User talk:Cullen328/Archive 19

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15 ← Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 → Archive 25

Let me run my arguments by you

  • The use of the word cult is restricted in the DSC article to just a couple of direct academic quotes in the body of the article. Yet some have an issue with even this limited usage.
  • Buddhist scholars speak of cult of Amitabha, Padmasambhava cult, cult of Tara etc. I know of many other examples like this, as this is normal scholarly discourse. And these are not even sectarian deities.
  • Similarly, Matthew Kapstein, a top scholar, refers to Shugden cult.
  • Similarly, Thurman never calls any specific organization a cult. And the Thurman quote just incidentally uses the word cult while talking about something else entirely.
  • Dodin, another Tibetologist, does say the NKT specifically fits the criteria for a cult, with the word cult being used in that other definition. But again, we are limiting the use of the word cult to direct academic quotes such as this.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 22:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I'll ping @Montanabw: on this as well. I just want to know if my arguments are sound.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 22:20, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
My take is that there is both the historic use of "cult" as noted above, which is entirely justifiable, and there is the reality that groups like the NKT and WSS probably are "cults" in the modern sense too, (charismatic leader, exclusivist teachings, etc.) though that bit might be more suitable for the articles on those organizations, with a short mention of them in the controversy article with "main" links to each article (though if a good RS says they are a cult, it could be mentioned in passing). The thing to avoid is "us" saying "cult" as a descriptive adjective, which would be viewed as non-neutral. Montanabw(talk) 00:29, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I fully understand the distinction between the two distinct meanings of the word "cult", VictoriaGrayson. However, we need to be aware the the perjorative contemporary meaning is far more understandable to the average 21st century reader than the academic one. Our target audience is the general reader at the high school level, not academics specializing in the sociology of religion. Therefore, we need to be careful about use of terms that may be academically correct but carry heavily loaded connotations. Especially when some of us who disapprove of Shugden worship may be tempted to employ those very connotations to hint at our concerns. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:53, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Did you understand that the word cult is only being used in a couple of academic quotes deep in the body of the DSC article?VictoriaGrayson (talk) 06:02, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
VictoriaGrayson, our content policies and guidelines do not have special force early in the article which diminishes as one gets "deep" in the body of the article. They apply equally everywhere. I am not arguing against any use of the word "cult". I am recommending caution. Selection of academic quotes involves editorial judgment. Since content guidelines recommend special care regarding words like "cult" that carry negative connotations, and since concerns have been raised by others on the talk page, I am simply saying that I also share those concerns. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Atleast we are using academic quotes in the first place. I can pull up hundreds of newspaper articles and other sources that use the word cult for Shugdenpas....VictoriaGrayson (talk) 06:17, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Blog about that to your heart's content elsewhere. But you don't really want to take this conversation in that direction here on Wikipedia, do you? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:25, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Are not newspaper articles equally reliable sources? Anyway, thanks for the feedback. You can hat this discussion.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 06:27, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, Cullen328. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 00:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Earthquake notice

I live at the southern end of California's Napa Valley, and was awakened last night by a destructive earthquake. Fortunately, damage was minor at my home, but there was more serious damage at the homes of many of my friends, and throughout the cities of Vallejo, American Canyon and Napa, where I spend most of my time. Please excuse me if I am slower than usual to respond in days to come. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I just found out about this now. I don't know why I didn't hear about it for nearly 24 hours. But when the news outlets reported the epicenter as being in American Canyon, I immediately thought of you and thought to check your talk page. I hope everything's okay up there and that the recovery is a swift one. – Your Yosemite friend, RedSoxFan274 (talk~contribs) 08:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Glad to hear you are OK Cullen; I hope your friends are able to recover as best they can. I, JethroBT drop me a line 08:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Newspapers.com

You received a Wikipedia email about access to Newspapers.com about 2.5 weeks ago about access to WP:Newspapers.com access through the The Wikipedia Library. We currently don't have record of your response on the Google doc. Please make sure to follow the instructions in that email for obtaining access, Sadads (talk) 16:45, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fields Medal

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Fields Medal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Thank you so much for your support! Williamahendric (talk) 21:33, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Williamahendric. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:15, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Will wiki allow us to create translated page from other language to English?

Hi Jim, Thanks for your support to new editors like me. I have a question and seeking for solutions from you. I have found a page in Non-English language, I would like to create an English version of the same page. Is that possible? or i should not do that?

