User talk:Jucos
Welcome![edit]
|
Sorry, but I changed the listing for her real name back from Trimble to Tremble because that is what the cited source said. If you want to change it back to Trimble, you will have to find an alternative reliable source which says "Trimble" - perhaps one of these interviews you mention, provided it was printed in a RS. In the meantime may I suggest you read Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth.2.28.124.127 (talk) 21:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
This is one of dozent sources. Her mother is pianist. It is not difficult to find her. --Juliana (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Well it will have to be something better than The Sun as this has been explicitly banned from WP sourcing as an unreliable source: see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#The_Sun. Some WP editors spend all their days going through Wikipedia deleting uses of the Sun as a reference.2.28.124.127 (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- So I said, one of a myriad of sources https://www.scotsman.com/news/blondie-star-debbie-harry-reveals-she-s-totally-scottish-1-4363726. --Juliana (talk) 22:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Steve Morell[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Steve Morell requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 21:58, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Reliable sources[edit]
Hi, user-generated sources like Instagram and Twitter aren't reliable sources in most instance (WP:ABOUTSELF is one exception). You can get an idea of the types of sources considered reliable at WP:RSPS. Schazjmd (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello, the Salt Lake City Tribune wrote about it too, but I cannot open it from Germany. https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/UtahMonolith?src=hashtag_click&f=live --Jucos (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- No problem, Jade Ten found a reliable source to add the information. Schazjmd (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
Woodroar (talk) 23:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, I just added a totally regular source, you seem not to like and now you try to toss me into english Wikipedia beaurocracy knowing that I am not native english speaker and not used to write here. Jucos (talk) 00:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Whether or not you're a native English speaker, you've been editing here for 14 years. You need to be aware that we take all content about living persons seriously on the English Wikipedia. This includes a presumption of privacy and the need for reliable, secondary sources. Woodroar (talk) 00:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- The sources are public since years! Millions read them till now, there is no secret anymore! Her name is public! There is no privacy to hide. Please present me a link or something else, that my sources are not valid. In Germany Wikipedia court documents and renowned publishers like Washington Post are 100% valid. Maybe we should add an editor outside of the Gamer's scene into our discussion? Jucos (talk) 00:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- I've already linked you to these policies at Talk:Zoë Quinn. But here they are again:
- WP:BLPPRIMARY:
Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person.
- WP:BLPSPS:
Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and social network posts—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article.
- WP:ABOUTSELF:
Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they are established experts in the field, so long as: ... 2. It does not involve claims about third parties
. - Note that these are policies on the English Wikipedia. Woodroar (talk) 01:18, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- You are very unpolite and I know the game from german Wikipedia, instead having a constructive discussion with somebody, flooding the person with beaurocracy and links to rules.
- I prefer to speak with somebody outside of gamers sphere. Should I seek for a neutral point of view? Jucos (talk) 05:53, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- ...and by the way, just for the record: Washington Post is NO trial document: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/03/18/appellate-argument-today-as-to-the-order-that-eron-gjoni-not-post-any-further-information-about-zoe-quinn/ Jucos (talk) 05:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- The sources are public since years! Millions read them till now, there is no secret anymore! Her name is public! There is no privacy to hide. Please present me a link or something else, that my sources are not valid. In Germany Wikipedia court documents and renowned publishers like Washington Post are 100% valid. Maybe we should add an editor outside of the Gamer's scene into our discussion? Jucos (talk) 00:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Whether or not you're a native English speaker, you've been editing here for 14 years. You need to be aware that we take all content about living persons seriously on the English Wikipedia. This includes a presumption of privacy and the need for reliable, secondary sources. Woodroar (talk) 00:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)