Jump to content

User talk:Chris troutman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AcademeEditorial (talk | contribs) at 21:18, 12 July 2017 (→Query). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Committed identity: 53034b2749273e66509e3f88fd103b4882f16345902df017ef05f53fcdaa37eb69268ba4777ee04b32c2a6d6fc308063da7f51adb04a5addd52649c095c47659 is grammatical article for the hash function SHA-512 commitment to this user's real-life identity.
If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 17:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

—Wehwalt, July 30, 2014.
AfC submissions
Random submission
2+ months
1,758 pending submissions
Purge to update
Today's Events

January 12, 2025

Birthday
Amire80
Adminship Anniversary
none
First Edit Day
AryKun, Lollipoplollipoplollipop, PickleG13
Other events:
Depiction of WMF destroying Wikipedia with Visual Editor and flow.

4th GA Cup - Wrap Up

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016 GA Cup - Wrap Up

Hello, GA Cup competitors!

Saturday, April 1 concluded the 2016-2017 GA Cup. 64 reviews were completed by our finalists. Although the backlog increased by 42 over the reviewing period instead of declining, the increase suggests that the contest is encouraging editors to nominate articles for review.

Congratulations to Shearonink, who is the winner of the Cup, finishing with 672 points! Once again, just as in last round, this is more than the point totals for all the other competitors combined! It was a close race for second place between Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, who achieved 164 points, and Sturmvogel_66, who earned 150. Though Sturmvogel_66 reviewed one more article than Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga managed to earn 14 points more due to reviewing older articles. Our two wildcard competitors, Kees08 and Chris troutman, came in fourth and fifth, respectively.

There were some bumps in the competition this time: The sign-up deadline and the first round were both extended due to fewer competitors signing up then was planned for. And there were delays in tallying points and getting out the newsletter. The judges apologize for this latter difficulty. Lastly, mid-way through the competition we bid farewell to Zwerg Nase, who stepped down from their position as judge due to other commitments. Information about the Final can be found here.

Thank you to all of our competitors, and congrats to our winners!

Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, and MrWooHoo.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

Username

thanks for stopping by. If you look another user designed a neat template for my page that rotates cool Ghostbusters quotes. Im not around much, but may be back, there are a few things from the old days that nees tidyed up. Anyway, happy editing. ~~

How to help with counter vandalism

Still a bit saddened by your response - gave my response on the new pages page. Is this the right page for the counter vandalism? Counter Vandalism Academy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saraht723 (talk • contribs) 03:20, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also I googled "How to help with wikipedia" and this is the first result: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_help and clearly I messed up because I went and just started doing the stuff there (1. create an account, 2. create articles). So would love some advice on how to start.) Thanks! Saraht723 (talk) 03:29, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Saraht723: You inability to read WP:YFA (linked right there below the article wizard) is proof of either your incompetence or your dishonesty. I've proposed removing that suggestion from the page so as not to confuse new editors. You're not yet qualified to signup for the Countervandalism Academy. (It says on that page you must have "contributed at least 200 edits to MAINSPACE" and you're not there, yet.) However, there are many useful tasks found both at Wikipedia:Maintenance and Wikipedia:Contribution Team/Backlogs. Only administrators can perform the "administrative" actions but everything else (and there's a lot) can be done by new editors. You can interact with editors other than me, see how other articles have been written, understand what Wikipedia identifies as problems, and increase your own edit count. Given a few months of regular editing ought to help you understand this community, qualify to be a student at WP:CVUA, and then better enable you to write acceptable articles. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

19:04:11, 11 June 2017 review of submission by 2601:143:8000:6E37:402C:DA87:4350:1E0B



Hi Chris My comments are related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Keykhosrou_Kesh%C3%A2varz. I am in the process of documenting why Mr. Kaikhosrow (keykhosrow) Keshavarz's contribution to the discussion of the Zoroastrian faith is unique and quite controversial. Unfortunately his book 'Mazda is not God but the creation of existence' has not been translated into English therefore I am preparing some excerpts from his book and a background to show that his contribution is unique and part of the general discussion in the Zoroastrian community of what the true teachings of Zoroaster is. I an addition Mr. Kaikhosrow Keshavarz was the first to author the Dari language, a dying none written language spoken exclusively by Zoroastrian's in Iran and the few dialects. These studies were first published in a few magazines as noted in the Wiki page.

