Jump to content

User talk:Cullen328

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Micromadmonkey (talk | contribs) at 12:24, 30 November 2020 (→Sending Love to Master: new WikiLove message). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I don't live on Cullen Ct, but I like the street sign

If you have any interest in editing Wikipedia by smartphone, I encourage you to read my essay, Smartphone editing. Thank you.

Welcome to my talk page I use the name Cullen328 on Wikipedia, but you can call me "Jim" because that's my real first name. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the old comments from July and August of 2009 that follow the "Contents" here, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome when I first started editing Wikipedia.

The importance of a friendly greeting

Hello and welcome to my talk page. If you want to start a new conversation, please click "New section" at the top of this page. I keep the comments that follow from July and August of 2009 readily visible, because these friendly words of greeting made me feel welcome here on Wikipedia when I first started editing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:38, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please offer your thoughts

I would appreciate comments and suggestions on any contributions I make. I am learning.Cullen328 (talk) 03:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on Jules Eichorn. He's been needing an article for a while.   Will Beback  talk  06:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I may suggest, now that you've posted the Eichorn article the draft below might be deleted. It's your talk page to do with as you like, but it's a bit hard to edit around.
As for formatting and pictures, a good way to learn is to look around at other articles to see what you think looks best. It can be helpful to break up long blocks of text into subsections. Perhaps it'd be possible to split the biography into two or three eras. Other than that, the formatting is usually kept fairly plain. As for photos, it's easy to upload them: the trick is in finding photos with appropriate licensing. If you have any personal photos then those'd be fine. There are might be pictures of the peaks he did first ascents on in the Wikicommons. File:Cathedral Peak.png is a so-so pic of Eichorn Pinnacle.
As before, feel free to ask if you have any questions. There are several editors here who are mountaineers or just admirers of the Sierra, so you're in good company.   Will Beback  talk  21:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Many editors create "sandbox" pages for drafting articles. For example, User talk:Cullen328/Sandbox.   Will Beback  talk  00:17, 1 August 2009


Your climber biographies

Hey Jim, just wanted to say welcome and thanks for your contributions to the Sierra Nevada climbing history articles. You're filling a niche that's been missing here, I look forward to working with you. --Justin (talk) 11:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that. Nice work on Allen Steck and welcome to Wikipedia. I don't know who you are planning to write up next but if your taking requests I think Peter Croft (climber) could really use a page. If you ever have any questions please ask. Thanks again for your great additions.--OMCV (talk) 02:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Justin and OMCV. I am beginning work on Tom Frost and Glen Dawson. Comments on Norman Clyde would be welcomed. I will defintely read up on Peter Croft, OMCV. I am still "learning the ropes" in Wikipedia, to use a climbing analogy, and have all sorts of things in mind. My biggest challenge right now is getting permission to use images. My next biggest challenge is hiking to the top of Mt. Whitney with my wife in ten days - she's never been above 12,000 feet except for the train ride up Pikes Peak. As she's 56 and developing arthritis in her toes, it will be an accomplishment if she (and I) complete the Class 1 feat. Jim Heaphy (talk) 02:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Debra and I made it to the summit of Mt. Whitney at 2:20 PM on Friday, September 11. Jim Heaphy (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Archive

2010 Archive

2011 Archive

2012 Archive (first six months)

Automatic Archive 1Automatic Archive 2Automatic Archive 3


== Whatever

22K watchlisted!

Jeez, I was thinking I should start culling because I just reached 5K. —valereee (talk) 20:36, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Valereee. A lot of them are old AFDs and a lot of them are inactive pages. But I enjoy scanning the list, looking for "interesting developments". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CLevic

Hi. Draft:Clevic aviation and space is clearly fictional, but nobody has responded to your CSDG3 tag in four days. Any idea why? This search points to simpleplanes.com, where it is tagged "fictional", plus it seems to be a "build your own fictional plane" site, where a user with the same name as the user who created it here (TheDerpingMemes) created it. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:23, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AlanM1. I am surprised it is taking so long. I have added a note with additional information to the CSD tag. I hope that works. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Saclote

