Hello, Morningbastet, 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 complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maggie Siner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salant. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Norman Cohn, Campaign Against Psychiatric Abuse and Viktor Fainberg. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Siner until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Hello. I noticed in this diff you say you "have personally interviewed the artist". Does this mean Siner is a friend of yours? We have specific guidelines on conflict of interest; are you familiar with WP:COI? Thanks. --- Possibly☎02:36, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Possibly. I was not a friend of Maggie Siner when I interviewed her and drafted the article. I had met her on a vaporetto leaving the Venice film festival, completely by chance, in september 2015, and as a member of the french Wiki Project Les Sans Pages, which was born precisely that year (2015), and focuses on women visibility in Wikipedia, I decided to write an article on her, because she was clearly a famous female artist that deserved mention. I collected some information and sources on her by myself, and I went to Venice again a couple of times to interview her, since I thought this was very important to have accurate information and obtain additional sources. In the years after the interviews we got to know each other and as it is natural to happen, we befriended each other. Her english wikipedia page has received thousands of visits and I believe she meets many criteria of notability. She is really a uniquely notable artist and I oppose the idea of deletion.Galileosdaughter (talk) 02:59, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. That was a question for Morningbastet; did you lose your password and start the new account Galileosdaughter? Since you have edited the article as recently as late August, and you are, as you say, a friend of the subject, you need to declare this per the COI guideline, and to use the talk page to make edit requests, rather than editing her article directly. Do you have other similar close relationships with the people you have written about? some of the articles you have created seem to have a similar tone of familiarity. --- Possibly☎04:28, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yes there was a mixup of accounts and logins, and I will follow your indication re: COI and future edits, and added COI info on talk page. No, I am not friend of other people I wrote about (past and present). Re : importance of interviews, I came to realize that precision and reliability of Wiki articles re:info that is difficult/impossible to source without breaching personal privacy laws (birthdate, education, and other) requires direct interview either of the person (if alive and available) or of relatives/friends of the person. I am concerned about reliability of Wiki articles (history rewritten, or even worse, hidden) and I am very strict about proof and objectivity and sources. I also realize that some sources, even articles by historians with good reputation, are referring to secondary sources that go back to unsubstantiated articles based on primary sources, making it hard to re-establish objective and factual "truth".Morningbastet (talk) 05:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi possibly, I am sorry I was not aware of this from now on I will only use sources and conduct no interviewMorningbastet (talk) 05:45, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Possibly, to be more precise: I have always used and am always using reliable independent secondary and tertiary sources and reference them in order to document all the articles I have written and I am editing, about Maggie Siner and anybody else. I read all the secondary and tertiary sources I can find, and then I write the article and cite the sources. As I said, I was not at all friend of Maggie Siner when I wrote the article, so there was no COI. Other contributors have made edits, and the last minor edits are not of great importance. Several independent people have written substantive texts about Maggie Siner, and they are cited. I will request edits for further improvement of the article, if you find there are not sufficient sources. It would be useful to understand which one of the sources you do not estimate are sufficiently deep. Thanks for your help to improve the articleMorningbastet (talk) 07:33, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there I am Nattes à chat founder of les sans pagEs and Morningbastet was a student at our first workshops at the university of Geneva. I can attest that she does not do paid contributions, even if her bold nature makes her very creative with rules :). She does edit when her professional responsibilities allow her to, in serveral languages and therefore I think we need to suppose WP:FAITH here. She became friend with the artist after writing the article (these things happen for example one asks a photo to an artist and then is in contact with the person...). She did mention that she had problems in connecting because she had lost her pass word, and we did tell her that she needered ed to create another account if she had not registered her email. That may be the cause of this imbroglio.
