User talk:DisabledEditor

This is DisabledEditor's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Straw (Disabled American Lawyer & Camp LeJeune Poisoning Advocate) (August 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The way this is written is a major neutral point of view policy violation and needs to be rewritten. This is not a comment on the notability of the subject. With that said, please only include and summarize what independent secondary sources have written about Straw. Primary sources cannot be used to establish notability.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Straw (Disabled American Lawyer & Camp LeJeune Poisoning Advocate) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 00:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DisabledEditor! Having an article draft 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! S0091 (talk) 00:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thank you for letting me know what needs to be adjusted for this article to be accepted. This is my first article created from scratch and while I have quite a few sources, as you can see in the citations list, I am no expert on these issues you raised and I need help! I totally invite you and others to make any adjustments you see fit to help me and especially to help the article so it fits in with other Wikipedia articles. Thanks again. DisabledEditor (talk) 01:28, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Hello, DisabledEditor, I have noticed your interest in articles related to Disability. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Disability, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles dealing with disability on Wikipedia.

If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds great!

DisabledEditor (talk) 10:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Straw (August 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The way this is written is a major neutral point of view policy violation and needs to be rewritten. This is not a comment on the notability of the subject. With that said, please only include and summarize what independent secondary sources have written about Straw. Primary sources cannot be used to establish notability.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Straw and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 18:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DisabledEditor, apologies for the duplicate message. It appears another editor was moving the draft to the new name at the same time I was declining it so I actually declined the wrong version. To your note above, it is highly unlikely another editor will improve the draft. However, please read Your first article for guidance. Also, a Wikipedia article simply summarizes what independent reliable sources have written about a subject. What I suggest is to forget what you know about Straw, blank the page and start over with a short concise version (less is better) using only sources that have written specifically about Straw. For example, a paragraph for an Early life and education section and a couple paragraphs for a Career section. For the lead, write a couple sentences that provide brief summary of the key points from the those sections. If you have questions or need help, you can ask at the Teahouse. In the interim, you also welcome to check out things to improve at the Task Center along with joining a WikProject such as WikiProject Disability as stated above. WikiProjects are a great way to learn and get to know some the editors. S0091 (talk) 19:13, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Given this is an article about a living person, maybe I can model it after another biographical page that meets all the requirements. Do you suggest any such page as a template? Maybe another notable American lawyer? DisabledEditor (talk) 23:01, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I made major changes to help the article achieve a more neutral tone, though I still ask for assistance. I used the Randall T. Shepard biography as a template because he is a living attorney in the same state as Straw. Straw appears frequently in the media because he is a political figure while Shepard was Chief Justice of Indiana, and thus is more known through his court opinions and not so much through media coverage or political action. DisabledEditor (talk) 01:04, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:AUDSPHOTO.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:AUDSPHOTO.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 12:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will email him to see if I can get his permission to use it, which he has clearly done before because it is all over news media and appears on his Ballotpedia.org page. DisabledEditor (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't sufficient to get permission to use the image. The image must be under a free license. Also note that in most cases, the copyright is held by the photographer and not the subject of the photo. Whpq (talk) 17:42, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Straw wrote back to me and said it was a selfie and that he gives me permission to use it. He said the same thing about his signature. What should I do? DisabledEditor (talk) 03:28, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He did say not to pretend to be him with his signature, which seems reasonable! DisabledEditor (talk) 03:45, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He said it was ok to use the badge image because that organization no longer exists, Council for Excellence in Government. He took the photo of the badge and he said I can use it on Wikipedia or for any other use. He also said I can use the photo of the snow pile in the sidewalk on Wikipedia or anywhere, which he says he took. Can I use those? DisabledEditor (talk) 03:43, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Emails between you and the Straw aren't going to be acceptable as proof of license and permission. Straw will need to follow the instructions for donating copyrighted material. Whpq (talk) 12:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Straw (August 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Many of claims being made are either unsourced, poorly sourced or the sources do not support the claims being made. What he has written or said should not be used and primary sources should only be used sparingly. I have removed some the content for these reasons but again, this needs to be rewritten in a neutral manner only using independent secondary sources that have written about him.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Straw and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, DisabledEditor. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Andrew Straw, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. S0091 (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you have developed a bit of an attitude, not sourced. Are you saying Democrats cannot write articles about Democrats, or Republicans about Republicans? I am a member of his party and it does explain why I know about him. The Party exists in over 40 countries and it looks like it has over 10,000 members. If you want to make sweeping, false, and misleading claims, I suggest you stop vandalizing the draft and let someone else have a look. DisabledEditor (talk) 22:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not paid by the Party, was not paid to write this draft, and I resent the unsubstantiated accusation. I suggest you withdraw and let someone else decide these matters. You posted this as a fishing expedition and it is unethical. DisabledEditor (talk) 22:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of course being a member of a political party is not a COI and I am not sure where that coming from because I have not mentioned anything about politics. Please also be aware that using the term vandalism has a specific meaning for Wikipedia and can be construed as a personal attack and certainly calling me hostile, etc. as you just did on my talk page is a personal attack which is a blockable offense. I am not going pursue that because you are new but I do think it is important understand the policy. You can comment on content but should not comment about about the editor.

