User talk:AxlHinge

Your submission at AfC Paul Lehmann (palaeographer) was accepted

Paul Lehmann (palaeographer), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

FireflySixtySeven (talk) 21:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Saxohinge, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Paul Lehmann (palaeographer). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

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 your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! FireflySixtySeven (talk) 21:38, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Paul Lehmann (disambiguation)

A tag has been placed on Paul Lehmann (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. PamD 15:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Human comment (the above was automatic)

There's no need to create a disambiguation page in a case like this, as everything is handled adequately by the hatnote at Paul Lehmann (though there's a template {{about}} which produces the hatnote more easily than writing it from scratch - I've upgraded your edit there). Three other editors (@Sulaimandaud:, @OccultZone:, @Magioladitis:) "reviewed" this unnecessary dab page and threw a few tags at it without noticing that it shouldn't have existed. But that's how it goes. Welcome to Wikipedia and Happy Editing! PamD 15:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good that we always had PamD to correct. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Leslie Berlowitz

What is your connection to Leslie Berlowitz and the Academy of Arts And Sciences? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muckrkr (talk • contribs) 02:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See my note in Talk for July 20, 2016. AxlHinge.

Please read WP:COI. Since you state here [1] that you are a friend of the subject you do have a conflict of interest. Please follow WP:DISCLOSE and be very careful about any edits you make to the article. It would be best to propose any suggested edits on the talk page so that other editors may discuss them. Meters (talk) 20:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If I am a friend (with some academic detachment), the other editor(s) is an enemy--is that not a conflict of interest? Please freeze the page in its current form. AxlHinge

You have a conflict of interest. The other person (whoever you are referring to) does not, as far as I can see. That does not mean that an editor without a conflict of interest has free reign to violate Wikipedia guidline and policies. Any information added must be correct, verifiable, and balanced, for instance. Anything that isn't should be removed or corrected, but because of your conflict of interest and your history with this article, not by you.

It's not a conflict of interest to dislike someone, or add negative information to an article. I don't know who you are referring to, and I don't want to know. Unless the person has disclosed on Wikipedia who they are it would be WP:OUTING for you to say, and you would be blocked. If you are just assuming that an editor is "an enemy" of the subject because of the content of their posts then you should stop. In fact, it could be argued that labeling an editor "an enemy" is a personal attack. Please read WP:NPA. Meters (talk) 05:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Leslie Cohen Berlowitz. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
You have removed the same material 4 times without attempting to discuss it on the talk page. Meters (talk) 02:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A bit stale now, I see, but I strongly suggest that you discuss this last undo of your removal rather than removing the material yet again. Meters (talk) 02:19, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]