Thanks in advance! Williamahendric (talk) 20:39, 25 August 2014 (UTC))

(talk page stalker) Hello there. I've been working quite a lot with translating Wikipedia articles to and from English. As long as your source text is from a Wikipedia there is no problem with translating it to English over here. The only thing you need to do is placing an attribution of the source page on the talk page of your new article. You can do that by using a template called {{translated page}} (click the link for more instructions). But please don't use any automated translation software because that will regularily result in nonsense needing a lot cleanup. The best way would be translating the text all by yourself. De728631 (talk) 21:02, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Translation software can be used to produce a first draft but everything should be checked and copy edited carefully. It works better for related languages than very different languages. So German to English works better than Japanese to English. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help User:Cullen328

Hi Jim, I would like to translate Comodo Firewall page (Also, if possible provide some page that need translation and i am very much interested in working on Security based article) from German to English, I am looking for your support. Thanks alot(Williamahendric (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2014 (UTC))

If you want to see a couple examples, I did this with Carl Raswan and German Riding Pony. I ran the translation through Google translate, but had to apply my own knowledge of the topics and look up a couple English language sources to verify a few things. I also consulted a German speaker for some fine points. Neither is GA quality, but they'll do. I also worked with a German speaker to translate over Hermesvilla and Georg Wahl. Montanabw(talk) 02:07, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Williamahendric: Thank you for your wonderful question. I've done a lot of work translation work on Wikipedia, that is, articles from a foreign language to English. Here are some examples: Malú Gatica (from Spanish), Ida Boy-Ed (from German), Wilfride Piollet (from French), Annika Bengtzon (from Swedish). Note, that in addition to placing the {{translated page}} template on the article's talkpage, giving attribution in the Edit Summary is appropriate, too. If you check out the edit history of each of the articles I mention, you'll see what I mean. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with an article - A question

This conversation belongs on the article's talk page, not here.

I noticed you helped with the re-writes on the Chuck Philips article - problems raised on the OR board. Thanks. During the re-write of the Chuck Philips article some original sources were taken out, which is fine with me. I was just wondering if perhaps we could add back a couple paragraphs. If not I believe that a false impression is created that most of the work he did has a retraction associated with it which is not the case. In fact, his 2002 Tupac investigation is still arguably the best and earliest source on the death of Tupac Shakur. The citations below are quite relevant in this regard. Is it possible to re-add this?

Rap crime investigation

Philips is known for his quest to solve the murders and attacks on black rappers Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls. An early reporter and interviewer of Tupac[1][2] Philips was a fan. "Philips produced some of the most important research into the crimes against Tupac and Biggie,"[3] said Tony Ortega, editor of the Village Voice. Rap fans, the Huffington Post noted, would be well advised to look into Philips' research as "he has been investigating Tupac's murder for quite some time now."[4]

The murder of Biggie

In 2000, Philips began a campaign for the Los Angeles Times to retract an erroneous story the paper ran about the murder of the notorious B.I.G. The Metro section of the Los Angeles Times wrote that police suspected a connection between the Notorious B.I.G's death and the Rampart Division police-corruption scandal, a popular theory at the time based the writings of Russell Poole and Randall Sullivan.[5] The Los Angeles Times Metro section ran a photo of Amir Muhammad, identified by police as a mortgage broker unconnected to the murder who appeared to match details of the shooter, and the paper printed his name and driver's license. Philips worked for the Business section of the Los Angeles Times had been following the Wallace investigation but had not heard of the Rampart-Muhammad theory. He searched for Muhammad whom the Metro reporters could not find. It took Philips only three days. Muhammad came forward to clear his name. The Metro section of the paper was opposed to running a retraction. But the business desk editor Mark Saylor[6] said "Chuck is sort of the world's authority on rap violence,"[5] and pushed, along with Philips, for the paper to run retract of the article[5] The Los Angeles Times correction article was written by Philips, who quoted Muhammad as saying "I'm a mortgage broker, not a murderer," and asking, "How can something so completely false end up on the front page of a major newspaper?"[7] The story cleared Muhammad's name.[5]

Another key source for Poole's theory was Kevin Hackie who later revealed to Chuck Philips that he suffered memory lapses due to psychiatric medications. He had previously testified to knowledge of involvement between Suge Knight, David Mack, and Amir Muhammed but later said that the Wallace attorneys had altered his declarations to include words he never said in pursuing their civil suit against the city of Los Angeles Hackie took full blame for filing a false declaration.[8]

A 2005 story by Philips, showing that the main informant for the Poole/Sullivan theory of Biggie's murder implicating a mortgage broker named Amir Muhammed, David Mack, Suge Knight and the L.A.P.D. was a schizophrenic known as "Psycho Mike" who confessed to hearsay and memory lapses.[9] John Cook of Brill's Content noted that this article "demolished"[10] the Poole-Sullvan theory of Biggie's murder.

