Jdftba

Genderfluid article

Hello, Jdftba. I've been clear to you here and here why I have redirected genderfluid back to genderqueer. Now I will elaborate: No matter the reported differences between genderqueer and genderfluid among some LGBT people, there are WP:Reliable sources that treat these two terms as synonyms. Because of that, creating a Genderfluid article is essentially a WP:Content fork violation. Because of that, and the fact that there is plenty of room in the Genderqueer article to discuss distinctions between genderqueer and genderfluid, and the fact that your creation of the Genderfluid article was twice a poorly sourced WP:Stub, I redirected redirected genderfluid back to genderqueer. There is no reason that you cannot elaborate on genderfluid in the Genderqueer article, as long as you provide WP:Reliable sources for that matter. These two topics should be WP:Merged. Look at the LGBT article for an example of how we cover variants in one article; we do not create an article for each variant. I also suggest you read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agender for where I am coming from on this matter. If you recreate the Genderfluid article again, then I will nominate it for deletion; see WP:AfD. And I know that you are that IP; so recreating the article as an IP does not hide who you are. Flyer22 (talk) 20:54, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hi Jdftba! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Palestine/Israel conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to Palestine/Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to your being blocked from editing.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Maté (composer) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Daniel Maté (composer). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Macbeejack ☎ 08:22, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

There hasn't been a large number of like published articles about him. But thats largely cause he's in the podcast space? The few printed articles are mostly transcripts of interviews. But there are many many various podcasts he is on.

Basically my argument for notariety is this: When you look up "Daniel Maté" the only result that shows anyone other than this Daniel Maté is the one wikipedia page for the Swedish Billionare. Wikipedia shouldn't be the odd one out.

It doesn't make sense that he is notable enough to be every single google page and image for multiple pages, but wikipedia thinks there's a different, more notable, (richer?) Daniel Maté.

I very much encourage you to google Daniel Mate yourself and have that factor into the determination of his notability.

May I ask. Is sourcing a large number of podcasts proof of his notariety? How does one capture the notariety of an activist in the youtube/podcast space? At what point does doing enough of them and getting enough views make you notable?

Genuine question, I really want to know more about how wikipedia accomidates these things.

Thank you for your time. Jdftba (talk) 08:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)