User talk:5patrickgilles5

Welcome!

Hello, 5patrickgilles5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was I'm Charlie Walker, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Marchjuly (talk) 06:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Doug Mehus, in hopes of setting your mind at ease, I assure you there is no conflict of interest on my part. You have stated this. I hear you. Unless you are citing a violation of terms of service on my part, I kindly request that the matter is now settled and there is no conflict of interest and no longer a need to assert this serious charge. Additionally, I assure you that my account does not belong to company, or corporate entity. Again, if you feel I am in violation of any policy on this platform, please be specific and state your charge and I will respond to your concerns. I appreciate your suggesting of using the network of "people on the list" for consensus.

Given the recency of these notifications, I assume in good faith that you, incorrectly, attributed Marchjuly to being me. I can assure that we are two different editors, so please be mindful not to cast unfounded aspersions as you did with this edit. As such, I kindly ask you to self-revert the above and change "Doug Mehus" to "Marchjuly". Thank you. Doug Mehus T·C 22:53, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I believe the potential COI that caused my editing colleague Marchjuly to bring the above notification was your apparent self-acknowledgement from this edit diff's edit summary in which you claim to be the director of this film. Please do reach out to any of the editors on this talk page, by posting a new question in a new section of this talk page using the {{help me}} template, or by visiting The Teahouse where friendly volunteer editors answer any question about Wikipedia. Doug Mehus T·C 17:27, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to America is still the place, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Obtain consensus on the talk page first. Thank you. Doug Mehus T·C 21:27, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please follow Bold, Revert, Discuss. This edit did not do this. Articles must be fully cited; moreover, WP:NOTBIBLIOGRAPHY applies here as well. Doug Mehus T·C 22:09, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Doug Mehus T·C 23:06, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dmehus. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to America is still the place, did not appear constructive. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Obtain consensus on the talk page first. Thank you.

Dmehus, please do not redirect without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Please follow Bold, Revert, Discuss. This edit did not do this. Articles must be fully cited; moreover, WP:NOTBIBLIOGRAPHY applies here as well. Doug Mehus T·C 22:09, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Your submission at Articles for creation: America is still the place (February 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
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.
KylieTastic (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, 5patrickgilles5! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! KylieTastic (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

@5patrickgilles5: What the above is trying to say is that Draft:America is still the place is not suitable as an article at Wikipedia. That is because a topic has to satisfy the notability policy in order to warrant an article. More detailed information is available at WP:NBOOK. An article must contain sufficient information to show that reliable sources have "noted" the topic. Questions can be asked at WP:Teahouse. Johnuniq (talk) 07:02, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am hoping to get assistance with unsourced material on several articles. 5patrickgilles5 (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've converted this to a more general help me request, as your question does not specifically require an administrator. 331dot (talk) 22:47, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User:3331dot Is it okay for me to communicate with you on this, my user Talk page?5patrickgilles5 (talk) 22:53, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be no question I can answer here – if you have a specific question about editing, feel free to use {{help me}} again. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

