User talk:Cullen328

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" or "Add topic" 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

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)

Nice work on Jules Eichorn. He's been needing an article for a while.   Will Beback  talk  06:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

2012 Archive (first six months)

Automatic Archive 1Automatic Archive 2Automatic Archive 3

Happy New Year

Happy New Year 2021 I hope your New Year holiday is enjoyable and the coming year is much better than the one we are leaving behind. Best wishes from Los Angeles.   // Timothy :: talk

working on a new page

hello jim, hope you are doing well. i am a beginner on wikipedia but i am auto correction user. i want to write an article on a ngo which is working very good in there respective field. a friend of mine wrote a article on that topic but it got deleted due to less third party source. can you suggest me something how to write an article which won't get deleted, also i have some credible third party source so i want to ask how can i mention them because they are external links. Devanshusharma569 (talk)devanshusharma569

Happy St. Patrick's Day

Happy St. Patrick's Day! I hope your St. Patrick's Day is enjoyable and safe. Hopefully next year there will be more festive celebrations. Best wishes from Los Angeles.   // Timothy :: talk

(personal attack removed)

(Personal attack removed)

Request of Help on "Just the Facts" Tone

Hi Jim,

I am very new to Wikipedia. I got your feedback on the draft article located under PhoCoHaNoi. Thanks so much for your comments. I would greatly appreciate if you would spare some valuable time to highlight those parts from the draft that I need to pay close attentions to regarding the aspect that you raised. I know it would be a long shot to ask if you would even consider providing specific examples by directly editing them on the draft.

Lastly, I still do not know on how to submit the revision for review. I do not see any obvious buttons or pull-down menus from the Sandbox setting that would be able to allow to submit the article for review.

Thank you so much.

PhoCoHaNoi

Hello, PhoCoHaNoi. I am not going to edit the draft myself, because I want this to be a learning exercise for you. Here are a few examples of unacceptable wording:

• "celebrating the 73-year history of outstanding men and women"

• "pioneering contributions"

• "sustained leadership and strategic vision"

• "Exceptional services to innovation ecosystem"

• "stimulating small business innovation, meeting the Air Force and DoD R&D needs, broadening participation in innovation and entrepreneurship, and boosting commercialization"

• " So, as Dr. Pham looked back now, he brought systems-theoretic science and control engineering principles, together with teamwork and interdisciplinary to bear fruition in solving warfighter engineering problems, various areas of specific focus for increased activities in space control autonomy and space domain awareness."

It is not the job of a Wikipedia editor (you) to praise a person. Every trace of this non-neutral language must be removed. A Wikipedia article should never say "Person A is great!" Instead, it should say "Reliable source C reports that Expert B says that Person A is great", along with a reference to Reliable source C.

As for how to submit your draft, I will explain that when the draft complies with the neutral point of view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

Sending Messages to Other Editors

Hi Jim. I will deeply appreciate anything that you can do to help. How can I find out about other editors and send them messages? I recently looked for an article about The Italian Coffee Company that I had read years ago. However, I could not find it. I believe that this article should be available. I am a new editor and I have a big learning curve ahead of me. Maybe you can post to my talk page. I am user Mojosa17. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Invitation to Local Wikimania Event in San Francisco this Friday

Hi!

Wikimania is happening and hopefully you're enjoying the sessions. While it's fairly last minute, you're warmly invited to participate in the local Wikimania-themed meetup in the Wikimedia Foundation office this Friday (tomorrow!). You will have to register in advance, but we would love to see more people from the WikiSalon community participate! For more information and registration, please check out meta:Wikimania 2022/San Francisco Meetup.

The event will involve hacking, teaching, learning, and celebrating and we'll have snacks. We will have the opportunity to watch live sessions at Wikimania together in the afternoon. The rest of the day we'll have opportunity to participate in the hackathon, and we may have some on-demand workshops/learning sessions.

In case we run out of space, it's first-come-first-serve so let us know soon! Hope to see you there.

(Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice here)

On behalf of the Bay Area Wiki Salon team and Bittakea, Effeietsanders

Debate to delete a Category

You have been Notified because you were once involved in a similar discussion involving Founding Fathers.
There is a debate over whether to keep Category: Homes of United States Founding Fathers as a category. More opinions are needed. The discussion is located Here -- Gwillhickers (talk)

January music

story · music · places

Happy new year 2025, opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Liebster Immanuel, Herzog der Frommen, BWV 123, my story today 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. Dada Masilo will be my story tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. Did you watch Masilo talk and dance? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:50, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

... and today, pictured on the Main page, Tosca, in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author Brian Boulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:08, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Today, between many who just died, Tobias Kratzer on his 45th birthday who was good for an unusual DYK mentioning a Verdi opera in 2018, - you can see his work in the trailer of another one that I saw, and my talk page has a third (but by a different director). 2025 pics, finally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Today I have a composer (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with another who became GA yesterday, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Today is Schubert's birthday. I added a pic to his article (and my story) and raised a question on the talk, regarding the lead image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

On Richard C. Rudolph article

Hello Cullen328, this is HC226 and I would like to thank you for the editing on Richard C. Rudolph (it won't allow me to reply on the Teahouse for some reason). Furthermore, if you're still interested in him, I think you could help to find the text of his thesis. I looked for it but can only find a partial version, so it's not worth it to link it on his page. HC226 (talk) 16:19, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, HC226. Please provide a link here to the partial version of his thesis. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 19:16, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Continuation of Teahouse question

Hi @Cullen328, if you have a minute, could you please look over this? I believe I have done everything you mentioned here. Thank you, CF-501 Falcon (talk) 16:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

CF-501 Falcon, that looks better to me. Cullen328 (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

@Cullen328, Thank you. If you can think of anything else to change/add please let me know. CF-501 Falcon (talk) 18:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Question from HistoryLover1231 (16:00, 29 January 2025)

how do I create a citation and cite my sources? --HistoryLover1231 (talk) 16:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, HistoryLover1231. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen328 (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Cullen328. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I ask that you reply to my email on your talk page. Thank you. Interstellarity (talk) 01:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Interstellarity. There is no consensus for the change you made in that extensive discussion and you got reverted by another editor. So, please build genuine consensus before implementing any change to the image. In my opinion, the change you made was not wise. The other editor was firm with you but I do not think they were toxic. In the spirit of full disclosure, I have been following discussion of that lead image for years and I think that the current image is just fine though not perfect. In my opinion, that image should stay until there is a clear consensus in favor of an alternate image. Cullen328 (talk) 02:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your honest feedback. Reflecting on what you said, it seems like that's a fair assessment of the situation. I have looked at the discussions on the talk page and it seems that there has been considerable amount of discussion on the talk page regarding the lead image and most of the time, there is either a consensus to keep the current image or no consensus on what to do with it. I do think there's a good chance that the current lead image will probably stay for many years to come especially since it's been a long time since it has been touched. I made a mistake, and I own up to it. The editor did acknowledge that I was editing in good faith, which I feel better about. Again, thanks for replying to my message for a third opinion. It has really helped me. Interstellarity (talk) 12:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Question from ADARSH POOLAKKAL (06:34, 30 January 2025)

HOW TO DELETE /MOVE THIS PAGE THAT I HAVE CREATED TO A NEW ACCOUNT --ADARSH POOLAKKAL (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ADARSH POOLAKKAL. To request deletion of the page, follow the instructions at Template:Db-g7. To move the page, follow the instructions at WP:MOVE. Please do not type in all capital letters. Cullen328 (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey mate still figuring out this Wikipedia shit but just wanted to hop on here and say thanks for sorting out that Peter bergmann thing it was quite weird how it hadn’t been touched for a while and then he came in, undid my edit, refused to engage in discussion and accused me of edit warring. 61.127.146.8 (talk) 20:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Let me know if you see any more inappropriate activity. Cullen328 (talk) 21:57, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

A block, or not?

