→judgement: striking. |
→judgement: r |
||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
::::<s>you can hear me, or not! your call, naturally. good luck! [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 15:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)</s> |
::::<s>you can hear me, or not! your call, naturally. good luck! [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 15:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)</s> |
||
:::::[[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]], please see my note re your behavior vis-à-vis [[Wikipedia:Civility|Wikipedia Policy on Civility]] here: [[User talk:Jytdog#Civility]]. I request that we discuss how the quoted comments of yours meet Wikipedia's Civility requirements. - Thanks; [[User:LeoRomero|LeoRomero]] ([[User talk:LeoRomero#top|talk]]) 02:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC) |
:::::[[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]], please see my note re your behavior vis-à-vis [[Wikipedia:Civility|Wikipedia Policy on Civility]] here: [[User talk:Jytdog#Civility]]. I request that we discuss how the quoted comments of yours meet Wikipedia's Civility requirements. - Thanks; [[User:LeoRomero|LeoRomero]] ([[User talk:LeoRomero#top|talk]]) 02:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC) |
||
:::::::Your message on my Talk page was over the top. I have archived it, and am not responding except for this, and am enacting [[WP:SHUN]]. I suggest you do the same. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 03:12, 23 April 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:12, 23 April 2014
Summary of "Not appropriate EL"? Discussion
Alexbrn & Roxy the dog, here's my attempt to summarize (organize, really, since I'm mainly copying & pasting) our discussion, to make it easier to analyze. Please edit as you see fit. - Thanks; LeoRomero (talk) 16:06, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Policy/Issue | LeoRomero | Alexbrn | Roxy the dog |
---|---|---|---|
Encyclopedic Understanding - Relevant | WP policy does not require that a link provide encyclopedic understanding. It requires only that it "contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject". The MARC@UCLA resources are relevant. | The undigested nature of the material means that while it may be "relevant" to the subject, it is not relevant to an "encyclopedic understanding" of it. | It seems to me that these links are not appropriately encyclopaedic. |
Encyclopedic Understanding - Neutral & Accurate | The MARC@UCLA resources are neutral and accurate. | Who knows if it's neutral & accurate? | |
Amount of detail | WP policy does not prohibit links simply because the material is "undigested". On the contrary, the link is appropriate precisely because the site's information "cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to ... amount of detail". | It's undigested material; just providing raw information. | |
Advertising and conflicts of interest | WP policy states: "Links to potentially revenue-generating web pages are not prohibited, even though the website owner might earn money through advertisements, sales, or (in the case of non-profit organizations) donations." Wikipedia itself regularly solicits donations. Following Alexbrn's logic, we wouldn't be able to link to Wikipedia itself. Alexbrn, please cite WP policy that states that links may not be included if they pose a a "risk of spam", or a risk that they "could incorporate any site claiming to have a valuable downloadable offerings". Jytdog, please explain why it "seems ... that these links are overly promotional" for WP. | It's from an organization selling courses and soliciting for donations to help it "promote its programs". While links to revenue-generating sites are indeed not "prohibited" there is a risk of spam; by the logic of such links being unproblematic, EL sections could incorporate any site claiming to have a valuable downloadable offerings - and that would not end well. | It seems to me that these links are overly promotional for our use. |
WP:NOTHOWTO | Refers to Wikipedia articles, not to links. | The link http://marc.ucla.edu/body.cfm?id=22 is a page of guided meditations that visitors can download. Something Wikipedia is not - a howto guide. | |
Value-added | In addition to educational information from MARC@UCLA, the link provides free resources to readers who cannot otherwise afford them. Jytdog, please explain how the link "adds nothing to the article". | The link to http://marc.ucla.edu/ adds nothing to the article. | |
Clutter | Jytdog, please cite WP policy that states that a link may not be included if there is a risk that it will invite a clutter of other links. | The link to http://marc.ucla.edu/ is one of a zillion that could be provided to specific institutions offering meditation/mindfulness classes and services. It invites the clutter of a zillion others. |
Disambiguation link notification for April 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mila del Sol, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pinay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
judgement
as somebody who has been in combat, you should know that you pick your battles; good judgement is essential. the amount of energy you have expended on the question of whether a single link should be in an article or not - and at that, a link that "means nothing" to you - is bizarre to me. by your own admission there is nothing at stake except a "principle" but what you cannot seem to see, is that it is your idea - a newbie's idea - of WP:EL, that is at stake here. I have neither time nor desire to pander to your ego here - that is what this discussion comes down to. If you want to learn, ask, don't argue - ask and listen. The fact that you are arguing legalistically with three more experienced editors over something that even you think is trivial, is not a happy sign to me of things to come should you choose to continue working on WP, in this manner. what will happen if you disagree with other editors about content, and content that you actually care about? i don't like the way that looks. maybe other editors will. i can only talk about me. Jytdog (talk) 12:46, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
- Jytdog, please see WP:NICE, esp "Try not to get too intense", " Take great care to avoid the appearance of being heavy-handed or bossy", "Be calm", "don't make snide comments", "don't make personal remarks about editors", "don't be aggressive", "no personal attacks", no "rudeness, insults, name-calling", no "belittling a fellow editor, including the use of judgmental talk-page posts". Also: Don't bite the newbies. - Thanks; LeoRomero (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
you can hear me, or not! your call, naturally. good luck! Jytdog (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)- Jytdog, please see my note re your behavior vis-à-vis Wikipedia Policy on Civility here: User talk:Jytdog#Civility. I request that we discuss how the quoted comments of yours meet Wikipedia's Civility requirements. - Thanks; LeoRomero (talk) 02:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- Jytdog, please see WP:NICE, esp "Try not to get too intense", " Take great care to avoid the appearance of being heavy-handed or bossy", "Be calm", "don't make snide comments", "don't make personal remarks about editors", "don't be aggressive", "no personal attacks", no "rudeness, insults, name-calling", no "belittling a fellow editor, including the use of judgmental talk-page posts". Also: Don't bite the newbies. - Thanks; LeoRomero (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)