User talk:Digital22759

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Hi - This is being requested by Frank Sobrino, Media Relations Director at CUNY. Our office poses a conflict of interest to editing James B. Milliken's page.

CHALLENGED MATERIAL #1 “Upon accepting the appointment to the position of Chancellor of CUNY, Milliken's first controversial 'move' was into a luxury, penthouse apartment located on Manhattan's Upper East Side, with a monthly rent bill of $18,000," according to the New York Observer, paid for by the public university system.^[12] Rudin Management reportedly leased Milliken's apartment to the Research Foundation of the City University of New York, a university affiliated nonprofit with the stated purpose of funding research and acquiring university facilities.^[13] Milliken himself no stranger to the perks of higher education administration, according to a 2013 The Wall Street Journal report of his annual financial disclosure statements, showed he had received numerous "personal gifts from donors, alumni and business executives" while at the University of Nebraska, including a pheasant-hunting trip, four Elton John concert tickets, and flights via corporate jets.^[14]^”

OUR COMMENTS: We urge removal of this paragraph on grounds of fairness and context. It smacks of editorializing by someone with an axe to grind and distorts Milliken’s tenure. It leaves the false impression that Milliken has been controversial and been accused of financial impropriety from the moment of his arrival and has accomplished nothing in his four years.

Specific points:

1. The footnoted attribution for the first sentence does not back up the statement that Milliken's move into an $18,000 apartment was “controversial.” The first link is to an article about CUNY faculty protesting outside Milliken’s apartment because they had been working without a contract (for several years before his arrival). There is no mention of the cost of his apartment.

2. Though an article about the apartment is footnoted after a later sentence, there is no support for the suggestion that the cost of Milliken’s apartment was improper. It's a mischaracterization to suggest it was or is regarded as unusually lavish or that it has been an issue during his tenure.

3. The information about perks at the University of Nebraska similarly has an editorializing tone and lacks context -- i.e. are/were these perks unusual, illegal or improper for presidents of major state universities? Further, gratuitously including this Nebraska information in the section about Milliken’s tenure at CUNY appears to be an attempt to advance the dubious claim that exploiting his public positions is a part of his record and reputation. There’s no support for that assertion.

This is not something that requires admin action. ~ GB fan 14:21, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will post this on your behalf to the appropriate notice board.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:48, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia with this username. This is because your username, Cunydigital, does not meet our username policy.

Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below) and continue editing.

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" on their talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you think that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below this notice, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. ~ GB fan 13:57, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Digital22759 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

James_Milliken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Decline reason:

This unblock request can't be dealt with until you answer the question below. I am closing this request for now, for reasons that I will explain, but you are welcome to post another unblock request when you do answer that question. Your editing does not give the impression that you are James Milliken, and if you aren't then using his name is not allowed by Wikipedia policy, as it is likely to be misleading, while if you are then you need to make it clear that you are, so that we know yo are not violating Wikipedia's user name policy. That is why we cannot unblock to allow the suggested user name until you settle that. My reason for declining the request is that it has already been waiting for a response from you for five days, and leaving it open longer will result in numerous administrators wasting time coming here to check the request, only to find that it is not ready to be dealt with. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:27, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you James Milliken? Or are you Frank Sobrino, Media Relations Director at CUNY? Or is this a shared account? ~ GB fan 14:21, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you have an interest in editing Wikipedia beyond fixing the article in question, you can verify you are James Milliken by emailing the Foundation. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:46, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BLP concerns

Please read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help. It might help you through these concerns.

Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Dealing_with_articles_about_yourself may be useful.

As you seem to be the subject of the article with contentious content, This E-mail may be a good alternative route as navigating all of Wikipedia's policies can be difficult. Especially if one has been blocked. Hope this helps. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:44, 22 March 2018 (UTC) -- thank you, we have contacted that email and the response has been to multiple policy pages which is why we're trying to go down these routes. much appreciated![reply]

OTRS verification

See OTRS Ticket

It is confirmed that this account is being operated by Maria Lee, Director of Digital Marketing, City University of New York.

@Account owner

Per WP:ISU and/or WP:ORGNAME, the current account name is not allowed.This account need to be renamed to something of your preference which might be MariaatCunydigital , MariaatCuny et al.

Please mention a new username of your choice.

You also need to go through this guideline and necessarily follow the steps, as mentioned at this section.

Please confirm that you have understood the guideline and will abide by it's directives.

Ergo not James Milliken.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Admins

@Dlohcierekim, JamesBWatson, and GB fan:Once the account owner confirms her abidance to the above-point(s), I think an unblock might be in order.∯WBG^converse 09:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is another concern. Who has access to the account? At one point the person who was posting stated that this was a shared account. That also needs to be addressed prior to any unblock. ~ GB fan 09:52, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yep.∯WBG^converse 10:07, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The OTRS ticket appears to confirm that this is a shared account and shouldn't be unblocked. She should create a new individual account and follow WP:COI. ~ GB fan 10:14, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We disagree as to the exact interpretation of her lines.Anyways, she need to clarify the aspect of the shared-usage.Or, a de-novo start might be preferred, rather than these hassles.....∯WBG^converse 11:10, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The interpretation of the comments in the OTRS really doesn't make that much difference. The person accessing the account stated unequivocally that this was a shared account. ~ GB fan 11:30, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Winged Blades of Godric can you provide the OTRS ticket number? ~ GB fan 09:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Check user-page:)∯WBG^converse 10:07, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I edit conflicted to say I found it there. ~ GB fan 10:08, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: re Once the account owner confirms her abidance to the above-point(s)-- of course. IMO, the block issues are shared user name and promo username and promo edits. Whoever winds up using this account will need to affirm they are sole user, rename, and abide by PAID. User name can be <<random alpha numerics or their name orotherwise>><<preposition of choice>> cunydigital. That person needs to refrain from editing directly and should make suggested edits and make a WP:PAID disclosure.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:34, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS "Maria Lee, City University of New York" should be fine. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Winged Blades of Godric: What exactly is this? <<giggles>> Confirming ID as an unblock rationale would only be appropriate if this were a famous username block. It has no bearing on a promotional user name hard block. You might want to remove or change that in some way. Cheers, -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:01, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eh:) I was working with utterly reduced sanity.I asked GBFan to delete it but umm.......I need to check (:∯WBG^converse 12:08, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you are saying that your statement on my talk page: it's probably best to delete the user-page for now was a request to delete the userpage. I didn't realize you wanted it deleted. ~ GB fan 13:02, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am here because WBG pinged me above. My only involvement here has been a purely procedural decline of an unblock request pending clearing up the user name issue, and I have no objection whatever to unblocking. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:45, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

renamed "Cunydigital" to "Digital22759"

and unblocked.-- Dloh cier ekim 17:39, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

Hello, I'm MelbourneStar. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to Felix V. Matos Rodriguez because they seemed inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 17:05, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

=

Hello Melbourne, Why would an announcement about of the chancellor's appointment be inappropriate encyclopedia material? The announcement about his tenure is a primary source document proving the claim. Rodriguez entry has reverted back to an outdated entry and all edits have been lost. Was this intentional?