/* Inquiry */ . I see that the article "I'm Charlie Walker" has been deleted. I cannot confirm that the article "America is still the place" has been deleted. Can someone here confirm the disposition of Draft:America is still the place? Thank you. 5patrickgilles5 (talk) 00:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at Draft:America is still the place and you look at I'm Charlie Walker, you will see that the former is a blue link and the latter is a red link; so, the a page titled "Draft:America is still the place" currently exists and a page titled "I'm Charlie Walker" doesn't. Drafts which have been submitted for AfC review and declined are not automaticlaly deleted; so, you can continue working on the draft if you like. In addition, since drafts are considered to be works in progress, they aren't held to the all of the same standards as articles; in other words, a draft is not necessarily going to be deleted due to a lack of Wikipedia notability. If, however, you have no intention of continuing to try and improve the draft, you can request that it be speedily deleted per WP:G7 or you can start a discussion about it at WP:MFD. Another option would be to simply do nothing and abandon the draft because if no attempts at improving it are made by any editors for a period of six months, the draft will be subject to speedy deletion per WP:G13.
Finally, you attempt to WP:PING 331dot didn't work because you incorrectly spelled his username (what you did was actually attempt to link to his user page instead of sending him a notification). There are various types of notification templates you can use to try and get another editor's attention (see the examples given in PING), but you need to format them correctly. One thing about pinging is to try and remember not to overdo it. Once is generally enough and if the other editor doesn't respond immediately it could just be that they're offline or have decided not to respond. So, don't be the person standing at the check-in desk of a hotel who repeatedly keeps tapping the bell over and over and over and over to try and get someone's attention. When an editor is (properly pinged), the bell or inbox image at the top of the page near their username will indicate who pinged them and on what page they were pinged. Some editors find these notifications annoying and therefore have disabled this feature, but most haven't it. Some editors have even set the preferences to receive email notification of pings, etc. Anyway, if you ask a question that you really need a response to but hasn't come yet after a day or so, you can try adding Template:Talkback to the other user's talk page to let them know, but in some cases they just might not be interested in responding. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:49, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank you. I would like to know if the article titled America is still the place is still active, or if it has been deleted.5patrickgilles5 (talk) 01:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at your post, you'll see that "America is still the place" is a red link, which means that no such page by that name currrently exists. There was a WP:REDIRECT page, not an WP:ARTICLE, titled "America is still the place" that was recently deleted. If you click on that red link, you see who deleted the page and why they deleted it in the pink box. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:30, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of I'm Charlie Walker for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I'm Charlie Walker 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/I'm Charlie Walker until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Bbb23 (talk) 16:57, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article/page "I'm Charlie Walker" IS an active movie title (See Imdb). "America is still the place" is NOT an active movie title (see Imdb), but rather specifically an active novel/book title (see Amazon 0974305707) Presently, "I'm Charlie Walker" has been redirected to "Mike Colter" page, where the words, or title "I'm Charlie Walker" do not in any form. This is confusing and fraught in inaccuracy. Note: the title "America is still the place" is a novel/book only and not a movie title. "America is still the place" incorrectly appears on "Mike Colter" page as a movie title. This is confusing and inaccurate. "America is still the place" is NOT a movie title and should be deleted. "I'm Charlie Walker" must remain and NOT be deleted and in fact, repopulated as a movie title, based on documented production release dated sources. Imdb, lists the movie I'm Charlie Walker's status as in "post production". Presently, the information on wikipedia is incorrect and confusing. The available research show the above to be true and correct. A simple and accurate remedy is to delete "America is still the place" article. Allow and/or redirect "I'm Charlie Walker" the movie title to remain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:301:A70:1102:1FBA:2F78:DA1D (talk) 18:01, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surely you can understand how it's confusing, particularly since IMDb is not a reliable source. The film America Is Still The Place opened the 2016 Pan African Film & Arts Festival and Sacramento Film & Music Festival, opened the 2015 San Francisco Black Film Festival, and was shown at the Harlem International Film Festival. Schazjmd (talk) 18:09, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand how this may be confusing and welcome a thoughtful and researched approach. While the film festival cites above are valuable, one must have additional knowledge of "film festival" rules and allowances to clear up the confusion here. Film Festivals are closed exhibitions and not a declaration of "completion", or "lock", or "final cut" of a film. Briefly, all the film festivals cited above allow "incomplete works" which would include working titles, temporary music obtained with aptly named "festival licensed music", an absence of open or closing credits, MPAA rating or other disclaimers, obligations and EO legal obligations. Film festivals in general are often used by film makers as valuable focus groups to provide feedback on incomplete works in order to gain insight into possible corrections, reshoots, edits, endings, etc. Also an opportunity to gain pre-release interest by winning awards. There is nothing to suggest that this work of film cited above was ever completed, finished, or released. There does not appear to be any evidence that this movie was ever for sale to the public. The working festival title "America is still the place" was replaced with the title "I'm Charlie Walker" by its producers and is listed on IMDb as in "post production". I respectfully talk note of your caution of IMDb, "particularly since IMDb is not a reliable source". I humbly believe this data base does have a place in the conversation in some degree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.199.20 (talk) 18:54, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb really doesn't have a place in the discussion; see WP:Citing IMDb for details. And I can find no reliable sources covering a film called I'm Charlie Walker. Since, as you say, the film hasn't been released yet, that's not surprising, and likely after its release, there will be reviews and other independent coverage that can be used to support an article. Trying to start a Wikipedia article about an unreleased film isn't realistic, as there is nothing to support notability. Right now, it seems to be too soon. Schazjmd (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and appreciate this approach. As you state, "trying to start a Wikipedia article about an unreleased film isn't realistic". With that, how do we justify the article titled "America is still the place" and subsequent redirects to other legitimate articles, when "America is still the place" the movie does not exist? The article "America is still the place" is confusing and should be deleted.2601:647:301:A70:1102:1FBA:2F78:DA1D (talk) 19:13, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect for America Is Still the Place is under discussion for deletion, you're welcome to add your views there. Schazjmd (talk) 19:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#America is still the place while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Doug Mehus T·C 01:57, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I can't help but notice your persistent ambition to have my account blocked, or restricted. I now believe your repeated negative posts have surpassed a good faith effort to monitor the article and has clearly become personal and lacking impartiality. While I may be a novice at navigating this platform, I wish to record this direct personal message toward me, as justification to seek protection and I appeal to others monitoring this convesation with a greater knowledge of a remedy to assist in affording me protection from [[User:Dmehus]. 5patrickgilles5 (talk) 02:25, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

