User talk:Curtster3

Your submission at AfC Sergio C. Garcia was accepted
 Sergio C. Garcia, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Tidying up your footnotes at Sergio C. Garcia
Hello, since your article has numerous footnotes to the same sources, you can make that much tidier using WP:Refnames coding. That will condense your footnotes down so the same number is used at multiple points to refer to just one footnote, making your list far more concise. Please take a look at that coding, and contact WP:Teahouse if it's unclear to you. Nice work on your article! MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I also agree on the "nice work." A couple other tips on references:
 * When using cite web or cite news, always include the title parameter. Otherwise you will get that red missing title error message.
 * When using cite web, the website parameter is used to indicate the name of the website, not the URL (you already cover the URL with the url parameter). If the name of the website is the same as the publisher, you can just omit it.
 * TJRC (talk) 23:18, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Curtster3. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article United States Senate election in Kentucky, 2014, you may have a conflict of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 23:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Mitch McConnell, you may be blocked from editing. Your addition of derogatory material about a possible connection between Wilbur Ross, Elaine Chao, and a mine disaster in an unrelated article appears to be synthesis by original research. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * On pondering this matter, I find 's charge here to be biased and a violation of WP:AGF. This was a single edit and I see absolutely no evidence of disruptive editing.  The material added clearly had WP:NPOV issues, but there's no reason to believe that this user was doing anything but trying to add relevant material to the Fundraising section of the subject article.  This warning is similar to one left on my page that I also believe is biased and violates WP:AGF where McClenon claimed an "edit war" waged on my part without any evidence whatsoever.  Stevie is the man!  Talk • Work 14:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Angela Chao for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Angela Chao 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 Articles for deletion/Angela Chao until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Anupmehra - Let's talk!  05:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

This is my first time trying to "talk" to defend my submission, forgive me if I do it wrong. Angela Chao is on the board of directors of some of the most powerful groups on the planet. As the one of the few Asian American women in the U.S to hold these kind of positions of power, I am concerned why someone would want the page deleted. Further, her support and enthusiasm for the arts in NYC, which I didn't have to time to add yet, is expansive. To summarize, Chao's a very influential member of the international business community, one of Harvard's most generous alums, influential in NYC arts, and a role model to Asian American girls. That's my best pitch. Do as you must.

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stephanie Horne


The article Stephanie Horne has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Fails WP:NPOL; all media coverage is related to her candidacy"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 20:51, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

The deletion of this article is biased political vandalism. The allegation that all media coverage is related to her candidacy is false, as there are citations both to her role as a school board candidate and member, and her role in her husband's congressional campaigns. Further, even if all coverage was related to her candidacy, which it is not, wikipedia users rely on the cite for information about candidates for high level office. Curtster3 (talk) 16:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC) curtster3