User talk:Rhododendrites/2016a

Hello, you might remember me from talk page of Moral panic and Social Justice and from the ANI where I was put up for hounding. I've now noticed they've placed the term social justice warrior in its own article since it was creating so much chism in social justice.

I looked at the Social Justice Warrior article and it seems like a battleground, full of bully tactics. I don't want to partake and be hounded, but I noticed someone removed four links from Further Reading which weren't duplicates even though that was the edit reason. I don't know any of the other people and I assume they're not monitoring your busy talk page, so could I ask for you, the brazen golem of impartiality, to look into the four links, please? --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 16:03, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh and at some point someone removed this book reference which probably belongs in Further Reading more as it's a book: ^[1] --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 16:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@Mr. Magoo and McBarker: Could you link to the removals you're talking about? There's been a lot of activity there. On the talk page there are discussions of a couple sources -- are those what you mean? If you're talking about Urban Dictionary, I'm going to completely endorse its removal per WP:ELNO, but other than that I'm not sure. There are some sources that have been repeatedly added, removed, moved, etc. based on the context of their use and disputes over reliability, and I'm not inclined to jump in without the benefit of having followed those discussions. Honestly, I don't relish the opportunity to jump in there at all. The reality of it is I tend to get frustrated by Gamergate-related articles because (even compared to some of the other contentious areas I work in) I feel like both sides of GG disputes operate with a battleground mentality in a total WP:AGF vacuum, which makes it really hard to do anything at all without spending a ton of time to make a little bit of progress.

Regarding the book (I typed the above before I noticed your second message), while it's obviously relevant, it looks like it's self-published. My own take on a book like this is that it may be worth including in further reading if you know it to be high quality, but unless there's a compelling reason to do so and/or unless it has received some legitimacy via, say, a review in the New York Review of Books or something, it probably shouldn't be included in an article about a contentious subject and, realistically, if someone challenges it it should probably be removed from any article. A self-published book might as well be a very long blog until it receives some outside validation. I may have missed something, but that's what I'm seeing based on my 2 minutes of research :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:44, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

No, I don't know about the Urban one: at the bottom here. I also don't really understand this "Gamergate". --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 16:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@Mr. Magoo and McBarker: Ah. Well, there's a ton of gray area here but I'll give you the strict policy rationale. Further reading should still conform to WP:RS and should be general resources to learn more about a subject. The NY Post and Crimson articles are explicitly in the papers' respective "opinion" sections. Opinion pieces are typically only considered reliable for the opinions of their authors. So if an author's opinion is significant, it might be appropriate to add to the article, but it's unlikely to be included as further reading or an external link because it's not a general source of information about the subject -- just about the author's opinions about the subject. The Daily Caller and National Review are treated similarly, as publications for which there is a well-documented political bias. It doesn't mean they can never be used, but especially in contentious political issues (or social issues that have a political bent), they're again just typically reliable for the authors' opinions. The gray area for using them comes down to whether the author's opinions should be included in the article per WP:WEIGHT and a more detailed analysis of the extent to which each is reliable. In short, by the strictest policy definition, they are right to be removed unless compelling reasons for their inclusion can be presented. For more information about Gamergate, see Gamergate controversy, but abandon hope all ye who enter there. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:36, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

By the way, I appreciate your "brazen golem of impartiality", whether or not it was intended as a compliment :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind that I overwrote your link. I'd see the same story, but it's a pet peeve of mine when sites recycle material from original sources for their own clicks; I make an effort to find the original creator of the content and give them the clicks (you'll notice that I failed on my first attempt, then finally tracked down the Youtube account of the news anchor). Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:49, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: Not at all. Thanks for doing so. I just happened across the story and quickly added it without making sure it originated with that site (I should've known better, since I'd never seen "Hefty" before). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:51, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Rhododendrites. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 00:41, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for your input.

I am not Matthew Christopher. I am his social media director. I am in the process of adding sources as I clearly mentioned in my edits.

Matthew Christopher is a notable designer in the same arena as Monique Lhuillier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monique_Lhuillier and I followed her format.

Please advise on the conflict of interest. I understand adding sources.

Thanks muchMatthewchristopher (talk) 06:50, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

@Matthewchristopher: I did see that in this edit you said you were "setting up sources", which I took to mean the social media links you added and the list of where his gowns were featured, which don't sound like they would verify other information beyond the existence of his work in those publications. If I caught you while you were in the middle of adding something else, I apologize. In general, though, there's a higher bar for citing sources when it comes to biographies of living persons and the edits looked promotional. Not egregiously so, to be sure, but they add accomplishments and additional details without including sources and add an array of social media links. And, of course, your username is kind of a red flag. I do recognize there's some irony in reverting your changes partially on the basis of sourcing when the article is littered with "citation needed" sorts of tags, though.

