Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JHUbal27 (talk | contribs) at 06:18, 12 August 2014 (→私のディックを吸う). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

If I left you a message, please answer on your talk page and place a Talkback, etc. on my talk. If you leave me a message, I will answer on my talk page (unless you request otherwise) and place a Talkback, etc. on your talk. Thanks

Archive index

2014:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2013:Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

How did you know?

Marchjuly, thanks again for your help. I am curious. How did you know it was Absalom Jones' page? Historian (talk) 12:29, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

It was from your question at the teahouse. Sam Walton deserves the credit. They figured it out. I just did a little cleanup. - Marchjuly (talk) 13:39, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Richard Jencks article

Hello, Marchjuly,

Thank you for your information and suggestions. I don't have aspirations to be a regular editor of *any* article, I only jumped in--- and yes, I don't think I stated it, but I am RW Jencks' daughter -- because I saw that someone wrote that he had achieved a job title that he never did (and the ref. cited, The Marin Independent Journal, did *not* get it wrong in their article, it was whomever entered it into Wikip. that didn't read the news-obit carefully enough). I think he would be horrified if someone thought he was exaggerating his accomplishments, and for me, as a fan of Misplaced Pages, I'd like to avoid contributing fodder to Wikip.'s critics by stating an untruth. I was able to change that without any problems occurring, so I then added more detailed information since there is more room here than in a news-obit, and I still didn't get any error msgs. My aim then was to change some of the language to the words he actually wrote in a self-bio he did a draft of in 2007. I probably should have known that he might not be remembering details from his life 40 years ago *quite* precisely. "..he was appointed Distinguished Visiting Professor of Communications at San Diego State University" is exactly what he wrote. I have no problem with the Wikip. editors not approving that change -- However, no one has a copy of the draft of his own obituary other than a few of us close family members, so I don't see why edits by family personnel should always be considered objectionable "conflicts of interest". If I sent his draft -- with his name and email address at the top since he wrote it to himself, along with hand-written edits -- to someone else who's not a family member and they entered information to the article from it, would that be allowed?.. It's difficult to see the difference? I'm not making subjective pronouncements, and I can see why that would have no place in an article about him.

Ndla (talk) 18:01, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

@Ndla: Thank you for the message. Please understand that I am not trying to accuse you of doing anything wrong. There are cases where editors who have a conflict of interest with a certain article can make edits to said article as explained in "Advice for editors who may have a conflict of interest", but these tend to be minor things such as spelling mistakes, formatting errors, vandalism, etc.: edits which any experienced editor would see and recognize pretty much at first glance as being beyond question. However, things get a little more complicated when a COI editor starts adding or removing content from such articles, especially articles regarding actual people, regardless of whether the change is positive or negative. Since Misplaced Pages is a 💕 that anyone may edit, the only real oversight provided regarding the quality of these edits is by other editors who hopefully act in good faith based upon existing Misplaced Pages policy and guidelines. When you stated in one of your edit summaries that you were Jencks' daughter (please don't take this as a sign of disrespect; Last names are often used to discuss people written about on Misplaced Pages just for brevity per WP:LASTNAME.), you were telling other Misplaced Pages editors that you have a close personal connection to the topic, i.e., a conflict of interest. This does not mean you are a bad editor in a way at all; It may, however, make other editors a little more concerned about edits you make to your such articles. One of the five pillars of Misplaced Pages is "Nuetrality" which is stated as follows:

Misplaced Pages is written from a neutral point of view: We strive for articles that document and explain the major points of view, giving due weight with respect to their prominence in an impartial tone. We avoid advocacy and we characterize information and issues rather than debate them. In some areas there may be just one well-recognized point of view; in others, we describe multiple points of view, presenting each accurately and in context rather than as "the truth" or "the best view". All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong.

When a COI editor makes content edits to an article, they may be, unintentionally and unconsciously, moving the article in a certain direction; They may assume because of their close relationship with the particular subject matter that they "know more" or "know better" (See WP:EXPERT for something similar) than other editors, and, therefore, their edits should hold more weight. This is why conflict of interest editing is highly discouraged on Misplaced Pages, and why COI editors are encouraged to post suggestions, etc. on article talk pages and leave the editing to others. If you have the time, please read "Misplaced Pages:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide because it pretty much summarize the things I have stated above and makes them much easier to understand.

