User talk:Paulsanjose

COI at Dennis W. Chiu
Hi, please don't remove maintenance temples such as the WP:COI template you removed here - I have replaced it, please don't remove it again. Clearly you mean well but you are creating an article that is not matching wikipedia standards and you are WP:OWNing it and not allowing editors to correct it - please take your time, listen to advice and be aware if you are the subject of the article it is advisable if you don't edit the article and allow others ot improve it. Please be aware your editing ability is a privilege and not a right, thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 21:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for your understanding reply. Its good to allow experienced editors to have a good look towards improvement - sometimes a bit less, but more policy compliant is the best position, regards. - Off2riorob (talk) 00:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

There is a problem with the edits to the Dennis W. Chiu article. Under the Wikipedia:Notability guidelines WP:N, a subject is notable if the subject has been noted by third party independent articles repeatedly. Editors have been removing footnotes and in-text references on Chiu's article on "Obscenity on the Internet" when its been cited in almost 100 legal articles and books, and the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Kilbride adopted Chiu's premise of using a "national community standard". This is a First Amendment issue of some import enough that it is discussed on multiple Wikipedia articles. Many scholars have cited "the scholarly debate" since Chiu's article in 1995 (Chiu's being one of the earliest to broach the topic), until the Ninth Circuit ruling in 2009. Chiu is notable for being a planning commissioner, community advocate, and politician but his legal article is further proof of his notability. The question becomes: "If a BLP is notable for an article he wrote, should editors remove notations for the article that proves the BLP subject's notability?" Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Dennis W. Chiu. --Paulsanjose | Talk 03:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of The Politics of Change for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Politics of Change 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/The Politics of Change 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Bbb23 (talk) 22:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Dennis W. Chiu for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dennis W. Chiu 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/Dennis W. Chiu 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Bbb23 (talk) 03:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe that Chiu is notable and should not be deleted. Editors have removed so much information in the current version Chiu's Wikipedia article from the one just available 45 days ago that he does not appear to be notable in current form. If you Google "Dennis Chiu" and "obscenity" a myriad of third party professional and reputable third party journals will arise, due to his 1995 authorship of an article that called for "national community standards" for judging material as whether materials are legally obscene when transmitted over the Internet. LexisNexis, the world's largest electronic database for legal and public-records related information proclaimed Chiu's article on obscenity a "litigation essential". (See https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&doctype=cite&docid=36+Santa+Clara+L.+Rev.+185&key=95a34af95c71002b3313b176fc5777e9) However, based on Users Bbb23 and OrangeMike's overzealous editing that information was removed.


 * If you Google "Dennis Chiu" and "media bias" you will find that his article with John Zaller has had a profound effect in proving how elite opinion (talking heads/government officials) affects how news media slants coverage. In Andre Billeaudeaux, David Domke, John S. Hutcheson and Philip A. Garland's 2003 article, "News Norms, Indexing and a Unified Government Reporting during the early stages of a Global War on Terror" (featured in The Global Media Journal), the scholars write: "In Zaller and Chiu’s (1996) examination of U.S. news coverage of foreign policy crisis, they refined indexing theory by providing 'narrower' and more 'situational rules' for news trend coverage during foreign policy crisis, or emergency situations. These situations defined and predicted how journalists would slant foreign policy coverage as either 'hawkish' in favor of aggressive foreign policy action or 'dovish' representing a more cautious approach for foreign policy. These measurements were found to happen at key points in foreign policy conflicts, leading Zaller and Chiu to hypothesize that the press indexes its coverage to the views of different actors at different points in a crisis: to the president at the first emergence of a crisis, to the Congress as events begin to settle down and to the opinion of non-politicians (such as experts or the public at large), in cases in which the crisis persists over a long period of time." (See http://lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/gmj/fa03/gmj-fa03-bdhg1.htm). Yet, conveniently Bbb23 and OrangeMike deleted the footnotes supporting for the significance of the Chiu-Zaller piece from Chiu's Wikipedia bio.


 * Furthermore, if you Google, "Dennis Chiu" and "Asian fundraising scandal" you will find a 1999 Asian Week newspaper article that states: "Despite the 1996 fundraising scandal, Asian Americans remain very much a part of the California Democratic Party, said Dennis Chiu, president of the Silicon Valley Asian Democratic Club, with 200 members. 'Two years ago, we met with Roy Romer from the Democratic National Committee to talk about the Asian American fundraising scandal,' he recalled, saying that the party, too, wanted to 'not repeat the events that led to that situation two years ago.' To that end, the party worked to re-create the APA caucus and issued a statement supporting it, Chiu said. And after Gov. Gray Davis won re-election in 1998, his office invited Chiu’s 200-member club to suggest possible appointees. Such overtures have helped bring about what Chiu called a 'renaissance period of Asian American involvement in politics in Silicon Valley.' " Yet, Bbb23 and OrangeMike proclaim that Chiu is not notable when he had a reported affect on the Democratic National Committee, California Democratic Party and worked with California Governor Gray Davis to appoint Asian Americans to state positions. Yet for Bbb23 and Orange Mike, Chiu is still not notable. (See http://asianweek.com/040199/Demsmeetinsac.html)


 * Additionally Chiu is not only an attorney that was appointed to the Santa Clara County planning commission. He was Treasurer and Legal Counsel for the Santa Clara County Democratic Party. In this capacity Chiu drafted a resolution for the California Democratic Party to criticize the Democratic National Committee regarding the attempt to not take political contributions from Asian donors with Asian last names. Emy Thurber "commended Dennis Chiu for doing a great job on his resolution and announced that Dennis’ resolution was the one voted on by the committee and this resolution's precise language was adopted by the California State Democratic Party. (Emphasis added) (See http://sccdcc.mn.sabren.com/archives/minutes/030403.htm); see also http://sccdcc.mn.sabren.com/archives/minutes/010301minutes.htm; see also http://sccdcc.mn.sabren.com/archives/minutes/030206.htm; http://sccdcc.mn.sabren.com/archives/minutes/030306.htm) Yet, Bbb23 and OrangeMike still claim Chiu is not notable and should be deleted.


 * OrangeMike and Bbb23 may have good intentions, by they delete references from reputable third party journals and third party journal articles and sources that make the case for Chiu's notability.


 * The facts, quotes and citations discussed above argue that Chiu is notable and it can be documented by verifiable souces as quoted and listed above -- that is unless OrangeMike and Bbb23 continue to delete the verifiable sources that make Chiu notable.


 * If Wikepedia readers allows OrangeMike and Bbb23 to delete Chiu's biography, then they will verify a methodology for bullying articles off the website - first delete the sources that make a subject notable, then wait until there is nothing hardly notable left and recommend the article for deletion. This is hardly unbiased editing. -- Paulsanjose   &#x007C;   Talk   07:16, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Dennis W. Chiu
Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring&#32; after a review of the reverts you have made on Dennis W. Chiu. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively. Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - you are not stepping back. Please back off and allow experienced independent editors to edit the Bio - Off2riorob (talk) 17:32, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

3RR Report
As you have continued reverting after my warning I have reported you to the 3RR noticboard, please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Paulsanjose_reported_by_User:Off2riorob_.28Result:_.29 - you are able to comment there to defend your edits - Off2riorob (talk) 18:34, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Evan Low, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Recorder. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:00, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:DennisWChiu.jpg


The file File:DennisWChiu.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, Paulsanjose, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Evan Low, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * Best practices for editors with close associations
 * Plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * 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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Central Midfielder (talk) 20:09, 25 September 2020 (UTC)