If you would like to learn more about Wikipedia's policies regarding paid editing and conflict of interest: WP:PAIDEDIT is about the part of the terms of use that requires disclosure of paid contributions, WP:COI is the full conflict of interest policy (helpful, but lengthy), and WP:PROMO is about promotion on Wikipedia (part of the "What Wikipedia is not" policy). The most useful for you, however, would be the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and how to make a simple COI request.

That last link is the most practical for what we're talking about. The idea is that you use the article talk page to propose changes to the article and use a little template, {{Edit request}} which draws the attention of users who might not otherwise see it. Someone else will come in and implement the change, revise the edits and implement, or provide feedback as to any problems that exist in the proposed text. It's an extra step, but does more to ensure what you want to change does change, and changes in a way agreeable with Wikipedia policies.

By the way, I know that Matthew Christopher is a notable designer. When the article was nominated for deletion last year, I worked to keep it because my own research showed that he is notable. That said, I don't have any particular interest in bridal fashion, and while I found some sources for the purpose of keeping the article I never did use them to improve it. If you click that "nominated for deletion" link, you'll find some links there that you could draw from (although, as you're handling his social media, I imagine you have all of those and more). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:21, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rhododendrites

I made many updates to this page following your recommendations and advice. Thanks. There is a tag on the wiki page -A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject

This might be based on the picture I uploaded. The picture is Matthew's official head shot. His husband, David J. Marchi is an artist/photographer and takes many of Matthew's business pictures. Here is an example of it's use. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=matthew+christopher+fashion+designerMatthewchristopher (talk) 06:40, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Matthewchristopher: I don't think it's because of the image; I think it's strictly because of your username. I don't have any major problems with the content, though, and it looks like Grayfell (an experienced editor) looked it over and made some tweaks, so while I still think it's better to use the talk page (and nobody could justify adding that COI tag in that case) but what you've added looks fine based on a quick look (I haven't actually followed any of the citations). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:18, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rhododendrites...

Getting close I think

Would you please help me remove the conflict comment on Matthew Christopher's page?

Appreciate your help here.

Vermontmountainboy (talk) 01:33, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I am having trouble finding out where to respond to Greyfell and his COI comment and the removal of the picture.

I was specifically asked by Wiki to change my username Matthew Christopher. I did this today and it was approved yet I am still getting comments like Greyfell is leaving.

Also, the picture I posted on behalf of Matthew Christopher Inc. is wholly owned by Matthew Christopher Inc. What do I need to provide as proof of this?

Thanks much

(Vermontmountainboy (talk) 03:35, 1 February 2016 (UTC))

@Vermontmountainboy: It looks like the tag is gone from the article, but there's not a way to remove it from the talk page because, well, you have a COI and you edited the article. I'd recommend leaving a message for Grayfell to follow up on that (and regarding the image). For the latter, you could also check out commons:Help:Contents. Media on Wikipedia fall into three categories: copyrighted content improperly used (should be removed/deleted), copyrighted material used with a fair use rationale, or content with a compatible open license. For the latter, uploads should be done at Wikimedia Commons. There are processes you'll have to go through to show that you're the copyright holder or that you have the copyright holder's permission to release with an open license. I'm not really the best person to help with that, but the Commons page on "email templates" explains how to do this via email. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:27, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, honestly, you are one of the best editors I have worked on at wiki and I appreciate the guidance. I will get proper documentation for picture.

The only other thing I want to discuss is the recent edits. I literally looked at the format of one of Matthew's competitors, Monique Lhuillier and her wiki page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monique_Lhuillier

Since her page has been up for quite a long time, I used it a guide and structured the language almost word for word.

Not that I want to call anyone out but all Matthew's content, subjects, statements about his flagship store are no different than how she was written up.

Thanks for looking into this.

(Vermontmountainboy (talk) 16:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC))

More information Saturday February 6 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon ...

