User talk:Stuartzs

Archives

Welcome!

Hello, Stuartzs, 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:

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!

University of Waterloo Stratford Campus

It is very clear to me that you have, despite your denials, a very clear WP:COI with relation to the University of Waterloo, either as a current, past or future student or staff member. WP has in the past and continues to have problems with editors making changes to articles to make them appear more favourable as a way of enhancing the apparent standing of the institution. This is done in a number of ways, for example by adding graphical shots taken from marketing materials that do not serve to increase readers' understanding of the subject, by copy-editing text adding WP:PEACOCK terms to the text, adding sections that "big-up" the work of the institution not written from a WP:NPOV and sourced only to the institution.
The image used should "preferably the university's official seal or logo" as per Template:Infobox_university/doc; the argument that this is some how a completely separate University is not one that is reflected in the campus own website and I see no reason to deviate from the guideline, if you disagree please make your case at the talk page.
The image File:Ginny Dybenko.jpg fails both WP:IUP#Content and MOS:IMAGES it presence only servers to make the article "look better" and it's presence does increase readers' understanding of the Uni, please make your case for it's inclusion on the talk page.
The Research section you added is sourced only to the Uni, please propose the section on the talk page, and make sure it is sourced to reliable sources that are independent of the university.

I hope this helps you understand the issues, if you have any questions please reply here or on Talk:University of Waterloo Stratford Campus so all the answers can be kept together. LGA _talk^edits 04:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, your initial allegation is completely untrue. Now on to your specific issues. The graphic shot was used in lieu of a seal. The schools building appears to be what it is known for. I have no idea whether or not a school crest exists. However, I know the one that you took the liberty of putting on the page is incorrect and will most likely be eventually contested by someone at the University. The Dybenko photo was added because it had cleared Wikipedia commons. I did not think there was an issue here because other universities have also featured pictures of either their administrators or alumni. No peacockery was intended here. I will however, follow your suggestion and address this issue on the talk page. I found an additional independent source for the Margot section that was included in the research section. I thought it was sufficient to address your concern.Stuartzs (talk) 12:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will reply to your points :

I am sorry but I don't believe you, the contributions of your accounts indicate a close connection with the University. A scenario also proffered by someone else.
Have a read of the documentation relating to the use of the University Infobox template, then have a look at other universities such as University of Oxford, University of Paris, University of Sydney, Harvard University, McGill University ALL of them use the crest at that position. Then have a look at https://uwaterloo.ca/stratford-campus and then at https://uwaterloo.ca they use the same logo so should our pages on both. WP has standards to make sure articles look and feel the same, please adhere to them.
Just because an image has a valid licence does not mean that you should use it where ever you feel like.
The "source" you used was a copy of an email sent by Christine McWebb from a University of Waterloo email address hosted on a University of Lethbridge list server. An e-mail hosted on a list server is not a reliable source and an e-mail from anyone with a University of Waterloo email address is not independent of the university.

I hope that helps. LGA _talk^edits 13:09, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for points #2-4. I will take this all into account when making future contributions. Related to point #2, what if a school does not have a crest? Here is what one school did: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Paris_Diderot_University I am sure I could fin other examples as well but I have already spent way too much time on our correspondence. As far as point #1 goes, I will continue to maintain the truth which is that I am contributing out of interest. . I encourage you to please stop making this allegation, which is inflammatory. You are leaving allegations on my Talk page which I do not appreciate and are there for all to see. I have a long list of offences that I believe you have committed. Yet, I have handled this matter privately in a more appropriate forum without tarnishing your reputation. Stuartzs (talk) 14:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LGA: To be fair, that was just an offhand remark/speculation. I'm actually inclined to believe him with regards to the COI, and in any case this is not something that can be proven one way or another so it's not really helpful to belabor this point. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:42, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LGA: Please note that I have asked you a question about #4 on the University of Waterloo Stratford Page.Thank you Stuartzs (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 4 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Timea Bacsinszky page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Stuartzs. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Stuartzs. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]