User talk:FredLuchetti

Welcome!
Hello, FredLuchetti, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Toronto municipal election 2018 have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 19:32, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Candidates
Please note that Wikipedia is not a free publicity platform for you to write whatever you want about an unelected candidate for city council. Candidates are permitted just a couple of lines to give the very basics of who they are, not the equivalent of a full-on article about them — for example, we do not give a flying cow plop where he went to grade school or high school. I see, as well, that I'm not the only editor to have attempted to trim your Danny DeSantis bio back down to the allowable — so please note that it is not your prerogative to decide how much information about him the article may contain. The article will follow Wikipedia's rules, not your own. Please also familiarize yourself with our conflict of interest rules. Bearcat (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Then please act the same way to all the other candidates doing the same thing I am. Otherwise I will just keep putting it up the way I want to.FredLuchetti (talk) 23:50, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There are no other candidates "doing the same thing" — no other candidate in the entire article has more than one or two short sentences in their "bio", no other candidate in the entire article has a mention of where they went to grade school or high school, and no other candidate lists a series of endorsements. And no, you won't just keep putting it up the way you want to — you will follow Wikipedia's rules, or the 24-hour block you just got will become 48 or 72 hours next time, and possibly even forever after that. Bearcat (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

And this is why I think you are working for another candidate and will bring this issue up to Danny directly and let him deal with it. Yes there are. Look carefully and you will find them even in ward 28 there are two. So go ahead and block me, I have advised the Campaign Manager and will send this up the flag pole and let them deal with it. I have also looked at many of your other edits of campaign items on the page you banned me on. From that analysis I believe that you yourself do not know what should be on there or not. School history speaks to BIOGRAPHY. Campaign Promises speak to POLICIES and even endorsements speak to POLICIES because (okay ever so loosely) the people that endorse a candidate show a particular flavour of support for them. The fact that Danny has endorsements from Liberal, Conservative, Municipal, Provincial and Federal show that he is a serious candidate. I have tried to keep the information tight and well organized but you and I seem to have a very different view of what should or should not go on there. Again, targeting just Danny in Ward 28 is not right. FredLuchetti (talk) 23:50, 12 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Edit conflict with : This is not an unblock request. Please review the Guide to appealing blocks. Further uses of the template that are not valid unblock requests may result in losing your ability to edit this page for the duration of your block.  SQL Query me!  00:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I apologize for putting my response to Bearcat below the unblock request. I am just getting used to doing this wikipedia thing. You are absolutely right, I do not understand the reason for the block because everything I was posting in the Ward 28 section under Danny DeSantis fell in line with BIOGRAPHY and/or POLICIES which is the header of the column  that you guys set up . So again, please explain why some admins have an issue with this if not for the sake of playing politics. Also, why are other candidates allowed to place endorsements in this column? Why are they still up?FredLuchetti (talk) 01:36, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

For one thing, you are either incorrect or outright lying when you claim that any other candidate in Ward 28, or anywhere else in the entire article, has a biographical sketch that looks or sounds or reads anything like what you're trying to do for Danny de Santis — you are trying to give him special treatment that other candidates have not been, and are not going to be, given.

Other candidates only have one or two brief sentences in that column, not an entire full-on article. A few list an endorsement from an outgoing city councillor, but none lists every single endorsement that the candidate has ever gotten from anybody at all. A few list political roles, like the person being an incumbent councillor or a former MP, but none lists the person's entire career history. It's simply false to claim that even one candidate anywhere else in the entire article has anything like the extended campaign brochure you're trying to post on behalf of de Santis.

The content is also not in accordance with Wikipedia's rules, the most important of which is that we are not a free public relations site for candidates or their campaign managers to post campaign literature. We are an encyclopedia, not a free public relations platform for you to promote your employer. You were also advised by 331dot to familiarize yourself with our conflict of interest rules — and furthermore, you're also incorrect when you claim that I just blocked you without attempting to explain to or educate you on the problem with your edits — you'll notice that this entire conversation began with an explanation which you chose to ignore. And then, as soon as the block expired, you went back and reposted an even more blatant campaign brochure for Danny de Santis, which tells me that either you didn't read the conflict of interest rules or you did and failed to understand what they mean.