The murder of Tupac Shakur

A 2002 two-part series Chuck Philips wrote called "Who Killed Tupac Shakur?" resulted from a year-long investigation, reconstructing the events leading up to Shakur's murder. The articles were based on police affidavits and court documents as well as interviews with investigators, witnesses to the crime and members of the Southside Crips.[11]

Philips research showed that "the shooting was carried out by a Compton gang called the Southside Crips to avenge the beating of one of its members by Shakur a few hours earlier. Orlando Anderson, the Crip whom Shakur had attacked, fired the fatal shots. Las Vegas police discounted Anderson as a suspect and interviewed him only once, briefly. He was later killed in an unrelated gang shooting."[11]

The article implicated East Coast music figures, including Christopher "Biggie Smalls" Wallace, Shakur's nemesis at the time, alleging that he paid for the gun.[11] Before their own deaths, Smalls and his family and Anderson denied any role in Shakur's murder. Biggie's family[12] produced documents purporting to show that the rapper was in New York and New Jersey at the time. The New York Times called the documents inconclusive stating: The pages purport to be three computer printouts from Daddy's House, indicating that Wallace was in the studio recording a song called Nasty Boy on the afternoon Shakur was shot. They indicate that Wallace wrote half the session, was In and out/sat around and laid down a ref, shorthand for a reference vocal, the equivalent of a first take.But nothing indicates when the documents were created. And Louis Alfred, the recording engineer listed on the sheets, said in an interview that he remembered recording the song with Wallace in a late-night session, not during the day. He could not recall the date of the session but said it was likely not the night Shakur was shot. We would have heard about it, Mr. Alfred said."[13]

The second article in Philips' series[14] dissected the murder investigation and detailed how the Las Vegas police department mismanaged the probe and why the homicide remains officially unsolved. His article showed that the specific missteps of the Vegas police: were 1.) discounting the fight that occurred just hours before the shooting, in which Shakur was involved in beating Orlando Anderson in the Las Vegas MGM lobby, 2.) failing to follow up with a member of Shakur's entourage who witnessed the shooting who told Vegas police he could probably identify one or more of the assailants—the witness was killed just weeks later, and 3.) failing to follow-up a lead from a witness who spotted a white Cadillac similar to the car from which the fatal shots were fired and from which the shooters escaped.

At the time of the "Who Killed Tupac Shakur?" series, Russell Poole's alternative theory, implicating Suge Knight was popular. For many years, Philips withstood attacks by proponents of Poole's theory, including Rolling Stone writer Randall Sullivan. Over the years, moreover, support for Poole's theory waned as new facts came to light supporting Philips' series. Mark Duvoisin, Assistant Managing editor of the New York Times wrote in 2006: "Philips' story has withstood all challenges to its accuracy, ...[and] remains the definitive account of the Shakur slaying."[15]

Tupac Shakur's attack at the Quad Studios

On March 17, 2008, Philips wrote a Los Angeles Times article stating that Jimmy Henchman, a.k.a. James Rosemond, ordered a trio of thugs to rough up Shakur.[16][17] The article, which was later retracted by the Los Angeles Times because it had partially relied on court documents that turned out to be forged, was thought to be vindicated when Dexter Isaac, a key assailant, admitted in 2011 to having attacked Tupac on orders from Henchman.[18][19][20] Following Isaac's public confession, Philips corroborated Isaac as one among five key unnamed source supporting Philips' 2008 Los Angeles Times article.[21]

In an article of June 12, 2012, for The Village Voice, Philips reported that Jimmy Henchman, during a plea bargain session with the government, according to the prosecutor, in autumn of 2011, admitted to setting up Shakur's ambush,[4][22] supporting Philips' theory of the attack that launched the East Coast-West Coast rap wars."

Note this includes the secondary sources editors wished to add. It references the LA Times retraction but does not overemphasize it which would be like reducing Dan Rather's career to one incident. Leaving it as it would be like using WP to advertise someone's biggest mistake and creates a misleading view of the work of this man and the literature on Tupac and Biggie. Note that google scholar also has many references to this man's work with his work on race and Tupac being primary. I think it's always best to err on the sunny side. All the best, Scholarlyarticles (talk) 21:49, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

