User talk:Jvpwiki

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

William H. Poteat[edit]

I changed the title to capitalize it-also put a link for the other William Poteat at the top. Thanks. Your article is now William H. Poteat Wgolf (talk) 00:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

I'm the author trying to complete the article.

William H. Poteat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Enlightenment, Charles Taylor and Phenomenology
Postcritical Philosophy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Enlightenment

Examples Requested[edit]

Could someone point out specific examples not in compliance with the Manual of Style? Thanks. JCvP 16:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Gandhi Peace Award Medallion - front side.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Gandhi Peace Award Medallion - front side.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stefan2 (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Gandhi Peace Award Medallion - front side.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Gandhi Peace Award Medallion - front side.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Information icon 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 Jonathan Self. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 23:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Not suggesting at all that Self and Van Pelt have split, nor does the current version of the article. Mention of a divorce or other sepasration would indeed require another reference. However, there were a few problems with the text you were restoring. For example, on what basis could they have a celebration at Grand Central in July 2009 when the available reference (NYT) was published months earlier (in January 2009)? Also, you were restoring a statement that they were living at Dromberg House, Ireland - this is not mentioned in the NYT article, which instead indicated they were living in Millbrook, NY as of September 2007. Generally, you need to ensure that details are accurately supported by references, especially under the WP:BLP policy. Meanwhile, names and details of previous spouses and children could be restored provided that new references are found to support these (they weren't mentioned in the NYT piece). Dl2000 (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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, as you did at Jonathan Self, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you.

The information you are removing is fully and appropriately sourced and may not be removed simply because you do not like it. Continued disruption and insertion of inappropriate content, particularly content regarding living people will quickly lead to you being blocked for disruptive editing. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:00, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Needs full community discussion and other processes[edit]

I have removed the Proposed deletion. The subject has sufficient coverage in reliable sources that a formal WP:AFD discussion should take place. In addition we need verification that the person posting the claim is actually speaking for the subject. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:BLP[edit]

"Many Wikipedia articles contain material on people who are not well known, even if they are notable enough for their own article. In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources. " Jonathan Selfs notability in no way resides on the fact that he married an equestrian.

then there is " If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out." You not only basing your content on a single source, the source that you keep using in your edit war does not actually verify any of the claims that it is supposed to be supporting.

Edit warring to insert improperly sourced claims is NOT acceptable. Stop or you will be blocked. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

You would actually need to provide a reliable source that actually supports the claims before we need to bother getting another opinion. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:28, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Reply by jvpwiki: This is an improper use of the WP:BLP classification, which specifically relates to contentious material reflecting on a living person. Such improper use is considered BLP zealotry. The appearance of edit warring is created by TRPoD's reversion of multiple attempts to satisfy his objections. Checking entries relating to TRPoD at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Anonymous_POV_edits item 28 reveals that he has been accused in a similar situation of having an agenda other than good Wikipedia editing. Further, in that same item he presents his case for why a spouse should be mentioned by name and cited, although he does not want to allow the spouse in this case to be mentioned by name or cited, even though such mentions are standard in biographical articles of all kinds. (I cited several, such as Cesar Chavez.) Further, he refers to Wikipedia policy regarding incidents and allegations, which is irrelevant to mentioning the profession of a significant family member of the subject of a BLP. Further, the New York Times considered the subject of the article and his spouse sufficiently noteworthy for a detailed article on the couple, which cites her equestrian status, and that NYT article is cited in the Wikipedia article. As he states above, he has rejected getting a third opinion, so that the only recourse is to submit this as a disputed matter for adjudication by Wikipedia admins. JCvP 19:12, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

complete nonsense. BLP applies specifically to ALL CONTENT about living people. in addition, it is NOT ONLY WP:BLP , the content is also covered by WP:UNDUE AND WP:OR AND WP:V.
AND it is YOU who are edit warring to insert the trivialities that dont belong - that is self admission of WP:COATRACKING as well. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:45, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

October 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Margaret Klenck may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "<>"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:
  • drug dealer. She has also appeared in numerous movies of the week and episodic TV guest-star roles.<ref.http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0459264/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1</ref> In 2007 a video was uploaded to
  • the president of the Jungian Psychoanalytic Association in New York <ref>http://nyjung.org </ref>), where she also teaches and supervises. She is a member of the C. G. Jung Institute of

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:45, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

December 2015[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on David Lisak. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. MusikAnimal talk 18:04, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

This is turned around. I added some cited and significant material to the David Lisak article. Someone deleted that additional material in a way inconsistent with stated Wikipedia guidelines. I made some changes to try to mollify the deleting editor. I restored the deleted material. The deleting editor keeps reverting while adding condescending and arrogant commentary. I have achieved consensus with several other editors (see David Lisak article talk page), using 3O as my first attempt to reach a settlement. The deleting editor then trivialized 3O. I will proceed to the next arbitration resource. In the meantime I will seek temporary protection for the complete article. I am doing my best to avoid an edit war. I asked the deleting editor to stop reverting until we can get more opinions. JCvP 02:00, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Your recent edits[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:32, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer[edit]

Olive branch drawing.svg

Hello, I'm considering moderating your DR/N case. There is necessary information missing from the DR/N case you recently filed. Please include a short, specific summary of the dispute and your personal account of the issue under applicable sections (Dispute Overview and Summary of dispute by Jvpwiki respectively). Please add that information as soon as possible. I've taken the liberty of informing user Roscelese of the dispute on their talk page, but please note in the future the filing party is responsible for contacting users involved. However, if this dispute has been resolved to your satisfaction and all involved parties, please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Resolved". --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 05:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Round one of discussions have been open for almost 24 hours. Please make sure to leave timely responses so we can resolve this dispute in a timely manner. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 22:07, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
I see you've been offline for over a week now. The dispute has been failed due to lack of response, but you can still find suggestions here: DRN archive. Hope all is well with you. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 07:05, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

No Problem![edit]

Glad to help! Keep fighting the good fight.NoahB (talk) 05:07, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Sayed Zulfi Abbas Bukhari for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sayed Zulfi Abbas Bukhari 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/Sayed Zulfi Abbas Bukhari 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. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 05:10, 26 September 2016 (UTC)