User talk:Steve Quinn

To start a new discussion you may use this link: New discussion

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! Here are some hints and tips:

• Create new pages, and customize the appearance and behavior of the website
• Rename pages
• Upload images
• Our intuitive guide to Wikipedia

Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, please make sure to (~~~~). Happy editing! SMP0328. (talk) 01:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Thanks for your great work on the superlens article!!! EdSaperia (talk) 11:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

I'm glad you are expressing useful views regarding the Introduction to Quantum Mechanics page. It seems that every so often someone must start a fork or insist that the article be cut down to some kind of simplistic gee whiz content. I hope we can keep it at a level that will be used to more than the occasional curiosity seeker. Thanks for your help.P0M (talk) 06:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems this same conversation comes around every so often. Also, this article deserves my support. And you have done an excellent job with this article. --- Steve Quinn (talk) 06:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Steve for your message

Steve thank you very much for you message. I know shopping addiction is a very significant subject in our current society but it is also a very controversial one. Because of this I have tried to include all the scientific aspects and perspectives. Moreover the knowledge of shopping addiction progress fast, so it is necessary the updating of the contents of the page. That’s why the article is substantially a translation of another Wikipedia page which has done all this complete scientific work. Now – following the advices of Melcous- I am improving the article with more references and bibliography in English, since that they will be more useful for English readers. Psicosociales (talk) 11:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

For saying it the way it is

	Barnstar of a thousand thanks
	LIke the title says! HappyValleyEditor (talk) 17:56, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Steve Quinn, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EWay

Hey,

I noticed you rolled back my last edit and put a tag for deletion on the article.

The reason I was updating the page is that a lot of the references on the current page have broken links or go to 404 pages.

If I update the page without the Industry Partners and Banking and Financial Partners sections would that help solve the issues with the page?

Then all references will be coming from third party newspaper articles (With the exception of the PCI Cert which I can remove as well if needed?)

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.55.147.158 (talk) 06:10, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Please post your proposed changes on the article talk page. I do not trust an anonymous IP who is removing material and vastly rewriting the article. You were doing this before I submitted the AfD. Steve Quinn (talk) 06:14, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

	The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar
	Congratulations, Steve Quinn! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Re: Casey Dienel

Okay, thanks! Chubbles (talk) 20:57, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

)

Please comment on Talk:Sirius

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sirius. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

russia interference- emails

Steve, explain your logic in deleting my addition to emails on russia interference. Undue weight? The whole paragraph is one sided and incomplete. OK, Trump called for someone to find the 30,000 emails. BUT, which ones? SPECIFICALLY he was talking about the 30,000 emails that were unlawfully deleted because there was a congressional subpoena. This is not mentioned in the paragraph at all and is very important to the context. It was well sourced, not original research.Aceruss (talk) 18:46, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

The whole paragraph is just fine. First, you left out some information because this is a complicated issue. As it is, as I said in the edit history, what you added is out of context. Therefore it is UNDUE, original research, and most likely has some BLP issues. Then I have to question if this belongs in the paragraph once all the bases have been covered. It might be beyond the scope of this paragraph or the scope of this article. I suspect that it could be both. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Why Beliefs Matter (March 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Why Beliefs Matter and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 05:19, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

• SwisterTwister Thanks for reviewing this in a timely manner. It is much appreciated. I actually submitted this to WP:AFC because it is a new (draft) article by a new editor, rather than summarily putting it up for deletion. I reached the same conclusion you did - lack of available reliable sources. I explained the situation on the new editor's page [1]. Anyway, I am hoping this can reside in WP:AFC for awhile, until the new editor decides its fate or finds some sources (which really seem unavialble). So, I don't know exactly how WP:AFC works, but I am hoping I can leave this article there for the time being. Is this OK? Steve Quinn (talk) 05:30, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes. SwisterTwister talk 05:33, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Microscope

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Microscope. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Economic Freedom of the World

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Economic Freedom of the World. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Wahhabi sack of Karbala

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Wahhabi sack of Karbala. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello Steve Quinn. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:06, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Steve Quinn, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
• Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

• Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
• The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
  • User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:

• Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Move to Draft

Ok, Steve Quinn, thanks. No big deal for me, that was mainly a quick translation. If it appears as not relevant enough, I don't oppose it being cancelled. Best, --Dans (talk) 12:40, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Draftification

I noticed that you draftified Draft:Guizhou_Institute_of_Technology. I would recommend installing the script User:Evad37/MoveToDraft, as it automatically notifies users of the draftification so that they are more likely to work on the draft, rather than recreate the article, as happened in this case (Guizhou_Institute_of_Technology). — InsertCleverPhraseHere 03:38, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Calendar

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Calendar. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

disagree

I disagree with your revert of my recent edit.

