User talk:Seraphimblade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23


Please do be nice.

Please read before posting[edit]

  • Post all new sections under a new header at the bottom of this page, not at random. If you make it clear you ignored these instructions by placing it elsewhere, I am likely to ignore your request in turn.
  • If you leave me a message here, I will respond to it here, as fragmented discussions are confusing. I may or may not leave you a notice that I've responded on your talk page. If you specifically request that I do (or do not) give you such a notice when I respond, I'll honor that request. If I contact you on your talk page, I will watchlist it so that I can respond there. If you'd like to leave me a notice when you respond (a ping will also suffice), it would be appreciated, and you'll probably receive a faster followup.
  • No lulztxtspk or emojis on my talk page, please. "You" is spelled "you", "though" is spelled "though", "because" is spelled "because", "people" is spelled "people", and so on. There is no character limit on Wikipedia comments, so there is no need whatsoever for ad-hoc abbreviating. If you don't even take yourself seriously, don't expect me to take you seriously either.
  • If you are an admin here to ask me about someone I blocked for vandalism or spamming/advertising, they've agreed to stop it, and you believe they intend to edit productively, go ahead and unblock them. If you still want my opinion please feel free to ask, but there's no obligation. For more complex cases I would appreciate a heads-up, but please go ahead with your best judgment if I don't seem to be online. I would appreciate it if you'd let me know after you do.
  • If you are here to discuss edits made to an article, please use the article talk page, not this talk page, to discuss them. If I made the edit and the question is specifically directed at me, you are welcome to ping me.
  • If you email me a question or request, and do not indicate why the matter is sensitive and must be handled privately (and such is not immediately obvious), I may ignore it or respond on your talk page rather than by return email. Talk pages are open to other editors to read, and so are the preferred method of communication for matters involving Wikipedia. If the matter you are speaking to me about is Wikipedia-related and would not violate anyone's privacy by being posted publicly, please use my talk page instead of email. This does not, of course, apply to editors who are blocked from editing, though I still may respond on your talk page rather than by return email.
  • If you are here to ask a question regarding deletion of any kind, please read this before asking, and ask only if you need further clarification or still disagree after reading. If you ask a question answered there, I'll just refer you to it anyway.
  • While I will generally leave any personal attacks or uncivil comments you may make about me here, that does not mean that I find them acceptable, nor that I will not seek action against attacks that are severe or persistent.
  • I reserve the right to remove, revert, or immediately archive any material on this page, but will do so only in extreme circumstances, generally that of personal attacks or outing attempts against others. I will only revision delete material on this page in accordance with the revision deletion policy, and will clearly denote the reason why.

Deletion of article about TDO Book[edit]

