User talk:Jonh-Los

Welcome!

Hello, Jonh-Los, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Jytdog (talk) 01:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion tags

Proposed deletion tags need to be placed at the top of the article you wish to propose for deletion, not on the talk page of the article. Please refer to WP:PROD for more information. Thank you. Safiel (talk) 16:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Thanks for caring about Wikipedia principles and trying to keep it a correct source of information. But in the case of hamideh kaffash who was one of the most discussed person in news media in Norway in 2014 you are wrong. Someone who has been subject of significant coverage in multiple published and reliable secondary sources in Norway and other countries, is considered notable according to Wikipedia standard. Sedai2014 (talk) 17:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Sedai2014:. Your claim is that Kaffash "was one of the most discussed person in news media in Norway in 2014".

This is hardly true. According to the news archive and media analyst Retriever Norge, she was mentioned 15 times in norwegian newespapers during 2014, and so far seven times during 2015. In comparision, the mayor of Trondheim was mentioned 414 times, and the deputy mayor was metioned 84 times during 2014. Bw --Orland (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the numbers you claimed for downgrading the notability of Hamideh Kaffash is not correct, either your search terms were not accurate or the tools you use is not competent. According to Google Hamideh Kaffash was at least 47 times mentioned only in NRK in addition to other major media outlet such as DN, Aftenposten, Adresseavisen and many times in university newspapers such as UA, Under Dusken etc. There are clear criteria for notability in Wikipedia that is not based on comparison with mayor of Trondheim.Sedai2014 (talk) 19:57, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies to Jonh-Los for continuing this discussion here. Feel free to transfer it to Talk:Hamideh Kaffash.

Hello again, @Sedai2014:. The complete content of DN, Aftenposten, Adresseavisen and 178 other newspapers are all included in Retriever's archives. 22 hits total in 2014 and 2015, of which 12 in Adresseavisen, 4 in DN and none in Aftenposten. If Kaffash were mentioned in Aftenposten ([1]), in must be under another name or spelling. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Akbarnejad is however metioned 2 times in Aftenposten, both in april 2015.

Apologies for not including NRK in my search, but your number of hits is obviously misleading, as it includes articles as "Starter organisasjon mot renovasjon" from 2001. The comparision the the mayor is of course not very relevant, but gives some material to enlighted your claim that Kaffash "was one of the most discussed person in news media in Norway in 2014". Bw --Orland (talk) 07:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Orland:NRK aired her few times and has several articles on its website. "Starter organisasjon mot renovasjon" was also funny, my bad. This one should have been mentioned. About Aftenposten you are right, there was an altearnative spelling when she was mentioned at least here. I understand that you didn't like my loose statement on "most discussed person in news media in Norway in 2014", (maybe one of the most disscused researcher/PhD students in Norway in 2014 would be better), but do you have a general doubt on Kaffash's notability?Sedai2014 (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Jonh-Los, I will transfer all these to the Talk:Hamideh Kaffash. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sedai2014 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

I see that you were not notified of this investigation. Please do read WP:SOCK and the section of that, WP:MEAT.

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jonh-Los. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 01:21, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonh-Los. I work on conflict of interest and advocacy issues in Wikipedia.

You appear to have joined Wikipedia in relation to what appears to be a SEDAI campaign here in Wikipedia.

I'd like to make sure you are aware of what we are all about here. First and foremost, there are a lot of things that Wikipedia is not, and one of them, is a platform for advocacy. Please read WP:SOAPBOX - that is both a policy and a "pillar" - something very essential to the very guts of this place. (that bit at SOAPBOX is part of a larger document called "What Wikipedia is Not" - as this is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", as you can imagine all kinds of people come here to hijack Wikipedia - some people come here and try to create promotional content about their companies (classic "COI"), some come to tell everybody how bad it is to eat meat, some come to grind various political axes... we get all kinds of abuse. It all comes down to violations of SOAPBOX.)

For non-financial advocacy issues, we have two very good essays offering advice - one is WP:ADVOCACY and the other is WP:SPA (the latter stands for "single purpose account"). Please do read them both. And also WP:COI - being involved in a dispute outside of Wikipedia does constitute a conflict of interest within Wikipedia.

Bottom line, is that if you continue to attempt to use Wikipedia as a platform for advocacy (we don't care what the cause is - raw capitalism or the most important social justice issue on the planet), you are going to lose access to Wikipedia. Editing Wikipedia is not a right - it is a privilege. One that is available to everybody, but one that can be lost by abusing Wikipedia. So please..... cool it. Please.

It takes time to really be what we call WP:HERE (as in "here to build an encyclopedia"). Only you can decide if you will be here, or not here.

If you do want to be here, and become part of the community and help with our work, you are very welcome and there are lots of people who will be willing to help you. Because we are a community with only a minimal hierarchy, the community has puts lots of policies and guidelines ("PAG") in place that govern not only content, but how we treat each other. You agree to follow those policies and guidelines every time you edit here - that agreement is in Terms of Use that is linked-to, at the bottom of every page. That is the basis on which we restrict the privileges of people who are NOTHERE.

It takes time to learn the letter - and most importantly, the spirit - of PAG. One of the hardest things for new users (especially passionate ones) to learn, is that PAG exist at all and that they form the foundation for everything that happens here. Passionate new editors are often in too much of a hurry to even wrap their heads around that. They tend to create a lot of fires, and then either leave angry, or get thrown out of here. Either way, it is unproductive drama for everybody involved.

So really - it is your choice! Slow down and learn, and stop trying to use Wikipedia as a SOAPBOX, or end up very frustrated (and frustrating a lot of people in the process - people who are volunteers and could be doing the work of building the encyclopedia, if they didn't have to deal with drama).

So... good luck! I will be happy to answer any questions you have. You can reply here if you like - I am watching your page now. Jytdog (talk) 01:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, Jonh-Los. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

see Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#SEDAI Jytdog (talk) 02:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just logged in to show some realities about these two pages Hamideh Kaffash and Discrimination in education in Norway. If my arguments are not valid you can delete that. But I strongly suggested that these two articles are not followed Wikipedia policies! Jonh-Los (talk) 08:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for sock puppetry. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Miniapolis 01:55, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]