You have blocked Kenneth Saclote before. I made a last-ditch GF effort to get them to communicate [1] but as far as I can tell, they are unable or unwilling. Their talkpage is just filling up with more and more warnings, and the meaningless disruption continues. Would you please look into it? ☆ Bri (talk) 04:44, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bri. I've blocked for a week with a warning that the next block may well be indefinite. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:54, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Baron Trump

You G10'd it, but I think that was based on just the last edit to the page, which was vandalism. It's a longstanding redirect, I think rather it should just be restored and permanently protected. I can do it, but figured I'd drop you a line first. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:47, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Amorymeltzer. I doubt the value of a disambiguation page with just two entries, one of which is a spelling error. It is definitely a vandalism magnet, but if you want to bring it back and permanently protect it, then that's fine with me. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:01, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It's a reasonable dab or even {{R from mispelling}}, and gets used so at the very least should be discussed. I've gone and done it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please help me fix edits on German Wiki to match English Wiki?

Can you please help me fix edits on German Wikipedia to match English Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cp147 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, Cp147, but my German language skills are poor. What article are you talking about? Please explain why you think it is important that things "match". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:18, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you so much for a reply and for such a quick reply. They should both match the physical CD liner notes, as well as many many other citations such as record label websites, etc., etc. but only the English Wikipedia has the correct album credits. Is there anyway I could please email you privately? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cp147 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cp147, I still don't know which article you are talking about. This is not a matter that needs confidentiality, so I prefer to discuss the matter openly here on Wikipedia. If there is a problem with a German article, then please edit it to fix it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:51, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did that by using an online translator but they denied my edits. I truly believe someone is doing this on purpose. I really need to talk to you privately and then I can easily give you my 6 great citations that should settle this matter once and for all (including images of physical CD liner notes and record label website info. about credits). It will also show how wrong it was that someone denied my edit and they should be banned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cp147 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cp147, machine translation is a bad idea unless you speak both languages quite well. You are responsible for the accuracy of any translations that you do. I do not want an email and I have no interest in seeing the liner notes or anything else. I don't even know which article you are discussing. If you are blocked on the German Wikipedia, then you must follow their block appeal process and file a properly formatted unblock request. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:17, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cp147, which account are you using on the German Wikipedia? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:25, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diva_Destruction Extra names of people that should not be next to a 2006 album title are the same names in English or in German (the album title is also in English). They are names of people that should not be there in that one very and short easy to translate sentence. If you pull up that same 2006 album title in the English Wikipedia you will see there is one and ONLY one name for all the credits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cp147 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cp147, which account are you using on the German Wikipedia? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:33, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe I was logged in at all. I tried to make the Oct. 13 edit. If you click on the header word just to the right of "Lesen" you will easily see my Oct. 13 edit. I also see that is says "Marking: Visual Processing" when I clicked in other categories. Does that mean it is being held for a "visual" review and maybe there is still hope it will be accepted? Have you looked at the page yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cp147 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cp147, please edit logged in when you have an account. Yes, I read the page using Google Translate, which is not highly accurate but gives me a good idea of what the article says. I also read the English article Diva Destruction, which has a lot of problems. I cannot help you with any problems on the German Wikipedia, and cannot evaluate the quality of your edit since I do not read German fluently. You need to get help on the German Wikipedia, not here. Why don't you work to improve the English article? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:19, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help with improving a Stub

Hello! I am a student at The University of Sydney and I am completing a Wikipedia editing course. We have chosen a stub to research, edit, and improve. I have chosen Lagos University Teaching Hospital as the stub to edit. I am currently adding information to the article and I would value your input and advice with the work I am doing. I appreciate your help. Thank you! Creatorhj244 (talk) 03:27, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NEED FOR ANDROID ARTICLE CREATION

Hi , i am a teenager and I like to create articles,i especially had the dream of creating a wikipedia article, but am on android and very confused to how can I create so in android. Please kindly help me .