You should be aware of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Scholarlyarticles. --NeilN talk to me 21:54, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Sami, Yenigun (July 19, 2013). "20 Years Ago, Tupac Broke Through". National Public Radio.com. Retrieved October 30, 2013.
  2. ^ Philips, Chuck (October 25, 1995). "I am not a gangster". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 3, 2013.
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference Village Voice Essay was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ a b Makarechi, Kia (June 26, 2012). "James Rosemond, Tupac Shooting: Mogul Reportedly Admits Involvement In 1994 Attack". Huffington Pose. Retrieved July 31, 2012.
  5. ^ a b c d Cook, John (May 23–26, 2000). "Notorious LAT". Brills Content. Retrieved August 1, 2012.
  6. ^ Trounson, Rebecca (February 22, 2012). "Mark Saylor dies at 58; former Times editor oversaw Pulitzer-winning series". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved April 28, 2013.
  7. ^ Philips, Chuck (May 3, 2000). "Man No Longer Under Scrutiny in Rapper's Death". Los Angeles Times.
  8. ^ Philips, Chuck (June 20, 2005). "Witness in B.I.G. case says his memory's bad". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 3, 2013.
  9. ^ Philips, Chuck (June 3, 2005). "Informant in Rap Star's Slaying Admits Hearsay". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved September 15, 2013.
  10. ^ Cook, John (June 2005). "Notorious LAT". Reference tone.
  11. ^ a b c Philips, Chuck (September 6, 2002). "Who Killed Tupac Shakur?". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 15, 2012.
  12. ^ Silveran, Stephen M. (September 9, 2002). "B.I.G. Family Denies Tupac Murder Claim". People. Retrieved July 23, 2012.
  13. ^ Leland, John (October 7, 2002). "New Theories Stir Speculation on Rap Deaths". New York Times. Retrieved September 29, 2013.
  14. ^ Philips, Chuck (September 7, 2002). "How Vegas police probe floundered in Tupac Shakur case". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 23, 2012.
  15. ^ Duvoisin, Mark (January 12, 2006). "L.A. Times Responds to Biggie Story". Rolling Stone. Retrieved September 19, 2013.
  16. ^ Samaha, Albert (October 28, 2013). "James Rosemond, Hip-Hop Manager Tied to Tupac Shooting, Gets Life Sentence for Drug Trafficking". Village Voice. Retrieved November 13, 2013.
  17. ^ (Court case exhibit: USA vs James Rosemond Case # 1:11-Cr-00424 May 14, 2012 Document # 100, exhibit 1)
  18. ^ Evans, Jennifer (June 21, 2001). "Hip hop talent agent arrested charged with operating drug ring". The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved May 29, 2012.
  19. ^ KTLA News (July 13, 2012). "Convicted Killer Confesses to Shooting West Coast Rapper Tupac Shakur". The Courant. Retrieved September 14, 2013.
  20. ^ Watkins, Greg (June 15, 2011). "Exclusive: Jimmy Henchman Associate Admits to Role in Robbery/Shooting of Tupac; Apologizes To Pac & B.I.G.'s Mothers". Allhiphop.com. Retrieved June 5, 2012.
  21. ^ Cite error: The named reference LA Weekly was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  22. ^ Philips, Chuck (June 12, 2012). "James "Jimmy Henchman" Rosemond Implicated Himself in 1994 Tupac Shakur Attack: Court Testimony". Village Voice. Retrieved June 24, 2012.

For your comment at Jimbo's talk page regarding ALS research

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.
Thanks ever so much for the sentiment. Fylbecatulous talk 17:20, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
I apologize for the insensitivity and cynicism of my comment there, Fylbecatulous. My concern is about fads, social pressure, and the wildly disproportionate way that we allocate voluntary medical research donations. Two months ago, ALS research was a "loser" and now it is a "winner". That is good for ALS research. But there are many other ignored orphan diseases, including the one that disabled my son. I have dealt with that every single day for nearly 25 years. His birthday is Thanksgiving Day.
I have worked steadily for over ten years to donate money to and raise money for research into the disease that killed my father.
I hope that is OK with you if I filet that trout, saute it, and serve it up with garlic butter and slivered almonds. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:48, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Joni Ernst

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Joni Ernst. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

