User talk:Steven Iwanow

August 2016

Hello, I'm GorillaWarfare. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Caribana seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:27, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And this is just terrible. There should be a colon after "You name it", ampersands should be spelled ("and") and "as per" is just a disgustingly long-winded version of "per". Read the Manual of Style thoroughly before adding any more irrelevant, poorly-sourced troll essays. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:44, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be an odd critique to add, InedibleHulk. It suggests that if the grammar was just tweaked, the edit would somehow be acceptable, which it would not. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:50, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not acceptable, just better. I assumed Steven already knew the opinion part is ugly, but was genuinely mistaken about the English. Writing neutrally will help him help Wikipedia, but writing properly will help him everywhere. Assuming the entirety of his writing doesn't revolve around pushing this crap, a nudge in the right direction doesn't hurt. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:36, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Caribana

Xtra is not poorly sourced - nor it the Toronto Star - In Canada, they represent the premier LGBT & str8 newspaper. What is a valid source ... or is LGBT equality the real issue ... let us co-operatively edit. Fox new is a premier US status. What is up this this please or let me challenge this and see what the wiki legal team feels if u are unwilling and unable to advise. http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/15/mizzou-activist-makes-anti-white-comments-orlando-vigil-causing-gay-couple-walk-out https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2016/07/11/shame-on-pride-and-black-lives-matter.html http://www.dailyxtra.com/toronto/news-and-ideas/news/caribanas-queer-challenge-3725 If you give me a copy of my blurb, I can print a copy and have my LGBT friend give feed back - and let you know how they felt. how does this sound - otherwise let me know what is not neutral and how you want to edit it. After all wiki, info may be the first source for LGBT Caribbean youth, and they need the inclusiveness. Psychologist on City TV stated that inclusive trumps exclusive in education - and it is better to exclude the bully than minority group like LGBT.

Your blurb is here. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:41, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Orlando nightclub shooting

Re this edit: there is little point in adding stuff like this, because it will be removed as soon as it is found. A blog allows personal opinions and commentary, but Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Also, most of it had very little to do with the Orlando shooting.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This commentary is right out of my psychology books "New Harbringer", Psychology Today, Patricia Evans et al. This was a psycho-analytical examination. Just so you know I am central Asian, Tatar muslim, and German Jew by heritage - who focuses on critical analysis. Can I have a copy of what I wrote = to go over it with Xtra, LGBT editor at Canadas premier gay newspaper, maybe the wording can use improvement. Also, I can have a retired University of Toronto Professor of Psychology reviews - to verify that the perspective is middle of the road & valid. How do you feel about these options

Your content argues specific points of view, which is inherently a violation of the Wikipedia policy WP:Neutral point of view. To know this, you need read no further than its "nutshell" box at the top: "Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without editorial bias." Clearly, you're taking sides. You could present those points of view, but they would have to be attributed as the opinions of specific individuals, not facts in "wiki voice". Further, they would be subject to WP:WEIGHT, and you would have to justify the amount of space devoted to them based on the amount of attention given in reliable sources. Consensus might decide that there is insufficient coverage to warrant any related content at all, per WP:FRINGE. Finally, no outside "authority" has any more weight than any other Wikipedia editor as to interpretation and application of Wikipedia policy.
You might wish to look at other Wikipedia articles on controversial subjects, and see if you can find anything resembling what you have tried to introduce here. I note that you are making the same mistakes in another article, above. You might consider editing Wikipedia awhile before taking on controversial content in articles about controversial subjects. The applicable policy is not something editors grasp in a few days, or weeks, or months. ―Mandruss ☎ 17:08, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Part 2: 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting

Question 1 - even if I can't use it on Wikipedia, can I have a copy of my content so as to publish it in our LGBT newspaper - I do agree the length was tedious - hence the referencing of sources. Question 2 - can you also give me an example of how controversial topic was handled to wiki satisfaction - because I beg to differ on the Caribana example so far my feedback from friends & family [I & my brother are both mixed race - I am with a black & my bro married a Filipina] and my 1 friend has a Master of Philosophy - working on their Phd. said that that content was even handed. PS the gay community at 10% of the population means it's a very tiny mixed race sample. Mind you I'll still get more feedback - to build a "snowball" sample as in survey technique. Thank u for your time - Rainbow nation includes all colors. You do realize that this puts undue hardship for any LGBT opinions to increate inclusive discussions on all sides - especially since LGBT studies is recent & consequently limited to 15 years or so - and the size of the community makes sample sizes of 1000 people or less at best. Please advise me on my questions above.

can I have a copy of my content - First attempt, second attempt. can you also give me an example of how controversial topic was handled to wiki satisfaction - 2014 Isla Vista killings#Misogyny.
Please sign your posts in all talk spaces, by typing four consecutive tildes (~). If unsure whether to sign, look for other signatures on the page. ―Mandruss ☎ 19:08, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I said over on my talk page, Wikipedia articles are not school essays, PhDs or similar pieces of analysis and commentary. Please familiarize yourself with the Five Pillars as material that goes against these guidelines will be removed.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:49, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Gay pride

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Gay pride, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 01:10, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]