User talk:Tufkaa

WikiProject Dance

Hello, I’m contacting you because you are a participant in WikiProject Dance. Myself and another editor, User:Mwacha are interested in developing some notability guidelines on WikiProject Dance for dancers, dance critics, performers, and other genre articles as there is no such thing at the moment comparable to what I have heard other editors use for Visual Arts, IE “if they are collected in a major museum, then they are considered notable.” There are of course exceptions to this standard but it is nice to have a rule of thumb to help with AfD, and other moderated discussions. We hope to start this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dance under Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dance#Notability Guidelines.OR drohowa (talk) 18:55, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arkan

(pasted from Talk:Music genre § a dance is not a genre): Arkan (dance) was tagged with Template:music-genre-stub. I've removed the tag, since a folk dance or its music is no more a genre than a page is a book.

I learned the dance in the sixties at Mary Ann and Michael Herman's Folk Dance House in New York City. I loved it and still remember it, and often hum or whistle the tune. --Thnidu (talk) 18:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Buffalo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

==Per Andrij Dobriansky

In regards to the wiki page for Andrij Dobriansky at https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Andrij_Dobriansky... I do work for the man's widow. She does not wish for the information contained in the wiki to be placed. She is distraught over someone else representing her deceased husband and wishes for the content to remain as it was prior to these extended edits and additions. Can this be agreed on? --LGR02g (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a public personality, all details listed in the article are publicly available online. The article now has 20 references and will probably have more, given the subject's long career. Per WP:CENSOR, "Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive—even exceedingly so. Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia."

Given WP:BITE, I will assume good faith and alter the text if there is something specific to be found offensive. Currently, you seem to be objecting to publicly available information.

Lastly:

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, but please do not delete entire sections without giving a proper justification. There may certainly be good reasons to remove entire sections from articles, but doing so requires justification. Valid reasons for blanking sections include (but are not limited to):

Violations of the Biographies of living people policy
Violations of the Neutrality policy
Violations of the No Original Research policy
Information that does not rely on Reliable sources

Please note that I don't like it is NOT a valid reason for removing information from Wikipedia.

You may cite your reasons in the edit summary, or in the article's talk page if you need more room than the edit summary affords.

Thanks again,

User:Tufkaa (talk) 21:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

tufkaa (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]