About a draft

Dear Sir, I make my first article on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrea_de_Andrade (its about a samba dancer), and I have an opinion from administrator Dangerous Panda who tell me that the article doesn't have any notability because the references are not reliable. Can you have a quick look and tell me your opinion? Please tell me honestly : is an article for Wikipedia or not? It can be categorized like advertising? I have impression that I was suspected making promotion but is not the case, because the subject of article withdrew from artistic life. Is true, I love samba and anything what is about it. The subject of article I was choose random from the "queens of samba". Anyway, I need a second opinion, that's all! Thank you very much Sir!Leedskalnin (talk) 12:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Leedskalnin. Your article is supposed to be a biography of a notable samba dancer. Instead, it seems to be mostly about various parades she participated in, with excessive detail about the floats. It is not an article itself that needs to be "notable" but rather the topic of the article (the dancer in this case). You need to demonstrate that this particular samba dancer is notable, and the article should be about her life and career much more than about the themes of parade floats. Another problem is the poor quality of the English prose. It is clear that English is not your first language. Have you considered writing for Portuguese Wikipedia instead? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much Sir, I understand your point. Unfortunately my first language is not even Portuguese, I am a poor little Romanian who love samba (very strange, indeed).This samba dancer has not a very long history(3 years),she has a fulminating ascension after that she stopped. The reference used in article (rede globo,uol) are for Latino American world similar to CNN,BBC,etc. I don’t know that an article about a living person means the biography of that person. I thing that was much more than that but I was in error. Thank you very much Sir, and again, forgive me my poor language. Leedskalnin (talk) 16:50, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

You need to consider, Leedskalnin, whether a samba dancer who had a career of only a few years should have an English Wikipedia biography. Is there a biography of her on Portuguese Wikipedia? Your draft article has 28 sources. Far better to have five excellent sources than 28 mediocre ones. I looked at the first two. Number 1 seems like a gossip directory linking to a bunch of photos of her in bathing suits, some talking about cellulite. Get rid of that, and every other similar source. Number 2 is far better. I don't read Portuguese but it seems to have several paragraphs about her life and career. So get rid of all the sources like the first, and keep the very best like the second with solid information about her life, career, accomplishments and awards. Read Referencing for beginners and fill out the remaining bare URLs. Trim away the details of the parade floats and focus on her life and career. Maybe DangerousPanda might have a suggestion or two. If you can show that she is truly notable as Wikipedia defines the term, then I will copy edit the draft to improve the English.
No need to apologize for your lack of full fluency in English. I understand you, and that is easy to fix. I wish I spoke any other language a well as you speak English. Take care. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, your point of view are true. When I started this article this is the first thing which appear in my mind :she has only 4 years of career (including 2010 when she win the contest for queen of Mocidade),maybe is not suitable for Wikipedia.But, in history of samba to be Queen of battery (queen of battery open and close entire parade on sambadrome) is equivalent with an Oscar for the movies world. A queen is chosen for an entire year. Madrinha (godmotter) is an Oscar for entire career. In the history of samba are very rare madrinhas: Monique Evans,Chris, Alves,Beth Carvalho,Andrea de Andrade,etc. But that is not all. Under queen of battery, the next degrees is the principal muse of parade.In the same years Andrea was madrinha for Imperio de Casa Verde and principal musa for Vila Isabel.Next year the same situation.This is a performance unique in samba history. Unfortunately she decided to stop her career and dedicate to her son. This is the reason by which I start this article. She was a genius of samba, but with a very short career. I thank you very much for this note number 2,you say is far better than the other . It is a important clue for me. Please take a look to this reference, is from uk telegraph but has a little description "http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/picturegalleries/8368348/Rio-de-Janeiro-carnival-2011-the-second-nights-parades-in-pictures.html?image=25".I don't know why I don't find in Anglo-American mass-media many description of the samba carnivals.I can use this link? I will trim the details of parade like you say and focus on her life career. But I am afraid do not be accused by promoted her. I even can't contacted her despite the fact that I try (she receive thousand of mails on a day).I want to ask her about her biography but I don't receive any answer. Anyway, I will try to rewrite the article. Thank you again Sir for you good intentions.Leedskalnin (talk) 05:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Although that is not the "world's best source", my friend Leedskalnin,since it is so brief, it does have some value. It shows that a newspaper in the United Kingdom recognized her accomplishments. I encourage you to continue your efforts. A brief career can be a notable one, as Jimi Hendrix shows.Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:04, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much Sir for your support.Leedskalnin (talk) 10:24, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For supporting the new users like me. Leedskalnin (talk) 10:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, Leedskalnin. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:11, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Considering moving a draft article to go live

