Jump to content

User talk:Pigsonthewing: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 98) (bot
→‎Help wanted!: new section
Line 315: Line 315:


:I have restored my comment; I have no idea what else you did, or were trying to do. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 22:45, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
:I have restored my comment; I have no idea what else you did, or were trying to do. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 22:45, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

== Help wanted! ==

Hi Andy,

I hope you are doing well. I'm writing to you to ask for your opinion regarding a client of mine: story time below!

Basically the gentleman ([[Martin Saidler]]) owns a company ([[Centralway]]) whose article has been edited by employees over the years (easy to track: they added "centrlway" to their usernames). They apparently weren't very good at it, however, because at some point they hired a guy over at Upwork to do their job. They then hired a second guy to create the owner's biography (still via Upwork).

Problems arose when the first Upwork guy was found to be an undisclosed paid editor: then all articles he'd touched were slapped with a {{t|CoI}} tag, which is fine. What is less fine, however, is that the Martin Saidler's article was also tagged, eventhough the CoI was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Martin_Saidler&type=revision&diff=801243172&oldid=799829728 appropriately declared] during creation by Upwork guy#2 (and the evil, no good, paid editor hadn't touched it).

Of course the second editor won't touch it anymore with a ten-foot pole, and I've been contacted to fix this mess (disclosure: I am NOT on Upwork or any similar site). Basically they would like:
* the unwarranted CoI tag on [[Martin Saidler]] to be removed;
* a [[:File:MSaidler.jpg|picture]] to be added (it's been uploaded and cleared with OTRS already);
* the infobox mention that he is a Uni Vienna alumni to be removed (he's a drop out, and it actually says as much in the first line of the second paragraph).

and that's it.

I've listed every employee I could find in the talk pages with the appropriate template, and contacted [[user:Doc James]] (who did the initial tagging), asking to correct the Martin Saidler article (the discussion can be seen [[Talk:Martin_Saidler|here]] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doc_James&diff=prev&oldid=819610181 here]). You read it all, but let us simply say that Jame has been politely uncooperative: : not saying a definite "no", but not helping either.
Things haven't moved an inch in a month and what I thought would be a rather straightforward thing needs to come to a close. That's when I figured I should contact someone neutral and distant enough with the whole affair to have a look at it : if you think the above three edits are reasonable, then by all means please fix them; and if it can not/should not be fixed, then let me know and I'll tell the client that they should have been smarter.

Thanks! -- [[User:Pplc|Pplc]] ([[User talk:Pplc|talk]]) 17:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:59, 18 January 2018

Bottom of Page

Talk to me, Andy Mabbett

  • If you post a message on this page, I'll reply on this page to avoid fragmenting the discussion.
  • If I've left you a message on your talk page, I will be watching it, so please reply there rather than here (but do feel free to drop a copy of {{Talkback}} here).
  • If appropriate, I will move discussion from here to the relevant article's talk page, so that anyone interested can join in.
  • If you want to start a new discussion thread, please start it at the bottom of the page. Better still, use the "new section" tab next to the "edit this page" tab, or the link at the foot of this section, either of which will do that automatically.
  • Please do not make links from within section headings.
  • Inaccessible HTML (coloured text, "small" tags, etc.) will be removed from this page on sight.
  • Please sign and date your entries by inserting four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
  • Start a new discussion.


ANI notice: improper COI tagging

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Improper_COI_tagging. The discussion is about the topic Language Creation Society.

The Bugle: Issue CXLI, January 2018

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:19, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #294

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks so much for your help. HayleySandford (talk) 18:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox UK school

Template:Infobox UK school has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox school. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:29, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: December 2017





Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

18:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #295

The Signpost: 16 January 2018

I screwed up the formatting during an edit conflict at MoS talk

Can you fix it? I wanted to move the comments to a new section, it was confusing having them interspersed. I also see that your format is now duplicated by someone else using different html. --RAN (talk) 21:42, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored my comment; I have no idea what else you did, or were trying to do. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:45, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Help wanted!

Hi Andy,

I hope you are doing well. I'm writing to you to ask for your opinion regarding a client of mine: story time below!

Basically the gentleman (Martin Saidler) owns a company (Centralway) whose article has been edited by employees over the years (easy to track: they added "centrlway" to their usernames). They apparently weren't very good at it, however, because at some point they hired a guy over at Upwork to do their job. They then hired a second guy to create the owner's biography (still via Upwork).

Problems arose when the first Upwork guy was found to be an undisclosed paid editor: then all articles he'd touched were slapped with a {{CoI}} tag, which is fine. What is less fine, however, is that the Martin Saidler's article was also tagged, eventhough the CoI was appropriately declared during creation by Upwork guy#2 (and the evil, no good, paid editor hadn't touched it).

Of course the second editor won't touch it anymore with a ten-foot pole, and I've been contacted to fix this mess (disclosure: I am NOT on Upwork or any similar site). Basically they would like:

  • the unwarranted CoI tag on Martin Saidler to be removed;
  • a picture to be added (it's been uploaded and cleared with OTRS already);
  • the infobox mention that he is a Uni Vienna alumni to be removed (he's a drop out, and it actually says as much in the first line of the second paragraph).

and that's it.

I've listed every employee I could find in the talk pages with the appropriate template, and contacted user:Doc James (who did the initial tagging), asking to correct the Martin Saidler article (the discussion can be seen here and here). You read it all, but let us simply say that Jame has been politely uncooperative: : not saying a definite "no", but not helping either.

Things haven't moved an inch in a month and what I thought would be a rather straightforward thing needs to come to a close. That's when I figured I should contact someone neutral and distant enough with the whole affair to have a look at it : if you think the above three edits are reasonable, then by all means please fix them; and if it can not/should not be fixed, then let me know and I'll tell the client that they should have been smarter.

Thanks! -- Pplc (talk) 17:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]