I hope I can convince you that Wikipedia users, specially Zoroastrians, parties interested in theology, philosophy, and history, will benefit from this discussion.

I need some time to do the documentation please let me know how long it will be before the page is purged.

Thanks Farhad Keshavarz Farhadekeshavarz@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:143:8000:6e37:402c:da87:4350:1e0b (talk • contribs) 15:04, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It may seem counter-intuitive to you, but none of your interest in Keykhosrow Keshâvarz matters on Wikipedia. It does not matter that you think anyone wants to read about him. I cannot, therefore, be convinced. Anyone, including you or Kurt Greussing, can improve the existing draft and re-submit it. If no one else edits that draft, it will be deleted on September 23rd. Keykhosrow Keshâvarz would have to meet either our requirement for biographies or be considered generally notable. Such is not the case. If you are related to the subject, then you have a conflict of interest and should bear that in mind. You may work on a draft and submit it even if you're biased but you should be open about your bias. What I recommend is that you take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Zoroastrianism. You are not yet competent to rate articles but you could find other articles that need improvement and participate with other editors also interested in Zoroastrianism. Learning about how Wikipedia works would help you out in the long term. Generally speaking, Wikipedia has too many articles already and we should prioritize improving the articles we have (or deleting them) rather than writing new ones. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Germany

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

... for the barnstar. I appreciate it doubly because there have been so many times that I have made similar mistakes like missing double words that are so obvious. Two sets of eyes are always better.

Ira

Ira Leviton (talk) 01:32, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Hey, sorry about that. I just wanted attention, not agreement. Thanks. New account 2 (talk) 00:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bajrak of Oštrozub

I did follow WP:BEFORE.

  • The article has been already PRODed but another editor opposed speedy deletion stating "...some more references (preferably in English) would be a very good idea, but article should not be deleted without discussion".
  • I also checked interlanguage links and the only link is zero sources Albanian wiki article of one sentence about generic term of bajrak which already has an article on en.wiki.
  • I also searched for sources and found out that the topic in question has zero hits at GBS and 17 hits on simple Google search, all of them being mirrors of this wikipedia article. Albanian language version of name has two GBS hits, which are both passing mentions.
  • I checked the article talkpage and noticed that an editor already expressed their concerns about the notability of this topic and that their concerns have not been addressed. Having in mind that another editor has already prodded it, it made sense to initiate AfD.

The topic of this article is not about a populated place which is presumably notable by WP:NGEO. It is about smallest Ottoman administrative unit consisting of several villages within Ottoman borderland. I myself created numerous articles about Ottoman Sanjaks. I think nobody created more articles about sanjaks than me. Unfortunately, individual bajraks obviously do not have significant coverage in RS.

