User talk:Jason S. Goldstein

Welcome!
Hello, Jason S. Goldstein, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I am pleased to present you with your very first service award, in recognition of becoming a Wikipedia contributor.

I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that may help you to get up to speed: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ; this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * The Signpost, our newspaper.

Again, welcome! PrairieKid (talk) 17:50, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States Senate election in Wyoming, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David McIntosh ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/2020_United_States_Senate_election_in_Wyoming check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/2020_United_States_Senate_election_in_Wyoming?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:44, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions
-- Cabayi (talk) 21:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello, I'm RandomCanadian. Your recent edit(s) to the page 2020 United States presidential election appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been removed for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.  Please cite CNN directly is they have updated their projection   RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  02:51, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Twitter endorsements
Please stop adding back twitter endorsements which are not considered endorsements. Also, to maintain civility, please do not use all caps in edit summaries or demand that another editor do something. Instead, try to work it out by means of debate on the talk page. Thank you and happy editing! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 20:26, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, they are! These ARE endorsements because they show support for their candidates in an election. Do you really think that only non-social media endorsements are acceptable? I do not. Second, I am so sorry for my remarks. I didn’t mean to frighten you. I just do not like it when a user removes endorsements in an unnecessary way. I hope you respect my opinion. Jason S. Goldstein (talk) 22:04, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

I most definitely respect your opinion. In fact, I think we both share the opinion that Twitter endorsements are endorsements. However, per this as well as WP:ENDORSEMENTS, it is not encyclopedic and should not be added to Wikipedia. You didn’t frighten me, I just wanted to let you know that the way that you were debating on Wikipedia did not conform to the civility policy and admins would see this as a potential downside if you ever were facing a block. Just some constructive criticism. Once again, you can reach out to me if you need any help. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:11, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Why did you remove John Boozman’s endorsement of Tom Cotton again? This IS a reliable endorsement and should be not be removed at all costs (unless you do not want to see Twitter-sourced endorsements). Jason S. Goldstein (talk) 12:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

It was not a reliable source. It was a Twitter endorsement. Feel free to add it back if you can find a reliable source or an article verifying this endorsement. Feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 17:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

This endorsement has ZERO reliable sources. I do not have an article citing this endorsement. Can you please leave all future Twitter-sourced endorsements alone if they have no reliable sources in your point of view? Thank you. Jason S. Goldstein (talk) 18:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

No, I will not leave Twitter endorsements. Per WP:ENDORSEMENTS these should not be included. It is not just my point of view. It is a policy for Wikipedia. Twitter endorsements will be removed. I’m happy to answer any questions that you have. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, another editing tip, when trying to get the attention of another editor such as myself, ping me or add to the discussion on my talk page. I will see someone is trying to reach out to me and will be able to respond quicker. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 20:55, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Do you understand this policy now? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 13:33, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

From now on, I will only add reliable endorsements that are not from social media. Jason S. Goldstein (talk) 14:01, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I hope you are enjoying being here at Wikipedia. Happy editing! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 15:01, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Twitter endorsements again
Hello! Once again, you have contacted another editor about Twitter endorsements. They are not encyclopedic and will be removed. Also, are you editing from a different account and/or IP address as well? Just wondering! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

No, I am not. Jason S. Goldstein (talk) 23:31, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I responded on Pennsylvania 2’s talk page Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 08:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 17:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Am I in trouble? We should have not argued about encyclopedic and non-encyclopedic endorsements. Jason S. Goldstein (talk) 17:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)


 * You have repeatedly been asked not to add Twitter endorsements which you keep doing. I can not impose anything on you but the administrators will see the situation and can impose a block if they deem it fit. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 17:46, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I have to because YOU were asked repeatedly by me NOT to delete Twitter endorsements as they ARE encyclopedic! You are just making an act of vandalism, and now you told them on me?! These endorsements have NO other reliable sources other than twitter. I hope you do not block me. I am sorry for arguing with you and refusing to listen to you. I have a broken speech center, which makes it harder for me to listen to people like you. Jason S. Goldstein (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, I have shown you this as well as WP:ENDORSEMENTS which both say they should not be included. You keep saying that they are encyclopedic but you haven’t pointed to a policy saying that they are. Once again, I can not block you, only an admin or User talk:Jimbo Wales can. I don’t get the whole speech center thing. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Jason S. Goldstein. Please stop adding endorsements sources solely to Twitter. Wikipedia operates by WP:Consensus. As per the guideline Political endorsement, this Village pump (proposals)/Archive 164 established the consensus that political endorsement require coverage in reliable independent sources before they can be included. (As well as 2 other requirements.) The guideline specifically notes (emphasis added).  If you wish this to change, you will need to start an equally widely advertised RfC to establish a new consensus. You should read the previous RfC before doing so, so it's quite likely any reason you believe this consensus is wrong had already been discussed and rejected. Until and unless this consensus changes, you need to stop violating it by adding endorsements sources solely to Twitter or other social media. It does not matter whether you personally feel these Twitter only endorsements are "encyclopaedic".  If you continue to make such violations, it's likely you will be blocked or subject to a ban of some sort.  Also please stop calling good faith disputes WP:Vandalism. Vandalism has a specific meaning hear on Wikipedia and it's requires an intent to harm Wikipedia. If someone disagrees with you on how Wikipedia can be improved, even when they are completely wrong about it or editing against policies and guidelines, this is not vandalism.  Nil Einne (talk) 11:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Warning
I am issuing this warning in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator. You've been informed that Twitter endorsements do not meet our inclusion criteria. If you continue to add them, you may be blocked from editing. Guy (help! - typo?) 23:16, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Your help desk question
You did not get a response to this question which I just now saw. The people who know how to solve such problems are on WP:VPT if it has happened since then.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  00:00, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)