47.222.203.135

Timeless words, in an era of 'fake news websites'

---

Timeless imagery, in an era of 'cultural revival'

---

Reliable source: "Wikipedia requires contributors to justify every assertion of fact in an article." --KQED aka PBS, via wormhole from 2050 AD

Teo Mora

Let me sincerely thank you for the big job and effort you put on my page.

Sincerely, I don't have a precise idea of what I want; the problem is not the possibility of wrong and nasty comments (I am sure that this kind of things smooth by themselves); the question is "I am willing to accept to be a voice in an encyclopedia, even if it were THE Encyclopedia?" And sincerely I don't know the answer.

After all, up to some minor flaws, even the first page was definitely honest but schocked me.

Well let us leave the choice to the guys which are managing the stuff.

Sincerely thanks.

Teo Mora (talk) 23:52, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello professor Mora, you are very welcome. It was my pleasure to put some time into the page, I enjoyed it. What happens next? These are the main options:

1. If you say nothing further, most likely the Teo Mora article will be 'deleted' on April 9th (put into a part of the wikipedia database only the ~1000 wikipedia administrators can see). If this happens, 'undeletion' is usually possible, but sometimes requires a bit of persistence.
2. If you decide the current article is acceptable, then you can post a comment at the deletion-discussion here, click 'edit' at the top of that page, and leave your comment at the bottom of that page, something like

   "I, Teo Mora, have reconsidered, and now believe the article Teo Mora is acceptable, if other wikipedians think it satisfies site-guidelines"

3. If you are uncertain what the correct decision is, then you can post a different kind of comment at the deletion-discussion here, click 'edit' at the top of that page, and leave your comment at the bottom of that page, something like

   "I, Teo Mora, am uncertain whether I think the article Teo Mora is a good idea, and ask that the contents please be 'userfied' to permit time for further discussion."

Because your co-author and fellow professor D.Lazard was the person who nominated the Teo Mora article for deletion, they may also be willing to follow your lead, and alter their own comment. I too will be happy to follow your lead, and alter my own comment to suit your wishes. That is true of most of the people commenting at the discussion thus far, in fact, they are already following your lead.

• changed to keep ...I think that we have to accept Mora's request... —User:D.Lazard
• ...IMHO we should respect Mora's opinion... —User:Nanuvutpanther
• changed to keep ...I am willing to go along with the subject's wishes. ... —User:David Eppstein
• ...Delete as per subject [of the article who is professor Mora]. ... —User:Xxanthippe
• ...personal wish [by professor Mora] for deletion (and that of the article's author [Nanuvutpanther]). ... —User:Kmhkmh
• changed to keep ...were it not for the express wishes of professor Mora and professor-emeritus Lazard. ... —User:47.222.203.135
• ...Delete per [comments by professor Lazard]. I wish there was some kind of "cold storage" we could put this article in [for later undeletion]... —User:bd2412
• changed to keep (from original Comment). Sławomir Biały

There are one or two other comments that are ambiguous or in favor of deletion, but most of the commenters would end up NOT deleting the article. However, your express wish to see the Teo Mora article deleted, is persuading many people to favor deletion. Now, when you say this: "Well let us leave the choice to the guys which are managing the stuff." I must point out that wikipedia is managed by you, and by professor Lazard, and by me, and by all the other participants. You are a wikipedian now, just as much as the rest of us, User:Teo Mora  :-)

And in this particular case, your fellow wikipedians are paying close attention to your thoughts on the subject. The person that decides whether to actually delete the article, extend the discussion another week, or keep the article, will make that decision almost entirely based upon what the discussion-participants are saying. Right now, the wikipedians who have commented, have been saying 'delete because Mora wants it deleted'.

That deletion can happen, of course, if that is what you still want. But if you are unsure, you can comment here to ask for the article to be 'userfied' to a safe temporary location where it won't be completely deleted ... or if you have definitely decided the article is worth saving, you can comment here to ask for the participants to reconsider the Teo Mora article with the new&improved contents. It is up to you, what you would like to see happen.

p.s. If the bureaucracy does end up 'deleting' the contents of the Teo Mora article before you have fully decided what to do, please do not be alarmed. It is fairly straightforward to restore any 'deleted' material on wikipedia. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 12:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Sincerely. Let's see how the story goes on. Teo Mora (talk) 17:29, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

So far so good, the article has earned four keep-votes (two of which were previously delete-votes). Wikipedia is not about nose-counting, see WP:NOTVOTE, it is supposed to be about the strength of the logical argument. In particular, there are a bunch of policies -- too many in fact! But for the question of whether the Teo Mora article should be deleted, or should be kept, the only wikipedia rules which really matters are these ones: WP:NACADEMIC and also the basic one WP:GOLDENRULE.

Now, what will help the chances, is if there are published works -- can be peer-reviewed journals ... but can also be television coverage, newspaper coverage, popular books, radio broadcasts, that sort of thing -- which specifically talk about Teo Mora the human, or specifically review/analyze the books and papers authored by Teo Mora the human. It is okay if that coverage is in Italian, or French, WP:SOURCEs don't have to be in English, see WP:NONENGLISH. It is also okay if that coverage is only available offline in libraries, WP:SOURCEs don't have to be on the internet, see WP:OFFLINE. Professor Mora, do you know of any publications like this, which have several sentences giving specific details about your life and work? If so please give me the title, year, author, publisher, and I will try to read them, and then summarize them into the Teo Mora article.

To be clear, this is an optional request, only if you have time, and only if you wish to do the work! It is NOT necessary, so if you are busy, or uninterested, please do not worry about it, that is no problem. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 12:13, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

The horror... the horror...

Well, this is funny. As an expert of horror movies I have an Itlian TV interview (in Italian) on Universal horror movies Of course I preserved the link http://www.melevisione.rai.it/dl/portali/site/puntata/ContentItem-adc98db7-9c95-4f96-a77e-59b8f27ecd00.html The person which appears is me; my interview appears after 15 minutes more or less Up to that, I carefully avoid publicity. Thanks for your interst and helpTeo Mora (talk) 13:53, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Okay great, thank you, that is Radiotelevisione Italiana and counts as WP:RS. I also found an Italian reference, again for your horror-books, which means we can add both into the Personal Life section. I am having trouble with the translation into English, can you tell me what this means?

«L'horror parla del nostro senso di colpa. Il vero horror, sia quello anglosassone che quello latino, racconta variazioni su temi morali. Questo è quello che mi piace. La paura c'entra fino a un certo punto.»

References

This is a from a newspaper, Repubblica.it, and has significant depth, so it will help at the Articles-for-Deletion discussion page. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 15:50, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

• "...What is horror for you? What is the fascination, in a word? [Mora:] «Horror speaks to our sense of guilt. True horror, for both Anglo-Saxon and for Latin culture', tells variations on moral themes. That's what I like. Fear is part of it only up to a certain point.» ..." (probably: better "Fear is only a marginal aspect") The translation is quite free but that was what I was intended to sayTeo Mora (talk) 17:54, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard

Discussion about Criticism of Walmart occurs at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Criticism of Walmart discussion, started by one of parties involved at Talk:Criticism of Walmart. --George Ho (talk) 00:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Oleg Atbashian concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Oleg Atbashian, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Oleg Atbashian

Hello, 47.222.203.135. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Oleg Atbashian".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. » Shadowowl | talk 16:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Oleg Atbashian

Hello, 47.222.203.135. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Oleg Atbashian".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. aboideau^talk 15:00, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

---