To conclude: this is a matter of WP:GNG. No significant coverage - no suitability for a standalone article. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:37, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Antidiskriminator: I disagree. The article seems to be about a place called Ostrozub which is a Bajrak, not "about smallest Ottoman administrative unit consisting of several villages within Ottoman borderland". There are books that mention Oštrozub (even if not in English) that pre-date Wikipedia so I think someone could buy the claim of GNG. (I don't speak this language; maybe you do.) If an editor like me has doubts about it then I think you might do a better job of explaining this apparent evidence. Chris Troutman (talk) 11:26, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your interest in this AfD. I agree that I could do a better job of explaining this apparent evidence and I will move this discussion at AfD discussion page when we conclude it, hopefully soon. I think you are wrong when you say: The article seems to be about a place called Ostrozub which is a Bajrak. Please read what article itself says: "Bajrak of Oštrozub was a bajrak which included about 43 villages..." Place Ostrozub is listed as only one of 43 villages of this bajrak. The article about bajrak explains that "The bajrak... was an Ottoman territorial unit, consisting of villages in mountainous frontier regions of the Balkans, from which military recruitment was based." Frontier regions of Ottoman Empire means Ottoman borderlands.
Let me explain you more about bajraks. They had great global influence, but people still do not know much about them. In the mountain regions of Ottoman Balkans lived very poor population scattered across numerous small mountain villages who lived in very poor living conditions. Those were small tribal herding communities whose life depended on sheep and goats. No big cities or towns, no gold or silver mines, no vine production, no numerous craftsman. That means no money - no tax income for the government. That is why until 19th century no country in history has ever fully included this regions within its administrative system. It was simply stupid to lose a life of a single soldier to capture this territory. The population of this region was grouped in tribes based on their family and/or territorial connection. This region was the last tribal region of Europe. Like many other empires in a similar situation during the history, the Ottomans discovered that it is much better to leave them as tax-free and to recognize their autonomous status as bajraks and to recognize their tribal leaders as legitimate. During the war, which means all the time in Balkans, the Ottomans would pay their tribal leaders to recruit members of their bajrak and to wage war for the Ottomans. Perfect strategy. The Ottomans had at disposal large army for peanuts. They tried to give up this system in the 19th century because tribesmen recruited this way were no match to modern European armies. Instead, they only compromised the Ottomans by harassing Christian population of the Ottoman Empire which was the main source of tax income for the Ottomans. The Ottoman attempts to formally disestablished bajraks and their privileges failed. On the other hand, Serbia and Austria paid them more to actually rebel against the Ottomans. Finally, their rebellion in 1912 provoked Balkan Wars that were one of the reasons that provoked the First World War and SHF. Albania and Yugoslavia repeated the same mistake, tried to formally include this tribal region and its population into their legal system and that was one of the factors of the misery they faced. Today, bajraks do not exist formally. Nor Ottoman Empire, Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, German Empire or Yugoslavia. My humble opinion is that the list is not yet closed.
To conclude. No bajrak is a populated place, including Bajrak of Oštrozub. This Bajrak has received its name against the mountain Oštrozub, just like ie Sanjak of Scutari received its name after Scutari.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:11, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Antidiskriminator: Ok. I hope you can explain that better at the AfD because it's confusing to me. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:17, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Chris, I implore you that be less negative. Also, as we are supposed to do, presume good faith. Thanks so much. New account 2 (talk) 13:54, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@New account 2: Perhaps I was hasty in my accusation; I assume bad faith because assuming good faith seldom makes sense. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, I have bad records now on my talk page and the talk page of the article. New account 2 (talk) 17:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@New account 2: There are no such things as "bad records". If you don't want messages on your own talk page you can delete them. As for the article's talk page, we have discussions all the time about articles as a method of figuring how to improve them. This is normal and nothing you should be worried about. Look at my talk page. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I always thought it was a bad thing to selectively remove messages from someone's talk page. If it's not old and archived, you are trying to hide something. The accusation will stay, I think, and if there is no explanation for it, people will always know that I was trying to canvas. Thanks. New account 2 (talk) 18:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

???

How did you make the red-linked category at the bottom of the talk page? The garmine (talk) 13:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@The garmine: You just make the link. Links are red if there's no page wherever the link points to, like creating a link for an article called This article does not exist. So you know, you want to avoid doing stuff like this because those entries show up in maintenance queues like Special:WantedCategories. The red link on this user talk page is a special exception to the rule. Don't create any new ones. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The garmine (talk) 22:25, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Sit-in movement

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sit-in movement. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 22

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

  • New and expanded research accounts
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re Jack Letts

Hi Chris, thanks for reviewing the article I created, Jack Letts.

I've removed some of the worse instances of paraphrasing, but I'm not sure where the line is between copyvio and coincidentally similar phrasing. Does more trimming need to be done?

As for the notability issue, there's not too much I can do as far as citing sources goes; most reliable news sources are already cited by the article. As a low-profile individual, Letts is certainly close to failing BLP1E, but being a suspected British Islamist is what makes him notable, and isn't really an 'event' as such. What event was it that you thought dominated Letts' media coverage?

Thanks, again, for the constructive criticism. — Quasar G. 19:52, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Quasar G.: The "one event" is his travel to Syria and subsequent capture. I'm pretty sure he'll be forgotten in 20 minutes. The news cycle creates these personalities and I think too many articles are produced from them. Were up to me, I'd forbid all BLPs on Wikipedia. We ought to have a good 20-50 year standoff from events in order to write responsibly. Anything newer than that is mere journalism but I'm sure Wikipedia would shut down if I had my way. After all, we're not writing an encyclopedia, we're an MMORPG for aspiring librarians and writers creating a platform for Jimbo to raise money. I removed the close-paraphrase banner; thanks. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wow – seriously? All BLPs? If you were an admin, I'd be scared stiff...
Do nominate it for deletion if you feel the article deserves it, but my instincts tell me it will be kept. — Quasar G. 21:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help listing articles for deletion

