User talk:Cullen328/Archive 47

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40 ← Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48 Archive 49 Archive 50

47.34.156.250

This IP is doing the same nonsense at North Fire, and I've opened an ANI thread about them.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Peacebroker

Hi Cullen. Peacebroker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sock of Kingshowman and needs a block upgrade to indef. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Edit Warrior for Truth. Thanks. Dr. K. 19:06, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Dr.K., for your deeper look. I have upgraded the block to indefinite. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:15, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

What is Talk Page Theatre? Come find out!

Please join us in downtown San Francisco!
Classic theatre meme

Come find out what "Talk Page Theatre" is all about! The last Wednesday evening of every other month, wiki enthusiasts gather at Bay Area WikiSalon to collaborate, mingle, and learn about new projects and ideas.

We allow time for informal conversation and working on articles. Newcomers and experienced wiki users are encouraged to attend. Free Wi-Fi is available so bring your editing devices. We will have beverages (including beer and wine) plus light snacks. We will be at the NEW Wikimedia Foundation offices! w00t!!!

Please note: You should RSVP here, and bring a photo ID that matches your registration name. This also helps us figure out how much food and drink to bring in.

For further details, see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, November 2017

See you soon! Ben Creasy, Nikikana, and Wayne | ( Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice ) | MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

About the PewDiePie photo

Hello its BoltznNutz again. About the photo, how can I deal with the Creative Commons licenses so I may post it? And I am aware of copyright violations and all that. BoltznNutz (talk) 05:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Unless you are the photographer, BoltznNutz, or hired the photographer under written terms that make you the legal copyright holder, then there is nothing that you can do about it. We simply cannot use the vast majority of random photos found on the internet. It simply will not happen. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:08, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

No I'm not, that is sad, I'm just trying to post a current photo of PewDiePie. And so what about the current photo displayed and how was it able to be posted here? BoltznNutz (talk) 16:07, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello BoltznNutz, yes it is sad, but that is the policy here. The difference with the current photo is that the person who owns the copyright to it -- probably the person that took the photo -- licensed it in a way that allows it to be used here. MPS1992 (talk) 19:02, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Hmm but I wonder what made the photo I had not licensed in a way to be allowed here. BoltznNutz (talk) 19:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

@BoltznNutz: the person who took it or hired the photographer, did not license it in that way. They could still choose to license it in a way that is allowed here, if they used the instructions at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Email_templates MPS1992 (talk) 23:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit War on Me Too (hashtag) page

Hi, I appreciate the notice, but if you look at the Talk and Edit pages, you'll see that reasonable people had already reached consensus that names be added to the Aftermath list only after new allegations arise. Yet, there's a troll who persists in adding Donald Trump's name for previously existing allegations (not new ones by people who were inspired/motivated by the #MeToo movement). Also, this troll uses different IP addresses and usernames in attempts to circumvent blocks on their ability to edit. This person wants to attack Trump for the sake of attacking Trump, not to help Wikipedia increase its utility. Maybe you or other administrators can IP ban this troll? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.229.80 (talk) 20:24, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. It looks to me like you made about 15 reversions, and you were therefore edit warring. Please be aware that edit warring is not allowed even if you are right. I have blocked one of the named accounts who has been verified as a sockpuppet of another disruptive editor. I extended the block to indefinite when I learned that. You can report any specific IP accounts that you think are the same person, and if so, they will be blocked. I have no comment on the content issue because I am focused on editor behavior regarding this article. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your help! It was my first time ever dealing with this kind of experience on Wikipedia, so I was unaware of how to proceed. I was trying to protect the integrity of the article. I now know about alternative methods. Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.229.80 (talk) 21:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate your informative response. My friendly and entirely optional suggestion to you is to consider opening an account. That has many benefits and no negatives that I am aware of. In any case, I wish you well. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:35, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello again! I should add that I forgot to apologize for any inconvenience that I may have caused you. I don't want to cause problems and just want to contribute.  :)70.112.229.80 (talk) 23:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but I believe that the page is being vandalized. We're trying to discuss things on the Talk page, but people just keeping deleting additions willy nilly.70.112.229.80 (talk) 05:08, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

If you look at the Talk and History pages, you'll see that "Another Believer" is just making a nuisance of himself. Thank you for your attention to this matter.70.112.229.80 (talk) 05:26, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Iqra Ali created a second User?