THANK YOU PRIMUS MEGATRONUS (talk) 14:31, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PRIMUS MEGATRONUS. I suggest using the desktop site on your phone. You can access it by scrolling to the very bottom of the mobile view. Successfully writing an acceptable new Wikipedia article is very challenging, so I recommend that you spend some time improving existing articles to learn how the encyclopedia works. Write with proper grammar, punctuation and capitalization. Read and study Your first article which has lots of excellent advice. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:24, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm....i can understanding Cullen , but you know..i want to increase the number of wikipedia article. I have bunches of topics to write in wikipedia and they are not written yet . Any ways ?? please ?? PRIMUS MEGATRONUS (talk) 07:05, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PRIMUS MEGATRONUS. You cannot write new articles at least until you are autoconfirmed. You can write a draft article and submit it to Articles for Creation. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i understood, but the thing is that i can't create my biography anyhow. That's the toughest part that I can never understand till now. PRIMUS MEGATRONUS (talk) 04:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, PRIMUS MEGATRONUS. You are not an autoconfirmed editor, so you cannot yet create articles directly. I described an option above. If you are thinking about writing an autobiography, then I have to advise you that this is a bad idea. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:07, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A mention

You've been mentioned at User talk:Sumit banaphar. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2021 NFL season Article

Why Did you Delete The Article for i was trying to finish it But why Little Too soon. Stop It 68.102.42.216 (talk) 03:30, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, that article is neither needed nor useful now. As you know, I am not the only editor who has that opinion. Cullen328 Let's discuss it
When Will the article be able to be ready How long will i have to wait. 68.102.42.216 (talk) 03:43, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please be patient. Wait until the major publications that cover Gridiron football start writing detailed articles about the 2021 NFL season. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:12, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding, I have read the article on cars in Cuba, and I found it a bit misleading- the article implies the yank tanks are only Being driven about 800 miles per year. My research says owners of these pre-1960 cars are making big money as taxi drivers in Cuba, upwards of 1200 dollars a month in an economy where the average Cuban wage is at 25 to $30 per month. Anyway thanks again as I am a student and we are getting set to publish live on Wikipedia. If you don't mind and have some time, would you comment on my article? Thank you, wesselm3, or Mike. — Preceding unsigned comment added by "wesselm3" (talk • contribs) 07:38, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Haha I'm going to bet you haven't had much sleep in the last few days. Can we hear it for Georgia? Atlanta Metro area is representing. The difference between the old and the new South is starkest in Atlanta--and its diversity approaches that of the Bay Area and NYC. Take care Cullen. Drmies (talk) 16:50, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Drmies. Great to hear from you. I admit that I have been getting up in the middle of the night to check the headlines. I am tempted to move to Georgia, but I would miss my granddaughter too much. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:07, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2409:4043::/32

In October, I did a hard block on Special:Contributions/2409:4043::/32. This was to stop a specific sock puppet from editing certain articles, so I made it a partial block. He uses both logged-in accounts and IP addresses, so a soft block wouldn't stop him. When you changed this from being a partial block to a site-wide back, it stopped everyone on this ISP from editing Wikipedia – both anonymous editors and logged-in editors. Now, the only people who can edit from this ISP are administrators. Unfortunately, policy makes this difficult for me to fix because it could technically constitute wheel warring. I need you to either fix this or give me permission to fix it. If I restore my original block, I can still make your range block work by doing overlapping range blocks (for example, a soft block on two /33s and a hard partial block on the /32). In the end, both your range block and mine would be active, and there wouldn't be collateral damage. But, as a first step, I would have to override your block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:09, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NinjaRobotPirate, you have my approval to take whatever steps you believe are best. I trust you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It's kind of weird how Mediawiki does some of this stuff. The WMF actually had some planned improvements that would have resolved this for us, but it was canceled. Oh well. Maybe some day. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:45, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

arb

Probably not the first time you've heard this, but as we could still use some arb candidates I was thinking about who would probably be good for it and also likely to get voted in. Your name came to mind, so here I am on the off chance nobody else has suggested it. Perhaps you have more sense than that, though. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:42, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's selling it. :) —valereee (talk) 17:19, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ha. I'm mostly assuming someone has done the hard work of selling it already, and I'm just reminding. Besides, if I fully sell it, then I have to feel responsible for all the stress that comes with it. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:28, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking, Rhododendrites. I do not think that it is my kind of job. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:16, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your kind counsel on how to do this right