Hi Chris. I am having trouble getting an article listed on the articles for deletion page. I followed all the instructions, placing the appropriate template on the article page (William Urban) and listing it on the articles for deletion page[1] but for some reason on the latter it is not listing a heading. Not sure what I've done wrong but was wondering if you could help me out since you seem to know the procedure well. Thanks Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhode Island Red: Ok, I've fixed it for you. Near as I can tell, you pasted in the code for the AfD nom onto the article but you didn't subst {{afd1}} as described in WP:AFDHOWTO. I think because of that, the resulting link didn't include the pre-loaded template. There are instructions on the how-to to then subst {{afd2}} to provide that header. Substituting the template is important because otherwise you've transcluded the template, which is not what we want to do. Honestly, Twinkle makes this really easy; I recommend it. On a separate point, per WP:DEPROD, if anyone removes the PROD for any reason, do not revert them. Going to AfD (which you did) is the right step. However, William Urban arguably meets #5 of WP:NACADEMIC. You always want to be sure if you're asserting the subject isn't notable you check every possible way the subject might be notable as well as performing research per WP:BEFORE. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a mil Chris! Much appreciated. Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:59, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dertosa

I am around. Srnec (talk) 06:19, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Srnec: Ok. NPP continually digs through the backlog of new pages and if you could help us revert edits like these, that would help. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:32, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The article created by User:ASTOROT was not a duplicate of Tortosa. Indeed, it was a (poor) translation of es:Dertosa and ca:Dertosa, since the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedias cover the Roman-era history in an article under the original Latin name. I've no objection to the revert, but it wasn't an act of vandalism, just a good-faith edit by a new editor. Srnec (talk) 14:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry for the inconveniences. Dertosa is the Roman name of the current city of Tortosa. Also the present city of Tarragona was Tarraco. Regards (Saludos/salutacions)--ASTOROT (talk) 13:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

squirrel

Can you please let me leave an edit up for 5 minutes at least!! I am trying so hard to prank my sister's boyfriend. He will be so embarresed when he sees his name and research on wikepedia! Its all legit too! He's crazy and actually believes squirrel placentas are beneficial! My addendum was well written and I believe it contributes to the humor of the thread.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SquirrelDefenseSquad (talk • contribs) 15:27, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SquirrelDefenseSquad: It is not a thread and it is not funny. You're a vandal, soon to be blocked on Wikipedia. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:31, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why I didn't see this coming...I've asked for page protection and I am sorry that you've put in so much time to baby-sit the article.
Best Regards,
Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 18:51, 24 June 2017 (UTC) Barbara Page[reply]

Wanted to let you know that I'd retired

Thank you for earlier affirming interactions. See User:Leprof_7272 page for details if interested. Bonne chance. Le Prof 73.210.155.96 (talk) 16:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Dobruja

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dobruja. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for your help at article Disinformation. Good cleanup of recently added cruft. Sagecandor (talk) 03:04, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2017 July newsletter

The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Blue Sky with a White Sun

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Blue Sky with a White Sun. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Understanding

Thank you Chris, I might have to scale and tone down the editing on the China issue instead since I have something else I have in mind. Supreme Dragon (talk) 16:11, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Swaroop Sagar Lake

I have made some updates to the page, and now i am hopeful that it complies with the Wikipedia norms. Hopefully this helps. Thanks. Vishal0soni (talk) 02:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mossy Oak Mudslinger AfD

Hi, Chris - Mossy Oak Mudslinger meets N per Wikipedia:Notability_(sports)#Rodeo - he's a notorious big bad bucking hombre! Moooo, moooo 🐮 See this article. Our project team tries to stay abreast of all the rodeo, racing & various other bovine & equine related articles, but this one accidentally escaped into article space before it was patrolled. I removed the N tag and wanted you to know that the project team will be working on the copyediting, etc. Thanks for your diligence and all you do for WP. Atsme📞📧 04:49, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Atsme: I saw that article and I thought, surely we don't have an SNG covering bulls. The subject might be failing GNG so let's tag it. Of course, the one time I don't look is the one time there's an SNG. Thanks for removing the tag and letting me know. I won't make that mistake again. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

America Chavez tags

I wanted to get your opinion on the changes I made to the America Chavez article before I adjust any tags. I have added in more secondary sources and removed some of the primary sources(although some are still used). This was to address the primary sources tag obviously.

