User talk:ColinFine

Thank you very much for your comments. I have now placed in my sandbox the first draft of my article on modeloids. I would appreciate very much additional comments and suggestions. Miro Benda, Seattle. --Mirobenda (talk) 07:25, 21 December 2018 (UTC) Mirobenda (talk) 07:25, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Dear Colin, I just wanted to thank you for your vote and constructive comments regarding the article IPA2. I wish you success and all the best. -DrMoslehi 22 September 2006, 03:47 (UTC+3:30)

Dear Colin,

I really did not get the impression you had wanted to keep my article and soothe my feeling, etc. I just thanked for the time you spent giving your opinion (to contribute to Wikipedia) and the instructions you gave (to guide others how to contribute). In case of Shashank, I just thanked to be grateful and when I used 'fan-style' I used the exact description. I did not give my opinion on whether showing fan-style support is good or bad (although you might think it as a kind of confirmation which in this case I really did not mean). -DrMoslehi 26 September 2006, 04:08 (UTC+3:30)

Dear Colin,

Many thanks for your prompt reply to my Wikipedia query, made earlier today!

Yours sincerely,

John L Bell

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 06:38, Tuesday, December 17, 2024 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Bat

	Hello ColinFine, Koopa24 has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely bat! Enjoy!
	Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{subst:User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks, figured it out

I appreciate you outreach on my citation question. I have deduced that Wikipedia balks at citations including https:// . Easy to fix, but also an easy mistake to make when one's source is curated via google amp. Thanks! Phbm9684 (talk) 17:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Phbm9684. I don't think it's that: if you look at the source of P.J.Fleck, you'll find several instances of https: in a citation. Glad you found a solution, anyway. --ColinFine (talk) 20:38, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

my edit on Rajneesh

Hi ColinFine, I have realised that now, the page of the interview is indeed copyrighted, so I will ask for permission. There is no reason why some of the content should not be used, as it is directly related to the topic in question. And other qoutes have been used on the page, that are also taken from people directly related to the question. Eternity5090 (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Eternity5090: you can quote a short excerpt from the interview without worrying about copyright, if you think it appropriate (see WP:QUOTE). But I can't imagine a case where it would be appropriate to reproduce more of an interview than that. Again, a Wikipedia article is not about what the those involved in the subject say, it is about what independent commentators have said about the subject, including what the commentators have said about what the participants say. The only kind of claim that an interview is capable of supporting is the "so and so said X in an interview": it cannot be used to support X (apart from uncontroversial factual data), and neither may the Wikipedia article contain any argument or conclusion from what was said in the interview, unless it is summarising the argument or conclusion presented in a single independent commentary (see original research). --ColinFine (talk) 19:14, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Edit on Rajneesh

Ok, thanks for the info, Colinfine.

So it should be stated as "so and so said in an interview with..."

And then one or two qoutes from the person concerned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eternity5090 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

That's right, Eternity5090. But really, such a quote should be there to amplify or exemplify something that an independent commentator has said. If no independent source has covered the material in the interview, it shouldn't be referred to in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:45, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me out!

Hey ColinFine,

if I may quote you: "I can see that, while the sources are probably reliable, not a single one of them is independent of Stossier"... So if I list the sources I used:

1) Registry of the Austrian Medical Association -> it is an Austrian governmental institution which administrates all Austrian physicians. it would be comparable with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_Board_of_California -> therefore I think this source is reliable and independent?

3) Website India Today -> based on the size of the organisation and the date it was founded it would assume it is considered as well-established. ""News reporting" from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact"

4 and 5) Union Registry of the Austrian Ministry of the Interior -> it is an Austrian governmental institution which administrates all Austrian unions and their registration. i would also assume that this source is independent?

now i would say at least 4 out of 6 sources are reliable and independent according to wikipedias guidelines?

Have a good day! Yet another IT guy (talk) 19:26, 21 January 2019 (UTC)