User talk:Annevalentino/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Annevalentino, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference errors on 20 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the George Ranalli page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

George Ranalli

Hi, it looks as if you've pasted a lot of text directly from Mr. Ranalli's website; this is in violation of copyright law, and such content must be removed. Perhaps you'd like to revert your own edits. If not, I may request assistance. Please understand that editors can be blocked for copyright violations, per WP:COPYVIO. Thank you, 2601:188:0:ABE6:3CF7:E4A2:6CC5:354F (talk) 02:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Copyright issues and conflict of interest

Hello, Annevalentino.

I have, for now, blanked the article at George Ranalli as there are several issues that we must deal with.

First, as the individual notified you just above, there are copyright issues with the page. Some of the content you have added to the page has been previously published elsewhere, such as at http://www.georgeranalli.com/studio/. We cannot reproduce content on Wikipedia that has been published elsewhere unless we can verify that it has been published under a compatible license or is public domain, except in brief and clearly marked quotations. You can read more about our approach to previously published content, including finding links to various policies and guidelines, at WP:COPYPASTE.

Your name suggests that you may have a connection with Mr. Ranalli and may be able to grant license. That's fine; we have a procedure for that, but cannot publish the content until you do. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for that process.

However, I do need to be sure you understand that Wikipedia has a specific and different purpose from official sites of the subjects about which we write and not all content for which license is granted will be appropriate here. Our purpose is to neutrally summarize what reliable sources say about notable entities. All content on Wikipedia must be verifiable to a reliable source. We are not permitted to include material that we know or believe to be true if it is not published in a reliable source. We cannot publish content like "Mr. Ranalli is known for his innovative design practice, and coherent, elegant work, at every scale, attuned to history and surroundings" even if licensed from his official site. Such statements may be included as part of critical response to his work, but it would need to be attributed to a specific, unrelated expert in the field.

If you are connected to Mr. Ranalli, you should read our guideline on conflict of interest (WP:COI). We strongly recommend that people not edit articles about subjects related closely to them, such as their spouses, except in limited circumstances.

If you would like to grant license for the content at Mr. Ranalli's website, please let me know. It will then be reviewed to see if it is appropriate under our policies and guidelines on Wikipedia. Alternatively, all of that content will need to be removed, and I will ask you to be careful proceeding with the article to follow the recommendations at WP:COI.

If you have any questions about any of this, I will be watching your talk page and am happy to discuss it with you. Alternatively, you can seek assistance at our online forum for new contributors, Wikipedia:Teahouse, or reach out via the considerably slower route of email to info-en-q@wikipedia.org. If you chose to write, please be aware that the email address is manned by experienced volunteers and response time may vary from hours to a few weeks depending on the contact load and the number of people working at a given time. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Anne. Thank you for your note on my talk page.

The copyright issue is resolved, and I've done some additional work to the biography. Some of the content that was in it could not be used - we would not quote the editor of his book - but I did find some additional sourcing to help expand critical reception of his work. Some of the changes are purely to meet our manual of style. For instance, while we can use an honorific in a quote that uses it, we do not use honorifics ourselves.

What the article really needs now is more sourcing in the awards section. While it's okay to source an award to the websites of the issuing body, we can't source them to the website of the recipient. This is not meant to be an aspersion on the integrity of any particular recipient; it's just a general rule to ensure that content is properly verified. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for adding sourcing to the awards section. :) I do see you've twice now removed sourced content from the article; we ask that you not remove content without explanation. Certainly, it's fine to correct errors, but that material seems to be accurate, given that the source that published seems to be reliable and the school now has an acting dean. If there are private reasons for your removal that you would prefer not to reveal on Wikipedia, you can reach out to info-en-q@wikimedia.org. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:01, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Hello, I'm 99.53.112.186. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to George Ranalli because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 14:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Blanking sourced content without explanation

As has been explained to you above, removing sourced content without a valid reason is not permitted. It is, in fact, regarded as vandalism on Wikipedia. Additionally, repeatedly undoing the work of others is considered edit warring and may in itself result in a block of your account. Either of these behaviors may result in your account being suspended or the article being locked so that you can no longer edit it. Please do not continue blanking this content without comment. Doing so again may lead to a block of your account without further warning. (In case you missed it above, I will reiterate that you can discuss your reasons or write to the email address above if your reasons cannot be discussed publicly.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:14, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

I've placed a conflict of interest template on the article. Your lack of attempt to communicate with or respond to other editors and continued removal of sourced content suggest issues with WP:OWNERSHIP. Nobody owns a Wikipedia article, and this is all the more relevant when there is a close affiliation with an article's subject. The encyclopedia depends on a community of editors who will communicate with one another when there's a concern. Very best, 2601:188:0:ABE6:B53D:47CE:83E6:3C5F (talk) 02:33, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Administrators' Noticeboad discussion related to your editing

Given your lack of conversation, I have asked for input on the issue of your repeated removal of this sourced information at the administrator's noticeboard. Your feedback there would be quite welcome. The conversation explaining my concerns is at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#George Ranalli. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:46, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to George Ranalli, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. GregJackP Boomer! 06:45, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Annevalentino. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article George Ranalli, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. GregJackP Boomer! 07:02, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Response

Thank you for your note on my talk page. I appreciate your explanation of your concern with the content. I think it is not likely to be the kind of detail that remains long-term, but it seems pertinent as this time as there is currently an acting dean. Calling him dean is not fully accurate, but indicating he is no longer dean is also not accurate. If the leave is to be short-term, then it may be appropriate to remove the reference once he returns. If he should officially depart the role, it will probably be appropriate to update it to note that this is the case.

I realize that you probably already know how short term it is, but this is one of the challenges of editing with a connection to the subject. Wikipedia doesn't (and can't) permit what we refer to broadly as "original research" (see WP:NOR). Because the website is open to editing by anyone, we have a very strict policy that all content must be verifiable to a reliable, published source. This is the best way we can ensure accuracy for our readers and fairness for our subjects. While it does sometimes mean that content is not updated as swiftly as facts change, it is overall the best approach for an open-source reference work. You'd be surprised how often people insert unverified information - we are often one of the first to hear when a celebrity dies, for instance, but steadfastly remove those rumors from articles until it is appropriately reported generally in mainstream press.

Copyright issues are addressed in the article, I believe. If there are other issues, it is to a source I have not reviewed. :) I removed the template because of that.

I do realize that you are not the author of the unattributed material you're sourcing. I didn't mention it to you as a possibility for improvement because I believed you were responsible or had an obligation, but only because you seemed interested in contributing to improve the article, and supplying sourcing is generally regarded as a good way for those who are connected to subjects to contribute. Substantial changes to text are likely best proposed at the article's talk page to avoid any seeming of impropriety. Wikipedia is heavily used for promotional proposes, so it is something we have had to be vigilant against. Open discussion and transparency go a long way to alleviating those concerns. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited George Ranalli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Rudolph. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Annevalentino. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.