User talk:Larry Hockett

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:EricEnfermero)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Editing Rich The Kid's Wikipedia Page[edit]

Hello, I am informing you that I am wondering why you editors keep removing the facts that I keep updating and you say it is because "the sources I am using are not reliable" - there are other things in the same section (Feud with Lil Uzi Vert) that also came from the same website I used, which was Complex. I am wondering why if the sources I used were not reliable, why the other ones from Complex were allowed to be in the article. I feel if you have to remove what I updated, you might as well remove the entire entry on Rich the Kid's Wikipedia page called "Feud with Lil Uzi Vert". I don't mean to sound mean, but I feel like I am not allowed to update anything on Wikipedia when everyone else is. By this I mean what everyone else has already contributed to the section "Feud with Lil Uzi Vert" on Rich The Kid's Wikipedia page was allowed and my content was not - - some of their sources came from the same website as my sources. The resources used from Complex on Rich The Kid's Wikipedia page (not by me, by previous editors) include and and the events I described were the most important parts of what happened between Lil Uzi Vert and Rich The Kid and if you do not think that is necessary to include in an encyclopedia, then you may as well delete the whole section "Feud with Lil Uzi Vert" on Rich the Kid's Wikipedia page. Because like I said, what I was trying to add to the article was the most important part of the feud by far, far more important than and — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxxtentacionskimasktheslumpgod (talk • contribs) 17:58, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

I agree with you that it makes sense to get rid of any section that involves non-neutral or poorly sourced allegations about living people until we have better sources. With that said, my main objection to your edit was that it was written so unprofessionally that I did not even think you were being serious. Think about reading an encyclopedia and seeing a phrase about someone pulling up on someone else. It’s just not close to how formal writing is done. If they had a fistfight that led to them making songs about each other, say that. The way it reads, these guys sound like the two most overly sensitive dudes on the planet. Larry Hockett (Talk) 18:45, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Raini Rodriguez[edit]

How is the source I used not reliable?

The best guideline to answer this is at WP:RS. Let me know if you have specific questions. I think you'll find that your cited source presents several problems, but it's best for you to read the full guideline before editing any more pages concerning living people. Larry Hockett (Talk) 23:52, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

List of healthcare accreditation organizations in the United States[edit]

You might like to edit what is said about the National Council of State Boards of Nursing in this list.Rathfelder (talk) 20:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Yikes. That list looks like quite the mess. I don’t think I’ll have the time to put such sustained focus into it, but taking out the unsourced entries might be a start. Larry Hockett (Talk) 20:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

"Overly flowery language"[edit]

Can you please explain how an bio page is a "self-published" source?

If we're thinking of the same article, the podcast was him talking about himself, and the link to the site included some info about the subject but not his place of birth or his college, as far as I could see. I think I accidentally clicked on save before finishing the edit summary. There were, of course, past issues that make us approach this WP entry with extra care. :) Larry Hockett (Talk) 02:24, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
You reverted the edits five minutes after they were made. You were able to listen to the whole podcast during that time?
There are time stamps that document each edit. Those are available under View History if you decide that you’d like to bring forward some assertions that approximate reality at any point. Further questions should be addressed on the article talk page so as to encourage input from a broader range of editors interested in this embarrassment of an article. Larry Hockett (Talk) 19:27, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you[edit]

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your diligence and helping out at the refdesk.—Mythdon (talkcontribs) 07:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, Mythdon! Happy to help. Larry Hockett (Talk) 07:02, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Help creating a new BLP[edit]

Hey there, I saw you're a member of the Biography science and academia work group and I was hoping you could help me review a new BLP I'm working on. I have a paid COI with MSK, and I've been researching and writing an article on one of their doctors, Nancy Y. Lee (sandbox link). Do you have the time or interest to help review it to ensure it's aligned with Wikipedia's guidelines and written neutrally? I'd greatly appreciate it.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:47, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi FacultiesIntact - I currently don’t formally participate in processes like Articles for Creation, but I have written a number of biographies of academics, and I think your article is in good shape. Many COI contributions related to academics have one of two problems - lack of notability or lack of neutrality - but I think you are fine on both counts.
On the neutrality front, my only suggestion might be to change “Significant publications” to “Selected publications”, but that’s really a very minor quibble. For notability, there are two ways that academics typically meet requirements - the guideline at WP:GNG and the one at WP:PROF. Academics rarely meet GNG, but I think your subject meets WP:PROF due to her citation counts, having authored several publications each cited >100 times by others.
In short, I think you’re in good shape, and I think you’ve probably done about all you can do with this article. The reality is that many articles of academics and physicians are pretty short because the mass media coverage just doesn’t work the same way as it would for a star athlete or entertainer. Nice work on this! Happy to answer specific questions. Larry Hockett (Talk) 02:05, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate the feedback! I'm not looking to submit this through AfC at this point, but rather find a willing editor to move it into mainspace, provided he/she thinks it's of sufficient quality. Pending the changes you suggested, would you mind?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 01:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
No problem. Took care of that. Larry Hockett (Talk) 03:55, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

David Eager[edit]

Could you weigh in on a user (Prof David Eager (talk) who appears to be editing his own Wikipedia article, David Eager? None of his edits seem to me to be problematic contentwise, but are an issue of wp:COI. I left a COI notice on his talk page, but he's since re-added his edits. Unsure how to proceed. Thanks. Zinnober9 (talk) 04:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Agree - not much of a problem with the content. It sounds like he has mostly fixed verifiable factual issues, like removing some affiliations and updating his academic rank. (If I were a full professor, I wouldn't want to be misidentified as an associate professor, and I wouldn't want to go through a cumbersome process to get it fixed. The UTS website supports that he is correct, and it would be pretty gutsy of someone to make that change if it were not true.)
Ideally, he would suggest those changes on the talk page, but that rule is often ignored. The tone could be better in some areas, but the subject is not making that issue any worse with the recent edits. To me, it's not worth fighting over at this point. Larry Hockett (Talk) 05:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


Thank you for reverting all those edits by Frosty. I've blocked him indefinitely, which hopefully will cramp his style for a while. - Donald Albury 17:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for taking care of the block. Larry Hockett (Talk) 18:40, 17 November 2018 (UTC)