand your point. There's a similar problem at Chicago#Parks and Greenspace with the second paragraph that was recently introduced to the article. As you said, perhaps not all the material does use the exact term (Chicago Boulevard System), but at the moment the terminology is justified by an image of a city map[2], and a TV-program description[3]. Moreover, I think Chicago is rather a well-established article, and therefore we would need some better sourcing to justify the addition's place in the article. The previous paragraph is well-sourced, and it already discusses the "Chicago Park District", a concept way more established than the "Chicago Boulevard System".
Heh, did you notice how cunningly I moved your attention from one article to another? ;-) Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 11:12, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Emma Watson

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Emma Watson. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

New article deleted unreasonably

Hi Jim,

Can you help me with appealing a speedy deletion of a new article about an artist? The article, Jennie V. Cannon, is already gone, despite my prompt response to the speedy deletion warning, that just said it was "promotional." I wrote on the talk page (also now gone):

Contested deletion[edit]
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because: 1) The subject was an artist of significance who happens to have fallen into obscurity, like many others. 2) No one stands to profit from the article. 3) We thought her notability would be established by the numerous awards she received, her leadership in the Carmel and Berkeley art colonies, her listing in California and Californians, and the traveling exhibitions of her work.
I have been a Wikipedia editor for almost ten years and have contributed to many articles, especially ones relating to historic California art. I was so impressed by Robert Edwards' book on Jennie Cannon and the other artists of Carmel and Berkeley that I've encouraged him to add to Wikipedia. I'm helping him with some of the technical aspects, although I'm not expert in the finer points, and I'm encouraging him to create a Wikipedia editor account.
I didn't go through the Articles for Creation process because I think some of my fellow editors have become too picky.
Please advise on how we can make this conform to Wikipedia standards, and please remove the "Speedy Deletion" section. I would also like to know if I/we should add categories or if that will be done automatically. HarZim (talk) 15:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

The original author and I have put a lot of work into this article, for purely altruistic/scholarly reasons, not to sell the artist's work or anything like that! Can you or someone overrule Anthony Appleyard's decision?

Thanks, Ann HarZim (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I've undeleted it, since the purported rationale for deletion (in its current form it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic) is clearly nonsense. If anyone wants to challenge this gross abuse of admin rights, you know where to find ANI. ‑ Iridescent 20:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Iridescent! Can you restore the history, too?
It has been; if you check the history tab it's as if the deletion never happened. This is technically against Wikipedia's rules for me to overrule an admin's decision without consulting with him first, but I can't imagine Anthony Appleyard objecting in this instance since an article on someone dead for 63 years is clearly not spam. ‑ Iridescent 20:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Please educate me (and all of us), Anthony Appleyard, about the checks and mental processes that an administrator like you goes through before deciding to delete an article in a case such as this. I have been working today on challenging projects that have kept my attention away from Wikipedia. But even a quick glance at that article leads me to conclude that the chances that the topic is notable are excellent, and that at the very least, a full Articles for Deletion debate is called for. What am I not understanding here? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I need help creating oil spill freeze salvage

Hello My name is Timothy Beck and I am in danger of being expelled from my sandbox in a clumsy attempt to post a new listing called "Oil spill freeze salvage" and add to the Wikipedia listing named "Oil Spill" under the "Clean-up and response" section and bifurcation of solidifying into two types of solidifying "temporary or freeze solidifying" and "permanent or chemical solidifying".

I have 3 newspaper articles for references. They are "A Slick Idea" by Cara Murphy Beach Reporter Manhattan Beach section page 1 11/14/1992, "If only they'd tried the chilled-soup solution in Alaska" by John Bogert Daily Breeze (Torrance, CA) local section page B1 2/17/1994 and "Zapping Oil Spills with Dry Ice and Ingenuity" by Gordon Dillow in the L.A. Times South Bay section page 1 2/24/1994

There are three YouTube video demonstrating Oil Spill Freeze Salvage. Google: Oil Spill Freeze Salvage www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3a8pzs_PwM Google: Earth Guard Technologies demonstrated oil spill freeze salvage at the B.P. Deep Horizon Oil Spill see www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrsTd2mmE8ls and www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLa5j1jLDYY

I need help. can you help me

Tim Beck 5/19/2016 10:40 PM

I am near computer illiterate and need help with the simplest things. I am having trouble communicating with my reviewer.

Timothy Beck of Torrance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy Beck of Torrance (talk • contribs) 05:42, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Timothy Beck of Torrance. Your draft article says that you are a science teacher so you ought to have the capability to learn some policies, guidelines and elementary wikicode. It is neither brain surgery nor rocket science. What you wrote above indicates that you are trying to draft an expansion to our existing article Oil spill but instead are trying to use the Articles for creation process, which is for creating brand new articles. This is analogous to taking a 1999 Ford to a Ford manufacturing factory for repair. They build new cars there but do not fix old cars. The first thing you need to do is learn what a reliable source is. Very few YouTube videos are accepted as reliable sources. For this type of topic, an article published in a peer-reviewed journal of petroleum engineering would be a good source. Please study Referencing for beginners to learn how to format your proposed references. Perhaps the newspaper articles may be of some use. Are they available online?
You are going to encounter a lot of push back from experienced editors because you seem to be promoting your own 20 year old research using a handful of newspaper articles. Wikipedia is not a platform for self-promotion. If your work is worthy of inclusion in this encyclopedia, people will assume that it ought to be discussed in technical books about oil spill remediation put out by respected academic publishing houses. The only way for you to make your argument effectively is to understand our policies, guidelines and basic social norms. So get to work. Start with Wikipedia's core principles, and read all relevant links.
Learn to sign your talk page posts so that a robot does not need to follow you around doing it for you. End every post with four tildes, the punctuation that looks like this: "~". That is a great first step toward competence here. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ted Cruz

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ted Cruz. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328/Archive_35&oldid=1077870909"