Before I create an article I look it up - it is mentioned in many other articles on many other pages on wiki and then I google it and find at least 5-8 independent articles from reliable sources that contribute details (this means it is notable, right?). I often look for something similar in theme that looks like a nice, neat page and I copy the structure code and sub in details of the article I am trying to write. This results in me getting accused of being paid and that the topic is not notable (as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Sno_Babies )

Im not even sure it will ever be reviewed again - its in article purgatory.

Also one of my favorite singers... his band has an article and he does other stuff like act and guest on other bands' songs, so I tried to make him a page. It took me to someone else's draft which was awful (and they said that person was paid) - I kinda fixed it but I am not sure if that is good enough to take the objection to the other person out of it.

I also now know about a film that a lot of my favorite musicians are going to be in - it has been written about some places. I want to start an article but there isnt a TON of info yet. Should I wait? It apparently takes months to be approved so maybe I should put in what I have now?

THANK YOU so much for your time - I really appreciate it!

)

MoviesAndMusicFan (talk) 03:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC) Movies and Music Fan![reply]

Hello MoviesAndMusicFan. Draft:Sno Babies is not submitted for review. It is not in "article purgatory". You need to submit it if you want it reviewed. Follow the instructions at WP:AFC. But it is not up to date. The draft says it is going to be released in September but it is now November. What happened? What did professional reviewers say? Reviews are probably the most important thing that makes a movie notable. As for the singer, they are normally covered in the article about the band they are in. Is the acting in major film roles or just minor TV cameos? Do reliable sources devote significant coverage to him as a person, describing his whole life, education, family and so on? As for the upcoming film, there is general agreement that films are rarely notable until principal photography begins. The standard is whether the project has received significant coverage in several reliable sources. Passing mentions are not enough. Do not submit a draft unless you are confident that the topic is truly notable. I hope this helps. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:58, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your time - I am going to read up and learn more. I want to get better at this and help the community too, like you do. I appreciate it! MoviesAndMusicFan — Preceding undated comment added 20:39, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re GorillaWarfare Talk

You might want to delete one more: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GorillaWarfare&diff=prev&oldid=989991535

IHateAccounts (talk) 04:42, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also they did a couple to https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rdp060707&action=history

IHateAccounts (talk) 04:43, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks for the notification,IHateAccounts. On another matter, I am familiar with the discussions that led you to register with your current username. But I am not a fan of your username. I appreciate your contributions, but I fear that your username may possibly lead to unnecessary conflict, if somebody takes it the wrong way. Do with that what you will. Thanks again. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:00, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks but I am really not into the idea of changing it right now. IHateAccounts (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren Southern

Turns out the account you blocked User:Lauren Cherie Southern was actually Lauren Southern and she is back again as Lozza77 posting on the talk page. She confirming it is herself on Her official Twitter @Southern_Lauren NZFC(talk)(cont) 09:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cullen328 and NZFC, I have a question: Is there is a possible signs of sockpuppetry by User:Lauren Cherie Southern? Wikipedia doesn't allow the use of multiple accounts by the same person. ----Rdp060707 (Your questions?/My fight against the devil) 11:59, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello NZFC and Rdp060707. The identity of the first account has been verified and it is unblocked. The second account is blocked and will remain blocked. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:56, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Silver Legion

