Jump to content

User talk:Jim Carter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mark W. Rocha (talk | contribs) at 23:39, 21 February 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

Your future at Wikipedia

Read: User talk:Rudra john cena#Rudra john cena/Jim Cartar

As this account seems to be an attempt at a fresh start, I will block Rudra john cena and you must only use this account and create no others. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:41, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kainaz Motivala, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Horror (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User category

By the way, about that red-linked user category you list on your userpage, Category:Users who use Mozzila: Did you mean to list Category:Wikipedians who use Mozilla Firefox? Or maybe Mozilla Aurora or Mozilla Nightly? --MelanieN (talk) 21:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes MelanieN I mean Category:Wikipedians who use Mozilla Firefox, I don't have time to fix it. I am a bit busy in creating some new userboxes. Have you seen the AfC draft. Jim Cartar (talk) 21:13, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
MelanieN please inform me here if you have see this AfC draft.
By the way I am having my Entrance examinations so I am going to be less productive in the next few days. Please leave your views about the draft here. I will surely reply after my examinations. Thanks. Jim Cartar (talk) 21:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck with your exams. I'm not sure when I will have time to look at your draft; certainly not today. Thanks! --MelanieN (talk) 23:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I took a quick look at your draft. You have put a lot of work into this article; did you write it as a school assignment? If so I bet you got a good grade, because it is very well done as a school paper. Wikipedia has other criteria.

Your draft has already been reviewed by someone who has a lot of experience with articles about Indian history. I agree with their assessment: the article is not well supported by references. Most of your references are not Reliable Sources, which means things like scholarly articles or books, reports from major newspapers, etc. Yourarticlelibrary.com is not a Reliable Source; those are self-written essays which anyone can write and submit, there is no fact-checking or other verification. (You could upload your draft to that library!) Same problem with the blog for exam preparation. Your draft could certainly be tidied up and copy edited, but that would not do any good if the article was not supported by Reliable Sources. Also, as someone else mentioned, the title of the article is not good.

On the other hand, this material is interesting and it doesn't seem to be well covered at Wikipedia, so I think there is a place for it. My recommendation is that you not try to make this a free-standing article, at least not right now. Instead, add some of the information - the parts that have Reliable Sourcing - to existing articles like British Raj#1870s–1907: Social reformers, moderates vs. extremists, or to Indian independence movement#Rise of Indian nationalism (1885–1905). You will get feedback from other editors who work at those articles; accept their comments and learn from them, and gradually expand the information. Eventually you may have enough material to split off into a separate article. But don't start out trying to write a brand new article. That's my advice. And in fact it's generally good advice for new users: start out by improving existing articles, not by trying to create new ones --MelanieN (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your involvement in discussions at my talk page