Hi, with this edit you left a block notice but the account wasn't actually blocked. I've done it now, but not sure what happened there! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Pickersgill-Cunliffe. Thank you for noticing that and taking care of it. I think I was falling asleep at that point. Cullen328 (talk) 18:26, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

For your usual work, and linking the recent Signpost. Bearian (talk) 17:16, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Question from Hassan Mubaraq Aduagba (11:46, 4 February 2025)

Editing --Hassan Mubaraq Aduagba (talk) 11:46, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Hassan Mubaraq Aduagba. That is not a question. Do you have one? Cullen328 (talk) 17:49, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2025).

Administrator changes

• Arcticocean
• Wugapodes

Euryalus

CheckUser changes

• Firefly
• L235

Oversighter changes

• Firefly
• Guerillero
• L235
• Moneytrees

Technical news

• Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
• A 'Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been closed.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

WP:RSN

Hi, Cullen. I hope you don't mind me removing your post at WP:RSN. It was hard to avoid since I wanted to remove the trolling KKK sock. Please see my edit summary. Bishonen | tålk 09:57, 8 February 2025 (UTC).

Bishonen, I am a literal and quite slow thinker, and lack the incisiveness of an editor who has advanced reptilian brainpower far superior to mine. Feel free to remove any comments that I may make when combatting KKK trolls and LTAs. Of course I had my suspicions but am prone to AGF in pursuit of that ever-elusive 1% minus chance that the person might possibly write several FAs and rack up a 350-1 count at RfA. Pretty pathetic, huh? Cullen328 (talk) 10:25, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Haha, thanks. The magnificent RfA is probably out per this (I had meant to revoke tpa right away, but forgot). Though you never know. Bishonen | tålk 11:01, 8 February 2025 (UTC).

Bishonen, using my formidable detective powers, I think we can exclude countries where American English reigns supreme, based on the distinctive "paedo" spelling. This Californian would never cook that up. Cullen328 (talk) 11:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Auto fire Vallejo 1.jpg

Hello! How did you capture this, because it looks quite weird to me. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor _{Ping Me🔔} 14:03, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ExclusiveEditor. I was walking out of a Safeway supermarket in Vallejo, California on May 12, 2019 and came upon this car on fire. I pulled out my Google Pixel 2 XL smartphone and started taking pictures. The woman who owned the car was standing there quite distraught and I tried to comfort her. I left when the fire department was pulling up. I uploaded the three best photos to Wikimedia Commons. Yes, it looks quite weird because unexpected car fires are quite weird to see up close.

Auto fire in Vallejo 2:13 p.m.

Auto fire in Vallejo 2:13 p.m.

Auto fire in Vallejo 2:14 p.m.

These three photos were taken within two minutes. Other than cropping, they are unaltered. In 2024, an IP editor added this caption to the first photo: A Chevrolet Cruze on fire due to a fire from the engine compartment caused by fluids getting trapped near the engine. That may well be true because the Cruze was recalled for that issue. Cullen328 (talk) 18:49, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Question About Smartphone Editing

I have an alternate account for editing from my smartphone, but haven't been able to use it much in the past year or so because I am having trouble setting up the skin and other aspects of the appearance. The skins and other appearance settings that I have tried, using Desktop View, usually have two problems. The first is that the Table of Contents and a lot of other information are displayed in a smaller font, and a smaller font on a small screen is not satisfactory for a retired IT engineer with vision correctible to 20/20. The second problem is that editing often splits the screen, or does other unfriendly things. I haven't experimented with different skins recently, because I sort of reconciled myself to not being able to do much on my phone. I am using an alternate account for editing from my phone, so I can use entirely different preferences. So I am asking what preferences should I use for an Android. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

By the way, I think that it would be a good idea to provide recommendations about skin and other preferences in your essay. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon. I use Vector Legacy (2010) without any problems on my Android phones, and do 99% of my editing that way. My current phone is a Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra 5G. I have no problems with Tables of Contents because I just use two fingers to zoom in which just takes a fraction of a second. Same for the split screen thing that you mention. I just zoom in to the left side of the screen as I am doing right now, and then move to the other side of the screen to preview my edit. As for experimenting with different skins, that is not how I choose to use my time. What I use now works just fine for me. I am not a software tester or an IT professional. I have worked in a construction specialty for decades. As for vision, I have a number of problems that keep my ophthalmologist on his toes, but so far, none of them interfere with my Wikipedia editing. Cullen328 (talk) 05:10, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