I would like to point out that in my case, Pixels, as the title of the movie I linked to, is a proper noun, thus I do not believe a mention on the disambiguation page for just "pixel" is proper.

If you could explain the situation better perhaps I could understand, but as it stands I don't think a plural form of a noun belongs on the disambiguation page of its singular form when said plural form is a proper noun used as a title.

Shentino (talk) 18:32, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

@Shentino: In a way, it is unfortunate that the "Pixels" movies happen to be the plural of 'pixel' because both "pixel" and its plural "pixels" are common-nouns that can stake a claim to being the most widely used forms of this word. This is what WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:DABCONCEPT try to make clear. The words "pixel" and "pixels" are deemed broad concept terms, the broadest of concepts for this word, and therefore merit the primary topic describing the general term.

Other uses of this word are not primary when compared to the frequency of usage for the generic words "pixel" and "pixels. And I think, as pertains to English language linguistic thought on this matter, "pixel" and "pixels" are the same word - one term is the plural form. A dictionary of course actually confirms this. At the same time, if you were to pursue the theory I am guessing you would discover the same result - if you want to go to all that trouble.

In any case, to actually change what is considered the primary topic on Wikipedia for "Pixels", or the lower case "pixels", would be through consensus. You could try to develop a consensus on the talk page of current primary topic article. Or you could try some other venue, such as Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Well, I hope this helps. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:18, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fighter aircraft

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fighter aircraft. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Adding signature

I noticed that you added a signature for a user here. Note that the proper way of doing this it to use Template:Unsigned, rather than copying their signature from somewhere. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:47, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

• @Northamerica1000:. Thanks very much. I saw you do this before and was wondering where the template is. ---Steve Quinn (talk)

So, you're going to just leave it as you posted, rather than fixing it? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:54, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000:. I just saw your reply. Sorry about that. What AfD was this again? I don't exactly recall. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 01:09, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Here. It's all good. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:11, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Warszawa (Porcupine Tree album) (August 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Curb Safe Charmer was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Warszawa (Porcupine Tree album) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 07:49, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Steve Quinn, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 07:49, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Precision Time Protocol Industry profile

Good day, I am not sure what your question is. The Wikipedia entry allows any engineer working on precision time for industry purpose (e.g. automation, vehicles, manufacturing, synchronized drives) to get a glimpse at the major parameters of the protocol. It is not a tutorial on PTP, but I wrote a tutorial in another Wikipedia page and in IEC 62439-3. This protocol is manufacturer-independent, license-free, defined by an international organization (IEC) and used in a large number of devices (although I cannot guess a value since the vendors do not disclose their sales). So if your question is "Why in Wikipedia?" you can ask the same for all standards issued by IEC which have a Wikipedia entry, that ranges from EMC specifications to high voltage lines and smart grids. Please respond to me if you read this message. Hubert Kirrmann — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hubert Kirrmann (talk • contribs) 15:52, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the review

Thanks for the review on my page for the Japanese movie Maestro! (2017 film) Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:37, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Please Comment on Melvin J. Ballard Center for Economic Self Reliance

Steve, you mentioned you put the redirect in place. Does that mean that All of my previous content that I wrote up was erased? If I find an independent source of information regarding the Ballard Center to clean up the notability issues, can i revert the page back or is my content erased for good? I haven't done this very much, so I'm just wondering. Thanks! Johnscottkeller (talk) 03:13, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@Johnscottkeller: - Thanks very much for contacting me. Your content has not been erased. It is preserved and can be accessed via the edit history. To see this, click on this link: preserved content in edit history. To restore this to article status, I recommend having at least two independent sources and that could be a bare bones minimum per WP:GNG and per WP:ORG. I usually try to have at least three independent sources, but if you want to work with two, I don't have problem with that. Then we might be able to use other non-commercial and non-independent sources. Well, let me know what you think. Regards ---Steve Quinn (talk) 00:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

https links for the Wall Street Journal

Hello, Steve. I see that you were making the same reversions that I and other editors had been making to the articles Qubo and Novo Banco. But it turns out that the various IP addresses weren't completely wrong -- the old links (i.e., the ones with both the "https" protocol and the "online" term in the address) were no longer functioning. Changing the protocol to "http" (as was being done by the IP addresses) did correct the problem, but only because of a re-direct at the Wall Street Journal web site. I've gone back to the Qubo article and replaced the original "https" link with the currently-working link, which also uses the "https" protocol but is slightly different than the original link. In a few minutes, I'll do the Novo Banco links, as well. By the way, earlier this month the Bender Bot was fixing the old links automatically and it isn't clear to me why these two particular articles got missed. I hope this is helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:34, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