Saturday February 6 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon

You are invited to join us and the AfroCROWD initiative at New York Public Library's Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of the Black WikiHistory Month campaign. Saturday February 6 Black Life Matters Editathon (RSVP). 12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St The Wikipedia training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm. We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC) (Bonus upcoming event: WikiWednesday Salon @ Babycastles - Wednesday, February 17)

Close

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thanks so much Ryan! -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 04:06, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For your tireless work on a range of issues, but more importantly Destruction of ivory, a long overdue article (took a look at Ivory and Ivory trade, and was very much discouraged by the lack of covering this strategy). Keep up the amazing work, Sadads (talk) 15:00, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@Sadads: Thanks! :) I was surprised by the lack of coverage on Wikipedia, too -- especially given the extensive press attention every one of the events attracts. I hope to go back to Ivory trade at some point to better include it there. BTW have you ever taken a look at the US Fish and Wildlife Service Flickr stream. I was peripherally aware of it before but never really took a look. I grabbed some of their images of the NY ivory crush and wound up grabbing about a hundred others :) Now to categorize.... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:28, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Haha, thats great! We always need to be scraping amazing content from PD-US-GOV sources. I worked for the Army Center of Military History for a summer and did a lot of scraping both text and images. Sadads (talk) 15:45, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, why did you place back an unrelated external link to the article? IQ125 (talk) 18:51, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

@IQ125: Why do you say it's unrelated? There's a section heading in the article about Chesskid.com which explains that it's part of chess.com. Chesskid.com also redirects to chess.com. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:09, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree with you, thanks for the clarification. IQ125 (talk) 13:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

So for this edit, did you have to resist the urge to make the edit summary "Added Typo"? Howicus (Did I mess up?) 22:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

@Howicus: No, but I did think about adding it as Tpyo first. Thanks :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:47, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rhododendrites, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! — xaosflux ^Talk 14:50, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

More information Tuesday February 16, 5:30pm: Art+Feminism Training / Photo-Poetics @ Guggenheim, Wednesday February 17, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC ...

Tuesday February 16, 5:30pm: Art+Feminism Training / Photo-Poetics @ Guggenheim
You are invited to join us for an evening of social Wikipedia training and editing at the Guggenheim, with a workshop given by the Art+Feminism project to prepare for next month's major campaign, and a tour and edit-a-thon of Photo-Poetics: An Anthology. Tuesday, February 16 Art+Feminism Training / Photo-Poetics @ Guggenheim (RSVP at Eventbrite - Participants have to bring their own laptops and power cords). 5:30pm - 8:30pm at Sackler Center Media Lab, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1071 Fifth Avenue; enter through 89th Street staff entrance
Wednesday February 17, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan. This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project! We will also include a look at our annual plan and budget ideas, and welcome input from community members on the sorts of projects the chapter should support through both volunteer and budgetary efforts. We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities. After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday December 17 WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One talk this month will be on use of Wikipedia press passes for photographers.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 00:28, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Close

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

On 15 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pocket FM, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a portable radio transmitter called Pocket FM (pictured) enables people to create pirate radio networks in areas where authoritative governments tightly control communications? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pocket FM. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

This month:

Development of the extension for setting up WikiProjects, as described in the last issue of this newsletter, is currently underway. No terribly exciting news on this front.

In the meantime, we are working on a prototype for a new service we hope to announce soon. The problem: there are requests scattered all across Wikipedia, including requests for new articles and requests for improvements to existing articles. We Wikipedians are very good at coming up with lists of things to do. But once we write these lists, where do they end up? How can we make them useful for all editors—even those who do not browse the missing articles lists, or the particular WikiProjects that have lists?

Introducing Wikipedia Requests, a new tool to centralize the various lists of requests around Wikipedia. Requests will be tagged by category and WikiProject, making it easier to find requests based on what your interests are. Accompanying this service will be a bot that will let you generate reports from this database on any wiki page, including WikiProjects. This means that once a request is filed centrally, it can syndicated all throughout Wikipedia, and once it is fulfilled, it will be marked as "complete" throughout Wikipedia. The idea for this service came about when I saw that it was easy to put together to-do lists based on database queries, but it was harder to do this for human-generated requests when those requests are scattered throughout the wiki, siloed throughout several pages. This should especially be useful for WikiProjects that have overlapping interests.

The newsletter this month is fairly brief; not a lot of news, just checking in to say that we are hard at work and hope to have more for you soon.

Until next time,

Harej (talk) 01:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I was just trying to correct an inaccuracy of the article. If you are not convinced, here it is from the horse's mouth: https://twitter.com/Salon . Here is but one example: "White men must be stopped: The very future of mankind depends on it" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.26.205.212 (talk) 17:10, 28 February 2016 (UTC)