User talk:Ddy1984

October 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Cornerstone (Austrian band) has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.facebook.com/pages/Cornerstone-R/143398920673/ (matching the regex rule \bfacebook\.com). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Fæ (talk) 18:58, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Cornerstone somewhere in america.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Cornerstone somewhere in america.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fæ (talk) 12:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cornerstone (Austrian band)


The article Cornerstone (Austrian band) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not meet WP:BAND per discussion here. No substantial third-party RS could be found.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Karst (talk) 10:06, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Somewhere in America (album) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Somewhere in America (album) 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/Somewhere in America (album) 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. MSJapan (talk) 03:06, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Cornerstone
Awards for a film do not establish notability for the band or a song on the soundtrack unless the award was for the soundtrack. Local radio playlists do not support notability of a band. An award from a personal website does not establish notability. Charting of a single in another country does not establish notability for a label that released albums the song was not on. In short, you apparently think that existence equals notability. It does not. I firthermore believe that you also have a conflict of interest and are connected with the band. Therefore, in lieu of arguing with you, all of the articles have been sent to AfD to let the community decide. MSJapan (talk) 03:13, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MSJapan (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia
Hi Morrissey1976 I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Your edits to date have pretty much all been about Cornerstone or Atom. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and questions for you below.

Hello, Morrissey1976. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

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. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

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.

Comments and question
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by out WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some connection with the subjects you have edited about? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, with please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), we can take it from there. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 03:48, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Reply Jytdog, first of all I have to say thank you for your calm and objective approach. I have no problem to say, that one band-member of Cornerstone is a buddy of mine. They are not quite familiar with WP, so they have asked me, to create a site for the English WP. I'm also not a WP-expert, but quite well-schooled in creating articles for science, university-work etc. outside of WP. I never thought, this was a problem, but reading some of the arguments here in regards of sources and references (fe.  Mini  apolis  "I couldn't help noticing that they're in .pdf format, requiring a download and harder to verify than webpages", as seen on the AFD-page of the "Head Over Heels" album) makes me cringe, to be completely honest. The fact, that the articles appear as "Blown-up" are a direct result of one person's efforts, to remove the band pages, because he doesn't like the band (User:MSJapan. I've added more sources and references then for some more exposed university work I've created outside WP, with the result, that this one special user "spins" this sources or simply ignores them. I've tried to keep everything calm and cool down, but creating this article, was a lot of work, and although I'm fully aware, that I don't "own" it, it's a kind of "my baby", and honestly I'm in anger, if I add dozens of sources and references, fulfill five points of WP:band, with MANY HOURS OF WORK, and there is ONE guy out there, who has the TARGET and put his highest efforts into the deletion process of the page, no matter, how well referenced or how many guidelines of the WP-guidelines are fulfilled - because ONE guy hates the band. COI - maybe, but I'd do that for every article I've created, not just for one, that I've created for a friend of mine. I already suggested User:MSJapan, to leave my pages alone, and I leave his pages alone, to calm down the situation, but as said before, this user target IS to remove the pages for personal reasons, not for objective, so of course he refused to do so. Morrissey1976(talk) 03:48, 13 August 2015 (UTC)


 * HI, thanks for your reply and for disclosing your connection with the band. I hear your frustration, which you expressed clearly, the longer you wrote.  I am sorry about that.  Writing in Wikipedia is really different from scientific publishing - you may want to have a look at WP:EXPERT for an overview of the kind of challenges that scholars/scientists face when they come to WP - there are some good links at the bottom of that page.  I work mostly on science-based topics - articles about health, medicine, toxicology, with WP:MED, and some ag stuff too.  Sources in those topics are .... orderly - the scientific literature.  I steer clear of popular culture stuff (like music) because sources are so... messy, and judging what the editing community will accept as really reliable (per WP:RS can get dicey.  Editing and content disputes are much easier to work out, when the base of sources is easy to sort out, since everything here depends on sources.  (I don't know if that makes sense to you, but I hope it does - I can say more if you like)
 * Turning back to the COI stuff... and discussing that in light of Wikipedia guidelines and practices.... so you have a significant external relationship and that does constitute a COI here in WIkipedia, in my view. Here is what would be "best practice" for you to do (two steps to this, each with two parts):
 * disclosure
 * would you please disclose your COI on the relevant Talk pages (I have gone ahead and taken care of that for you by adding a section to the bottom of the box at the top of the relevant Talk pages)
 * would you pleaes disclose your COI on your userpage (here: User:Morrissey1976 - note - you appear to have also edited in the past under User:Morrissey19766  - I am guessing you forgot your password for that).  It would be good to add something to your userpage like: "I formerly edited under the account User:Morrissey19766 but I forgot the password; I don't use that account anymore.   I am friends with the band Cornerstone (Austrian band) and directly edited articles related to that band  before I understood Wikipedia's WP:COI guideline." (see below)  That would disclose relevant information to the WP community, which is what User pages are for.  If you also want to add something like   "I am a scientist and study X" that would be of interest too....but is less important for the controversy around you now.
 * peer review, WP-style
 * going forward, please don't directly edit articles where you have a COI; instead make proposals for content changes on the article's Talk page
 * going forward, instead of creating articles directly, please use the articles for creation process
 * The "peer review" part might seem strange, but considered in light of academic publishing I hope it makes sense.  Here in WP, editors can instantly publish - you make an edit, and click "save", and it is published, or you create an article, and click "save" and there is a new article.  Instant and unmediated (no publisher, no peer review - just direct publication).  So what we ask editors with a COI to do, is work with peer review, WP-style.. to submit new articles through AFC instead of directly creating them, so we get a peer review step.  And instead of directly editing, we ask editors with a COI to propose changes on the Talk page, so other editors can review before they are implemented.  This is a decent process to ensure that the integrity of WP is maintained.
 * Does that all make sense, and would you be willing to do the peer review things going forward? Thanks!  Jytdog (talk) 13:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply Jytdog, thanks for your understanding! Yes, writing about "clearer" topics is probably easier to refer to, I write about educational issues outside WP, and the sources are quite clear most of the time, so that's a lot easier. Writing about a band is always a bit of a subjective point of view, too. For example, I've read something on the band's discussion page, that most of the sources are "parked" on the band's website... it's hard to find someone, who collect, scan or record interviews from printed magazines or Radio-stations about Cornerstone, except the band itself, so this is quite hard to understand for me. At the moment it looks like, if the article might be deleted, but let's see.


