User talk:KDS4444

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

Your submission at Articles for creation: Manchester VA Medical Center has been accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
Manchester VA Medical Center, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 TT me 16:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

Please do not remove this again[1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

DRN volunteer roll call[edit]

Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Volunteer Roll Call[edit]

This volunteer roll call is sent to you because you have listed yourself as a volunteer at dispute resolution noticeboard. If you are still interested in assisting at DRN and are willing to do so by either handling at least one case per month, or by helping at administrative and coordination tasks on monthly (at least) basis, please add your username here. Volunteers who do not add their username on the roll call list will be removed from the volunteers list after November 15, 2017 unless it is chosen to have them retained for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. In case you are removed from the volunteers list, you may re-add your username at any time. However please do so only if you can and are willing to participate as described above.
Either ways, I would like to thank you for your participation and assistance at DRN so far, and wish that you will continue contributing to the encyclopedia and assisting when available.
The DRN coordinator, Kostas20142 (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stewart Levenson (October 13)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 04:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)


Teahouse logo
Hello! KDS4444, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 04:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Tom Paradise for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tom Paradise 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/Tom Paradise 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. RelaxedTim (talk) 14:14, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Tritech Research for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tritech Research 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/Tritech Research 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. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Bob (image) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bob (image) 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/Bob (image) 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. DGG ( talk ) 20:40, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

A note[edit]

I am pulling this out of the sprawling thread you started to make sure you see it.

The key behaviors and ideas you are not understanding if you really want to be a paid editor in good standing (and I think you do), are:

a) A big part of being a member of this community is understanding the values, norms, and consensus on things (see WP:CLUE). Volunteerism -- that all this is freely done and freely available -- is very deep in the guts of this place and one of the main things that drives contributions. People want to be part of something that deeply good. You need to understand that many people hate the activity you are engaged in. It is marginal activity in WP - not loved, but rather tolerated. Don't expect cookies and sunshine for doing it or disclosing it. At all. Expect some elbows. It is not nice, but neither is exploiting people so you can make money. Don't do things that exacerbate the underlying tension there.
b) keep in mind that it is entirely your choice that you are engaging in this marginal activity that exploits the value the community has built and that exploits other editors.

Concretely:

a) disclose clearly at your user page and at the relevant article talk page at the start of the editing. When the specific conflicted editing is starting. Not after.
b) Do not edit directly where you have a COI or are paid - do not directly create articles, and do not directly edit articles (the Bob (image) article should not have been directly created but should have been put through AfC)
c) stop directly editing template instructions, essays, etc related to paid editing and COI, and at the talk pages of such pages, disclose to others your paid status (you got the "orangemoody" crack from someone who felt you had taken up their volunteer time so you could make it easier to make money here - that happened because you didn't make it clear enough that you edit for pay. That person felt used by you. )
d) accept feedback on conflicted or paid proposals with grace and with self-awareness that you actually have a conflict of interest, and are very unlikely to have an unbiased view on the content or your editing of it (that is what conflict of interest does and why we manage it)

If you do that stuff, you will be happier and there will be way, way less drama. Paid editors can be part of the community, and good contributors to it. But you have to get your head on straight and part of that is understanding that some people will be mean to you sometimes. Paid editing is always going to run hard against gut-level values of this community and people are going to lash out sometimes. They shouldn't, but they will. That is part of the "price" you pay for doing marginal stuff. Jytdog (talk) 21:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