@NewYorkActuary: Tnanks. Yes, this is very helpful. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 02:40, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Assessment Request

Hello and greetings. Recently I noticed that you added a quality scale on the article Wu Commandery. After the first assessment, I have made some improvements of this article and I would request another assessment of it. Thank you. ----損齋 (talk) 02:20, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@損齋: OK. I don't see this as a problem. Thanks for contacting me. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 02:34, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Do i need someone such as you to do this? ----損齋 (talk) 06:47, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

@損齋: I am willing to do it, I just haven't made it over to the page yet. Also, if you feel comfortable upgrading the assessment, I don't think it is a problem if you do this yourself. It seems you think it deserves an upgrade and there is nothing wrong with that. ----Steve Quinn (talk) 01:10, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@損齋: I just started a new discussion on the talk page at Talk:Wu Commandery - Assessment. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 01:27, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Steve Quinn, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

• Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
• Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Over Deletion of page : C Ravichandran

Hey, Steve.

I think the page already has enough verifiable and reputed resources which describes the individual. I'm glad that you have spend time looking for reputable contents of C Ravichandran, and you mentioned about Google Books and that you wasn't able to find a book written by him. I had done one search and I find this one  : Google books - C Ravichandran, the book cover page is printed 'C ravichandran' but since it's in Malayalam, may not be understandable by you.

GoodReads profile of C Ravichandran is user-generated, but then you should be considering this profile page of him, which is not user-generated : https://onlinestore.dcbooks.com/authors/ravichandran This is his profile page in DC Books official website, and it lists all the books published by DC of him.

Regarding Notability - This is the result page of Youtube on searching the keyword : C Ravichandran https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=c+ravichandran ,and I hope this shall proves how much attention he gets from regional (Kerala) people.

I can understand the doubts of you on C Ravichandran having Post Graduated degrees in many subjects, but it's somewhat a common here in India, that some people grabs many Degrees and Post Degrees. This is strictly not exaggerated claim. But don't ask the University certificates as sources to prove this, please.

As a wikipedia user and one who created this page, I'm deeply disappointed by these activities which could only hinder wikipedia from expanding. You cannot provide 'resources' for every sentence of a wikipedia page and not all sentences in a page can be supported with a 'source'.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajkrishnan R (talk • contribs) 17:22, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Makerspace Dispute

Hi Steve,

I'm sorry, but a Makerspace is not a Hackerspace. Equating the two as identical is outdated. There has been support of this position on the Hackerspace Talk, and I'd like to boldly move forward by having a separate Makerspace article reflect reality. A Hackerspace is but a subset of a Makerspace. Makerspaces are completely independent of Make Magazine. But Make Magazine and Dale Dougherty is widely credited with inspiring the Maker Movement. This is common knowledge in the Maker community. There is no agenda or promotion here.

Please let me know how we can come to a consensus, as I intend establish Makerspace as an independent article from Hackerspace, in full accordance to the rules. If there are additional or alternative criteria or citations you could suggest, I'd be happy to include them.

BrainDozer (talk) 22:27, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Vaccine

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Vaccine. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Three simultaneous Atlantic hurricanes (2017) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Three simultaneous Atlantic hurricanes (2017) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Three simultaneous Atlantic hurricanes (2017) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jasper Deng (talk) 17:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Google's Ideological Echo Chamber

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Google's Ideological Echo Chamber. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Steve Quinn, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

• On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
• Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Harold Hecht

Hey Steve, I wanted to thank you for your support on the Harold Hecht filmography page that I created earlier tonight. Last year I wrote the Harold Hecht biography with the help of his children who proofed the article before I published it. I noticed that you suggested that images be added to those two pages. I initially had images on the Harold Hecht page last year but someone took them all down. All but 2 film posters and now it looks silly and empty. His family sent me a few images that they wanted included in the article but I'm having trouble with finding the correct copyrights, permissions and descriptions to make sure they don't get deleted. Is this something you could help me out with?

