ThisDirect
Welcome!
editHi ThisDirect! I noticed your contributions to Barrett Watten and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! †TyphoonAmpil† (💬 - 📝 - 🌀 - Tools) 01:47, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Typhoon. I have actually edited at Wikipedia from about ten years back, but have established a new nom-de-plume. I am a professor of English and former academic editor at University of California, Berkeley. I have edited and published over a hundred volumes in various formats; therefore, I am no amateur when it comes to editing, though I have not mastered all the techniques. I am interested in building up pages of contemporary writers whose pages have suffered from neglect, lack of decent bibliography, and at times flames. ThisDirect (talk) 01:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Managing a conflict of interest
edit
Hello, ThisDirect. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Barrett Watten, 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 article subjects 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 {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
- 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, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- In this case, when faced with inaccuracies that have been on the site for over five years, I needed to act. Other editors have been similarly involved. The objections I am raising are serious; and I would be happy to present them to an oversight entity. I am a professor of English and professional academic editor; I know a great deal about objectivity and citing sources. At the same time, the Wiki community has let biased and defamatory content persist on this site for the aforementioned five years; it is out of date and irrelevant; it should be taken down. ThisDirect (talk) 02:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'll make a further objection: why was the link to FIRE's intervention removed? It is a public document, elucidating important aspects of the student mobbing campaign. Removing it is sheer bias, and a good argument for why the entire issue cannot be adequately or appropriately discussed on Wikipedia. ThisDirect (talk) 02:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- FIRE is an advocacy organisation and not considered a reliable source. Their opinion must be reported by an independent reliable source like a newspaper or academic journal before it can be included in your article. There is a discussion on the BLP Noticeboard about your article that echoes this that StarryGrandma had already linked to.[1] Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- That again is opinion. FIRE publishes news, and can be cited as source just as much as the New York Times. What they print is subject to the same criteria as any other publication. / On the other hand, the student complaints were recently published by the communist party journal People's World and removed as defamatory. The published notice reads that the material was "unverified and unverifiable." Search the name "Barrett Watten" on their site. A co-author was a former graduate student, removed from the WSU program, who falsely claimed to be a professor. / The point is that what appeared in 2019 in the Chronicle has been intensively contested, including by testimony under oath, and is false. Wikipedia should not be citing it. ThisDirect (talk) 02:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- FIRE is an advocacy organisation and not considered a reliable source. Their opinion must be reported by an independent reliable source like a newspaper or academic journal before it can be included in your article. There is a discussion on the BLP Noticeboard about your article that echoes this that StarryGrandma had already linked to.[1] Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'll make a further objection: why was the link to FIRE's intervention removed? It is a public document, elucidating important aspects of the student mobbing campaign. Removing it is sheer bias, and a good argument for why the entire issue cannot be adequately or appropriately discussed on Wikipedia. ThisDirect (talk) 02:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
September 2024
edit
This is your only warning; if you assume ownership of articles again, as you did at Barrett Watten, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- You must make WP:EDIT REQUESTs to implement any disputed edits into your article per WP:AUTO#IFEXIST. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:13, 28 September 2024 (UTC)