  • It feels like this is the price I pay for disclosing my paid edits. And I didn't think I was asking for cookies, I was asking for a basic level of respect which the hate I have been receiving has demonstrated is gone. Every article I have edited for pay has now been nominated for deletion (notwithstanding the article on the VA hospital, which was gutted with a snicker and which I was not paid for anyway). Prior to this, in eight years, there were 3 or 4. There doesn't seem to be any standard at which I can write which will prevent this from happening, meaning that disclosing my paid editing has become an albatross. I can certainly accept feedback from others on my paid editing, but when that feedback becomes "You can't publish this because you were paid to create it," it becomes hard to listen to. Believe it or not, I feel I do have some good ideas for changes for some of the paid editing templates— no one will listen to them, because I am a disclosed paid editor. The edits aren't even self-serving, and the templates are not ones that apply to me or my work. But again, I don't feel you are listening to me yourself. The message I get from you is, "Shut up and take it." That just adds to my sense of regret. I don't think you've spent 10 minutes yet trying to stand in my shoes. I have no more sympathy for undisclosed paid editors than you do, but when every article I have edited at all for pay has been put up for deletion while the other 140 are just fine, it feels like a pattern is forming. I would be glad to submit my paid articles through AfC if it seemed possible to get them through it— so far, AfC has shown me that this is not possible, and my latest rejection includes a vague request for "more evidence" which is nothing I can even follow up on. All of which means I was foolish to follow the rules. Call it what you like, I am having a very hard time seeing this any other way.
Here, I am a size 10½. Let me know if they fit, but I want them back when you are done. Thanks! KDS4444 (talk) 11:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
I work with paid and conflicted editors all the time. I understand the role.
You are choosing to focus entirely on the negative stuff, and you are ignoring the important stuff.
I understand it is hard to shrug off the insults.
But really -- of course paid/conflicted edits actually get scrutinized (that is why we have it put through peer review -- because it is motivated by external interests) -- so yes, your paid edits are looked at harder than any edits you have done before. Why is that surprising to you? That is a real question, and I hope you reply to it. Jytdog (talk) 21:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Scrutiny I understand. Systematic deletion of every paid edit I have made I do not understand. I have one editor who has nominated one of my articles for deletion (Bob (image)) without even having read the references I provided but by guessing their content based on their titles. I think even you will agree that this is unfair, unprofessional, and inappropriate, because that isn't scrutiny, that is prejudice. If you are asking me to sit back and say, "Well, that's okay, it's just another article," I hope you will forgive me for disagreeing with you. A subsequent editor has complained that the difficulty in verifying that article's sources means it should be deleted— the sources are not available on line, and he thinks that means it aught to go. That flies in the face of what I have always understood to be the acceptability of off-line sources. None of this would even be up for discussion if I had not disclosed my role as a paid editor. Scrutiny is one thing. This isn't that. This is teaching me that I should never have disclosed my role because by doing that, my paid work is now being deleted for reasons not based in any policy. That feels like a problem to me. I wonder if it does to you (?). KDS4444 (talk) 01:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
You shouldn't have created Bob directly, as you have a COI for that topic which you acknowledged in your edit note when you created it. As you and I have discussed, conflicted edits should go through peer review before they are published, and you should have put it through AfC yourself.
Putting it through AfD is drawing the kind of peer review that it should have had before it was published. We sometimes do this, exactly for that reason.
Again you are taking the most negative view possible.
At this point, it is your choice to keep taking that stance. If you can't pull yourself out of that and get yourself grounded on the fundamentals of COI, what it does to people, and how it is managed here in WP, and why, you are going to end up quitting WP or get indefinitely blocked and be bitter either way.
it doesn't have to be that way. Jytdog (talk) 01:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
@Jytdog: Can you give it a rest? Wikipedia pile-ons are a sad tradition, and I can't believe you honestly think that you are providing useful and helpful advice. On the one hand, while your "note" (the original post in this thread) contains some very useful advice, it is marred by multiple examples of pejorative wording ("marginal activity", "exploiting", "hate") that undercuts the presumed intent to provide neutral advice. If it wasn't intended to be neutral advice and just your strongly worded opinion, so be it but you've said it again and again and again and it's not going to sink in by saying it yet one more time. Enough is enough.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Please see your talk page. Jytdog (talk) 15:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Robert christensen.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Robert christensen.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Should Wikipedians be allowed to use community granted tools in exchange for money?[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Should Wikipedians be allowed to use community granted tools in exchange for money?, since you are mentioned tangentially. Regards:) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 07:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

Hi, KDS4444 I have received your message about disclosing myy employer, client and affiliation to my profile. How do i do this using the template $ This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that he has been paid by {{{employer}}} for his contributions to Wikipedia.

$ Corecontent, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that he has been paid by IDA for his contributions to Wikipedia.

.