Jim, You had commented on my most recent article candidate a short while ago. I submitted it through AfC, and there is an extreme backlog. I usually go through AfC to avoid a lot of work with questioning editors as a result of going live without prior review; however, that was when the turn-around time was roughy three days. Could you possibly take a quick review at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Allison_Argo to see if it can stand on its own without getting hacked up by other editors? I'm considering just going live with the article at this point, but I just don't have the time to get into it with other editors. Having been subjected to three senseless edit wars, I left Wikipedia for quite some time. I hope things have improved. Please tell me what you think about going live with the article. I hope that you and your neighbors are doing well in repairing damage from the earthquake. Thank you for your help. Doc2234 (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Doc2234. I remember your draft. Although I am not an AfC reviewer, I believe their standard is that an article would have at least a 50% chance of surviving an Articles for Deletion debate. In my opinion, your chances probably exceed 90% with this article. Accordingly, I support your idea of moving the article directly to main space. I have written over 60 new articles, every one has survived, and I've never used AfC. That being said, it is a good (if backlogged) process for complete newbies.
As for "senseless edit wars" they can be entirely avoided by refusing to revert repeatedly and discussing things on the talk page. I have also never been in an edit war. When you contribute to Wikipedia, you agree the instant you hit the "save" button that other people are free to edit your work. One person's "hacking up" is another person's improving. But, yes, there are some jerks on the internet. So, I am not sure that Wikipedia has gotten better or worse in that regard. Final suggestion: I dislike the word "numerous". Consider saying "14" or "22" instead. In conclusion, I think you have done very well with this article. Please feel free to ask for help if anyone gives you static.
As for the earthquake, my home and business escaped damage. But Napa and Vallejo, the two cities I am closest to, both figuratively and literally, were hit pretty hard. It could be worse but it is quite serious. Thanks for asking. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:10, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Jim, Thank you for your comments. I'll look at defining "numerous", and then move the article. Thank you, again. Doc2234 (talk) 00:46, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

madame alexander edits

Hi Jim - my edits to the Madame site are factual and relevant and are not promotional in nature. I am stating the description of the company as it is not just a collectible company as you state and revert back to - it is and has always been a baby, play and collectible company. Madame herself never wanted her dolls to be collected, she created dolls to be played with and loved. My edits are to update the intro paragraph to state that the The Madame Alexander Doll Company creates and manufactures baby, play and collectible dolls for all ages. Please edit the intro to include this statement. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bea112w (talk • contribs) 01:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Bea112w. Let's consider the following sentences:
"Since the company's inception in 1923, Madame Beatrice Alexander, a talented, entrepreneurial, New York woman with a vision to engage a child's imagination thru doll play, has inspired girls of all ages throughout the generations, to have fun, to grow, to learn, to imagine. The Madame Alexander Doll Company upholds that vision today and encourages girls of all ages to enjoy a lifetime of fun delighting fans with Baby, Play and limited edition doll collections that are beautifully designed, age-appropriate products of quality and craftsmanship."
That is not neutral language appropriate for an encyclopedia. That is promotional language appropriate for a company brochure or website. Let me make myself crystal clear: This type of promotional, marketing, advertising language is simply not allowed on Wikipedia.
If you want to help improve this article, then you must abandon all attempts to add such language. Any substantive changes to the article must be based on what reliable, independent sources say about this doll company. This is not negotiable. Once you accept and agree to these core principles, I will assist you in working on the article. Post your suggested sources on the article's talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:20, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard Negrin

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard Negrin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Mentoring at the Co-op

Hey Cullen. It's a bit early to ask, seeing as the Co-op doesn't have a real interface yet, but to give you plenty of notice, I wanted to ask if you might be interested in mentoring 1 or 2 editors during our pilot. We plan to start piloting in December and run for about two months. Like we laid out in our proposal (for which your support is still very much appreciated), mentors would only need to teach things relevant to what an editor wants to do or accomplish, so it's less of a commitment compared to teaching comprehensively about Wikipedia. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have, of course, so let me know if there's anything about the space you'd like to know more about. Much like the Teahouse, the only way we'll know if our project is useful is if we can get folks to help teach. I, JethroBT drop me a line 06:44, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

...pertaining to a lack of citations...

Hi there Jim, Many thanks for the offer of discussion on the Teahouse topic.

I have a link to the article in question which has been re-edited since my initial editing (understandable as wikipedia is a work in progress) though one of the reasons given was that one of my previous assertions was merely opinion and not fact.

I guess I dived in at the deep end commenting on a very politically heated issue, and the link to said page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine

Having looked wider on the internet and found numerous sources, I noticed that there isn't anything to be filled in after the first sentence which suggests that it is more than speculative justification. "....army deliberately targets civilian infrastructure utilized by militant group." There is no citation here. The army targeting civilian infrastructure is is well documented and discussed by the Generals involved and documented through media and leaked US Government communications. The justification that the civilian targets are used by militant groups seems to have no back up.

I didn't make any amendment to that part as I'm not sure how it should really be.

