Archives

Archive 1

Hello. I received a notification that an article I recently edited, on the town of Greenwich, CT, represents a conflict of interest "because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article." However, I neither am the town of Greenwich, nor do I work for the town of Greenwich, nor do I officially represent the town of Greenwich in any way -- and I really can't think of any reason Wikipedia would think that any of these apply to me. Granted, the office I work in happens to be in the town of Greenwich. Is this supposed to be enough to imply a conflict of interest? That seems a little absurd to me. Does that mean that none of the people who work in New York City can edit the article on NYC? If those are the rules, I'll abide by them, but it seems to me that someone just said "his IP address is from Greenwich, therefore he works for Greenwich," which seems a ridiculous assumption to make. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.51.145.131 (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@65.51.145.131: Hi, the comments you're referring to are from 2017, which was five years ago. My memory isn't good enough to remember why the COI was applied outside of visiting the edits you made, which are reflective of promotional material (see WP:PROMO). I might have been using Huggle, which is a tool that helps automate some edits and allows for greater reach in terms of unconstructive edits & providing warning messages (like what you received) on user talk pages. My guess, though I haven't used Huggle in quite some time, is that it might have ID'ed your IP address, and that combined with the content you added led me to add the COI message on your talk page. I did notice this, on a different talk page:

Hello. This is a public computer in a hotel. I suspect the person you intended your message for is long gone. Good luck on catching the vandal. (Do you guys actually catch vandals, or just get rid of the vandalism? Nevermind, I guess I won't be around to read your response! Good luck, though!)

If it's a public computer, that could have contributed to the message you received -- is this a shared IP address? If you're thinking that you specifically were unfairly targeted, it might actually just be this IP address. Just some thoughts! ɯɐɔ 💬 20:09, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, just to let you know a wrote what you asked of another user. Perhaps you could give your thoughts before a change is met. Wiki Wars are not fun; thank you for this suggestion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123HelloBozo456 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for socking. Doug Weller talk 06:55, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cam,

I hope you are well in the Chicago climate. I have noticed our disagreements over wha may or may not be "vandalism" over a certain Wikipedia page. I do see that some of the syntax could be outside the realm of confided speech, but I would like to come to a compromise. Let me edit the page just by adding the names of two associates and all will be well.

Signed, ≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wizbot (talk • contribs) 06:49, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cam, this one is probably an LTA, dunno who though Mako001 (C)  (T)  07:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mako001: -- 99% sure it's a sockpuppet of User:Nahsoko and Special:Contributions/2603:8000:BD40:5B00:604B:E239:6379:1E9C; could be an LTA eventually but honestly not expecting much to come out of it lol. ɯɐɔ 💬 07:24, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I initially removed the CU request from the SPI, since it didn't seem necessary, as the behavioural evidence would've been sufficient to block as confirmed by behavioural evidence. I then took the look at their above, and decided to re-request CU, as the comments seemed like they weren't new, having the form of the comments of an experienced LTA. I hope this was OK, as I have had some experience with unnecessarily requesting CU myself (fortunately, CU's are quite a patient bunch). Just a tip for the future though, some of your reverts on that page could've landed you in trouble, as some were right on the edge of the 3RR exemptions. One thing that would really be unpleasant would be being taken to AN3 by a vandal. One strategy I use when dealing with such cases, where it is (relatively subtle) vandalism and the account has made no other edits, to try the following steps: Revert them and warn clearly; if they revert without explanation, go directly to a level 4 warning; if they revert again, leave the edit as is, and report them, then revert after the block. This strategy is similar to WP:BRI. Often, after an AIV report, you will find that you don't need to revert again, as other editors notice the report, hit the "contribs" button and keep them reverted until they are blocked (I've had this happen a few times now). I hope that this wasn't too long, but I had a few things I felt I needed to say here, so I hope you don't mind the length. Keep up the good work, and if it is blatant vandalism, just remember the 'other' revert rule, the ♾RR. Mako001 (C)  (T)  13:44, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your query on the Assange article. I forgot to ping you so thought I'd just drop a message just in case you don't have the article in your watch list (I assume you do). Cheers. – ².O.^Boxing 21:50, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Squared.Circle.Boxing: Hey, I saw! I've rarely used footnotes myself, but I saw it used on Juno's page a while back and liked the application. Thanks for consensus-building! ɯɐɔ 💬 05:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Long Articles, 4th Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Thisisnotcam for copyediting 2 long articles during the GOCE March 2022 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 20:31, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Old Articles, 3rd Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Thisisnotcam for copyediting 5 old articles during the GOCE March 2022 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 20:31, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Thisisnotcam for copy edits totaling over 20,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE March 2022 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 20:31, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thisisnotcam. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:Thisisnotcam/sandbox, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Akevsharma was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jaeah Lee and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Akevsharma (talk) 15:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thisisnotcam! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Akevsharma (talk) 15:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Julia Carrie Wong, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. MaxnaCarta (talk) 01:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm feeeling pretty conflicted about this message, considering the article has numerous reliable, independent sources, as well as is of a notable journalist of interest to multiple WikiProjects (including Journalism, Women in Red, and Women Do News). Obviously some of her work is cited as examples to back up her reporting that I mentioned, but there are numerous secondary sources that establish notability and credibility for her work. 10 out of the 19 sources are secondary and include her as a subject, with the rest used to establish her body of work.

Would you mind giving me a specific example of what you're looking for in terms of additional things to establish her notability, or reasons why she doesn't pass any or most of the benchmarks for WP:NOTABLE or WP:BLP? Otherwise, I'm inclined to move this back into the mainspace, especially considering the page was already reviewed after I published it. If your issue is with the tone of the article (that it is too "resume-like") and not the notability of the subject, then I'd recommend reverting your edit and tagging it instead. ɯɐɔ 💬 20:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I disagree with you on the notability of the draft, I still appreciate your work at GOCE and recent changes patrol. No need to reply to this further, but if I was a bit confrontational apologies, I altered my comment a bit. Many thanks and have a nice day! VickKiang (talk) 02:51, 14 October 2022 (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.

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) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jaeah Lee, 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 Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs 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.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 20:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thisisnotcam. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sallie M. Moses, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thisisnotcam. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Neema Roshania Patel, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Daily Campus is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Daily Campus 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 until the discussion has finished.

Chances last a finite time (talk) 14:00, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Thisisnotcam for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE July 2023 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Dhtwiki (talk) 20:48, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thisisnotcam. Thank you for your work on Mandy Jenkins. User:Skynxnex, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice article. Thanks for writing it.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Skynxnex}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Skynxnex (talk) 13:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Skynxnex: — thanks for the kind words, I appreciate it! Writing the article made me wish I could have met her in real life. Glad you found value from it! ɯɐɔ 💬 18:57, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thisisnotcam. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Henry Fuhrmann, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]