In regards to the notability tag, could you clarify some more why you believe the character is not notable? She has received significant coverage from multiple outlets, especially after her solo series was announced/came out, including from The New York Times,[2] CNN,[3] USA Today,[4] PBS,[5] Time Magazine[6], The Huffington Post[7] along with tons of others[8]. Unless the issue was simply the article didn't show the notability/coverage before some of those sources were added in.

Thank you for any kind of response. WikiVirusC (talk) 14:56, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiVirusC: I removed the tags thanks to your improvmenents. I wish you'd add the citations you provided above to the article. It think you buried the lede, so to speak. Chavez in the raft of Marvel diversity characters, which is how most readers will have heard of her. You only mention Gabby Rivera once, and she figures prominently in more than one of your sources. Her point of view informs the character. That meta story is the notability of the character. Maybe fans care about what storylines she's in. Everyone else cares about the politics. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:47, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for you response. Most of the citations I mentioned here were included in the article, with the exception of the PBS and Huffington Post one. Almost all of the article was taken from the Miss America section on her and transferred here as she has received more notability and individual coverage this year. The lead was shortly written when I split it and will be expanded in the future, as I am only just starting working on this subject. The reason Gabby Rivera was only mentioned once is she has only been writing the comic since spring of this year. The character has been around since 2011, so the majority of the information about her came from before Rivera was invovled. Rivera will be the primary point of view of the character going forward. There isn't that much information from Rivera's view out there yet as she has only released 4 issues. Once the first Volume(Issues 1-6) is out there I will be adding the summary of the story to fictional background. The diversity angle and more information about Rivera and her and her point of view of the character will be added into the publication history. Once again this was mostly splitting the information about Chavez from Ms. America article to her own, with the intention of expanding it out more. There is definitely work to be done. Thanks WikiVirusC (talk) 16:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Friends

Chris troutman, Mike V and Oshwah are all friends of one another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.138.192.249 (talk) 06:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

added Happyme22 • Dragons flight
removed Zad68

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
  • A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
  • Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coi

Hi Chris, three questions:

1. My name is Michael, Arad's manager, and therefore do not edit his articles. Is it ok if I make submission through WP:AFC?

2. Does the following notability specifics seem fair as to be incorporated within the draft:

Subject meets notability in following sections:

WP:GNG

Non trivial and objective coverage by reliable sources such as: ynet.com, Jewish Week, All About Jazz (article) and Israel Times.

WP:MUSICBIO (Although single section notability is sufficient, Arad meets notability in 4 different sections)

Section1: Multiple Reliable Publications:

● http://m.ynet.co.il/Articles/4182867 ● https://www.allaboutjazz.com/sketches-of-imaginary-landscapes-kobi-arad-self-produced-review-by-glenn-astarita.php?width=412 ● http://jewishweek.timesofisrael.com/for-jewish-artists-a-space-of-ones-own/

Section 6: Several of Kobi Arad's projects, featured several notable musicians:

● 'Sufi Songs' Trio featuring Bob Moses (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Moses_(musician) and Cecil Mcbee (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_McBee)

Sources:

- http://www.tunedloud.com/2017/07/05/kobi-arad-ellington-upside-down-as-a-musical-portrait-of-the-jazz-titan/

- https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/community_feed/jazz_pianist_kobi_arad_a_career_overview.html

● Grammy Awards- Claes Nobel Team Participating Notable musicians: Wouter Kellerman, Brent Fischer, Robert Margouleff, Mickey Stevenson, Ganda Boys

Sources: - http://fmwebtv.com/TheForgottenPeople/ - https://article.wn.com/view/2017/01/24/Kobi_Arad_Performs_with_Members_of_Israeli_Orchestra_in_Tel_/ - https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/community_feed/jazz_pianist_kobi_arad_a_career_overview.html

Section 7:

● Arad is a world-wide authority in the Third Stream style, as he is the first and only (as of 2012) musician to earn doctorate in the field.

Sources: - Letter from Dean of New England Conservatory of Music to Kobi Arad (dating 2012): https://issuu.com/kobiarad/docs/novak_letter - https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_stream - http://m.ynet.co.il/Articles/4182867

Section 9:

Arad participted in multitude of interviews which featured panel discussions, airplay and interviews in Israeli National Radio, IBA (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Broadcasting_Authority).