Within the "History" section, under "Gaza War" I added the following: "Israel implemented such a strategy during the Gaza War,[4] using D9 armoured bulldozers on Palestinian farmland, wrecking 17% of it and leaving 30% of it unusable.[5] A leaked U.S. embassy cable from October 2008, two months prior to the Gaza War, reports that General Gadi Eisenkot in his first interview in four years, discusses Israel's northern, central, and southern regions, and "labeled any Israeli response to resumed conflict the "Dahiya doctrine" in reference to the leveled Dahiya quarter in Beirut during the Second Lebanon War in 2006. He said Israel will use disproportionate force upon any village that fires upon Israel."[6]"

The reportage of the General from multiple sources and the leaked embassy cable, In my mind illustrate that the strategy was indeed carried out. The destruction of farmland and the statistics given relating to this also support that assertion, my alteration was changed with the reasoning given being "Fixing an objectively incorrect implication" which as far as I could make out wasn't objectively incorrect due the basis in fact.

Corrections are made which play this down, replacing the opening with, "Some claim that Israel implemented.....etc."

I am aware there is a lot of volatility on the subject, so some clarity would really me helpful because from what I can see there is almost a "dumbing down" and alteration in language, on this and also another post I made, which serves almost to deflect what I had seen as evidences supporting responsibility. Ecifitra (talk) 10:56, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ecifitra. Please familiarize yourself with the Arbitration Committee sanctions that apply to this and all other articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. They are described at the top of the article's talk page. The talk page is where you should discuss proposed changes with other interested editors. A "leaked embassy cable" is a primary source, and it is better to use discussion of that cable in secondary sources. You are not permitted to conclude "in my mind" as you put it, that the strategy was carried out but rather only to summarize what the range of sources on both sides of the issue say.
Personally, I am not interested in editing an article about such a highly controversial topic, though I have great respect for our editors who do so in compliance with our policies and guidelines. So my advice to you is to be cautious. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

No you're lack of interest in it is understandable. I appreciate the advice, so will read up a lot more before edits. Thanks for taking the time out to reply and advise me - will definitely use caution as the watchword, thanks. Ecifitra (talk) 10:33, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Hendrik Koot

I just added an external link to the article; it has footage of his funeral, with thousands of Nazis marching, and citizens along the way bringing the well-known salute. It's revolting. That's my city. And then Seyss-Inquart, speaking to his cohorts, in the Concertgebouw, one of the most beautiful buildings in the city. To top it all off I read that he was buried in Zorgvlied, the archetypical Amsterdam cemetery; I wonder if they dug him up and dumped him in June 1945. Incidentally, I used to ride my bike along the Amstel, across from Beth Haim of Ouderkerk aan de Amstel--it is beautiful, absolutely beautiful, and very solemn. Which reminds me: there's another very old Jewish cemetery, and it doesn't have an article yet--nl:Joodse begraafplaatsen (Amsterdam), in the Flevopark. I used to live a few blocks from there in the Indische Buurt and used to visit. It's no Old Jewish Cemetery, Prague, but it's really quite something, a place where the past is palpable. Thanks for the link and for keeping your eye out for me.

Thank you for the little memory tour, Drmies. I would like to visit Amsterdam - perhaps someday. I am always saddened by spats like that one. All too often, experienced editors fall into the trap of bickering rather than collaborating. I don't fully understand the social dynamic. I'm really a simpleton, I guess. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:50, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Spikequeen

Thank you for your words of welcome. I am enjoying Editing at Wikipedia. I find it very educational, actually exciting. One of the articles had problems and now is coming alive, which is exciting. I do get upset by people though. It is incredible that I can be sensitive when editing but I am. Good to meet you.Spikequeen (talk) 06:14, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Welcome, Spikequeen. I completely understand the excitement and the sensitivity. If you stick with it successfully over time, you will learn to control those emotions a bit, but they will never go away. That is a good thing, as this is a wonderful project. Please feel free to ask me any question, any time. If I don't respond for eight hours, I am probably asleep. Nice to meet you as well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

ANB discussion

There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive265#Move War at History of the Jews in Nepal, and RFC review that concerns you because you were recently involved with one or more of the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Jews in Nepal, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 30 (History of the Jews in Nepal), Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal#RfC: Should we change article name to 'Judaism in Nepal'?. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 07:56, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Joni Ernst

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Joni Ernst. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Help creating wiki article for beauty brands I love! Newbie Comment Copyedit (minor)

Hello Jim, It's a pleasure to meet you virtually at least. I've read through your work (amazing articles) and I also thinks it's fantastic that your wife is also involved. I especially wanted to receive help from a fellow Sierra Club supporter (SF Chapter).