Beyond My Ken has not been active at the Silver Legion article since Nov. 5, when he said he would "think about" whether including the disputed Harry Turtledove passage constitutes original research. User Vif12vf, who did the original revert and whom BMK has claimed to his "side" even though he never stated a position, has said that he "has no interest" in editing the article. Although counting noses is not the best way to resolve disputes, that is the basis that BMK advocated and the count is now you and me supporting removal of the passage, BMK supporting inclusion, and Vif12vf a no-show. If I remove the passage I assume he will just revert me, but you could try it. I only ask that you preserve the example of Sinclair Lewis's "It Can't Happen Here," for which I have provided a secondary source. 73.71.251.64 (talk) 21:48, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that this is called WP:CANVASSING, and is not allowed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:09, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond My Ken, I do not think that a message to a single editor who has already expressed an opinion on the matter amounts to canvassing. What am I missing? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CANVASSING]: "Canvassing is notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way, and is considered inappropriate." (emphasis added) The "IP" editor seeks the outcome of removing disputed material from the article, and came here to, as they write themselves "suggest[] that [you] act on what [[you] said ". [2] They were not attempting to further the consensus process by bringing in editors about whom they had no idea what their opinions would be, which is what WP:CANVASSING limits notifications to. ("The audience must not be selected on the basis of their opinions—for example, if notices are sent to editors who previously supported deleting an article, then identical notices should be sent to those who supported keeping it.") Nor was his comment here neutral, as is required. ("Notifications must be polite, neutrally worded with a neutral title...")
That the comment violated the policy against canvassing seem quite clear to me. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond My Ken, in my 11 plus years of editing, I have never once heard a message to a single editor described as canvassing, especially when the editor (me in this case) has already expressed an opinion on the specific matter. Can you please point to a previous case? Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, I cannot, but the meaning of the policy is clear, and the actions of the "IP" clearly violate it. That you -- or I, in my 15 1/2 years of editing -- have never seen an instance of such a particular violation does not mean it is not a violation, it simply means that either it has never happened before that someone pointed out such a violation, and, more likely, that you and I haven't seen it. Neither is dispositive, since this violation has occurred and has been flagged. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, User:Vif12vf (mentioned above) thanked me for restoring the information that the "IP" is attempting to remove from the article, but I didn't go to their talk page and ask them to act on their position, as the "IP" did with you. If what the "IP" did here is not canvassing, then I guess I'll have to go to Vif12vf's talk page and do so. That seems to me exactly what WP:CANVASSING is attempting to prevent, the "gathering of the tribes". Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:17, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond My Ken, I disagree with your analysis, and believe that canvassing must involve multiple editors being notified who have not previously discussed the specific content in question. On the broader question, I also disagree with you about adding unreferenced "In popular culture" content, as that loads up articles with unencyclopedic trivia and fancruft. I expect a reference to an independent secondary or tertiary source. So, now you know where I stand. But out of respect for you, I will not participate in editong that article at this time. Though I disagree with you, I do not care strongly enough to join that fray. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just not seeing anything in WP:Canvassing which specifies that multiple editors have to be involved. I do appreciate the respect, though, thank you. It's mutual. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond My Ken, WP:Canvassing consistently refers to the plural "messages", and never uses "message or messages". In addition, it emphasizes that the volume of the messages matters, with fewer messages being less problematic than many messages. To me, that implies that a plural number of messages is required, and that a single message does not rise to the level of a canvassing violation. But that's just my interpretation. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To me, it's more like it's avoiding the awkward "meassage or messages" or "message(s)". I think that if the policy means to not apply to single messages, it would specifically say so. Something like, "It's acceptable to reach out to a single editor to bolster your position" -- which sounds pretty absurd on its face. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond My Ken, then why the emphasis on the volume of the messages, contrasting limited posting with mass posting? Surely one is the most limited possible posting. The posting was transparent. I was not contacted off-Wikipedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:16, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heads-up

You might want to look at ASIANPOPCHANNEL, compare to an account you recently blocked. Courtesy ping Jimfbleak who blocked that account. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:59, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hagia Sophia