Sources:

- http://www.tunedloud.com/2017/07/05/kobi-arad-ellington-upside-down-as-a-musical-portrait-of-the-jazz-titan/ - https://issuu.com/zmiralu/docs/selection (Letter from Iba editor Zmira Luzki) - https://issuu.com/acum9/docs/5_7_1_ (BMI international airplay statements) - https://issuu.com/acum9/docs/9 (BMI international airplay statements)

3. In case the requirements are fulfilled (links are alive, and you find #2 satisfactory, are you going to be willing to assist in living the draft and unsalt 'Kobi Arad' article?

Thanks :=) Ee212 (talk) 01:07, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ee212: I have no interest in helping you. You or someone on your behalf has been trying to push an article about this subject for years, in what I think is an abusive manner. In any case, only an administrator can remove the SALT prohibition so I can't overcome that even if I wanted to, which I don't. I recommend giving up on Wikipedia. You've burned too many bridges here. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I was only involved in this for a month, and I apologize if past attempts were abusive.

As his manager it is important to place him in wiki.

I understand your lack of interest to help, which is fine. However, ignoring the notability specifics I presented (both Atlantic306 and Anachronist believe it meets at least one of the categories), and continuing to consciously jeopardize future efforts may at some point be interpreted as a coi (even simply disliking the subject) in the eyes of your peers.

Thanks :=) Ee212 (talk) 20:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ee212: You claim "continuing to consciously jeopardize future efforts may at some point be interpreted as a coi (even simply disliking the subject) in the eyes of your peers" which is utter nonsense. I voted against the current conflict of interest rules because I used to be a paid editor (for WikiExperts) and I think we have a real problem with religious fanatics, fans, and partisans none of whom are being paid. But Wikipedia is concerned with moneyed interests, like you. Nobody but you cares if I choose not to volunteer my effort to help your business. You evince your issue by admitting "As his manager it is important to place him in wiki"; you're only in this for crass promotion. I'm working on writing an encyclopedia for free. Wikipedia has outlawed the former while paying lip service to the latter. And, oh by the way, you can tell from my talk page that I don't give much of a damn about my peers. I make enemies here everyday, gladly. In the immortal words of George W. Bush: "you're welcome." Chris Troutman (talk) 20:42, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chris, it does seem you don't give a d__mn about your peers / fellow humans.

In contradistinction to that, I sincerely believe in Arad's genius, and indeed do it voluntarily (I am not asking for a cent, simply because I believe his music should be shared with and recognized by the world.

If you had taken a listen to his output you would have agreed with me. Anyhow, the real conversation here, is regarding notability specifics which you ignored. Interestingly except of you other editors and an admin are encouraging this edit and submission, the admin also advised to include the notability specifics in the draft's talk page,

Thanks :=)

09:09:33, 7 July 2017 review of submission by Johnnyspangles


Hi Chris Can I ask a question about the rejection. The reason given is the the 'references do not adequately show the subject's notability' So is it the references that are a problem? If so, I'm not sure I understand why, as most are independent and verify the statement about the organisation. Others, such as the annual reports evidencing the Revenue and Income may not be independent, but do verify the amounts. Johnnyspangles (talk) 09:09, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnyspangles: Wikipedia already has an article about Keepmoat, so why are you trying to write this? Chris Troutman (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:23:27, 7 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Cececaca


I'm asking for support. I tried 3 times to post a new article/contribution, I strictly followed the instructions your collegues gave me in the online chat and I put all footnotes and references you asked for me: all references and footnotes are 1. Secondary Fontes 2. Reliable 3. Enough .... Did you click on the footnotes and references? They are not internal fontes. They al Secondary and reliable for sure. what else do I need to change?

If you need another reference, here it is another one.

http://voguediary.ru/meeting-cesare-catania-in-milan-the-modern-leonardo-da-vinci/

I could post even this limk on the new article / contribution.

Everyone are Secondary and reliable as asked.....

Kind regards.