I recently made an update on an existing wikipedia article for Sephora. I included another brand that is available to purchase via Sephora or Sephora.com. My citation was taken directly from the Sephora.com. I want to ensure I've done it properly (NPOV) and not receive "promotional tone" feedback. --SiliconvalleygirlSF (talk) 03:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello SiliconvalleygirlSF. Thank you for your kind comments about my work here. I have been a Sierra Club member for almost 40 years. For what it's worth, I did some repair work at the Sephora store right across from the Market/Powell cable car turntable a couple of years ago. So I have a notion of what that company is about.
Here's my concern: It seems that Sephora sells about 100 brands. It would be promotional to list every single brand cited to the Sephora website, or the vendor website for that matter. Lengthy product lists are opposed by many editors. If we mention a few representative brands, then they should be cited to an independent, reliable source. So, let's say that the Wall Street Journal runs a story that says that Sephora is a leading retailer of eyeliner brand X and lipstick brand Y. That would be a good source. But I consider it promotional to go through a list of 100 brands on their website and cherry-pick a Japanese brand of skin oil absorbent paper to mention in the article. That's not neutral. That's promotional. Do you understand my concern? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) SiliconvalleygirlSF, here's a good tip for you: when you're trying to find independent sources on commercial subjects, try to Google it with keywords, such as: bloomberg "Sephora". In the next page or two you'll get the most Bloomberg articles on the topic (including Bloomberg Business Insider). Heh, and this is not intended to promote Bloomberg, that's just what I've been using though! :-) I guess Wall Street Journal is equally good. :-) Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 18:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Norman Johnson

In my Teahouse post on this topic, I had my tongue firmly inserted in my cheek when I mentioned Washington. Yes of course a bluelink to the Washington House clears up all ambiguities, real or imagined. I was satirising the NA-centric attitudes which some editors seem to have.

I'd have cheerfully accepted improvements to my edit. But a full revert without explanation was, to say the least, mildly annoying. Narky Blert (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

So I figured, Narky Blert. But it is not always possible to be sure when an editor is satirising with tongue-in-cheek. Out of respect for you, I have avoided the US spelling with a "zed", for fear it might bother you.
Unexplained reverts should lead either to talk page discussion, or to conceding the point and moving on. Both are techniques I have used. Annoyance, though sometimes unavoidable since we are humans, accomplishes nothing.
As for NA-centrism, as you put it, I do not deny that it may sometimes rear its ugly head, maybe connected recently to the 200th Anniversary of that time the British Army came uninvited to the other town called Washington, and burned down our White House. That brought back unpleasant memories. But I for one don't hold grudges, and also observe that we have many highly competent editors from the UK who so speak up quite forcefully when need be. And our NA neighbors to the north, the Canadians, have a surprising tendency to side with UK opinion, as opposed to the country they share a very long peaceful border with. You can't win them all.
I admit that I often write on American topics, as those are the ones I know best. I try to remedy the situation by working on an Australian topic here, a Japanese topic there, a couple of Dutch topics, and a surprising (to me) number of Indian topics. Not Native American Indian. India as in New Delhi. But I have also written several Native American artist biographies, to mix it up. Every editor (in theory) should be open to a wide range of topics. I try. Your tongue and your cheek are always welcome on my talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
I hate to have to say it, but the US "-ize" is closer to the original Greek suffix "-izein" than is "-ise". When editing, I try to use spellings consistent with the original page.
That long border wasn't so peaceful during the War of 1812. In my opinion it should never have been fought, but at least you got a National Anthem out of it.
(I remember once answering a question on Yahoo Answers, as to whether people in the UK knew Johnny Horton's song The Battle of New Orleans. I truthfully replied that Lonnie Donegan's version was much more famous over here - it got to #2.)
Exactly so, write on whatever you know about, or know how to find. Sometimes small edits can be the most satisfying. Narky Blert (talk) 13:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

PS An edit or revert with explanation can be helpful, I like that. Narky Blert (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Cullen328/Archive 19. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Mirror Freak 19:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Need help to create Billy tchouague articles

Hello Cullen328, Happy to be here. Thank you for your reply from Teahouse , i really appreciated. I didn't read notability guideline for association football players before i write my artcile and just realize now that my article was not really notable, i made some changes by removing Association football on it, can you please check if my article Billy tchouague is now notable ? or tell what i have to do else to make it notable , if not i'll find how to choose articles about topics which meet Wikipedia's notability standards as you suggest from Cullen328. Many Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcosantos2014 (talk • contribs) 07:03, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Marcosantos2014. It seems that this person's only claim to notability is as a football player. He is not a member of parliament, or a movie star, or a famous scientist. So, if he doesn't meet the notability guideline for football players, it is likely that the article will be deleted. You can't transform a non-notable topic into a notable one. Only career progress and coverage in reliable sources can do that.Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:15, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328/Archive_19&oldid=1142947747"