Iqra Ali, subject of recent temporary block for vandalizing articles and other User's Talk appears to have created a second User: WikiThingsForThings already exhibiting bad behavior. And also cleared out from Iqra Ali Talk any mention of the past block. David notMD (talk) 14:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello David notMD. I have blocked that account. Thanks for pointing it out. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:46, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I am concerned that Iqra Ali has reappeared as Penguin2233. Similar pattern of behavior: 1) immediately showing up at Teahouse claiming to be a newbie, yet had already made at least a score of small edits to various articles, 2) User page and Talk usage of "Yo" and exclamation points. David notMD (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
That is not definitive evidence, David notMD, so let's wait on that third account. If you see disruptive edits, please let me know ASAP, or post at WP:ANI if I do not respond promptly. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:15, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Escalating US Dissension

Hi Jim. I'm wondering if either you or one of your talk page watchers would mind taking a look at Escalating US Dissension. It was tagged for speedy as per WP:G11, but the tag was removed by someone who seems to be acting in good faith, but may have a COI. The article also appears to have been created by another person affiliated with the subject. I say subject because I'm not exactly sure what it's supposed to be. In addition to the possible COI/Paid issues, there may also be some WP:MEAT or WP:SOCK involved as well. I've done some basic formatting cleanup and added some maintenance templates (perhaps too many), but that's about the extent of what I feel I can do. I thought about AfD, but figured I'd ask around first to see whether there is something in this kind of mess which can actually be molded into an article. You're always a lot of help at the Teahouse, have tons of Wikpedia experience, and tend to not sugar coat things, so I thought you be a good person to ask. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:23, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly. Writ Keeper has deleted that promotional article. Thanks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I saw that. Thanks for taking a peek. Anyway, I was queried about the deletion at User talk:Marchjuly#Escalating US Dissention and tried to advise the other editor the best I could. If, however, you think something else needs to be added, then please feel free to chime in. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I think you did a very good job of advising that editor, Marchjuly. Their username may be technically OK but raises several warning flags in my mind. As for the deleted article, it was pretty bad. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
good job Flaming Afro (talk) 09:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Russian Propagandists

Those working for RT were registered as State Propagandists today under the Foreign Agents Registration Act with the United States Department of Justice, this is meant to be disseminated publicly and widely to allow people to know that Russian State Propagandists are active in the United States of America. This is the intent of FARA; to blunt the message of a state sponsored messenger. So it was not defamatory in any respect; it was cited by a reputable source; https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-media-restrictions-rt/russias-rt-registers-as-foreign-agent-in-usa-editor-idUSKBN1DD25B

“Americans have a right to know who is acting in the United States to influence the U.S. government or public on behalf of foreign principals,” said acting Assistant Attorney General Dana Boente. Jasonanaggie (talk) 03:38, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Please provide multiple reliable, neutral, independent sources calling this specific person a "Russian propagandist", or drop this Iine of personal attack, Jasonanaggie. This matter is not negotiable. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:54, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
I just read the link you provided, and it does not even mention the person in question by name. Therefore, it is worthless for backing up your BLP policy violating edit. Please do not waste my time providing sources to read that do not even mention the BLP subject. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

RT is the company in question; those employed by RT are paid by the Russian Government to tow Russia's Propaganda in the United States therefore anyone working for Russia is a foreign agent and a foreign agent is a Propagandist by definition. First rule on Wikipedia is assume good faith of edits all of my edits are in good faith.