Cececaca (talk) 14:23, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cececaca: We need reliable sources. Who is voguediary.ru? Who is luxurynewsonline.com? It all looks like PR stuff to me. Ticino Online is definitely a paid-for PR spot. Posting URLs frm lopinionista.it is probably your only reliable source and a single source isn't enough to connote notability. Unless a subject is generally notable, they might pass one of our specific guides like our criteria for artists, which Catania fails. I warn you now that if you have a conflict of interest your objectivity might be clouded by your desire to promote the subject. Acceptance of drafts only comes after proving the subject meets our criteria. Wikipedia doesn't actually want or need an article on everybody and everything and we have to draw the line somewhere. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:47, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Syria

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Syria. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 13:10:13, 8 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by TridentP2


I recently submitted an article for Company P2 of the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets. It was rejected as it was "not notable". What are the guidelines for notability? This is a unit that has produced a substantial amount of military officers, even the commander of the 2nd MEF of the USMC, and has existed as a formal training unit with the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets for 40 years. The unit has received awards from Texas A&M, is formally recognized as an organization under Texas A&M, and has its own financial accounts to conduct unit business and transaction. I do have photographic evidence as such and have also added the page recognizing the unit within Texas A&M University to the list of references on the page itself. It is also featured within 40 yearbooks for the University with unit photos, rosters, and unit awards. To reference an organization within Texas A&M that was recently approved for Wikipedia, the MSC Student Conference on National Affairs has similar standing within the University and their page has been approved. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSC_Student_Conference_on_National_Affairs)

Please let me know what more I can do to substantiate the units "notability", and how to move forward. Thank you in advance.


TridentP2 (talk) 13:10, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TridentP2: To be successful here, you need to spend more time reading and less time typing, troop. The template placed on your submission said "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time." and it included a bunch of links. I understand that text was in a colored box and new editors seem to experience cognitive dissonance and ignore it. That template, however, is our primary means of communicating with you. Our guideline for organizational notability is where you need to focus. Please recognize that you have a conflict of interest blinding your objectivity. You would like to use Wikipedia to write about your cadets, which is understandable. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we don't desire to have an article about your cadets. If we had, we'd've written it. The onus is on you to demonstrate notability. Pointing at MSC Student Conference on National Affairs is a WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS argument. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. I will keep working to post more legitimate sources. Aside from documentation showing the units affiliation with the University, what other types of sources would you recommend? I noted on SCONA because they are similar in standing, so I was asking what documentation they supplied that made them acceptable to Wikipedia's standards on notability. I understand my conflict of interest and I did take the time to read the green text, but it is my conflict of interest that is making it difficult to be unbiased when debating the units notability. Were you writing this article, what types of references would you look for/put down. Thanks for the reply, by the way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.179.78.1 (talk) 16:40, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Focus on nothing but books and newspapers; avoid anything published by the University and most anything written locally. You'd be better off inserting a sentence into Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets and then develop it there before spinning it out. Your draft is a non-starter. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

COI WikiExperts

On your user page you disclose that you have a COI in respect of the BLP Gabe Zichermann which you created and edited on behalf of WikiExperts, an organization that conducts paid editing and has been banned from editing Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure states If you are being paid for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship. If you have been paid for this contribution, please will you follow this Wikipedia policy in full. On another point: I see that there have been complaints about your behavior here under WP:Civil. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:00, 10 July 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Take it to ANI, get your boomerang. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:46, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 22:42:42, 10 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by SingoutLOUD


Clearer breakdown of notability substantiation "7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style"

Maybe I put too many references. This is the main one that establishes notability in a genre: http://web.archive.org/web/20170426184101/http://harmonizer.s3.amazonaws.com/Harmonizer_vol70_no3_mayjun2010.pdf

He has won two quartet gold medals and directed a chorus to four gold medals. He travels the world to coach groups and has been the face of the two quartets and chorus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7mGjSZpdpk - singing Bass, 700k views https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmDGntpZC3I - directing, 2.8 million views

I cannot find reference to him in the NY Times. Interview of Dr. Jim Henry on Fox & Friends at Rockefeller Center: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4166960021001/?#sp=show-clips

Thanks for your patience. This is my first article created. SingoutLOUD (talk) 22:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SingoutLOUD: Please understand, I know nothing about your hobby and I don't care. What I know is, The Harmonizer isn't known to be a reliable source. The "quartet gold medals" aren't notable awards. YouTube isn't allowed as a source and the views don't count. An interview on Tv doesn't count, either. The subject needs to meet our notability criteria and I'm not seeing it. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I get that. However I do think he is influential enough to be referenced on Wikipedia. I may need to figure out how to search Australian German, Dutch and British sources to establish that. Some of the references are from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, a Pulitzer-Prize winning newspaper. Those really aren't solid enough? I have also noticed that choral conductors often have links to their wikipedian students. Not sure if that helps validate notability or is just incidental. Dr. Henry has at least one, I can probably find out if there are more. I am hoping to create a few other articles as well, one about a local fellow who was recently written up in Rolling Stone, but not NYTimes (happens to have been a student of Dr. Henry), and another who had a long profile in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and has been quoted in the NY Times, but not featured, and will be interviewed on CBS Sunday Morning in a couple of weeks. Do you think those are worth exploring?

