User talk:Jayen466/Archives/2012/November

Debi Gliori: The Tobermory Cat, the trolls & me
Debi Gliori, an author and illustrator hounded by an alleged troll and a legion of his fans now faces a controversy section in her wikipedia page that she can't get removed (recently repeatedly added and removed) ....

For Debi Gliori's side of the story, see Fiddle and pins: The Tobermory Cat, the trolls & me. Regards, Eric:  Esowteric + Talk  19:55, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Andreas, I'm watchlisting this one. It's gone right now, but I think WP:UNDUE really applies here - A l is o n  ❤ 19:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Eric and Alison. AndreasKolbe   JN  466  20:13, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Andreas and and Alison. This just in. Regards, Eric:  Esowteric + Talk  15:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Of course, this doesn't really help her: the more coverage there is of this, the more it becomes appropriate to include a reference to it in her biography. AndreasKolbe JN 466 15:56, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, Andreas. That was my unspoken point. Especially since I've just added loads of other refs and tidied up .... Regards, Eric:  Esowteric + Talk  16:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

If the Daily Record quotes Debi Gliori has an "army of fans including J.K Rowling" http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity-interviews/childrens-best-selling-author-reveals-her-garden-1365347 I would think this very relevant to the story of "trolling", yet when I attempted to add this to the story to give it a more NPOV, Esowteric deletes this and yet a similar statement about another involved party in the news is allowed to stand. The involved party has already said that he believes Debi Gliori is inciting others to troll him, it is relevant that Debi Gliori has been reported as having "an army of fans". It also brings up the question of what Debi Gliori's motives were in publishing her blog in which she makes a whole host of accusations against the involved party when she knowingly has an army of fans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.243.171.14 (talk) 08:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * The "involved party", artist Angus Stewart, recognizing the damage that this has done, has recently issued a heartfelt plea for the issue to settle down. Many people, including Debi Gliori are thankful and grateful for this manly approach:


 * He writes on his Facebook page for "Tobermory Cat":


 * "[Tobermory Cat] May we close this thread please. I would rather like things to settled down. It seems my idea to follow the process of creating a celebrity cat turns out to be an extremely dangerous and damaging idea. It has caused a great deal of hurt and I want no more of it. My understanding of what is and what is not acceptable is misguided. It has been extremely hurtful to Debi and she does not deserve it. I met her once and she does not deserve to be hurt by my work. I don’t like that. I am guilty of following an idea too far - the fog came down and I forgot about where I wanted to go. The good thing is Debi's book came out and its a good book and will give more pleasure to more people than this page will do if this is the way its going. Good things can come from difficult beginnings and truly hope that is the case for Debi’s book. I need a bit of time to think about this so if possible could everyone take a bit of a deep breath. Time to think about good stuff not bad. I would really appreciate that. Sunday [3 November 2012] at 12:20am · Edited · Unlike · 4"


 * Please can we allow this issue to settle down?  Esowteric + Talk  09:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Intimidation
Hi, Jayen, regarding the the Debi Gliori cyberbullying, just for the record and for posterity, please see User_talk:Esowteric and User_talk:Esowteric. Regards,  Esowteric + Talk  18:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Editor_of_story_is_cyber-bullying_me.2C_I_believe_the_author.27s_fans_are_using_the_wiki_for_cyberabuse_against_an_involved_party ... AndreasKolbe JN 466 19:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Tnx.  Esowteric + Talk  19:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I've also started a discussion off-wiki: AndreasKolbe  JN 466 19:26, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Tnx again. Will have to practise slow breathing for a few minutes, then I'll have a look.  Esowteric + Talk  19:30, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Typical Wikipedia fare ... :) Your accuser seems very confused. Don't worry too much about it. AndreasKolbe JN 466 19:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

wlm.it
Thank you too for inviting me to the discussion :-)) --Frieda (talk) 09:55, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 November 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 23:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Raelians
There has been some recent activity at the above article, including a move made without any apparent discussion that I can see. I would be curious regarding any input on the article and the recent changes of all sorts that have been made in it. I do have both this page and that watched, so feel free to respond in either location, although I think comments at the talk page of the article itself would probably get more attention and input from others, including the editor who has made the recent changes. John Carter (talk) 21:21, 7 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I made a redirect, not a page move. Please wake up John. Pass a Method   talk  22:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Court ruling in Germany
Do you happen to have any materials in English about the incident? Like did the company edit-war to keep the bias content on the page? Was it accurate and properly sourced? Did the competitor try OTRS first? Is there any documentation on the ruling in English?

As you can see I'm fluttered with questions ;-)

I certainly want to make sure they feel Talk page contributions are ok. Corporate 21:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in English yet; the story is really only just breaking in Germany (I understand that even though the decision was in May, it has only recently been published). However, talk page contributions in which you disclose your conflict should be absolutely fine. The whole problem was that articles are assumed to be written impartially by neutral parties, and that readers cannot be expected to check the contributions history or talk page. The problem is providing stealth advertising, i.e. paid contributions with an aim to influence purchasing decisions, disguised as neutral material. At least one solicitor commenting has said that what they said about the competitor product's eligibility for import was not correct. However, that was only half of what was considered improper advertising: the very mention of their own product was also considered to be improper. The article still exists, it is called Weihrauchpräparat. The account that was sued was Gallpharma. It doesn't look like they edit-warred; in fact, they made very few edits, and removed their material a couple of months later (probably when they were sued). Andreas JN 466 21:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Just noting that there were edit wars previously in that section, involving another account http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spezial:Beiträge&target=MinaerBa_AU which may be the competitor who sued; at any rate they said the opposite to Gallpharma, i.e. that imports were possible with a private prescription, because these Ayurvedic products were accepted as medicines in India. Andreas JN 466 22:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Consider the following: The article on CrashPlan is neutral and well-cited and does not trash competitors, but it will certainly (I would hope) influence a customer's decision to buy, as would any article I work on, even where the product itself is not the primary subject. And in every case the author of the content is not disclosed to readers, only to Wikipedians. I don't think it's a clear case and it actually makes an argument for putting some form of COI tag in article-space where disclosed COIs participated.


 * On that note, I think I am well-covered under the FTC's application of common sense, but astrotrufing is a more complex and nuanced subject than we would think. I am not sure the company knew what they were doing was wrong. On another note, his COI disclosure also exposed him to real-world legal consequences, just as non-disclosure also does. Corporate 22:22, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * This is one idea that has been raised in German Wikipedia too: abandon the pretence that Wikipedia is written by neutral third parties, and note that manufacturers of products mentioned may have contributed to the article. Andreas JN 466 22:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

RfC on La Luz del Mundo
The above named article isn't seemingly included in any listings of NRMs yet, but the evidence indicates it could be and maybe should be. The RfC recently started on it could definitely use some input from individuals who have some experience with such matters, like you. John Carter (talk) 15:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Osho.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Osho.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:04, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

JSTOR
Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one.

JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swalling@undefinedwikimedia.org) with...


 * the subject line "JSTOR"
 * your English Wikipedia username
 * your preferred email address for a JSTOR account

The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist.

Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   20:59, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 November 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 November 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Information
I noticed your username commenting at an Arbcom discussion regarding civility. An effort is underway that would likely benifit if your views were included. I hope you will append regards at: Requests for comment/Civility enforcement/Questionnaire Thank you for considering this request. My 76 Strat  (talk) 10:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)