Jasonanaggie (talk) 05:04, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Jasonanaggie, it is entirely possible for an editor to make edits in good faith that inadvertently violate core content policies. I assume good faith that this is what happened here, and that you will understand that you have now been warned. If you call somebody a "Russian propagandist" without furnishing multiple reliable sources using that wording about that specific person, you will be blocked. Please let me know if there is anything unclear about my warning, and I will clarify the warning. Otherwise, I will expect that you will refrain from any more BLP policy violations. Thank you very much. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:15, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Cullen, can I draw your attention to Jason's dozens of other edits surrounding the Abby Martin one, it seems he went on a vandalism spree and most of them have not been reverted. Thank you. – Planetjanet (talk) 03:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Planetjanet, please revert any vandalism or make a report about genuine vandalism to WP:AIV. You can also discuss the matter at Talk: Abby Martin, where no one has commented since June, about five months ago. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Well it's more than just Abby Martin, from what I can tell he did it to everyone who's ever been on RT. I will go back and do the reversions but am I imagining this or did you mention that you were a moderator or administrator? I was hoping you would do something directly. – Planetjanet (talk) 06:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I am an administrator, Planetjanet, but that does not give me any special powers with regards to content disputes. All editors work together to clean up bad content. If this editor continues to add content violating the BLP policy after my warning, then I will block them. Please let me know. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

I've only just spotted this discussion. There is an ongoing discussion in the same vein at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jasonanaggie. Please weigh in there if you don't mind. Regards, nagualdesign 19:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

@Nagualdesign: I seek to move forward, I have corrected the problems I have created and I seek forgiveness. I will not take such action in the future. Thank you for the work you do. Jasonanaggie (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I corrected many of the problems you created. I spent about an hour sifting through your many 'contributions' and reverting them, then wasted another hour or so trying in earnest to explain to the administrators the extent of your efforts. Sorry but I don't buy this public display of penitence, but lucky for you I'm not the one you have to convince. nagualdesign 17:21, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Stephen Paddock

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Stephen Paddock. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Flooder block

Hi Cullen,

Thanks for the block of 121.135.87.119. Since I blocked the previous offender with the same MO (86.237.67.33) for 2 weeks, I've amended your block to last 1 week. That's also what Materialscientist gave for the first offence from that latter IP. If it flares up from the same IPs again, I suggest a six month block on the suspicion that they are repeat offending static IPs.

Best wishes,

Samsara 09:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Samsara. I have no problem with extending the length of any such block. My initial inclination is to block for shorter periods under the assumption that other people might use the same IP address, but the disruption is clear and extensive. My watchlist has been full of this garbage for hours, and quite a few IP addresses are involved. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 09:14, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the "Request" at AN

Softlavender took it upon herself to move my last contribution to the discussion, however, I would like to have it moved back and have expressed as much at her talkpage. [1] It would appear that from her most recent comments there that is unlikely to happen. I'm not asking you to intervene so much as asking if you think my request to her is out of line or inappropriate. I wanted people to read my further comments in direct relation to the original request, not get lost in the comments by other editors. So many, I think, read the original request, scan for a few other comments to see how others are !voting and then put in their own two-cents. The second grouping of comments I made are important and relevant to the original request. I think they should go back to where I put them but need to know if you agree or have a different solution. Thanks, as well, for noting that I did change my signature and commenting about same in the discussion thread. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I am trying to assist you right now, Winkelvi. Please allow me to respond to Softlavender on my own. I appreciate your recent contributions to that debate. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:36, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks for looking into it. Appreciated. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:37, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Disappearing discussion

Apologies if you've had enough of thinking about it, but I thought I ought to draw your attention to this. Regards, nagualdesign 21:41, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello nagualdesign. I suggest that you provide diffs to any edits that violate policy at the AN. I am traveling now and do not have a lot of time to research it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:25, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Cromulent words

Hello C. I saw your post at AN/I and thought I would share these (make sure to use the left and right arrows to see them all) that I recently came across. I particularly like vellichor and petrichor. Safe journey to you. MarnetteD|Talk 00:09, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, MarnetteD. I was familiar with about half those words, and the others were new. I enjoyed reading the list. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:12, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
You are welcome C. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 01:15, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Red Thunder Cloud