You mention zooming in with two fingers. I have sometimes accidentally zoomed and so changed my font size and found it disruptive. So I think that zooming in or out on a smartphone is a feature that isn't obvious to an IT professional, and so probably isn't obvious to other users, except those to whom it is obvious. So my thought is that this is a feature that would be usefully explained in your essay. If it isn't obvious to an IT professional, it probably isn't obvious to other people. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

I zoom in and out constantly on smartphones, and consider that technique exceptionally useful. I am surprised that you don't. As for my essay, I wrote it over nine years ago and don't really try to update it. Cullen328 (talk) 06:00, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

The reason that I don't zoom in and out on a smartphone is that it is an unfamiliar feature for me, and I haven't read about it or had it explained, so it is a feature that I know that I don't understand, and so try to avoid. Where is it documented? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, start by reading Gesture-enhanced single-touch and Multi-touch and their references. The specific technique is called "pinch to zoom" which implies use of the thumb. I actully use my index finger and middle finger. I think use of the thumb is more common on somewhat larger screens such as tablets. Cullen328 (talk) 19:13, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I hope it's ok to add a bit to this @Cullen328 and @Robert McClenon.

I use my smart phone 100% of the time to edit Wikipedia.

There are a couple of quirks that I've found Robert. For example, when I switch to Desktop as I want to leave a welcome message such as 'welcome, users whose first edit are unsourced', which is further down the list. I can't scroll down on that Twinkle selection box unless I have zoomed right out. So I have to open the Twinkle menu for welcome messages, zoom right out, scroll down the list, then zoom back in so I can read the selection menu. It sounds like a bit of a faff but you do get uses to it and it becomes automatic. You might find that with some other menus, I think the other one I came across was when adding tags via Twinkle to an article.

Overall, I think once you get used to switching between mobile and desktop it is fairly easy to use. I wear glasses these days but have to take them off when doing anything on my mobile.

The only other thing I would watch for is when scrolling watchlist entries, it's easy to catch the rollback button. I eventually worked out how to change the setting for rollback so that it asks 'do you really want to rollback this edit'. I was fed up of reporting myself lol. Knitsey (talk) 19:38, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello Knitsey.

1. I too have rollback configured that way. I use rollback very rarely, only when a fast moving vandal edits an article repeatedly.
2. I almost never use the mobile site.
3. I do not use Twinkle. I do everything manually. Cullen328 (talk) 20:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

That's interesting, about Twinkle I mean. I think I've seen other established editors saying they don't use Twinkle/Huggle. Knitsey (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Help for AFD

Hello @Cullen328 I’m a newbie to Wikipedia and need help, I created a wiki page for an actress from the 80s named Aarti Gupta Surendranath which got tagged for deletion and I’m trying my best to improve the page but I think I need help from experienced peers on Wikipedia. Please feel free make edits to the page or leave comments on the talk page. Heloise327 (talk) 07:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Heloise327, I have no expertise about the Indian film industry but I will make a few comments. Paid news in India explains a journalistic practice that almost all experienced Wikipedia editors object to. Some of those concerns have come up in the AfD debate. When it comes to Biographies of living people, all substantive assertions must be verified by a reference to a reliable source when challenged, and AfD is a challenge. Many assertions are unreferenced. In the AfD debate, you wrote the information I’ve pulled out are from old newspapers and magazines which aren’t available online. I’ve been trying to find them but no luck so far. If you do not have access to the old newspapers and magazines, then the material does not belong on Wilipedia. You then wrote Please check Kailash Surendranath’s Wikipedia and connect the dots. Please be aware that one Wikipedia article cannot be a source for another Wikipedia article per WP:CIRCULAR and "connect the dots" is equivalent to original research especially synthesis, which are not allowed on Wikipedia. We do not connect dots. We require verification, which is a core content policy. It is midnight here in California where I live, so it is time for me to go to bed. Cullen328 (talk) 08:08, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much for patiently explaining everything to me. Truly appreciate your comments on it and as you must have read through the AFD discussion, anyone would loose their cool with such deprecating tone. Anyways I’ll keep these points in mind and proceed. Hope you have a good night. Heloise327 (talk) 09:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Question from Driftly1 (22:45, 14 February 2025)