Regarding your specific edits, the problem was not that you corrected a factual error. I think that most editors would consider that to be acceptable; Of course, it would have been better if you had explained why the change was needed and how the Marin Independent Journal was being incorrectly cited on the article's talk page first. The problem was when you decided to add more detailed information since there is more room here than in a news-obit. The extra information you added seemed to be primarily based upon your personal recollections of your father or private things he may have written. It may all be true, but it was also unsourced, and thus would be considered by many to be something called "original research". Even though you did add <ref name=ndla> and <ref name="ndla" /> tags (most likely trying to follow what what was done in the article) to indicate you were using yourself as a source, you didn't add a source. (See "Inline citation" and "Citing sources" for more details.) Since there was only a tag and no actual source, a bot came by an added that error notification to your talk page. It might be possible to use your father's draft as a source, but a thing such as that is called a primary source and the rules regarding primary sources can be a little tricky. Using primary sources is sometimes discouraged, not because they have no value, but because their neutrality or accuracy may be questioned by other editors. If your father's draft had actually been published somewhere, even self-published, then it could possibly be used to cite factual information such as dates, places, titles, work history, etc. However, since there was no source given, there was no possible way for anyone to verify whether the content you added was true, other than by simply taking your word. On Misplaced Pages, unpublished materials are not considered to be reliable sources.

For what it is worth, I really tried to keep as much of what you added by verifying it with the Marin Independent Journal article, but there were limits to what I felt I could do. Moreover, simply removing the faulty reference tags you added while leaving everything else would have been even worse and something I believe that would have been contrary to Misplaced Pages policy. Misplaced Pages relies heavily on verifying information by examining previous published materials considered to be reliable, so it is extremely hard to verify things when no such published material exists. I've probably only confused you more by being so wordy, and I am only a single editor. If you would like more specific formal advice from other editors with more experience, then please feel free to ask at the Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. You can also contact Misplaced Pages directly at "Contact us" if you're looking for a more "official" answer. Furthermore, if you just want another editor's take on this for further clarification or because you feel mine to be incorrect, you can add a Template:Help me or Template:Admin help to your talk page, post on the article's talk page, post another question at the Teahouse or at the Help Desk to get assistance from perhaps a different and possibly more experienced editor who may be able to explain things better or advise you differently. - Marchjuly (talk) 22:32, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Re my article on BN Morris Canoes

hello! I appreciate your input very much-- was unaware that it is frowned upon to cite to something I myself have written-- thought it was okay as I cited to reliable sources. One reason I have taken-on the project of writing this article is that I am "the expert". It is very.. VERY difficult for me not to include all the "stuff I know" because it is yet unpublished. I included articles I have written in a RELIABLE PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL. I really am NOT AT ALL interested in "self promotion" and if I were not a lady of nearly 70 years would use some profanity here to emphasize how deeply offended I am at the thought that I would "promote myself". For the love of God, I wrote articles for zero money in the publication of a not-for-profit organization. I am writing a book that will be out next year, where ANY PROCEEDS would go to the not-for-profit organization. I simply wanted "everyone" to get the correct information. Is Misplaced Pages interested in correct information or in the useless speculation of 30 years ago? There is a lot of bogus stuff written about this company--- things based on speculation rather than research. I have done the hard work, and some of it has been published. If I knew anyone else who had the time or inclination to write a Misplaced Pages article, I could send it to someone else. Anyway, thanks, and I will try to sit on my hands and not write anything else. For what it is worth, I am an old woman whose entire income stems from Social Security. I don't give a rat's ass about money or self-aggrandizement, but I do like to share the things I am passionate about and I believe I can write well.Kathrynklos (talk) 23:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kathrynklos, I've added my reply to your post here to the one you made on your talk page, just to keep the discussion going in one place. Please respond there. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

私のディックを吸う

こんにちは、あなた人種差別日本人野郎。私はあなたが正当な理由なく、私の編集を元に戻してください。では、なぜあなたは日本へあなたのお尻を取得しないと離れて、この記事たわごとのあなた愚か個から性交を取得します。私の気の人生を台無しにするためにありがとうございました！ ~~JHUbal27 06:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)