Hi Jim. Hope you had a nice Thanksgiving. Would you (or any of your talk page watchers) ming taking a look at Red Thunder Cloud when you get the time? It's completely unsourced and it's not clear the subject meets WP:BIO or even WP:GNG. There are also claims that he is no longer alive, but with no sources provided for verification, this might need to be treated as a BLP per WP:BDP. Finally, there are also posts on the talk page about him being an imposter of some kind, which might be helpful in showing notablilty if properly sourced, but might also indicate that this is another article created a WP:LONGTIME ago which never probably should've been created in the first place. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly. I am traveling now visiting my newborn granddaughter in a rural area and sadly I have very poor and sporadic internet access. The article states that the New York Times ran an obituary but I was unable to log into my NYT account to search. If that is true, then there are no BLP concerns. I recommend searching for sources with more search terms than just the three very common words that comprise his Native American name such as "Catawba" since his claim to notability seems to be his linguistic expertise. I find this type of article fascinating and would not be quick to conclude that the topic is not notable. If my smartphone and the wavering internet connection cooperate, I will try to find some sources. Take care. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:49, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
I found the NYT obituary plus coverage by the Smithsonian Institution and National Public Radio. My preliminary conclusion is that this person is both notable and dead. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:23, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you so much Jim for taking the time to do all that. — Marchjuly (talk) 08:47, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Marchjuly, I will expand the article and add references when I return home. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:04, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

User SandyBeachCentre

Hi Cullen328! I hope you had a good Thanksgiving. I noticed that you blocked SandyBeachCentre for disruptive editing for 72 hours. I wanted to also let you know that the username matches an Organization in Australia with the exact same name (a simple Google search will return the result right on top); you might want to consider extending that block to an indefinite soft block and letting the user know that they need to change that username or create a new account. I'll leave that decision up to you, as you originally blocked this user. Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:40, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks, Oshwah. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:00, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
You bet. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:27, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Patriot Prayer

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Patriot Prayer. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Beyoncé years active

But it was the year she was taken on by two managers to be included in girls time which at that time consisted of 3 divisions. Pritsindhar (talk) 07:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I understand your point but it was not until 1997 that she became a professionally viable entertainer as opposed to a talent show participant. Please make your case for changing the date at Talk: Beyoncé. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:33, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Got a spare pair of eyes?

I've been patrolling Gerrymandering and Gerrymandering in the United States, and could use some advice. I'm unfamiliar with the editors suddenly in an uproar regarding a particular image. Thinking maybe an RfC would help resolve the tension. DN (talk) 08:11, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, DN. Perhaps there is something going on that I am not seeing. If so, please clarify. I see a graphic changed to more neutral colors and the removal of a POV pushing word "steal". Is there something else? Where's the uproar? What would you hope to accomplish with an RFC? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:45, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Glasgow Gladiators Powerchair FC

Hi again Jim. I'm wondering if I can bend your year about another newly created article I've stumbled upon. Glasgow Gladiators Powerchair FC was created a few days ago and the creator and primary contrubutor (they might be one and the same person, but not sure) are new SPAs who mostly likely are connected to subject in some way. I don't think this is a case of paid editing, but rather probably just a person or person who's involved with the team and who might not understand WP:NOT.

Anyway, the article is completely unsourced and it may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. I've done a bit of minor clean up, and added some maintenance templates (explained on the talk page), and also have checked for something which might help establish notability per WP:ORG. Most of what I've found, however, appears to be WP:ORGDEPTH kind of trivial mentions or articles about a particular member of the club (like this or this). This article looks promising, especially as a possible source for article content, but I'm not sure that's enough for notability per WP:CLUB.

I believe the team does exist and does complete against other teams, but there are probably lots of whether it should have a Wikipedia article written about it. This is a bit tricky because of the subject matter, so I'm trying to do an extra thorough WP:BEFORE, but it's looking more and more like something which is going to eventually end up at AfD. If there was something to redirect this two then that might be an option, but I have been unable to find a suitable candidate so far.