Hello, I want to know how to add a link to text inside of an Infobox? --Driftly1 (talk) 22:45, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Driftly1. Assuming you mean a wikilink, then it is the same as anywhere else. Editing the wikicode, you add two square brackets immediately before the text and two square brackets immediately after. I cannot help you with the visual editor because I do not use it. Cullen328 (talk) 00:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Lajoswinkler

Hello Cullen. I can't post on ANI since it's semi-protected, so I would like to ask you. Could you please examine the above user's behavior? They have been persistently making personal attacks and just generally had a hateful and aggressive tone. I politely asked them to refrain from this behavior. This is what they responded, which is blatantly unacceptable. If you could do something about it, I'd be happy. I don't want people ruining Wikipedia's collaborative atmosphere with personal attacks, nobody wants that for that matter. Thank you, 35.136.190.243 (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Ha, yes, I just semi-protected it because some big baby can't get over something. I'll have a look. Drmies (talk) 00:21, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• IP editor, I was just going to recommend that you reach out to my fellow administrator Drmies since he is already familiar with the dispute, and what do you know? Here he is. Yes, I agree that Lajoswinkler is being overly combative.

I own a print of this 1863 Abraham Lincoln portrait by Alexander Gardner, made directly from the original glass plate negative

• On the naming dispute, "film photography" has problems because dageurrotypes and glass plate negatives are not film and are exceptionally important in the early history of photography. Cullen328 (talk) 01:19, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Continual edit war in Peter bergmann case

Hi I just wanted to bring to your attention, user Aspects is continually reverting my edit, repeating the same sentence and is not engaging in discussion for an alternative. 38.87.93.151 (talk) 11:02, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Since I have already expressed my opinion on the content matter, I cannot act as an administrator per WP:INVOLVED. I recommend a Request for comment which will bring in new voices. Cullen328 (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

I can’t really work it out, I’m new to Wikipedia. Do you think you could set one up on my behalf? 38.87.93.143 (talk) 12:30, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

To be honest, I do not care enough about the matter to get more deeply involved. Cullen328 (talk) 17:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

That’s fair man 38.87.93.143 (talk) 04:01, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Concern about a user you recently blocked.

Recently you blocked a user for personal attacks – and now they are back to doing it, in a way which shows they didn't learn anything from your previous block. Thank you. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 00:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

SomethingForDeletion, I have blocked that editor for a week this time. Cullen328 (talk) 02:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Question: are we allowed to remove or strike their comment from that Talk page? It isn't adding anything constructive to the discussion. But I'm hesitant to do that myself, since I've been actively involved in that move discussion. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 03:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

SomethingForDeletion, please leave that comment alone. I commented that I have blocked the editor. Cullen328 (talk) 03:47, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

I think with your reply there is no need to remove it anyway. Thanks again. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 04:13, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Apology

Sorry for adding so many comments to my ani i just got really stressed when i got the notice i panicked. i have removed most of my redundant comments Wwew345t (talk) 00:37, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Not gonna donate

Hello, Jim,

I was wondering if since you moved this article to a different page title, if the abbreviation for it should also be changed to reflect this title change. It would be more accurate but it might interfere with past usages of the abbreviation. But I thought I'd bring it up in case it was an oversight. I like your updates to it.