I hope you don't mind my writing here but I just want to say that the Hagia Sophia dispute is a misunderstanding; I definitely did not present the story as true, I'm just arguing the fact the story existed at all and was widely known and influential in its day makes it worthy of inclusion in the article. That's all. Look at all the other work I've done on the article, and look at the way the narrative is presented in Constantinople and Fall of Constantinople (neither of which I have edited much or possibly at all). I still want to mention it, but please believe I've not been "engaged in anti-Muslim propaganda". Exactly the opposite is true; the narrative was considered an epochal event in its time and a landmark shift in the history of Western Christianity's perception and attitude towards Islam in general and Turks in particular. The mythologization of Hagia Sophia is no less important than its building fabric, and that's the only reason I want this information to be in the article, just as I've added quite a few of the cultural myths and legends elsewhere in the article. I can't accept the accusation of propaganda. Sorry to pursue this here but I have to defend myself on this point: I have no agenda here. GPinkerton (talk) 08:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello GPinkerton. I have zero interest in discussing the details of the myths, lies, fables and disinformation campaigns surrounding the Hagia Sophia with you. Or, to quote Elvis Costello, my interest in that is less than zero. My interest as an administrator is in your behavior, nothing more and nothing less.
If you look at my user page, you will learn that I started out editing in large part about people and places associated with the Sierra Club and California mountaineering. At one point, there was a new editor who was a disgruntled coal miner, and he was repeatedly inserting his personal anger about the club's opposition to coal mining into the main article, and I reverted three times. I then asked for advice from a well-known administrator. I got some very good advice and then he went on to say something like "just be sure that you don't edit war yourself". That mild sentence hit me like a lightning bolt, and for the past 11 years, I have never engaged in edit warring behavior. I have never once been blocked and I have never once given a formal warning by a respected editor. Not a single article I have written has ever been deleted. That is because I spent a lot of time familiarizing myself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines regarding content and editor behavior, and to actually follow those policies and guidelines. You, on the other hand, are acting like a bull in a china shop, so convinced that you are right about everything from the Hagia Sophia to Balkan nationalism to the Syrian civil war that you do not need to avoid edit warring or truly understand the definition of vandalism or do the hard work of building consensus. And when called out on your own behavior, you berate and denounce your critics, utterly disregarding the requirement to assume good faith of other editors in the lack of incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Are you capable of self-reflection and a true change of behavior? If so, you can be a great asset to this encyclopedia. If not, I suspect that you will be involved in escalating conflicts that may well end in your departure from the project. I hope that you choose the first path.
Look, I understand that some of the editors making comments calling for you to be blocked are POV pushers of various types. Separate those out and instead pay attention to what productive, long term generalist editors are saying to you, and please take that feedback on board. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:24, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone has suggested I have edit warred on anything related to the Syrian civil war, and I don't think I can be maligned for not doubting that the Holocaust definitely did happen. Most of the criticism has come from the editors whom I have reported for tendentious editing and with whom all possibility of assuming good faith is finished. Perhaps this happens less often in subjects you're interested in; I mostly edit articles about history, which is foundational to ideology and attracts contrarians and the fringe. Apart from this though, I do take your points. I ask again that you withdraw your previous accusation. Thanks. GPinkerton (talk) 20:05, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, so you limit your edit warring to topics other than the Syrian civil war, GPinkerton? Am I supposed to be impressed by that? As for the Holocaust, I am a Jew whose father-in-law lost dozens of relatives to the Nazis in what is now Belarus, and no one has more contempt for its deniers than I do. If "all possibility of assuming good faith is finished" for all of your opponents, then why haven't you presented the incontrovertible evidence that would get them blocked indefinitely? As for the Hagia Sophia talk page matter, I have now read every word of it, not just the excerpts, and I find myself in agreement with Drmies about your conduct there, though claim no expertise about the topic. You are correct that I do not often edit articles about highly controversial topics, because my personality is not suited to never ending brawls. On the other hand, I have blocked over 3000 editors who were extremists, kooks, racists, trolls or spammers. That has brought me a steady stream of abuse, including quite serious death threats on two occasions, so it is not as if I am risk averse. As an editor, you have access to a wide variety of legitimate tools to deal with "contrarians and the fringe". Please use those and please abandon the types of behaviors that have brought you under scrutiny. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My position on "anti-Muslim propaganda" is identical to your position on the Holocaust, which is why I am pressing this point. I am not trying to impress anyone, but I do not appreciate being lumped with the extremists, kooks, racists, trolls or spammers and I am saddened you're restating this. As for incontrovertible evidence, you can see here] for one such case, and a much less well formed one earlier here, though really if anyone were to look at the talk page of Syrian Kurdistan they would swiftly see the evidence themselves, which is so voluminous and goes back months. GPinkerton (talk) 21:36, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, GPinkerton. If I was lumping you in with all those other indefinitely blocked editors, then I would not be engaged in lengthy discussion with you. I would have simply blocked you without discussion. The fact that I am conversing indicates that I think you have the potential to be a good editor. After considering your points, I have struck through "sweeping generalizations" at ANI and substituted a more generic description. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for doing that, it's very charitable of you to reconsider, and thanks for taking the time to talk about this. GPinkerton (talk) 08:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question on Fae topic ban