Any suggestions, etc. you might have would be most appreciated. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly. I rarely get involved with soccer football articles since I am not at all a serious fan, though I used to see my sons play at the beginner level. I lack any deep understanding of the organizational structure of the sport and lack motivation to study it. I once supported keeping an article about an amateur team in San Francisco at AfD because I knew the local sources very well, and it was the oldest team west of the Mississippi or some such thing, with a very long history. My initial reaction to the article is negative for a variety of reasons. It seems there are no articles about the league and the other teams in the league. The team is very new. The article you cited as the best looks like run-of-the-mill mill local coverage of a worthy but small charitable venture. I hope this helps clarify your thoughts. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Jim for taking a look and I appreciate the feedback. I'm not much of a fan myself, but came across the article why doing some non-free image checks. I've tried to clean up the formatting, etc. so that it starts to resemble a Wikipedia article, but am also concerned about the lack of sourcing, or at least the lack of anything that goes beyond a local feel good piece that helps show notability. Anyway, I also asked for assistance at WT:FOOTY since its members likely have more experience with these types of articles. Thanks again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
You are, of course, entirely free to work on any article you want, my friend. I decided a long time ago to avoid substantive editing on any article unless I am about 80% to 90% sure that the article should be kept. Like Red Thunder Cloud, for example. Stop by here any time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:22, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Academic notability

You asked me to discuss my draft article on Dr. Robert F. Turner and criticized the sources, stating that they did not establish notability. I took a look at Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria, and ISTM he is more than qualified for an article. Specifically 1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

He and Dr. Moore created the field of National Security Law

2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.

He was the Charles H. Stockton Professor of International Law at the US Naval College

3. The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the IEEE).[2]

He has been chairman of two different ABA Subcommittees

4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.

The reason national security law is a discpline at ever major law school in the US can be attributed to his and John Moore's groundbreaking work at UVA

5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon).

See US Naval War College

6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society. 7. The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.

He has testified before more than a dozen House and Senate committes regarding national and internation law as well as the separation of powers doctrine and been cited by every major newspaper as such

8. The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.

That one I don't know yet.

What issues do you have with the sources? They are what they are. For example, the ABA doesn't even list their current chairman, much less past ones. I can't cite them, because such a cite doesn't exist. But I have multiple sources that state that he has been Chairman of two different subcommmittees.

Help me understand what the issues are. I have cites to the NY Times, WaPo, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe. Lawyers in this field of work don't get feature articles in major media. They are considered advisors, and the good ones are sought for advice repatedly. Do I need to include cites from law review articles? (I don't even know how to find those.)

Hello, Txantimedia. I did not say that Turner is not notable. Perhaps he meets WP:ACADEMIC if reliable sources verify that national security law is a significant discipline and he co-created it. My initial suspicion is that national security law has existed as long as the United States has, but I am not an expert. As for the one year post at the Naval War College, it is usually permanent tenured named chairs that are considered a pass of WP:ACADEMIC. Chairing ABA subcommittees is nowhere equivalent to an elected membership in a highly prestigious academic body like the National Academy of Sciences. Not even close. As for the major media sources, please point out the ones that are substantially about him as opposed to simply mentioning him or quoting him. You came to the Teahouse asking for advice, and I gave some good faith advice. I am not formally reviewing your draft, but rather I am giving you some friendly advice. You are free to ignore my advice if you do not like it. I have made major contributions to hundreds of articles and given informal opinions on many more. You can disregard my experience if you want. If I was you, I would ruthlessly remove the weaker sources and emphasize the stronger sources. But you can do whatever you want. Good luck with your draft article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:39, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to argue with you. I was trying to learn. I am thankful for you rinput, and I will certainly take it to heart. Txantimedia (talk) 05:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Dear Cullen328,
This is EXCELLENT work - how come Jytdog or anyone else does not accuse you of tendentious editing with such a lengthy analysis? I like giving, reading and talking about ACTUAL analysis and I can't thank you enough for being willing to volunteer so much time - maybe you could take a look at a few of my contributions to talk pages and noticeboards and give me some guidance?
MakinaterJones (talk) 03:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  • My advice to you, MakinaterJones, is to be far less combative and less repetitive, and to listen far more to the advice of experienced editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:48, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Well for one thing, Cullen's analyses usually make coherent sense. EEng 03:36, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Flatterer. EEng 04:02, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fatima

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fatima. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI

It's the madness of crowds all over again... Guy (Help!) 21:16, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Guy, there used to be workshops all over Europe faking up wood fragments of the cross on which Jesus died, and now we have supercomputers minting "currency" for money laundering and tax evasion. We are so smart. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:24, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Have you read any of David Gerard's comments on this? Attack of the 50ft Blockchain and the like? I'm sticking with Sterling, though my government is doing its best to make that worthless. And yours, I guess, is trying to transfer all the currency into as few hands as possible. Le sigh. Guy (Help!) 21:28, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
What happened last night in the U.S. Senate was unconscionable but I try to restrain myself here and express my opinions off-Wikipedia. Can you provide a link to Gerard's comments? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:33, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
here is the blog for his book. (i am bummed that he self-published it - this makes it not RS), On WP here are some general comments by him. He is active at all the articles. There are so many! We have now added "holding cryptocurrency" as generating a COI about that currency, btw. See WP:EXTERNALREL) Jytdog (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Guy and Jytdog, thanks for that information. I just spent some time reading David Gerard's blog, excerpts from his books, and assorted links. If anything, I am now more skeptical about cryptocurrencies than I already was. Someone I otherwise respect is a big fan and got indignant when I recently uttered the word "bubble". Not a Wikipedian. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:58, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cullen328. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

My Children's Book Article

So, hi. I came to your talk page to discuss this, seeing as you might know quite a lot more than me on the image rules. Can you detail it further and if possible, help me get some new references on her books. Because most of the information is taken from her website, but I only used it as I knew the information there would be correct. ShyPinkLolly (talk) 09:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC) And also, if I am not available, please add a new section on my talk page, because I can't be bothered to keep coming back here. Sorry. ShyPinkLolly (talk) 09:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, ShyPinkLolly. The problem with the image permission has been solved by other editors. I left a couple of notes on your talk page, including links to some possible sources for Murder Most Unladylike. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:18, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

GeoJoe1000

Hi Cullen,

A few weeks ago, you put my talk page under semi-protection after I was being harrassed by GeoJoe1000. You asked me to alert you if he returned. Well, he's back, this time under the username "GuyPerson01". This isn't the first time that he has created an account purely for harrassment; a few have been detected through SPI. His intention is clearly to humiliate me in front of other editors by pointing out the times that I have been blocked but I have no idea what he wants to get out of it. However, it's clearly a case of long-term abuse—as I am sure the likes of @Tvx1 and @Spintendo can attest to—and he has no intention of doing anything differently. He posts anonymously or from socks, and during the SPI it was suggested that he is using a VPN to get around blocks within his IP range. Is there a long-term solution to this problem? Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Prisonermonkeys. I reverted the trolling, indefinitely blocked the sockpuppet, and extended the semiprotection on your talk page to 90 days. Immediately revert any such trolling from your talk page as is your right, and notify me if it happens again. The next time, I will semiprotect for an even longer time, but if this guy is willing to game the system to create new autoconfirmed socks, it may happen again. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:12, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Cullen. I fully expect that he will be back given the frequency with which he does it. I genuinely have no idea what he wants. He blames me for "getting him blocked"—as if I conspired against him—when his bad behaviour was more than enough to spell an end to his account. But I haven't been able to figure out what he's trying to do here. I think he's under the impression that if he can somehow humiliate me in front of other editors, then other editors will pay me no heed when making decisions. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 02:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Responding at RfPP

Hello. When responding to requests for page protection, make sure that you use {{RFPP}} (e.g. {{RFPP|s|3 days}} to say that you've semi-protected for three days) in your response, otherwise Cyberbot I (the bot that clerks RfPP) won't realize that you answered the request. The template documentation includes all the possible responses with the template. —MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, MRD2014. I just became an administrator a few months ago and am new to RFPP. I will study the template. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:56, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Who?

