Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:00, 19 February 2017

This is Exemplo347's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 7 days

Please read this box first! Welcome to my talk page! Please leave me a message below; new topics should go at the bottom of this page, and please sign your topic by placing ~~~~ (four tildes) at the very end, and please remember to assume good faith on my part. If I have nominated your article for Speedy Deletion, please read this article which lists the Criteria for Speedy Deletion. If your article has been deleted, direct your queries to the Administrator who deleted your article. If anything I have done has upset you, then let's please talk about it! You can click HERE to start a new topic. This talk page is automatically archived - topics more than 7 days old are removed by an automated process.

Automatic removal of updates to the Mutual Fund page

You rolled back my changes to the Mutual Fund page because it appeared to be promotional. I guess it was linking to two specific companies that offer classifications of mutual funds. The classifications are ubiquitous, but also proprietary, so I felt it necessary to link to the companies wiki pages. There is nothing promotional about this and I believe the changes should be replaced. Note I also made some changes to address the fact that the article was too US-centric. Rozwat (talk) 02:14, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

@Rozwat: Greetings. You'll note that there are no other company pages linked within that section of the article, so your addition of two companies to that section does indeed seem like a promotional edit. If there was any need for individual company names, they would already have been added. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 02:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

@Exemplo347: Thank you for the clarification. But I disagree with your reasoning. Mainly, this reason is tautalogical: "If there was any need for individual company names, they would already have been added." There is a need for the individual company names, and nobody has added them before. The classifications being used are proprietary to those two firms, so it seems impossible to discuss the classification without linking to the only sources of the classification. But the classifications do need to be discussed, because they are used very widely. Can you link to broader guidelines on this point? I am a new contributor and I had planned a project of updating related information on mutual funds and ETFs, both of which I have expertise in. Rozwat (talk) 17:04, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

New to Misplaced Pages Editing

ARodak (talk) 18:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Hey @Exemplo347. Thank you for reaching out with the message about the new edits to the Cabela's wiki page. I am new to[REDACTED] editing so please bare with me on this, but how would one go about adding valuable information to a page without it breaking conflict of interest. Was just hoping to put up some information about their locations. Let me know! Thanks.

First of all, can you confirm that you have read WP:COI? What's your conflict of interest? (Please don't say "none" if you actually want to be taken seriously) Exemplo347 (talk) 18:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

ARodak (talk) 19:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC)I have read the conflict of interest. thank you for bringing that to my attention. I am an employee, however I am not looking to advertise. Just want to put current and valuable information on the page. Much of it is outdated. Sorry if putting that graph back up was a mistake, I've just seen it used on other pages and figured it was acceptable after removing the address/phone number like you had mentioned. Like I mentioned, I am still new to this. What would be your suggestions moving forward? Thanks again for working with me on this one.

As the Conflict of Interest policy states, you should not be editing the article at all. Instead, you should be suggesting edits on the talk page of the article declaring your conflict of interest clearly. Simply follow the procedure in the Conflict of Interest policy. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 19:19, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

ARodak (talk) 19:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)That works for me. If I go in and suggest some edits, can I reach back out to you through here to verify them for approval?

If you follow the procedure in the Conflict of Interest policy, any experienced editor will respond to your request and perform the edits that they feel are appropriate. I must point out that the list of locations that you've tried to add to the article is against Misplaced Pages's guidelines at WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Exemplo347 (talk) 19:28, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Comment

Hi Exemplo347,

It looks like you deleted my page shoe´ups. Could you send me the text that i had written on the page ?

Regards,

OrnJoh — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrnJoh (talk • contribs) 12:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

@OrnJoh: Greetings. As the notice says on the top of this talk page, you need to direct your query about your deleted page to the Administrator who deleted it. In this case, as you can see if you access the deleted article, the Admin in question is Fabrictramp - they will be able to answer your query. Regards Exemplo347 (talk) 13:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Indo-Iranians peoples

Indo-Iranians peoples is compelete and correct and better than Indo-Iranians. similar to : https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indo-Aryans&redirect=no

Closure

I appreciate your closure, but to be clear, I was actually referring to the entire thread, now rendered moot by the RfC, of which only two sub-sections are currently closed. It's really a minor point, but since convention allows for closed threads to sit idle on ANI for at least a day to allow for global participation, its a fairly consequential housekeeping matter for lengthy threads. TimothyJosephWood 14:11, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Ah bugger. That'll teach me for trying to help in a half-assed manner! Exemplo347 (talk) 14:12, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

name of article is incomplete

https://en.wikipedia.org/Indo-Iranians = wrong

• Indo-Iranians peoples is correct

If you want to rename an article, the correct procedure is to suggest the change on the talk page of the article. Incidentally, "Indo-Iranians peoples" is never correct. Exemplo347 (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

pls see it: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Aryanic_languages&redirect=no and :

• https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Indo-Aryans&redirect=no

Please stop. I've told you the correct procedure to follow. Exemplo347 (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

can u help me?

can u add Aryanic to article with this source : http://cura.free.fr/xv/14boutet.html - One of its two stars, much like our own Sun, is on the white spectrum while the other is of a yellow-red tinge. Did not Enmerkar, the Sumerian king of Uruk have gifts of silver and gold to offer the Aryan overlord of Chariots? It is therefore possible that these two stars were not as close then as they are now. If one looks closer at the Sumerian legends, one finds many overlapping details with those of the Aryanic peoples. The wild-man of the Gilgamesh cycle for example, bears much resemblance with those found in Scandinavian, Celtic and Vedic myths. This takes us to the imagery found in astrology as well as in I.E. mythology. The Rig Veda, selected, translated and annotated by Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty, 1.160 Vs 1-5, p. 203. « Text

• thanks

No, as I've said, you should suggest your changes on the Talk page of the article. An experienced editor will then assess your change & make the edit they feel is appropriate. Exemplo347 (talk) 14:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

COI Template

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please do not add COI templates to articles, as you did at The Russian Bride, when no COI has been declared. If the text is neutral, it doesn't belong there at all. If it isn't, edit the text. Lyrda (talk) 15:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

The COI template is there because you haven't declared your Conflict of Interest. Until you do, please do not comment on my talk page again. Exemplo347 (talk) 15:53, 19 February 2017 (UTC)