User talk:Scovington42

Hello, Scovington42. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Latter Day Church of Christ, 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 organizations 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 {{request edit}} template);
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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:06, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your concern @Horse Eye's Back. My years of research on the topics discussed do not amount to a conflict of interest. I strive to make sure my edits adhere closely to reliable sources, which I've cited. The citation in question includes two opposing views, which I feel should both be represented. However, it appears your edit eliminates one side and not the other.

Please disclose any conflicts of interest you may have that compels you to only represent one portion of the citation(s) on this article. Scovington42 (talk) 20:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you feel is being ignored? Always happy to add more. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:43, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article would suggest that its a very real and common thing[1]. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:53, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian article cites a specific case that former members feel is an example of "bleeding the beast." Current members respond in the article with a rebuttal. Both sides are represented in the citation, and should be in the wiki article as well.

"Bleeding the beast" appears in FLDS doctrine (not the same group), (Polygamy Primer, Shurtleff, 2005). Some sources like SPL attempt to attribute the practice to a homogeneous conglomerate of all Fundamentalist traditions, which does not exist (Escaping the Perils of Sensationalist Television Reduction, Mueller, 2019). Scovington42 (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I worry that if you go too far you get a WP:FALSEBALANCE, which we always have to avoid. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:30, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A false balance can occur, but is much worse by simply ignoring one side. Wikipedia is a restatement of reliable sources. Either the source is reliable or it isn't. It is not a restatement of the parts of the citations we like most while ignoring the others.

You've changed the subject twice now. Do you have a conflict of interest that compels you to only represent one portion of the citation?

When I responded to your question, "[w]hat do you feel is being ignored?" with citations, it appears you attempt to divert from the original issue you brought up. Scovington42 (talk) 21:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Young William R R Stowell.png

Thanks for uploading File:Young William R R Stowell.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:30, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Scovington42! Your additions to Latter Day Church of Christ have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 17:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Anson Call House a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Anson Call House. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

.

John Ortell Kingston

What TF is your problem? The article says he was born and died in America, and ALL his work described by the article is in America. Why would you need a source to call him American?

And why would you refer to it as vandalism? YOU are the one who is vandalising. Braintic (talk) 07:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]