Hi there. I know you are just trying to be helpful, but sometimes others find it simpler if just one person handles a matter. Thank you for your understanding. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:53, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(You replied at my talk:) "...I am sorry if you disliked my interference in your talk page discussions. I am just trying to assist them.
Was my style of approach to the new users were correct ??
What do you think should I continue helping new users with suggestions ?..."
Your suggestion was fine. Your style was correct. You may help new users as you wish, but maybe not new users who have come to my talk page for answers.
When I started at Wikipedia, I spent the first few years learning, reading, seeing how others handle things, and feeling not at home at all. Years! I am still learning and always will. I am just beginning now to feel able to dispense some advice. I am truly at the bottom of the ladder in terms of expertise. I still ask zillions of questions at IRC and elsewhere, and try hard to learn how to approach and respond to matters. You have been here for such a short time, have had issues with your contributions (and still do), complaints, and problems, yet you are doling out advice like an expert. Please consider spending your time learning and absorbing. I say this with respect. Slow down and learn. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your suggestion was fine. — No, it was not. I saw that post and ignored it. You suggested to keep his userpage "simple". The issue was not related to simplicity or complexity of the userpage. The userpage was deleted under Wikipedia:CSD#G11 — using userpage for advertisement/promotion. A better (read "correct") suggestion could be asking him not to create userpage like a fake article or detailed biography or resume.
    Secondly you asked him to contribute in medical science related subjects. His prompt reply was I shall surely provide much information on Total Knee and Hip Replacement Surgeries. I won't be surprised if he adds his suggestions or prescriptions in some disease articles. Mentioning the Wikipedia policies e.g. please contribute to medical science related articles following Wikipedia policies, check WP:OR, WP:V, WP:NPOV etc could be better. You and that editor have similar level of expertise. A blind can not lead another blind. Tito☸Dutta 13:51, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, true. It wasn't such a good suggestion Cartar made. It wasn't absolutely terrible either. I was hoping he'd just stay away from suggestions and advice altogether, and if he didn't, speak up then. Also, I'm sure many are watching the doctor's contribs, searching for mainspace articles to appear, and even linksearch drnirajvora.co.in and linksearch www.drnirajvora.com/. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Titodutta can you please be polite when talking with me. Okay @Anna I will gain experience first. Thank you for bringing me the issues. And @Titodutta your words are quite rude. If you want to insult me then please don't talk with me. I am just asking Anna if I am going in the right way or not. She told me not to suggest others with out experience, which I have agreed thats all, its over. Why are you poking your nose every where? Jim Cartar (talk) 14:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • can you please be polite when talking with me — shut up. From the very first day you have flooded me with notifications and help requests and now you are asking why I am getting involved! And why are you notifying and adding talkback messages if you don't want me to reply? --Tito☸Dutta 17:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Hey, guys, cut it out. Both of you. Now! WP:CIVILITY is one of the Five Pillars of Wikipedia, and is also what your mother taught you: "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." Since the two of you don't seem to get along, I would suggest you simply stop talking to each other and stay off of each other's talk pages. Don't join conversations they are having with other people. Don't tell them what to do. You know, people can be blocked for getting into personal fights. (By the way, Jim/Rudra, there is no need to use "talkback" notes to tell someone they have a message on your talk page. Just address your message to them using their Wikipedia username, as in [[User:MelanieN]], and they will receive one of those top-of-the-page notices telling them that they have been mentioned.) --MelanieN ::(talk) 17:37, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @User:Titodutta please calm down I have told you not to talk like this earlier. shut up. From the very first day you have flooded me with notifications and help requests and now you are asking why I am getting involved!—What else, you are the one who started talking with me first at my alternate accounts talk page, this is not called involvement instead this can be called Adding fuel in fire (i.e. provoking others to feel bad about someone) and by the way every expert Wikipedian receives hundreds of notifications, none of them complains like you, every new user has rights to ask for help from a experienced user like you but no one use this term shut up. to a new user. It was a small issue of suggestions but you have started fighting with me. You are the one who pokes his nose in others conversations you did it multiple times on User:Anna Frodesiak talk page, in my talk page in User:BgWhites talk page etc. Before pointing fingers on others please think 100times that if you are doing the correct one or not. Before you critisise others please think once if you are doing the right thing or not. It was User:MelanieN for whom I am not fighting. You suggested to keep his userpage "simple". The issue was not related to simplicity or complexity of the userpage.—Are you judging my suggestions. I know my suggestions were not good and I have already stopped suggesting others. But I have just told Niraj Vora to make his user page Simple after I have seen the suggestion by Anna-Editors who arrive, make it plain and in a earlier discussion she told something like this "one must add only Basic Information on there user page" I know you are thinking what I am trying to explain with this, If you try to find the meaning of simple in Oxford English Dictionary, isbn=0-19-569258-6 then you will find the meaning is Plain and basic that mean I have commented partially same what User:Anna Frodesiak already said him. So, Tito-No, it was not. also means that the comment introduced by Anna was also not totally perfect. 2ndly a New user cannot always understand the heavy meanings of Wikipedia guidelines so it is our not me but other users responsibility to make them understand step by step not only providing see this guidelines first makes them understand the total system how Wikipedia works. I don't know if you have seen other parts of the discussion or not but I have mentioned the advertising or self-promotional topic already some where there. Secondly you asked him to contribute in medical science related subjects. —Is it wrong to encourage new users to contribute. I personally think that one should contribute in a article in which he as good knowledge. That is why I asked him to contribute in the field which is his profession. I won't be surprised if he adds his suggestions or prescriptions in some disease articles.—Do you think that Indian editors are so stupid that they will add prescriptions about diseases, He maybe new but it is his common sense that he will not do such a idiotic blunder. (This point makes me laugh) Anna has already said that some users are watching his contributions if he makes any error then they will revert changes he will make.
See I am not here to proof something nor I am trying to fight you and neither I am suggesting you something. I have done numerous mistakes in wikipedia and this could be another one. I am not trying to proof myself correct nor I want to proof what I did is perfect neither I'm trying to proof Tito wrong. I am already feeling guilty for my work. I am just trying to answer what Tito said please don't take me otherwise. I have said everything assuming Good faith (as far as I think) But if any thing hurts you then please forgive me assuming me as your family member. Maybe I have mistaken everything above, it is upto User:MelanieN and User:Anna Frodesiak if I am correct or the negative one. Again please forgive If I showed any incivil behaviours. Jim Cartar (talk) 21:59, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:Jim Cartar, you saw my advice: Just stop talking to him. But instead, you wrote a book. I understand: you wanted to reply to his criticisms and justify yourself. Everybody wants to get in the last word. Everybody wants to prove that THEY are the good guy and the OTHER guy is a problem. But that's not a good way to handle things at Wikipedia. It just makes for escalating battles, "he said this!", "he did that!" It's childish and it's also bad for the Wiki.
You will do as you want. But my advice is to ignore Tito. Other people can see what he says and judge for themselves whether one or both of you is a problem. Yes, he was wrong to tell you to shut up. Everybody can see that. You don't have to point it out. If you keep replying to him and arguing with him you will only make matters worse. If you just stop talking to him, the situation will quickly calm down.
As for the situation raised here by Anna: Anna was trying to help another user at Anna's own talk page. Anna asked you, politely, not to jump in with additional advice or comments, but to let Anna handle it. That's good advice and you should follow it. And in the more general case, since so many people have objected to your advice to new users, I also think it would be better if you focus on your own editing and leave the advice to more experienced editors. --MelanieN (talk) 22:26, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim Cartar, Thank you for you help with creating an article. I saw your notes and have added some citations to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mark_W._Rocha page. I was wondering if this is notable enough to get the article approved.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jim_Carter&oldid=596562110"