@AbridgedPause: thanks for contacting me. Well, it seems you have created two wonderful articles. I might be able to help you with the images the family sent you. I am certainly willing to try because this is a good idea. I just emailed you, so I now have your email address. I am glad his family is happy with the article. Also, you forgot to sigh your above post. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:18, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Franz Lidz

My name is Franz Lidz. For the last 40 years I have worked as a professional journalist. I spent 27 of those years as a senior writer for Sports Illustrated. For the the last five, I have been a columnist for Smithsonian magazine. I am also -- concurrently -- Vice President of Communications of the Detroit Pistons, an NBA franchise owned by Palace Sports & Entertainment. All of these inarguable facts can easily be verified in the External Links section of my Wikipedia page. (For instance, the Sports Illustrated resource search opens to my current bio, which is scrupulously maintained by my longtime employer: https://www.si.com/vault-authors/franz-lidz I’m still a contributor to that magazine). Similarly, the Smithsonian magazine resource search has catalogued my columns - sometimes with additional biographical material - since my hiring in 2012. Both full-time jobs have long been listed on my Wikipedia page.That is, until yesterday, when an editor changed one job title from columnist to "published magazine article writer” and the other to “former vice president.” I should note here that I rarely pay much attention to my page unless a Wikipedia user alerts me to mischief by other users. But yesterday was different. Yesterday morning a college professor sent me a distressing email about what he termed "vandalism and trolling" on the Talk page of my entry. At the time, I wasn't exactly sure where the Talk page was, but when found it, I was horrified. Copy had been mangled, misinformation inserted and aspersions cast on my character and integrity. For reasons I can only guess at, over the last few days one editor implied that I lied at a reading I gave before several hundred people, and that if I hadn't, I should have. (In a subsequent post, he frantically walked back this theory, but the damage has already been done and his biases baldly revealed). In another exchange, the college professor mentioned that he teaches my oeuvre ito his students, prompting another editor to snark, "I look forward to the invitation I am sure will be coming from you shortly to look over your course material and help you improve it." (In the magazine world, we call this "open contempt" for a subject - not the sort of neutral attitude WP encourages in its editors, is it?) By tacking a couple of demeaning templates onto the first page of the entry, that same editor implicated me, my family, close friends and a onetime Bloomsbury U.S.A.publishing flak in a vast conspiracy to insert my name into pretty much every Wikipedia story ever written. OK, I'm overstating things, but the notion of any conspiracy between me and people close to me (let alone "paid" by me) is as insulting as it is preposterous. (I have no idea who's responsible for the pranks, but pinning the blame on a dead Bloomsbury publicist is probably the wrong way to go. BTW, Bloomsbury delisted the book in question in 2011, at which point the paperback rights were sold to Penguin, which doesn't plan to market it the anniversary of the event, in 2024. Tell me - Why would Bloomsbury care? These Wiki shenanigans - and the egregious behavior of the editors behind them -- both anger and disgust me. Normally, I’d just shrug it off as “kids will be kids.” But Wikipedia editors are alleged to be adults. The Talk page fantasizing and the finger-pointing templates that blanket both pages of my entry are inappropriate, unprofessional, malicious and, in the opinion of PS&E counsel, potentially libelous. And because the pages are on public display, they impugn my professional reputation. According to Talk page guidelines, personal attacks and insults are not allowed (Editor Ken violates this rule repeatedly) Which is why have been advised to request that the entire entry - including the Talk page -- be "blanked" and replaced by clean, untainted copy. I realize that under normal circumstances, Wikipedia articles should not be blanked. But these aren't normal circumstances. Wikipedia's bylaws state that it is acceptable to blank an article for libel or privacy reasons as an emergency measure, as described in the policy on biographies of living persons. Your rulebook also notes that "completed deletion discussions (or other discussions) may be blanked for reasons of privacy or courtesy to individuals. Which suits me fine. I'd love to put all this behind me and give the page a fresh start. In other words, I'm asking for a common courtesy.

I look forward to your response. FL

FRANZ LIDZ Vice President of Communications

248.377.0148 / office 610.306.7022 / cell [email protected]://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steve_Quinn&action=edit&section=new# cid:[email protected] FranzLidz (talk) 11:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)