...writes up local Jewish histories on Wikipedia? I ran into El Ghriba synagogue, which was in pretty bad shape, and found that the history of the Jews on Djerba is fascinating. One of the things I just noted here is that after 1967 many of the local Jews left. One of the sources I cited has 1360 Jews in all of Tunisia, a thousand of which on Djerba (and Haaretz confirms this), so those must be post-1967 numbers, but unfortunately History of the Jews in Tunisia doesn't have much to say about 1967, and neither does Djerba#History_of_Djerba's_Jewish_community. Do you have experts among your talk page visitors? Drmies (talk) 17:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Drmies. In all honesty, I am not aware of who the truly productive editors on Jewish topics are. I have edited some articles on Jewish topics on my own but it is probably far less than 5% of my work here. I worked on another North African synagogue article about two years ago, Ben Ezra Synagogue, but I cannot remember what brought the topic to my attention, other than the fact Debra and I visited there fleetingly on our honeymoon 36 years ago. Or was it another Cairo synagogue?
I never wanted to be seen as a "Jewish oriented editor" and like being a generalist so have not cultivated those relationships. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful.
The mass departure of the formerly large Jewish communities of almost every Muslim country in the last 70 years is a very sad and very interesting story that is largely out of the consciousness of most non-Jewish westerners. I have read about it quite a bit and our little synagogue in the Napa Valley has members who are Jewish refugees from Morocco, Turkey and Iran. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Cullen. You know I'm not trying to pigeonhole you, but you know more than I do in general, certainly when it comes to Jewish history and tradition. In high school we studied all forty or so Protestant denominations in the motherland, but Judaism wasn't part of the curriculum, I think. I'd like to go see that island--and Cairo! So the diaspora continues, doesn't it. Thanks Cullen; I hope you and yours are well. Please give my regards to Deb. I hope someone who runs into this post and knows their stuff will get interested in these articles. Drmies (talk) 16:43, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Egypt was wonderful, Drmies. In addition to Cairo, we visited the Valley of the Kings, Luxor, Karnak and Abu Simbel. We also toured Israel and Ireland. We returned home the day before Anwar Sadat was assassinated. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:27, 8 December 2017 (UTC)]

Mail

Hello, Cullen328. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--MelanieN (talk) 18:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

  • Why does he get mail and I don't? He's already got a dog! Drmies (talk) 18:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)


Mail is on the way
Awww, don't feel bad, Drmies. I love you too. Here's some mail for you. MelanieN (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuullshit, all I got was some spam from the Toyota dealer... :-( Drmies (talk) 23:22, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
It takes a while when it is delivered by a cartoon fireman on foot. --MelanieN (talk) 23:24, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Ha, you're right. Drmies (talk) 23:28, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
This might be anticlimactic, but I received and responded to MelanieN's email. Thanks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:01, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
What country has firemen that look like that? Natureium (talk) 15:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
I wondered that too. The uniform is vaguely British, but the helmet looks like something out ancient history. Sparta, maybe? --MelanieN (talk) 16:48, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
He looks like a character from a 30 year old video game to me. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:29, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
That helmet is far more recent than ancient Sparta. More like WW2. See for example these Soviet & nazi designs. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Now that it's been said, I can see it as a helmet, but I thought it was a floppy cloth hat and a headlamp around his waist. I wouldn't have known it was a fireman if it weren't for the filename. Natureium (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
It seems likely to be a Phrygian cap, variously associated with Mithras, freedom, numerous ancient and some modern nations, revolutionary republicanism, the U.S. Senate and other things. There is probably fertile ground for a conspiracy theory in there somewhere. Some ancient Phrygian caps -- or headgear inspired by them -- were metal rather than fabric, and therefore capable of protecting our eager fireman from falling objects. MPS1992 (talk) 00:53, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello

Can you teach me how to create myself as a bot so I can deliver them a newsletter like event and tip of the day also some good jokes. If you approve that, that will be great! TheDeliveryGuy (talk) 08:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

A detailed video tutorial can be found here, including a demonstration of some of the pros and cons. nagualdesign 08:37, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
didn’t help me though and no movie links TheDeliveryGuy (talk) 09:11, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Oh dear! Here's your tip for the day from me to you: If your sole contribution to Wikipedia is to say you want to 'create yourself as a bot' so that you can deliver 'some good jokes' then somebody replies with a bit of whimsy, it's not the End of the World. Also, lay off the petty vandalism. nagualdesign 10:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Blue Sky (artist)