Hey Cullen, you closed Special:Permalink/910447139#Disruptive_Editing_by_User:Fæ a while ago, so I was hoping for an opinion from you on that topic ban. Do you think the scope of the TBAN is just article-related, or would discussion of gender issues anywhere on Wikipedia be a TBAN violation? I'm here wearing my ElectCom hat: Fae posted this question to the question pages of all of the current ArbCom candidates, I feel like this breaches the TBAN but wanted to get your perspective before doing anything about it. GeneralNotability (talk) 15:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GeneralNotability, I agree with you that this question is a violation of the editor's topic ban. In closing that discussion, I made it clear that the topic ban extends beyond article space. When the editor asked me a follow-up question, I replied "Please be aware that the topic ban will be broadly construed." Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:37, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Cullen, much appreciated. I'll take care of it. GeneralNotability (talk) 17:22, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving!

 Jerm (talk) has given you a Turkey! Turkeys promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving!

Spread the goodness of turkey by adding {{subst:Thanksgiving Turkey}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Sara Radstone article (me RSLLX) //photographs

Dear 'Cullen 328', I have noticed, with absolute horror that you have removed the images of Radstone's work from the published article 'Sara Radstone'. Without them the article is diminished almost to the point of meaningless because her work is so individual and certainly is far removed from most people's assumptions about clay, pottery, ceramics. This is compounded by the fact that the paragraph which is descriptive of her work and its content has also been removed..I don't know why. They are not exactly vases or plates. What matters to you, and I, is the important issue of copyright. Please believe and understand, that copyright agreement has been reached with Radstone. If I knew how to scan things in, which I requested on a previous teahouse, talk page I would do this. Copyright Agreement was reached with Radstone, and also it was discussed with her representing gallery and York Art Gallery, where the photos were taken. My frustration regarding the images and the taking out of writing is increased when I remember that I utilised the wikipedia pages of some of her ceramic colleagues, indeed peers and I believe friends, namely Julian Stair and Edmund De Waal . They quite rightly include images and descriptions of their work, indeed De Waal includes a photograhic image of the artist himself. You mention the fact of reproduction of the image on mugs, t shirts. I imagine, when giving copyright permission she thought about these issues and decided that she would welcome such exposure, not least because it would raise her profile along with the value of her work. In my research I found that Sir Terence Conran, sadly now deceased, utilised images of her work, in the, 'My Favourite Things', Observer Magazine of 06/02/1994. I wonder whether he gained copyright? Please, please restore the phographs....and the writing. RSLLX (talk) 12:39, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hope ‘Cullen 328 ‘ that you have seen my (RSLLX) responses to the removal of images from ‘ Sara Radstone’. Not knowing the system very well it becomes difficult to perhaps respond correctly or in the right place. I have written in Teahouse and your dedicated talk page. Radstone has relinquished / agreed to the use of the images. Please can you restore them to the article. Her work is so individual the images are needed. ‘Theroadislong’ has informed me that Julian Stair in the article that he wrote put in the photo himself- so presumably that is also what Radstone could do. RSLLX (talk) 14:38, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello RSLLX. Please do not be upset because the problem can be solved. The photos currently violate copyright and cannot be restored to the article until the copyright issue is resolved. This is a matter of policy and it is non-negotiable. When you uploaded those images to Wikimedia Commons, you attested "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license". That was incorrect. Radstone is the primary copyright holder, and your photos are derivative works. I am sure that you are acting in good faith but as an administrator, I cannot believe the assertions of an anonymous person who does not have the legal right to upload those photos to Commons. It is Radstone herself who must release the rights to her work, in writing, under an acceptable free license. I informed you of the problem quite clearly on your talk page, and you did not respond. It was therefore my obligation as an administrator to remove the copyright violations. Mike Turnbull gave you all the information you need to resolve the problem on your talk page. I am very sorry that this is upsetting to you, but if you want to contribute to this encyclopedia, you have to follow bright line policies and Wikipedia is very strict about copyright. If I responded, "well, she seems like a nice person and is probably telling the truth", without proof, and left the photos in, then it is quite possible that I would be removed as an administrator. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Notifying Michael D. Turnbull. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:45, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Broadly construed