5patrickgilles5, the message is simply making you aware of a Wikipedia policy that you might not be familiar with. It is a caution, not an attack. Schazjmd (talk) 14:57, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Schazjmd for your level and tempered monitoring of this section. I am regularly grateful for the stewardship and direciton offered by the more proficient users on the platform and welcome constructive critisism along with neutral guidance. I had acknowledged and even welcomed Dmehus' initial concerns and felt that one entry was sufficient. The issue is with his frequency and persistent splashing the same issue on multiple sections seemingly meant more to embarrass and discredit me personally, than to inform and educate me in good faith. I wished to address that issue. I hope we can put his concerns to rest with this humble post of acknowledgement in regard to the mutually agreed absence of [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|. 5patrickgilles5 (talk) 16:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

5patrickgilles5, I understand that it can feel that way, but please understand that these postings on your Talk page are intended to educate, not intimidate or embarrass. Wikipedia is a jungle of policies, guidelines, and unique expectations that new editors are naturally unfamiliar with, and when any editing behavior is at odds with those policies/etc., it's a kindness to notify the editor rather than allow them to continue in ignorance until they get blocked for violations.
Although Dmehus had left you previous messages, those were on other topics. This latest message is one I should have mentioned earlier as well, so I apologize for that oversight. I noticed that you modified the comment that you left as an IP editor on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#America is still the place to include your named account, which is the right thing to do, thank you for that. Schazjmd (talk) 17:05, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
5patrickgilles5, I concur with what Schazjmd said. Thank you for modifying the signature. The reason why commenting while logged out and logged in on the same page is not permitted is because it makes it difficult for the closer to ascertain as to whether different comments are actually the same person expressing views more than once. With your clarification, it is clear. What I do, to avoid logging out, is allow Wikipedia to set a persistent cookie to remember that I am logged in. When I visit the site on a different computer, I check to ensure whether I'm logged in on that computer by checking for my username in the top-right side of the screen. Doug Mehus T·C 18:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#America is still the place, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please do not modify the RfD discussion header templates, as you did with this edit. The header templates are required to be properly constructed in order for the non-involved closing editor/administrator to properly close RfD discussions. Many thanks for your cooperation! Doug Mehus T·C 22:19, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:America is still the place

Hello, 5patrickgilles5. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "America is still the place".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]