User talk:Ffsrtfm

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Ffsrtfm, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! MartinPoulter (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Martin! Will do my best. Ffsrtfm (talk) 22:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia style[edit]

Hi, in addition to the above welcome, I wanted to observe that you have been deleting references from the article Charisma. This is not normally done unless the reference is decided to be unreliable or inappropriate to the article. If you think "The Charisma Myth" by Olivia Fox Cabane is unreliable, then you need to make the case why it should not be cited. You are claiming to be the author of the book and you are summarising the book in the article, so I infer you don't think it unreliable, so please restore the citation. You also deleted a citation to a journal, The Leadership Quarterly; again, if you want this removed you need to make a case on the article's Talk page as to why that source is unreliable or inappropriate.

Some other style points that apply on Wikipedia (but you understandably won't know about if you're used to writing elsewhere):

We don't use first- or second-person language like "When we first meet someone".
We try to avoid short paragraphs so splitting one paragraph into four short ones is discouraged.
Text should be backed up with citations: a paragraph without citations is a bad sign. Readers need to be able, at least in principle, to verify for themselves what they read on Wikipedia.
We are careful with Conflicts Of Interest, which include when contributors write about themselves or their own work. Expert contributors are welcome, but be careful if you find you are writing about yourself.

I hope this helps to make clear why the edit you've made shouldn't stand. I'll try to edit to a compromise. MartinPoulter (talk) 17:34, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've just replaced the citation to the book, and added other citations: that's great. The citation of The Leadership Quarterly is still missing. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 17:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't delete the LQ ref, just moved it to the section above (modern perspectives) b/c as it was previously positioned, seemed to indicate The Charisma Myth overlooked/underestimated verbal charisma. In fact it's about 50/50 on focus. Though TBH neither is as important as mental charisma, ie mental state which will then impact verbal & nonverbal behaviors etc . Ffsrtfm (talk) 22:15, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, this really helps. in fact, I would be ok with the entire section (popular notions) being deleted! I had actually originally (years ago) deleted the wiki pages on me in both French and English, cause TBH I didn't see the need, but I was overridden :) Ffsrtfm (talk) 22:11, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I didn't notice that you'd replaced the Leadership Quarterly ref elsewhere. I was looking at this edit but I now see that some of my problems with this edit were fixed by your subsequent edits. I'm curious if we can say more about the evidence for your view of charisma: at the moment it's described as "theorised". Is there more to be said about the research on which the theory is based? MartinPoulter (talk) 13:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with the research is that the book was written more than a decade ago. At the time, the research was cutting-edge. These days, much of the science underlying the book's exercises has either changed or been put into doubt (eg Amy Cuddy's research). Apparently, the tools/techniques/etc still work, but now I can't explain how or why many of them work. It's the reason I am continuously asking audiences NOT to buy the book. Someone really should have written a better and/or more updated version by now! Ffsrtfm (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ev psych link, I believe we "over-react" to the charisma components of presence, power and warmth the same way we overreact to sugar, salt, and fat. That's just a personal theory though. Ffsrtfm (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's really interesting: thanks for your candour! So no further summary of the book is needed. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question was answered.

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Ffsrtfm. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Olivia Fox Cabane, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 17:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, attempting to upload a photo to Bernard Cabane page. Is this a conflict of interest? Thanks. 172.58.89.168 (talk) 17:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a conflict of interest with regards to Olivia Fox Cabane then yes, you would also have one regarding her husband. You're welcome to disclose the conflict of interest and suggest the edit at Talk:Bernard Cabane. Belbury (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks, will do Ffsrtfm (talk) 17:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, I’ve consistently tried to REMOVE content that sounded like advertising or promotion to me! Originally tried to nominate the entire page for deletion (seriously, the world does NOT need a page on me) but was overruled. OFC. Ffsrtfm (talk) 18:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated! You're welcome to give input on your article, but any actual removal is better left to an independent editor who can make the call on what the content sounds like to them (and whether it's better to rewrite or remove it).

WP:COIADVICE gives a short list of appropriate edits you can make with a COI, everything else should be raised on the article talk page. Belbury (talk) 18:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, thx! Ffsrtfm (talk) 18:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]