I don't know why I have to keep reminding editors that topic bans should not be "broadly construed" but "womanly construed", because calling women broads [3] is way too Guys and Dolls. EEng 04:54, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EEng here is a cliche just for you: I will take your comment under advisement, and give it the attention that it deserves. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:39, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just trying to spare you undeserved criticism. EEng 10:09, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles requiring improvement

Hi Jim! I hope this message finds you well. I am new to Wikipedia and would love to improve or expand articles dealing with history, preferably Irish. I've read that stub-articles are the ones needing improvement. Besides, are there other articles on history topics which require editing? As I do not really know where to start, I was wondering if you could help me out on this please? Sincerely, JackReads (talk) 16:40, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JackReads. Welcome to Wikipedia. Please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland. You can find many tasks that need to be completed at Wikipedia:Community portal. If you type "Category:History of Ireland" into the search box, you can navigate to many articles that may need to be improved. Feel free to contact me with follow-up questions at any time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MrJollyWollyWingly188281/MrRobbertson722029271

Can you block both accounts? Because did the genre warring on [4][5]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.164.94.105 (talk) 02:29, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello IP editor. Both accounts have made only a single edit. One bad edit is not "warring". Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:57, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bus stop

I'm sorry for cutting across your warning, but I've blocked Bus stop for one month for the breach of their topic ban. Their AE appeal was closed just a few days ago with the comment The "unofficial grace period" for this topic ban ends, effective immediately, and any future topic ban violations will be met with blocks. and I don't think we have any option but to conform with Newslinger's close. --RexxS (talk) 01:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RexxS, given Newslinger's specific wording that you pointed out, I have no objection to your block. Perhaps I was reluctant to block myself because the editor had just attacked me and two other administrators. I guess that I was concerned that it would be perceived as personal retaliation if I had blocked. On another matter, I am not skilled at searching for old sanctions. Can you let me know if Bus stop has current sanctions in place regarding Judaism? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:36, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Finding records of sanctions is probably more than an art than a science, especially if you're looking for very old sanctions. Nevertheless, the current system requires AE sanctions to be logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log and there's a convenient search box for user name. "User:Bus stop" only turns up 'Shonen's topic ban and my block, although "bus stop" gives a false positive for 2011 Jerusalem bus stop bombing, which I thought might have been the answer for you.
Unless there is a still-current community-imposed sanction on Bus stop, it looks like they have no outstanding sanction concerning Judaism (even though, looking at their contributions, it would be better if they did have). A search for "User:Bus stop" jewish on the archives of WP:AN turns up 272 results and "User:Bus stop" judaism shows 122 results, and that's a lot to search through. None of it makes pleasant reading, and they range from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Community sanction/Archive10 #Full Judaism community topic ban for Bus stop in 2007, through Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive827 #Topic ban for Bus stop in 2014, to the most recent Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1052 #User:Bus stop bludgeoning discussion at Talk:Parler (which only tangentially refered to their "fixation on tagging people he identifies as Jews")
tl;dr: I can't find a current sanction regarding Judaism, but I can't be 100% certain that one doesn't exist. --RexxS (talk) 04:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, RexxS. I truly appreciate your expertise in the art of searching for sanctions, and the tips you gave me. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sending Love to Master

Hugsss
Hi, Sir, I am totally new here need your help and suggestions. Thanks Micromadmonkey (talk) 12:24, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328&oldid=991505388"