I'm a longtime editor in Spanish Wikipedia but this days I created my first article in english edition because I'm enrolled at the #everybookitsreader campaign for writing and enriching article about books (fiction and non-fiction). The article about de book "The discipline of organizing" has been flagged as promotional. But it's not the case, TDO Book is a well-known notable work that deserves a Wikipedia article. It's used for more than ten year in many Information Schools all over the world, and has been published and reissued by MIT Press, Berkeley University, O'Reilly and other recognised publishers. Its author Robert J. Glushko has an stable article in Wikipedia and I was enriching content about its more spread, and also contested, work. The article was newtral and with references to reviews, linking to translations and also its recent innovative version for kids. Let's talk, I'm sure we can improve together Wikipedia. Tsaorin (talk) 08:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tsaorin, as you have been involved in writing promotional material, please first clarify if you are being paid or otherwise compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 11:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I'm not a paid editor. I use this textbook every semester and due to the recent release of a very innovative version for kids, I realize that the link to the book in the author's article didn't redirect to an own article. I've to elaborate a non promotional and objetive text, including reviews negative and positive, because other academics have concerns with the main proposal of the books. I'm editor of Wikipedia in spanish for more than ten years, and evangelist of peer collaboration, open content and Wikidata. Tsaorin (talk) 12:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just looking at the lead paragraph of the opening text, I see: is a seminal work, serving as a foundational manual, it provides comprehensive guidance, offering invaluable, It is well known, and the rest of the article goes on and on with puffery like that. Leave out the adjectives ("seminal", "foundational", "comprehensive", "invaluable", everything like that). If you think that constitutes "non promotional and objetive [sic] text", I would encourage you to review our policy on writing neutrally. The frequent use of needless puff adjectives is not neutral writing. Stick to facts confirmed by reliable and, importantly, independent sources, and present them in an entirely neutral tone; do not in any way "talk up" the article's subject. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in fact is a "seminal work" in the Information Science field, and also a contended text, because of its proposal of a "organizing discipline" as umbrella for LIS corpus of practice, reserach and knowledge. It's "comprehensive", becasue ir's not an opusculous or a breif reflection. It has more than 600 pages, and detailed references and cross-domain examples. I think you have to applied better the Goof faith collaboration spirit and suggest way of improving adjectives you don't think enoguh neutral, instead of deleting. It's better to foster better article writing than delete withou any conversation. It's more polite, and also better for Wikipedia as a project.
Why don't we try to write an article that fits better with your concerns? It's a notable work that deserve be at Wikipedia. Let's write the right content, not throw out editors. Tsaorin (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that you can write an appropriate article on it, you can certainly give that a go. I might encourage you to use the draft and articles for creation process, rather than trying to get it right in mainspace from the first. You will need to find more reliable and independent reference material for it; the vast majority of what was in what you wrote was "sourced" to the work itself and seemed to be what you think about it, which is original research and is disallowed. The article cannot contain any of your thoughts or observations on the subject. Rather, it should summarize facts verified by reliable, independent sources, and do so in an entirely neutral tone, just stating the facts without any editorializing or "talking up". If there is not a substantial amount of reliable and independent reference material about this subject, it is not notable and so it would not be a suitable subject of an article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've rewriten de article. Could you take a look to it in my user sandbox? User:Tsaorin/TDO_Book_revised. I've been avoid superlative adjetives and tried to be informative. I expect your feedback to put it in the main namespace, if you consider I've resolved the issues with the first version. If all end well, then I'll do also the spanish version. Tsaorin (talk) 19:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It still seems to be mainly your own thoughts on the subject, and has very few citations, which would be prohibited original research. Each fact in an article needs to come from a reliable published source; absolutely nothing should be what you think about it. If the sources you've cited are the best ones available about it, it may not be notable. Or it might be; a couple of full-length reviews isn't terrible sourcing, but it's pretty marginal. But regardless, stick to what the sources verify, and leave out what you think is important about it or the like. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see it's hard to convince you. Please, consider the content of the article as informative, because a textbook talks by itself. The article revised has similar standards that others in the category or . You can't be serious about it isn´t notable, having been awared as book of the year by ASIST. In my opinion you are benn too strict with this article. Let it be published and it will be improved by the community. Tsaorin (talk) 09:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, I have extended the references and cites. Tsaorin (talk) 09:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's looking a fair bit better. Still some issues with what looks like editorializing/commentary, but I certainly would not delete that version under G11. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 62[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 62, March – April 2024

  • IEEE and Haaretz now available
  • Let's Connect Clinics about The Wikipedia Library
  • Spotlight and Wikipedia Library tips

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naenae SC[edit]

Hello Seraphimblade,

How are you, I just wanted to let you know that I think there may be some confusion on this article as another admin, That Tired Tarantula, is helping me out, if necessary, please keep in contact with me.

I appretiate your help,

Loganmascarenhas Loganmascarenhas (talk) 13:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'd just like to let you know that I'm not an admin, but I'm still happy to help out. That Tired TarantulaBurrow 13:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, i did not realize that, I apologize for any confusion.
Loganmascarenhas Loganmascarenhas (talk) 13:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but you'll have to be a little clearer; I don't understand what you mean. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, for the confusion, please disregard the former messages. Loganmascarenhas (talk) 13:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Article on the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies and accusations of being paid[edit]

Hi, I saw that you reverted my deletion of the following message on the wikipedia page of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies: This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. (November 2023)

I am one of the main contributors to this page. And I've been accused in the past of being paid for my contributions. So I think this warning message on undisclosed payments was prompted by my edits. However, I can assure you that I am not doing this for anyone else but myself, and that I am not paid to do so or otherwise instructed. In fact, I have no ties to this Institute apart from being a fan. So I'd appreciate starting a discussion on this, and eventually resolving this matter. Thank you User talk:Robinsonodora 23 April 2024 (UTC)

At the top of this page is a section entitled "Please read before posting". Had you done that, you would have found two things in it. The first states: Post all new sections under a new header at the bottom of this page, not at random. If you make it clear you ignored these instructions by placing it elsewhere, I am likely to ignore your request in turn. The second is: If you are here to discuss edits made to an article, please use the article talk page, not this talk page, to discuss them. If I made the edit and the question is specifically directed at me, you are welcome to ping me. Please actually read those things this time. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SIERRA ODC Private Limited[edit]

FYI. Wikishovel (talk) 11:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The McDonough County Voice[edit]

