Misplaced Pages

User talk:Stustu12

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hipal (talk | contribs) at 22:55, 5 December 2007 (→"Controversy": moved your comments here and replied). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:55, 5 December 2007 by Hipal (talk | contribs) (→"Controversy": moved your comments here and replied)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome!

Hello, Stustu12, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 15:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Kazakhstan pictures

I hope you find time to upload some of your Kazakhstan pictures to Wiki. The best way to do so is to create an account at Wikimedia Commons - pictures uploaded there can be accessed on all Wikimedia Foundation wiki's, whereas pictures uploaded to a specific wiki (like English Misplaced Pages we are on now) can be accessed only at this wiki.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 15:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Lawrence Shulman

If you are still around, the article needs some improvements. DGG 23:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dgsna logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Dgsna logo.png. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 23:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of DGSNA

A tag has been placed on DGSNA, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages per CSD a7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Misplaced Pages criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Ridernyc 01:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Misplaced Pages, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
  3. linking to the Misplaced Pages article or website of your organization in other articles (see Misplaced Pages:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Misplaced Pages when you have conflict of interest, please see Misplaced Pages:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Misplaced Pages:Conflict of Interest. Thank you. --Ronz 18:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Please also read WP:EL, WP:SPAM, and WP:NOT#LINK regarding your recent edits. --Ronz 18:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Those links are useful in related contexts.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
The issue here is not if the links are useful, but if there's a WP:COI. --Ronz 19:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Discussion started at Talk:Qualitative_research#Stustu12.27s_external_links.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

"Controversy"

Copied from Talk:Qualitative research: "As a fairly inexperienced wikipedian, I can assure you this 'controversy' is a deterrent to future engagement. My real curiosity is why the other external links are considered legitimate? User:stustu12 —Preceding comment was added at 02:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)"

I've copied your comments to here for a more private discussion than would happen on the article talk page. I hope you don't mind.
First I'm very sorry how this situation has evolved. For me this started as just a very simple and straightforward case of spamming with a conflict of interest. Piotrus intervened for you without understanding the issues at all in a manner that's potentially embarrassing for you (and him).
I think Wp:spam#How_not_to_be_a_spammer pretty clearly explains the situation. My concern has nothing to do with the quality of the links, but how you added them. Piotrus apparently doesn't understand this.
As far as my dispute with you is concerned, that's about all there is to it. I'm happy to explain the situation further, answer your questions, or point out good ways to get others involved to help. I recommend you follow the suggestions in WP:COI closely, especially in using the talk pages when you want information added where you have a coi.
As for Piotrus, because he's persisting in claiming these problems do not exist, I feel it's best if I take his complaints to a forum where they'll be handled by experts in these matters. I don't think you need to be involved, though others will probably ask for your response to the suggestions in WP:COI. --Ronz (talk) 03:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Moved from Talk:Ronz: You are certainly strident. is it Wikipedian philosophy to scorn all compromise in this manner? Please cite the page source for this if so. Are all Misplaced Pages rules clearcut? If so, please site the page that states the rules are not subject to interpretation, discussion and collaborative problem-solving. Is COI the most clearcut of all wikipedia guidelines, or is there some debate about this? Finally, your history of interactions with 'violators' is anything but cordial; it has an unmistakably imperious tone. Please cite the Misplaced Pages guideline or principle that enables you to adopt this tone with impunity. Frankly, you give the collaborative enterprise an awkward and offputting feel by behaving like a general before his troops instead of a peer in a great collaborative effort. User:Stustu12 5 December 2007

I'm sorry that you've responded in such a way. I've moved your comments here for discussion. In general, I ask that comments on my talk page follow WP:TALK.
I've taken a great deal of time to explain the situation to you, and to differentiate what you've done with what Piotrus has done. If you're unhappy with it, then it's time to get others involved. --Ronz (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)