The notice above is a standard notice and all it does is provide guidance if someone does have a WP:COI, which does not necessarily mean one is being paid. As it states, any affiliation with a subject about which you are writing is likely a COI. As far as my edits to the draft, that is standard editing. I explained each one in my edit summaries, in addition to explaining my changes in the decline notice. You are welcome to disagree. In fact, you are welcome revert my changes so the draft stands as it was before my edits and another reviewer will take a look. Just don't remove the decline notices or my comments as that will get you in trouble which is not desirable, even from my perspective. S0091 (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You said "organization." You are engaging in personal attacks. Get off my talk. DisabledEditor (talk) 23:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have not removed decline notices or your comments. You are totally off the rails. Irrational. DisabledEditor (talk) 23:33, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Straw (August 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HenryTemplo was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please improve the draft by addressing the issues brought up by reviewers before resubmitting, thanks!

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Straw and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

HenryTemplo (talk) 11:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the page is getting closer to what you are asking. I am going to try to model my next edits on other pages about prominent civil rights lawyers, such as Nan Aron or Lydia X. Z. Brown. Ms. Brown's page appears to have much the same tone and there do not appear to be so many objections like this page has received. DisabledEditor (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Straw (August 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by BuySomeApples was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Declining this submission until the concerns below are addressed.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Straw and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

BuySomeApples (talk) 05:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I put the whole list of references into Excel and quickly found that 59.3% are from newspapers, TV, radio, wire service, or news magazines. At what percentage does this need to be? Are no other citations besides these allowed? Certainly if those 64 citations are all that is allowed, that will decrease the quality and interest of the article, which right now is classified as GA-Class. It appears that these 64 perfectly permitted citations establish the notability. What remains is if ANYTHING ELSE can be included in the article as a citation. If notability is already established, for instance, primary sources should be allowable because they are not present to establish notability, but to provide more information. Please explain how it is different from this and what exactly needs to be excluded once notability is established. DisabledEditor (talk) 22:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Went through the citations and refined them. The article is now listed as FA-Class. Thank you for motivating me to make the needed changes to keep moving up. Less than one month ago, this was a start-class article and then it went to C-Class, then B-Class, and finally FA-Class. DisabledEditor (talk) 18:30, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Straw (September 3)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by DGG was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Major continued POV problems: puffery; inclusion of minor data irrelevant to notability such as the accomplishments of his siblings; or undergraduate or even high school awards (eg National Merit Scholar); extreme overuse of name; halo effect from vague or indirect relationships with famous people; attempts to use WP as a platform to criticize other people than the subject (mainly judges who have ruled against him; overemphasis on his many unsuccessful runs for electoral office; excessive details of his legal problems. Most of the refs are irrelevant to his specific notability, and in many cases there are multiple references covering the same thing, and only the best is needed/ See WP:CITEKILL.

Successive revisions have cleaned up the reference format, but in other respects have not improved it; if anything they've added yet more duplication and minor detail.

There is obvious undeclared coi. If this should by any chance be written by the subject themselves--The contributors user name is "Disabled Editor, it is not appropriate to do so; see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. I am very unsure that he is actually notable; if he is, someone without coi will know about him , and then a draft would need to be started over by someone else, someone without COI. The rule for passing a draft is that the article would likely be kept at AfD. There's almost no chance that this would; indeed, if it were in mainspace it would probably be speedy deleted as G11, advertising.

I am, btw, somewhat concerned that some of the reviewers focussed on details of referencing and did not adequately consider the broader issue.

Please do not continue with this draft.

DGG ( talk ) 11:35, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. DGG ( talk ) 11:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GIVE EXAMPLES, not this vague kind of ad hominem. I made an article that within one month went from start class to FA-Class and you say this and reject it. You are the one who needs to explain and stop making personal attacks. DisabledEditor (talk) 00:39, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page is not significantly different in tone from the other living civil rights lawyers listed at the top. It sounds like a sour person with an axe to grind simply ran across the article and wants to make trouble. Let someone else look and stop posting on my talk. DisabledEditor (talk) 00:42, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See other stuff exists, the draft is entirely promotional and was correctly rejected. Theroadislong (talk) 18:37, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:07, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 19:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Camp lejune

I just hope that the government doesn’t wait until a lot of people pass away before they get some compensation,meaning some type of justice 2600:387:F:4437:0:0:0:1 (talk) 06:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Andrew Straw

Hello, DisabledEditor. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Andrew Straw, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Andrew Straw

Hello, DisabledEditor. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Andrew Straw".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]