 * Anyway, regarding the other issues, that's not a big deal.... but I hope, that the article will not be removed, BECAUSE the band asked me to write it... to be honest, I did everything with my best mind and effort and tried to stay neutral, and I wasn't aware, that it could be an issue, if I write for a buddy of mine. Regarding the second user Morrissey19766... you reminded me, that I have this account, but in general this isn't in use anymore. Isn't it possible, to simply delete this old account? Of course I could mention that on my site, not an issue, but it isn't in use anymore.


 * Ah, would be great, if you could check out my site, after I've added those informations to it, if everything is in order? Thanks! Morrissey1976 (talk) 11:22, 14 August 2015 (CET+1)
 * No, we cannot delete accounts, ever - accounts are part of the record of what happened in WP and with a few exceptions nothing is ever deleted from WP. (see WP:AKASHA). I didn't see a clear yes/no, on whether you will agree to follow the COI guideline going forward, and stop editing the articles directly.  Will you? Jytdog (talk) 13:04, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply Yes, will do, of course, will do that over the weekend (probably tomorrow!). I reply here, when it's done - the only thing I'll ask you is, if you might check, if it's done right. Beside of this, is it possible, because of the COI, to be part of the discussions at the AFD-pages? There are one, two comments, for which I'd love to write a reply... :-D Morrissey1976 (talk) 15:14, 14 August 2015 (CET+1)
 * yes you can contribute to the AfD discussions - you should just make it clear in your statement that you are connected to the band and created the article so that other editors are aware of your COI. Also, you  owe MSJapan an apology and I will be looking for you to do that - your going and nominating his articles for deletion was ugly, WP:POINTY behavior. Jytdog (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Reply So I'll do this COI-topic now, and already mentioned that on the AFD-page for the discussion of Cornerstone. Anyway, regarding MS Japan: You explained to me, that it is a COI, when I write about a topic or a band, at which a friend of mine is part of. The problem, that we have here is, that the user has a strong COI regarding the article Cornerstone and with this whole AFD's, that he has started, too. I already wondered, why someone put such strong efforts into the deletion process of a - please excuse me this term here now - f***g band. But this make sense: reading all his other articles, except one, all of them are about Freemasonry, the term 'Cornerstone' has a strong meaning there (Which I wasn't aware of, when I wrote the article). I suppose, he is an expert and/or a part of this communion, and furthermore he wants to remove the article either out of it's own interest, or someone told him to do so. So, I declared, that I have a COI, but he has obviously also one. so, before we are talking about apologies and so on, we have to fix those issues first. Morrissey1976 12:25, 16 August 2015 (CET+1)
 * Thank you for making the disclosure on your userpage!  That is great. now if you will refrain from editing directly the articles where you have a COI, you will be fine.  But Morrissey, I have to tell you that what you just wrote is wrong, in many ways.  We assume good faith here as policy exactly to cut off the kooky conspiracy-minded thinking you just wrote.  I have encountered MSJapan a few times, and one thing he/she is really good at, is sniffing out editors with a COI.  And I have reviewed all your interactions and what you have done is wrong in that you have been editing with an undisclosed COI, and you went and nominated for deletion articles MSJapan created in retaliation.  Both of those behaviors were inappropriate. You don't have to apologize to MSJapan (although that would be best) but I am at least looking for you to acknowledge here that nominating their articles for deletion was wrong.  Jytdog (talk) 15:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Sugar vs vinegar
About your comments here - as a conflicted editor, you "depend on the kindness of strangers". Sugar gets you farther, faster, than vinegar. Jytdog (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply I guess your right, I've stayed away now for a while from that issue, and I've tried to concentrate on the references and the article sourcing, I guess for 98% this has worked out fine. But obviously...User MSJapan is User MSJapan, isn't he? ;-) Anyway, let's try to stay objective and write good articles here in the future, this is what WP is for. Morrissey1976 (talk) 01:33, 23 August 2015 (CET+1)

NPA warning August 2015
about this comment, which i removed::

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Jytdog (talk) 15:13, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cornerstone (Austrian Band) (August 24)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

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


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Cornerstone (Austrian Band) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Cornerstone_(Austrian_Band) Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Cornerstone_(Austrian_Band) reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Cornerstone (Austrian Band)
Hello, Ddy1984. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cornerstone (Austrian Band), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:02, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Cornerstone (Austrian Band)


Hello, Ddy1984. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cornerstone".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 05:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)