I'm curious of your A7 deletion of The McDonough County Voice. As far as I can tell it was a long-standing article and it is now the sole Gannett daily newspaper missing an article. There seems to be a good amount of mentions of it, both on Google and Newspapers.com. I don't think A7 could be appropriately considered as applying to a prominent-looking newspaper like that. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BeanieFan11, the deleted article contained the single unsourced statement "The McDonough County Voice is owned by Gannett", so indeed made no assertion of significance. Of course if you think you have found enough material to write an article, no problem if you do that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024[edit]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Barkley Marathons on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail[edit]

Hello, Seraphimblade. 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.PageScribe (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PageScribe, as stated both above in the "Please read before posting" section and in the notice you would have seen before writing me that email, I do not discuss issues like that by email. If you would like to discuss the matter you raised, please discuss it here. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of states with limited recognition on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:New York City on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Draft: The Movie Institute[edit]

I did not even have time to contest the deletion flag before the article was deleted. I thoroughly researched before writing a single word by reviewing more than 20 other nonprofit writeups on Wikipedia to see what kind of content they covered. Most of the nonprofits I reviewed -- some of which were Texas-based, and others were nationwide -- spoke about the purpose of their organization, what kind of program(s) they run, how they are funded (what they do with the money they receive), and who governs their organization. Some had historical information that spoke to how they came to be, where they had been located, etc. One -- the Susan G Komen Foundation -- also had a couple of sections dedicated to scandals that had taken place in their past. After taking care to stick within similar guidelines of what was published for these nonprofits, I spent many hours writing and re-writing factual content about the 24 years The Movie Institute has existed.

You did not give me an opportunity to understand what you found "promotional" or to make adjustments to the content. This is an unfounded bias and, frankly, is discriminatory coming from volunteers of a nonprofit. I have always thought poorly of educators who would not allow students to cite content from Wikipedia, but I now understand their motivation. WorknMomma (talk) 01:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WorknMomma, a G11 deletion is not a case of "adjustments", but rather that an entire thing is promotional and would need essentially a fundamental rewrite. Just at the beginning of the article, there's completely inappropriate material like "mission", "vision", slogans, and so on—those are marketese, and almost never appropriate to include in an article. From there, again just as a sampling, Having discovered their method of training was effective in training young people in life and leadership skills (no reference for that, puffery), Video production projects provide MI alumni who want to work in the movie industry with hands-on experience working alongside mentors. MI supports this through corporate video production and team-building events. (brochure style stuff), The Movie Institute is currently working on or planning for... (unless reliable and independent sources have treated those plans as somehow significant, doesn't belong in an article), and similar "About Us" type material from there. If you are used to writing marketing material, you'd have to learn a very different neutral writing style for Wikipedia, as we do not permit any kind of "copy", PR, or "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Y'all might want to do a review of multiple other nonprofits then, as what I submitted was based on what was already published from other nonprofits. One that I reviewed was literally organized by the name of each of their campaigns. I'll agree that the Vision should be deleted, but the Mission was literally required as part of the nonprofit charter filing with the State of Texas so was part of that official document. I didn't cite it because I couldn't link to it, but it certainly seemed relevant.
Regarding the "puffery" -- if I had included metrics to back up that statement, would that have been puffery as well? I only saw outcomes spelled out on two nonprofit Wikipedia pages. One was a healthcare related one that spoke to research (difficult to tie research discoveries to dollars), and the other was related to DIFF (a film festival) and listed the films that won in each year. From a journalistic perspective, I get it that you want every sentence to be verifiable, but without drawing the conclusion on how a youth development organization helps a person beyond their youth... what is the point in covering it at all?!? Or, is that your point? It's highly subjective.
Seeing that I am a new writer on the platform and taking a drastic action like deleting every single word written and every citation -- those were from the Dallas Morning News, WFAA, and other legitimate news outlets -- was really disrespectful and revealing about what you think of writers attempting to contribute anything at all. I am personally not concerned about whether the nonprofit I support is on this platform. However, our founder has been donating to Wikipedia for years and sees it as an important place for information. I get it you're not concerned with any kind of sales-ish content, but taking the action the way you did has disillusioned someone who has been a dedicated user and donor of this platform. You could have engaged in a productive dialogue with me but elected not to do so.
You asked about what kind of content I'm used to writing. I'm used to running business units that provide global services to clients across the world. I have input to content that goes into service descriptions, proposals, marketing campaigns, websites, presentations, RFPs, job descriptions, employee reviews, press releases, etc. It's my job to be flexible and open. I expect the same of people who work with and for me. I'm not a full-time writer. I am a volunteer, and writing this just seemed like a good way I could support the organization for all it does in our community. WorknMomma (talk) 02:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:International Churches of Christ on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hunter Biden on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]