User talk:Schistocyte

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Hello, Schistocyte, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lord Sjones23! Schistocyte (talk) 22:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template is specifically for a promotional user page, instead of an article in the main space of the encyclopedia. Please use this only on pages of the form User:[username]. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:49, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Drm310: Thanks for clarifying that - Schistocyte (talk) 06:54, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Schistocyte, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello Schistocyte, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Howard F. Bremer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being professor at a notable university or college indicates importance/significance (WP:CCSI#ACADEMIC). If you are interested in learning more about how speedy deletion works, I have compiled a list of helpful pages at User:SoWhy/SDA. You can of course also contact me if you have questions. Thank you. SoWhy 09:27, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SoWhy: Thank you for explaining your rationale for the declined request. I did have a followup question that will help understand this process a little better (your essays are very helpful by the way).

If the article in question does not provide references that support the assertion of "being professor at a notable university or college," why would it fall within the guidelines at WP:ACADEMIC?

The references are to index entries in WorldCat, Library of Congress, and an Amazon.com search page: besides not appearing to provide evidence for the claim of being a professor at Briarcliff, the provided references seem only to support the claim that the subject has published work.

As per WP:ACADEMIC: "Having published work does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study."

Thanks, in advance, for your further insight - Schistocyte (talk) 15:10, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ACADEMIC is a notability guideline. The speedy deletion request was based on WP:A7 which is not about whether a subject is notable but only whether they meet the lower standard of "significant or important". By this standard, anyone holding a professorship at a notable college and publishing multiple books warrants more discussion and thus their articles should not be speedy deleted. You are free to nominate it for regular deletion using WP:AFD. Regards SoWhy 15:22, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SoWhy: Thank you for the followup and clarification. However, my main concern is that there appears to be no evidence that the subject holds/held a professorship. Is an unsourced assertion that someone worked as a professor enough to satisfy WP:A7? Thanks again Schistocyte (talk) 15:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The claim just needs to be "credible" (see WP:CCS). It does not need to be sourced. For someone who was active 50+ years ago, it's unlikely that sources can be found easily but that is not relevant. His professorship at least can be easily confirmed using GBooks, see [1]. Anything more likely needs research in offline sources. Regards SoWhy 15:52, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SoWhy: Makes perfect sense now. Thanks again - Schistocyte (talk) 15:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum, I also found his obituary in an old newspaper. Happy to help. Feel free to contact me if you have other questions. Regards SoWhy 16:00, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI. In the edit history, where the 'bot removes the page protection template is not where the protection has expired. Your undo restored an edit by the IP who you partially reverted. I had undone the IP's edit and you undid my undo. Complicated? I think I've restored the deleted content and kept the productive edits. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 02:58, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim1138: Thanks for the heads up! This was a complicated set of edits, that I think your most recent revert rectifies. Just to clarify, I reverted to the bot version because I thought your undo[2] appeared to contain the IP's edits. For example, there was a typo ("attract they backers [the plan]...") that seemed to be introduced when the IP made their first edits. Apologies for the oversight. — Schistocyte ^(talk) 04:05, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have not edited since you started posting warning templates Axlerout (talk) 20:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken heed of your first notice, which is sufficient to advise me to stop editing and look at policies before I start again. Axlerout (talk) 20:49, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you place additional notices as a precursor to support an AIV report? Again, allow me to reiterate: I am not editing any more. Axlerout (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the fact that you are saying you will stop vandalizing Wikipedia. — Schistocyte ^(talk) 20:53, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And just to answer your question, I make a habbit of always providing warnings when reverting for vandalism. It has noting to do with supporting an AIV report. I always assume good faith. — Schistocyte ^(talk) 21:00, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In light of your username and editing history, are you a doctor!? That is SO COOL! Axlerout (talk) 20:53, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Schistocyte. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted your edit on the Donald trump inauguration page as all other inauguration pages say "term of [president's name] as president" rather than simply as president — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lawrence 979 (talk • contribs) 19:46, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrence 979 My revert was not because of the sentence you wrote above. Please continue this discussion on the article's Talk page

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]