Again, what you're doing is simply not what Wikipedia is for. We are not a free publicity platform for you to promote your employer. And no, I have nothing against Danny de Santis as a person — I don't know him and don't live in his ward. It's simply not Wikipedia's job to publish the type of information you're trying to add — we are not a campaign publicity platform. Bearcat (talk) 04:29, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Fine, I will just hand this over to Danny and let him deal with it as he sees fit.FredLuchetti (talk) 04:37, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Nope, he doesn't get to "deal with it as he sees fit", either. Wikipedia content follows Wikipedia's rules, not Danny de Santis's or yours. Bearcat (talk) 05:32, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

You can spin this any way you want. When I had no headlines you objected. I put headlines in to organize and to show you that I was just following the intent of the column. Just because others are too slow to update their section with policies and bios and have just a few quips here and there you chose to just take a broad brush and delete everything I put up. To me this just constitutes unfair treatment and the only questions that I have for you are the following: Do you want a Bio on there or not? Do you want policies or not? If you do, how many? I compacted his life down to two freaking sentences and that was still too long for you??? There are so many policies that could be put up there, I just put the big ones up. I will give you the Endorsements, they do not really belong there in the spirit of Biography and Policies however, there are others with endorsements listed yet you chose to delete only Danny's. So, if you allow endorsements elsewhere, how many endorsements are allowed? one? two? Go to the site and you will see there are so many more I could have put up, I just put the relevant ones up. When I said that Danny was going to deal with this in no way did I mean that he was going to take over the management of his profile and "break" wikipedias rules. He is not that technically literate. Hell neither am I, this took me a while to learn and just deleting it really got me upset. You say that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, how is the information I posted that far out of that box that you choose to act in this heavy handed way? Feel free to look me up and call me to discuss if you like.FredLuchetti (talk) 05:49, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not about other candidates being "slow to update their section with policies and bios" — it's about our rules say that policies and bios aren't what that column is for. Election candidates, not just in Toronto's municipal election but in every election everywhere, are not allowed to use Wikipedia as a venue for distributing their campaign brochures at all — officeholders get articles (which still have to be written neutrally and encyclopedically, not as campaign brochures), while unelected candidates do not. Not because some candidates are slower and other candidates are faster at taking advantage of Wikipedia for that purpose, but because that purpose is not what Wikipedia exists to be used for — every candidate who tries to do what you did has it removed.
 * So no, full biographies are not what the column is for, and policy statements and campaign promises are not what the column is for. Other than a person's current job, their job history is only relevant if it was in politics, such as Jim Karygiannis' history as a Member of Parliament (and even then we only list that role and don't delve into the details). And endorsements are permitted only if they're coming from a past or present city councillor, and not if they're coming from a newspaper columnist, a federal MP, a provincial MPP, an advocacy organization or anybody else. Not just for Danny de Santis, but for anybody at all — that type of content crosses the line from "encyclopedic" into "campaign brochure", and campaign brochures are not what what the notes column in the ward tables on the election article is for. Bearcat (talk) 13:10, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

I get your points really I do. That being said: how can you state that one persons endorsement is not allowed yet someone else's is? You seem to see this as a grey area where I see it as black and white. Either you allow them all or none at all. Allowing some but not all gives unfair advantage to some candidates. (This all started with Filion's endorsement of Markus). The kind of endorsements that Danny has the power to close will be made more apparent as this campaign goes forward. Would endorsements from a sitting Mayor or Premiere work within your guidelines? If you believe that what I posted on Danny was a full biography then you really need to rethink that one. That was not full by any stretch. It did contain more information than the rest but at least is was a complete thought which gave a pretty accurate picture of the man. I was actually kind of proud of having been able to distill that much data into two sentences. If Policy statements are not what the column is for then take the damn lable out. Would it not make sense to call the column "notes"? That way you could also say "limited to 140 characters". Had you done that, this whole thing would not be a problem for you or I. The issue that we seem to be butting our heads against constantly is this one of lables. I have a completely different definition of them than you folks do. I do get your point however that non elected people should not get the same treatment as elected ones. This is why I have yet to erect a page about Danny. (that and the fact that Danny is a very private person).FredLuchetti (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2018 (UTC) @Bearcat See? Now was that so hard? Thank you for taking my suggestion and changing the header of the column to "Notes" I can work with this and will attempt to edit in the spirit of the "NOTE" rather than the much larger proposition that the former lable provided. FredLuchetti (talk) 21:28, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi FredLuchetti! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 04:54, Sunday, August 19, 2018 (UTC)