User talk:DaneCoGuy

March 2022

Hello DaneCoGuy. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Nancy Raabe, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:DaneCoGuy. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=DaneCoGuy|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:44, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DaneCoGuy here. I am not compensated for my editing. I am a retiree and a pure amateur, I have no employer or contractor, direct or indirect. What else do you want to know me, thank you for asking. DaneCoGuy (talk) 21:55, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You took photos of her two weeks ago. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:15, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personal photo, no direct or indirect compensation DaneCoGuy (talk) 22:23, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:COI: "Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships". Magnolia677 (talk) 22:55, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need to disclose on the talk page that I am Nancy Raabe's spouse DaneCoGuy (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda. Also, nothing personal about nominating the article for deletion! Nancy is a very accomplished person and the world is unquestionably a better place for having her in it. Several editors have since improved the article. I always take time to look for additional sources to support notability before nominating an article for deletion, but sometimes other editors are able to find what I cannot. Thank you for your honest response. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will post that on the Talk page. Will you now remove the deletion warning? Thanks for your help, obviously I am new at this and appreciate your comments. DaneCoGuy (talk) 12:32, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD can't be withdrawn at this point. In a few days a non-involved editor will close it. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

COI editing

Your edits have become disruptive at Nancy Raabe. Please refrain from editing the article, per WP:COIEDIT, and propose changes on the talk page. Thank you for your cooperation. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:13, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits have removed important information with good sources. This does not match what other, similar pages look like. I am acting in good faith and do not appreciate being characterized as "disruptive." DaneCoGuy (talk) 13:34, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Nancy Raabe) for continued distuptive editing.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 14:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to use the talk page to suggest edits and make edit requests. But because you have refused to follow the guidelines around COI editing, you may not edit it directly. Star Mississippi 15:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

DaneCoGuy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please unblock me as an editor on Nancy Raabe. I understand that one other editor has found my edits to be disruptive, and I understand why it has been characterized as such. I will not edit in this manner in the future.

Decline reason:

No need. You are free to suggest edits on the article's talk page after properly disclosing your conflict of interest as required by WP:COI. Yamla (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I am working in good faith, and I have disclosed on the Nancy Raabe Talk page that I am her spouse. I believe that this meets the COI editing requirements. If not, I will make further disclosures as requested.

I have made edits that match those found on similar pages, and they have good sourcing. These are the only types of edits that I will make. DaneCoGuy (talk) 15:24, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nancy Raabe graduation date

Hi DaneCoGuy! Thanks for adding Nancy Raabe to the List of Pomona College people. Because that is a featured list, it's especially important that all information in it have a reference. I noticed that her website doesn't currently include her graduation year from Pomona, which you entered as 1977. Do you have another source you could share? I know the request sounds kinda silly, given that as her husband you presumably know the year from personal communication with her, but Wikipedia requires that all information used in references be publicly available so readers can check that it is true. I'll note that if Raabe decided to add the year to her website, that would be considered a sufficient source. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip! The graduation date is now in the About page on her website. DaneCoGuy (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've added it as a reference. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:16, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

10/23 updates

Might you update the photo on this page. To: http://nancyraabe.com/images/333_nmr_23-14c.jpg

Here is recent citation that you might add, Thanks.

https://www.thereporteronline.com/2023/09/08/local-pastor-to-deliver-keynote-at-lutheran-synod/

DaneCoGuy (talk) 13:16, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DaneCoGuy! Requests like this are generally better placed on Talk:Nancy Raabe than here. Wikipedia has strict rules around image copyright, so the image must be explicitly released under a free license by the exact person who took the photo. One way to do this is to have the photographer upload it to Wikimedia Commons (or Flickr and choose a free license). High resolution is important. The new image doesn't look like all that much of an improvement on the existing one, but I'd be fine swapping it in if it were uploaded under a valid license. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the new pic to wiki commons, please use it if you'd like, it merely is a newer shot of her DaneCoGuy (talk) 16:20, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]