  • Corecontent: Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I will put this template on your own userpage for you— normally only you edit your userpage, but since you have asked for some help with this, I am going to presume you are alright with me doing this. If you are not, you can always undo my edit of that page. Also, note that my placing this notice on your userpage will change your username appearance from red (meaning no such page exists) to blue (meaning the page now exists)— from now on, whenever you sign a talk page posting with four tildes (~~~~), the letters of your name will be blue instead of red (in case you find yourself wondering what has happened to the red letters). If you have any additional questions, feel free to let me know here. Thanks! KDS4444 (talk) 10:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Precious[edit]

featured images

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Thank you for quality articles such as Mire, Macrostomum hystrix, Ugly Animal Preservation Society and Spring Flowers (Fabergé egg), for creating images that were shown on the Main page, such as chicken egg diagram, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

  • After all of what you no doubt saw above, I am especially thankful, to you, Gerda, for noticing. Also, and in pursuit of FA status for Liliuokalani, please see my recent change to both the article and FA discussion there (did you realize that in the article on the Republic of Hawaii she had no Wikilink but was only referred to as "the Queen" and "a Queen"?? I went ahead and fixed that, and please count on me for support for the eventual recognition of her article for FA status, which she and her article totally deserve). KDS4444 (talk) 23:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

AN[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Jytdog (talk) 20:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Conso International Corporation[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Conso International Corporation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A borderline WP:A7 candidate but I'll give the benefit of the doubt owing to they claimed to be the world leader in this area. Not a single thing even remotely approaching a reliable source, just routine directory entries and passing mentions in coverage of other topics, nor can I find anything remotely approaching a reliable source—Conso International Corporation just brings up assorted directory entries.

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.  ‑ Iridescent 20:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

WP:NOPAY[edit]

Please read WP:NOPAY: you should not accept any such affected article(s) at articles for creation process. You did so indirectly on Draft:Bill Fink. Please don't do it again. Nihlus 21:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:Stewart Levenson[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Draft:Stewart Levenson, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Stewart Levenson and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Stewart Levenson during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

DRV[edit]

The links on the 16 November log have been fixed. I have moved your comment from the 17 November log over with this edit, and blanked the 17 November log. You are free to revert my edit on the 16 November log should you not want your subsequent comments from the 17 November filing showing there. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:24, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bill Fink (November 17)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
DGG ( talk ) 05:32, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Community ban[edit]

Persuant to the community discussion here, you are hereby indefinitely banned from Wikipedia for abuse of the OTRS system to solicit paid work. This account has been blocked to enforce that ban. --Jayron32 15:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.
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 ~~~~}}.  Jayron32 15:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Tom Paradise for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tom Paradise 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/Tom Paradise (2nd nomination) 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. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:11, 21 November 2017 (UTC)


-your email[edit]

Since you asked: If the artist is notable, some unpaid editor will create a suitable article. I am not going to help any paid editor ever do work for pay unless the subject is so notable that an article is essential. DGG ( talk ) 21:23, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia email[edit]

Your access to the Wikipedia email feature has been withdrawn concomitant with your block and ban. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:10, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:VITA Zahnfabrik concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:VITA Zahnfabrik, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Travis McHenry for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Travis McHenry 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/Travis McHenry 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Dinkelberger/VITA Zahnfabrik neu[edit]

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 User talk:Dinkelberger/VITA Zahnfabrik neu, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 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. DGG ( talk ) 19:20, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day LA, March 31[edit]

Wikipedia Day LA 2018
Ace Hotel.jpg

Please join us from 10:00 am - 5:00 pm on Saturday, March 31st for Wikipedia Day LA 2018 at the Ace Hotel in downtown Los Angeles. There will be speakers, panel discussions, a presentation on Wikidata, flash sessions, and a discussion about the formation of an LA User Group. There could be dramatic readings of LA-related talk pages, and there will be truly excellent cake. Please RSVP on the event page if you're thinking of joining us.

We hope to see you there! JSFarman (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Proposed deletion of Renee Hoyos[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Renee Hoyos has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Paid article created as part of the September 2017 election campaign for the 2nd Congressional seat of Tennessee. Fails WP:POLITICIAN

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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Arts Datathon![edit]

LA County Civic Arts Datathon!
Please join us for the LA County Arts Commission Civic Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Beginners are welcome! We'll provide training for new editors.
(See the meetup page for more details.)
Friday, April 27, 2018, 9:00-5:00
Bob Hope Patriotic Hall, 1816 S. Figueroa St., Los Angeles, CA 90015.
We hope to see you there! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Join our Facebook group here, and follow us on Twitter .
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License[edit]

Ambox warning orange.svg Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 01:14, 3 June 2018 (UTC)