Hope you are well and having a good weekend! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Thanks for the positive feedback. I actually changed the shortcut at the top of the essay but Nat Gertler reverted me with the comment "pithiness is of value in a shortcut". Both shortcuts WP:GONNADONATE and WP:NOTGONNADONATE are functioning. I know it is possible to display more than one shortcut/redirect but I don't remember how. I will look into it. Cullen328 (talk) 02:45, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Liz, I added the other shortcut. It was easy, of course, after I looked it up. Cullen328 (talk) 09:11, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

TheDarkkknight

That was weird, the rant, but then this fascinating article[1] showing most Republicans see Nazis etc as far left. Doug Weller talk 08:18, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Doug Weller, that demented screed plus the three k username was enough for me. A common talking point among some factions of today's American far right is that the Nazis and fascists in Italy were actually far left instead of far right. They are often quite insistent. The whole Left–right political spectrum is an oversimplification, of course, and extremists at the very far end of each wing often have repellent characteristics in common. But left and right categorization is a useful tool in political science, and both Hitler and Mussolini were far to the right according to credible scholarship. Mussolini was a left wing journalist and socialist party operative until World War I, when he shifted far to the right. Hitler's party included "sozialistische" in it name and had nominally left wing factions led by Ernst Röhm and Gregor Strasser until both were summarily executed with dozens of their associates during the Night of the Long Knives in 1934. At the height of each man's power, though, both men were far right to all but cranks. Cullen328 (talk) 09:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Good block in any case. Hm, I missed the kkk, wonder if this is a sock of [2]. Probably not. Doug Weller talk 12:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Tdkelley1

You blocked this editor from editing the Aquatic Ape article and talk. They have opened multiple threads at the Teahouse and all indications to me is He's trying to 1) advertise his subreddit [3] [4] and 2) sealion other editors [5]. You may want to extend that to a full indef as WP:NOTHERE. Iggy pop goes the weasel (talk) 21:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Iggy pop goes the weasel. I have indefinitely blocked that editor. Cullen328 (talk) 21:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

One note on promotional accounts

I pinged you on one talk page but I thought I'd leave a comment here which I would rather not be there. I do know a degree of WP:AGF applies since someone I know personally did ask me privately about creating an article for their business. I advised them against it. But at least in that case referring them to WP:NCORP was enough to dissuade them before any accounts or pages were created. TornadoLGS (talk) 05:34, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

TornadoLGS, I am not sure what you are trying to say. Policy does not permit promotional usenames corresponding to a business. Policy does not permit creating overtly promotional content such as Founded by Christian Cole, a master furniture maker and designer based in Melbourne, the company is dedicated to traditional woodworking techniques and fine craftsmanship. Each piece is meticulously handmade at the company's Coburg (Melbourne) factory/showroom, ensuring quality and attention to detail. Are you arguing that I should not have blocked this policy violating editor, or are you arguing that I should not have warned them that most paid Wikipedia editors are scammers? Please clarify. Cullen328 (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you should have blocked and all that. I was the one who reported the account in the first place. I was more responding to the "liars, scammers and con artists" bit. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

TornadoLGS, how familiar are you with the day-to-day business practices of the people who market paid Wikipedia editing services online or through unsolicited emails? Have you read Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning? Cullen328 (talk) 20:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I was aware that such scams existed. I guess I was figuring, how prevalent are those compared to someone creating a page for their business and is simply ignorant of how Wikipedia works? Forgive me if I sound naive. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

TornadoLGS, my comment was the result of the blocked editor's comment Maybe I should employ someone to set a page up? Had that editor not said that, I would not have warned her about scammers. As for being naive, I do not know whether or not you are. I do know that, as an administrator, I have blocked close to 10,000 undisclosed paid editors. Cullen328 (talk) 21:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I had though you were indicating that the blocked editor was a scammer, rather than warning her about them. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:51, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase III/Administrator elections

Administrator Elections | Renewal RFC phase

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase III/Administrator elections.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Question from Amar bogati (07:27, 22 February 2025)

Hello --Amar bogati (talk) 07:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Question from Amar bogati (07:33, 22 February 2025)

Hello do you pay for my work or? --Amar bogati (talk) 07:33, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Amar bogati, I have no idea what you are asking. Please rephrase. Cullen328 (talk) 07:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Explanation for "revert"

