User talk:NorthBySouthBaranof/Archives/2018/March

Another Daily Mail RfC
There is an RfC at Talk:Daily Mail. Your input would be most helpful. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

George Soros
This was pretty much exactly what I was typing when I edit conflicted with Emir yesterday and decided not to bother. GMTA. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants  Tell me all about it.  02:12, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Dinesh D'Souza
You just undid one of my edits, and also sent me a message, and I appreciate both.

Re the claimed/said edit, you made a very worthwhile point, and educated me as well, so I thank you for that.

As to the message regarding "edit wars", I am the furthest thing from a digital native, and barely understand how Wikipedia works. Even the term "edit wars" is new to me. I can try to follow up on the many links you sent me, but I will need a strong learning curve here. As I write this, in fact, I am far from certain if I am responding to you in the appropriate venue.

I make edits when they seem to cry out for them, but that is based on an interest in knowledge, facts, and good writing, not the world of Wikipedia.

The Dinesh D'Souza situation is very frustrating. I made a small number of edits for clarity's sake (three IIRC), and another one for readability. Some editor who shows himself to be a far-left ideologue swooped in and removed all of them, calling them controversial. I do not want to see Wikipedia descend into political rants, neither right-wing nor left. Frankly, this whole thing just is depressing, and is souring me on Wikipedia overall. Too many editors like the political hack who overruled me would have the effect of ruining the Wikipedia reputation for fairness and openness.

Thank you,

Vinny C. Vcuttolo (talk) 07:30, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Your opinion that another editor is a "far-left ideologue" is neither here nor there - it can have no relevance to this discussion. You do not get to dismiss other editors because you disagree with what you perceive to be their political opinions. Your edits were objectionable for a couple of reasons - they introduce editorializing language, for one, and they insert unsourced statements - such as the word "alleged," which is not present in the cited sources. The proper response to your edits being reverted is to open a discussion on the article talk page - Talk:Dinesh D'Souza. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 07:40, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Alan Dershowitz
In the Dinesh D'Souza article, Dershowitz is lumped in with conservative critics of the federal prosecution of D'Souza for illegal political donations. I made an edit to reflect the fact that Dershowitz is not a conservative. (See Dershowitz's wikipedia page; his lede flat-out calls him a political liberal.) You didn't like my edit, and removed it. I am definitely not a Wikipedia expert, as you clearly are.

I respectfully request that you make the appropriate change to the D'Souza article to properly reflect that Dershowitz is not a conservative, in a way that you find appropriate.

Thank you.

Vcuttolo (talk) 07:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC) Vcuttolo (talk) 07:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

D'souza article, and Volunteer Marek
I see that to responded to the first item I posted here, so I guess I placed my comment in the right place. Or maybe not, but at least you saw it, so I will take that as a positive.

There was an edit that I made for which you thanked me (and I thank you for that!). I had previously added the word "alleged", you removed it and explained why, so I made the appropriate adjustment, and earned the thumb's up from you, which I certainly appreciate.

And along came the redoubtable Volunteer Marek, and undid my edit.

Again, I am way out of my depth here. What do I do when a Wikipedia editor (Volunteer Marek in this case), acts like a total asshole (is asshole a scientific term?). The combative part of me wants to metaphorically beat him over the head, while the pessimistic side wants to quit Wikipedia forever.

I would like your advice here, as you are clearly a very knowledgeable and fair editor, and I mean those compliments sincerely. And would love to know what a Wikipedia nobody like myself can do against a Wikipedia editor who is, in my humble opinion, grossly misusing his power under the lamb-like handle of Volunteer Marek.

Thank you.

Vcuttolo (talk) 19:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC) Vcuttolo (talk) 19:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

king
Although I don't care a whole ton, so probably will let it go I think your calling synth on the DOJ line from the king article was probably incorrect. What_SYNTH_is_not. In any case I think this source probably covers this hypothetical inclusion, since it says pretty much exactly what we said in the same order. http://www.complex.com/life/2016/01/shaun-king-black-lives-matter/self-promoter ResultingConstant (talk) 13:33, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages! ACTRIAL:
 * ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing
 * Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking  place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled
 * While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.