SingoutLOUD (talk) 03:29, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23:23:52, 10 July 2017 review of submission by Nalad


Hi, I am requesting a re-review into the article I recently submitted. After looking at the "Wikipedia: Notability (Music) page I see that the subject fulfills at least 2 of the criteria and other:

4. Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[note 4] 12. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.

Both of these criteria were met in the submission along with news sources about the events also discussing the subject.

The article was written as the subject is a well established, notable singer/songwriter worldwide with Press and news coverage to support this.

@Nalad: I disagree. She's been an also-ran in other people's shows. She's not been the subject of significant coverage. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23:56:34, 10 July 2017 review of submission by Nalad

The subject Starred in and Won multiple episodes of a UK wide Television show which has been referenced by news articles & IMDB links this was not an "also ran" role in other artists shows. The subject was also named as the reason that the show even went into production? Does this not constitute a Notable Subject? This would in my eyes cover item 12. Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.?

@Nalad: No one cares what makes something notable in your eyes. I'm not convinced. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 14:53:52, 11 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Cececaca

{{SAFESUBST:Void|


Hi Chris, thanks a lot for your kind reply.

Reguarding your opinion about luxurylife and voguediary.ru they are well know and riliable online magazines. Not PR stuff and so on..... Try to find the on all social network and you will find how much engagements they have! Reguarding the TIO.ch it is the most famous online journal in the Ticino Swiss Area. Everybody in Ticino usually read the TIO.ch

Cesare Catania is a very well known contemporary artist and the argument has so much notability that he deserves a place in wikipedia enciclopedy.

If you need any other references here they are: 1) http://www.laprovinciacr.it/arte/arte/170465/il-moderno-leonardo-da-vinci-cesare-catania-espone-reart-2017.html 2) http://www.arte.it/calendario-arte/cosenza/mostra-cesare-catania-reart-37509 3) https://sinapsinews.info/2016/10/04/arte-italiana-nel-mondo-le-opere-cesare-catania-al-louvre-parigi/ 4) https://www.agendalugano.ch/events/37315/cesare-catania-l-abbraccio 5) https://www.dailycases.it/cesare-catania-conquista-londra-lesposizione-presso-la-royal-opera-arcade-gallery/ 6) http://www.meteoweb.eu/2017/03/riarteco-cesare-catania-larte-dei-rifiuti-urbani/871999/ 7) http://www.controluce.it/notizie/cesare-catania-larte-dei-rifiuti-urbani/

Do you need any other references?

I'm sure you will understand the public importance of the author and that you will give a place in your enciclopedy for him.

Kind regards.


Sabry


Cececaca (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cececaca: I think you're a partisan and I'm not convinced that the subject is notable. Good luck finding a Wikipedian that is. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Movement Strategy reminder

Hi. You contributed in a previous part of the discussion, so this is just a reminder to you (and any interested talkpagewatchers), that it's the second week of our Movement Strategy Cycle 3 discussion. There's a new topic each week in July, and this week's is: How could we capture the sum of all knowledge when much of it cannot be verified in traditional ways? You can see more details, and suggest solutions or respond to other people's thoughts (from this week and last week) at Wikipedia:Wikimedia Strategy 2017. You can also read a summary of discussions that took place in the past week. Cheers. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Hello, I just noticed a message that my user-page has been reviewed by you. I guess this might be due to me removing a comment that you perhaps placed near my username? In case it is, then that is fine indeed since it shows integrity in checking users and the kind of edits they do. I believe you have now an idea that I am gaining more clarity on how the Wikipedia policies and etiquettes work, and also that I have started to engage in some editing here other than the article that attracted most of my attention when it was placed for a deletion discussion. I am taking my time now to become more familiarized with the policies, and to have more confidence in the processes before I resume editing articles in philosophy and related humanities entries. In the meantime if after reviewing my user-page you have some recommendations for improvement, then I would be grateful to hear from you and other experienced editors here. Thank you (AcademeEditorial (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)) (AcademeEditorial (talk) 21:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chris_troutman&oldid=790303067"