Hi Cullen. I'm a new editor and made some edits on a page. Some of them were "reverted" and some were not. I couldn't find an explanation for why it was reverted and whether there is some appeal process. Can you help me with that? Don Friedmann (talk) 03:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Don Friedmann. I assume that you are talking about the removal of "fanatical" and "vehemently" from Ultraconservatism. You can always look at the edit history of an article to see who reverted you and why. In this case, your edit to Ultraconservatism was reverted by User: Vipz with the edit summary These changes introduced loaded language (Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch). So, you can go to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch to see the guideline in question. You should also read the neutral point of view, a core content policy that is also applicable. In brief, we do not use intensifiers like "fanatical" and "vehemently" unless such language is used by the preponderance of reliable sources discussing the topic. As for reverts, they are routine and commonplace on the encyclopedia, and are an essential part of developing content that has the consensus of editors interested in the topic. Please read Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Cullen328 (talk) 03:47, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for that quick reply, and I will look for that information. Is there a way to correspond with the editor, as I would like to work on a more acceptable change that would accomplish the goal of clarification. Don Friedmann (talk) 002, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Don Friedmann, unless you believe that the Manual of Style has been misinterpreted, I do not see what there is to talk about. By "correspond", do you mean email? We only use email when there is a compelling need for privacy, which is not the case here. You are free to discuss the matter at User talk: Vipz, just as you are discussing things with me. Cullen328 (talk) 04:11, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I think you could've handled Tdkelley1 better

Adding things such as if you complain any more about the editorial processes of the #7 website in the world, then your talk page access will be revoked [6] is rather questionable. I understand that this user didn't really get our policies, but the correct move isn't to imply the user is insignificant compared to Wikipedia, because that escalates the situation. Likewise, Engaging in personal attacks against MrOllie is a poor tactic. That editor, after all, has has been editing for about 17 years, has made roughly 200 times more edits than you, and clearly understands Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and social norms vastly better than you do. also wasn't the best because it implies the personal attacks were wrong because of MrOllie's status in the Wikipedia community. It also reads as if your block is because MrOllie is more important than Tdkelley1, not because you're equally applying a rule to everyone on Wikipedia.

Starting off with an indefinite sitewide block for WP:NPA doesn't seem to be good here, because you didn't fully follow our civility policies leading up to the block.

For why I care, I got indirectly linked from a thread at WP:FTN and saw their user talk page. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 23:52, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Chess. I do not believe that I implied that this person is insignificant, but rather that they were having great difficulty either understanding or complying with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I do not see that my pointing out the truth constitutes an escalation. Similarly, I informed the editor that MrOllie, an editor they were harshly criticizing at every opportunity, is better positioned than they, because of vastly greater experience, to understand the relevant policies and guidelines. This simple fact does not mean that MrOllie is "more important" than Tdkelley1, because experience and importance are not at all the same thing. Despite your claim, I did not start out with a sitewide block, but rather pageblocks on Aquatic ape hypothesis and Talk: Aquatic ape hypothesis. Those pageblocks were for (Contentious topic restriction: Disruptive editing in a contentious topic area - pseudoscience and fringe science). As WP:CTOP says, Administrators are allowed to impose editing restrictions on editors who do not follow project expectations within contentious topics. Several editors besides me made pertinent and relevant observations about this editor's pattern of disruption and tendentious WP:IDHT behavior in pushing this fringe theory. Only after the editor continued with their disruptive editing and continued their personal attacks over a period of over 19 hours did I block sitewide, adding Disruption and personal attacks have continued since the pageblocks to the block reason. I do not agree with you that I was uncivil. My approach to dealing with problematic editors has always been to be friendly but firm. In my judgment, this editor required a high degree of firmness, and I cannot imagine this person becoming a productive contributor to this encyclopedia without a major change in attitude. If I was treating them uncivilly, I would not have repeatedly offered advice about filing a formal unblock request. I still do not believe that they paid much attention to the Guide to appealing blocks despite me encouraging them to do so three times. Cullen328 (talk) 02:05, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I should probably be more clear. I understand that you meant that editor should look towards MrOllie as an example to follow and that Wikipedia has high quality standards. But the way I would've interpreted your reference to the "#7 website in the world" as a new editor, is that you don't think I am good enough for Wikipedia. You could've made your point equally as effectively without saying Nobody cares about your unverifiable claim that "I have reviewed and edited scientific papers professionally for over 30 years." Do you think that anonymous people on the internet will get better treatment here on Wikipedia, the #7 website in the world, by making such statements? This easily reads as "Wikipedia is an important site, and doesn't care about your experience", instead of "we can't verify your experience which is why we can't judge you for it". The second would be more friendly and firm than the first.