She is a honnest person and does not have any hidden agenda or activity. She is just bold and creative with rules. I have told her to indicate on both her user page that she has a suckpuppet account and the reason why. @Rosiestep: could you please look into this ? Warm regards. Nattes à chat (talk) 09:23, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Rosiestep: do you think that I can contribute to the discussion on the deletion of the Maggie Siner article? I am sorry if I created confusion because I forgot my password and created another account. I do wish to abide by the rules, but they are very complicated and it's difficult to learn them all in a short time. With your help, thanks. My 2 linked accounts (Galileosdaughter and Morningbastet), were not created in bad faith. I would like, in fact, to block or deactivate the Galileosdaughter account? Can somebody do it for me ? (I don't know how to do it). I have an important job that keeps me busy, and I have made a few contributions in the context of LesSansPages, just out of passion for women's history and visibility. I especially would like to stress that I am not a paid contributor, and that I have taken care in all my contributions to emphasise precision of information and sources.Morningbastet (talk) 09:46, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Morningbastet:. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!
Regarding Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. In the case of the Maggie Siner article, you know the detailed history of when you met her, what the circumstances were, when you took the photo or created the article or improved the article, or became friends. Other people don't know these facts unless you disclose them on the article (biography) talkpage. Note, meeting someone and/or taking someone's photo doesn't constitute a conflict of interest. Interviewing them does constitute conflict of interest.
Regarding paid editors: Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. If you are not a paid editor, and someone asks if you are one, make a statement on your userpage... something like, "I am not now and have never been a paid editor". If you are asked about paid editing for a specific article, then put a similar statement on the article's talkpage.
Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (AfD). Anyone can make a comment on the AfD discussion page, including the editor who created/improved the article.
If you have any further questions regarding women's biographies, please consider asking here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red. This is the English Wikipedia version of Les Sans Pages and it is monitored by friendly, supportive editors available 24 hours/day. Lastly, remember, we were all new at one time so don't worry about that. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll answer once and not twice. Morningbastet, please drop this. Don't waste time sending me an emails as you did, don't waste time rounding up your editor friends. The sole issue here was that you had created and edited the Siner article without declaring your COI. Interviewing a subject, or knowing the subject, is a COI. Continuing over the years to maintain the article without letting anyone know you had a COI is not correct. These issues are now solved as you are declared and using talk page requests. Regarding the notability of Siner, that is being discussed at the AfD. Thanks. --- Possibly☎10:00, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly, I wasted time because you did not answer my kind messages, and you immediately archived my kind request to you to take note of the additional sources I had found, and possibly insert the text yourself (too much to ask probably). I feel a sense of disrespect from your part. I am sorry if I am not a great expert, don't know all the rules and make plenty of mistakes, but I have a job that takes most of my time, and I spend little time on Wikipedia. Also, I feel that my message has not gotten through to you yet that I created the article at a time when I was NOT friend with the artist, I just became aware of her existence by chance, I got a leaflet and was aware of a show, did not know her at all, and wrote the article. AFTERWARDS, only after several years, we became friends, and there are very few minor edits done after that time. I said this already and it's too bad I have to repeat it, since saying, as you keep doing, that I wrote the article while I had a COI is a misrepresentation of what really happened, and it's not right. I am making further research on museum exhibit catalogues, and I will make additional Request Edits, in order to allow expert editors as yourself to come to a consensus, without bias, objective and balanced. I asked other Editors to help, in good faith, because instead of answering my messages you just archived them and ignored them. I think an important pillar of Wikipedia is to treat people with dignity and respect, instead of curtly telling them what to do, as you do above. Thank you very much for your consideration and understanding.Morningbastet (talk) 10:34, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Possibly: she is not rounding up editor friends, she called me for help because she did not know what to do and I was her wikipedian mentor in the past. I think we should not bite newvies for not knowing all our rules here, there is a space for human mistakes. I have read the newspaper clippings sent to me, and in truth, there are references, only they are not available online. Morningbastet has apologized, she did not realize the problem, being a researcher she often works on primary sources and the difference between primary sources and secondary sources is not that obvious to grasp for a newbie. So please consider that there are sources, centered ones, I have named a few on the deletion request. I think Monringbastet is aware now of the "extreme gravity" of making that type of mistake
Hello Morningbastet, Beginning signature has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Ending signature Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Gwen Strauss, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits 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. Kj cheetham (talk) 11:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Norman Cohn, Campaign Against Psychiatric Abuse and Viktor Fainberg. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you.
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits 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. Kj cheetham (talk) 11:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