Hi Jim. You were a big help with Red Thunder Cloud, so I'm wondering if you'd take a peak Blue Sky (artist). It's only supported by one source (which seems a bit iffy) and reads more like personal profile than an encycopedic article. I Googled the name, but all I found is primary stuff or other trivial type mentions. Article as been around since 2006, remained unsourced until this 2016 edit, but otherwise has stayed the same. If better sourcing cannot be found to support even a trimmed down version of the article, then I think that maybe a redirect to Tunnelvision would be OK as an alternative to deletion. The problem is though the notability of that article is also a bit iffy. Anyway, just looking for some other opinions on this. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Marchjuly. Here are some possible sources for either or both articles, of varying degrees of reliability and usefulness:
  • Art Voices/South contains the following snippet: "Although Blue Sky is best known for his mural Tunnelvision (1975) painted on the Federal Land Bank Building in Columbia, he has produced a collection of recent oils and acrylics which are representative of the "true realism" that he freely employs in his illusionary murals. "Nights," an exciting and entertaining exhibition , was housed in the Columbia Museum of Art and Science, from November through January. At the museum gallery visitors were introduced to the artist by viewing a ..."
I hope that this helps. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:27, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a peek Jim. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:51, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Canvassing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niazi Express?

Dear Cullen328, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niazi Express, editor Ammarpad feels that I have been canvassing, as I posted at the WikiProject Buses [2]. I had been previously told that WikiProjects are a place to ask interested editors to have a look and so I posted at the Buses WikiProject. I mentioned in the AfD that I will be posting there. If possible, could you please have a look at the AfD and let me know if what I did counts as canvassing? Thank you--DreamLinker (talk) 09:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, DreamLinker. In my opinion, you did not canvass, and I have commented at the AfD debate. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help Cullen328.--DreamLinker (talk) 03:24, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Aydin Aghdashloo

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aydin Aghdashloo. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cullen328!

File:Worms in a Can.jpg
An hors d'oeuvre, perhaps?

I think you can probably delete User_talk:32.218.36.178 per that. The IP geolocates to a different continent. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 06:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, The Quixotic Potato. Please take this up with Kintetsubuffalo. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:48, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Haha! What a wonderful idea. </sarcasm> nagualdesign 08:11, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
If I thought it would be productive, I would try to figure this out. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:20, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I think this was a decent solution. Have a nice day! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 08:37, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Well if you ever manage to figure it out, do let me know. nagualdesign 08:52, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Ainundil

Please could you take a looksee at this discussion. In the beginning I thought it was a straightforward case of tendentious editing, then because it's not my area of expertise I backed off a little and asked others to comment.[1][2] Since no help has been immediately forthcoming I decided to continue with my own investigating and now I feel even more sure that I'm correct. Unfortunately I'm worried I might say or do something I shouldn't and end up landing myself in hot water, and I could of course be completely wrong about this, so I thought I'd better pass the baton to you instead. I hope you don't mind. Regards, nagualdesign 03:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, nagualdesign. My recommendation is to keep watching these articles and reverting any obvious nonsense. Keep a page of diffs documenting the problems. Do not try to discover this person's real world identity. The issue here is the quality (or lack thereof) of their contributions to the encyclopedia . Many Wikiprojects are inactive and not very helpful in such situations. You can ping editors who have made recent productive contributions to these articles, drawing their attention to article talk page discussions. If the situation deteriorates, be prepared to make a report to WP:ANI, and notify me as well. Thanks for your work on this. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Repinging nagualdesign due to my typo. (I have a new phone). Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:38, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the advice, Jim. I'll revert the latest swathe of edits and alert previous contributors to those articles about the discussion. I'm sure they'll know more about oceanography than I do. And don't worry, I never had any intention of trying to 'out' anybody, I only meant that since the user claimed to be a "Geoloigist Profesor in the Univeristy" then they might wish to either produce their credentials or pipe down, but fair point, I won't even mention that again. ~Joe A.K.A. nagualdesign 06:09, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you know that the discussion at Ainundil's talk page is now heading in the right direction. Thank you again for your advice, and feel free to chip in or help to oversee proceedings. Regards, nagualdesign 06:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

In the end he volunteered to identify himself. It turns out that he's a PhD student and not a university professor. The good news is that he's posted a question on that website (scroll to the bottom of the page to read it) so despite the hyperbole - "wikipedia editors are about to burn me in a public square" - we might get a solid answer from scientific professionals. nagualdesign 16:33, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328/Archive_47&oldid=1078470713"