Likewise, the direct comparison of Tdkelley1 with MrOllie while you were punishing Tdkelley1 is also susceptible to misinterpretation. Yes, MrOllie was right, and Tdkelley1 probably should've listened to them. But the justification reads as if the block was because of the specific person Tdkelley1 got in an argument with, not because of Tdkelley1's misunderstanding of our policies.

The reason why I said an indef might be too harsh here is that if I were similarly situated without knowledge of your intent, I would probably be extremely mad as well. It still wouldn't justify personal attacks, but I could definitely see someone unfamiliar with our policies lashing out. Additionally, I'd probably interpret an indef in that situation as "you're permanently banned and you're never coming back" (because that's how most websites work as they send your appeals into the aether), when realistically that editor could get a WP:ROPE unblock in a year or two if they promised not to do it again. I was in similar situation on a different wiki website when I was a lot younger and less mature (I'm aware that editor claims to have 30 years of experience). The fact I got a block for a year or two instead of indeffed made a world of difference to me. I think based on the context + my own personal experience, if given a lengthy block, they will either forget about this site or come back with a different attitude. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 02:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Chess, I think that you are reading into my comments things that I did not say and did not intend. If I intended the block to be interpreted as "permanently banned", then why would I have encouraged them several times to make a formal unblock request, and why would I have encouraged them to read and follow the advice at WP:GAB? I consider a block of a year or two to be harsher than a block of indefinite duration, because many indefinitely blocked editors can write a responsive, persuasive unblock request and be back to editing within a few days. All that is required is self reflection and a commitment to positive change. I have supported unblocking indeffed editors on many occasions. As for blocking/unblocking procedures at other websites, I know nothing about that and do not consider it relevant to this discussion. Cullen328 (talk) 03:23, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

All that is required is self reflection and a commitment to positive change is a reasonable stance and I think communicating it that way would be helpful. I don't believe Tdkelley1 understood that, though, and phrasing it that way might help. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 03:43, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Chess, they did not understand that because they either did not read the Guide to Appealing Blocks, or chose to disregard the excellent advice found there.

In addition, I want to note that I did not block this editor to punish them, and did not block them for personal attacks against one specific experienced editor. The primary reason for the blocks was to stop the disruptive and tendentious editing to push a fringe theory, and the personal attacks were an aggravating but secondary factor. I would have done the same thing if the editor being harassed was a new account. My only reason to mention MrOllie's experience was as an indicator that they have had the time to develop a deeper understanding of policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Question from Ovuefe Ighobeduo (12:45, 26 February 2025)

Hi Cullen328, How do I create an article (profile) for myself --Ovuefe Ighobeduo (talk) 12:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@Ovuefe Ighobeduo: Please read WP:AUTOB and understand that writing about yourself is strongly discouraged. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, so how do I get someone to write about me

@UtherSRG Ovuefe Ighobeduo (talk) 14:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Ovuefe Ighobeduo, provide convincing evidence that you are a notable person. Please be aware that self-promotion is not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 16:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Question from JamesDrum (04:55, 27 February 2025)

Bonjour mentor, je voudrais apprendre concrètement comment créer un article biographique sur un artiste J'ai commencé un brouillon et j'aurai besoin de votre mentoring --JamesDrum (talk) 04:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, JamesDrum. Il s'agit de Wikipédia en anglais. La communication entre les éditeurs doit se faire en anglais. Je ne parle pas français. J'utilise Google Translate pour répondre.

This is the English language Wikipedia. Communication among editors should be in English. I do not speak French. I am using Google Translate to reply. Cullen328 (talk) 05:52, 27 February 2025 (UTC)