User talk:James Smith1967

Welcome![edit]

Hello, James Smith1967, 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:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @ 22:29, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An extended welcome[edit]

Hi James Smith1967. Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 01:34, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Hi James Smith1967! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. I’m inviting you to join other people who edit conservatism-related articles at WikiProject Conservatism! A friendly and fun place where group members can ask questions and meet new colleagues. You'll also discover DYK: the easiest and funnest way to get your article on the Main Page. I hope to see you there! – Lionel^(talk) 10:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing?[edit]

Hello James Smith1967. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:James Smith1967. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=James Smith1967|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Jytdog (talk) 18:25, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jytdog I am sorry if I didn't do something right when posting, as I am new to this. I am not paid editing, just trying to enhance the articles of people and things that I find interesting. In regards to the book publications, I thought it would add value to the reader if all of his books were posted, I didn't know that it had to be selected publications only? What can I do better next time?

James, I reviewed your contribs. Several edits to Liberty, Jeffries and Amen. I'm surprised that anyone would suspect your editing to be COI. Regarding Amen, just drop "Selected" in the section title so now it's just "Publications." And voilà you can add all of the books.– Lionel^(talk) 06:44, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A cookie for you![edit]

If you have any questions about policies or editing or anything else about WP just add {{ping|Lionelt}} anywhere, anytime. Tip #1 put something on your userpage so people don't know you're brand new :-)

– Lionel^(talk) 06:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of D3Energy[edit]

Hello James Smith1967,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged D3Energy for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Obaid Raza (talk) 19:07, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

=Obaid Raza, I only created the page less than an hour ago and I am still working on it. Please give me a little bit of time to accomplish editting it. James Smith1967 (talk) 19:11, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018[edit]

Hello, and thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia! However, you should know that it is not a good idea to remove citations or information sourced through citations simply because a link to a source is not working, as you did to Joseph D'souza. Dead links should not be deleted. Instead, please repair or replace the link, if possible, and ensure properly sourced information is retained. Often, a live substitute link can be found. Links not used as references, notes or citations are not as important, such as those listed in the "External links" or "Further reading" sections, but bad links in those sections should also be fixed if possible. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Nat Gertler (talk) 00:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let me add that if you don't have time to hunt down a working link, using Template:dl to mark the link helps. It can point out to others that a new link should be found. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Liberty University, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SUP and IHSA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:32, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional tone[edit]

Edits like this create the impression that you are here to promote Robert Jeffress. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion or advertising. If you have a conflict of interest, carefully review Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If you are compensated for editing the article, you must disclose this, per Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure in order to comply with Wikipedia's terms of service. This is not optional. You may also find Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide useful. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 04:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

talk Those are word for word quotes from the article whose title is: "How Robert Jeffress Justifies $130 Million Church Campus" Don't you think that if an article is used as a source, the main point should be neglected for people who cherry pick info? I was trying to add more description to give readers a complete picture of why Jeffress thinks the building is justified, like the article states. James Smith1967 (talk) 04:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ironic that you are neglecting the main point of my comment, but I will take that to mean you don't have a conflict of interest you would like to declare.

"Our church felt a need to expand and improve the campus in order to fulfill our ministry calling" - This is obvious and tells readers nothing new. It in no way completes any pictures. What other reason would they have for expanding? "Newest technology" is WP:PEACOCKery, and "interactive worship opportunity" is WP:BUZZWORD salad. He is fully capable of issuing press releases for this kind of thing, but Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue for that. Grayfell (talk) 05:39, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. What's ironic is that you are removing sourced content and adding unsourced allegations in violation of WP:BLP. – Lionel^(talk) 06:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removing citations and marking with cite needed tags[edit]

Hi. I see this edit as being largely unhelpful. The reference did provide that Falwell founded the university in that year, but not that name. There is a certain "evolution" to articles where sometimes the original sentence (with citation) gets changed over the course of time. It's likely someone was trying to be helpful and put additional info in the sentence and provided no additional citation. Also, you marked two more things as needing citations when that info was in the reference you removed moments before. Again, not exactly helpful. Killiondude (talk) 20:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please desist in removing a reference and then adding a citation needed tag. It's disruptive. The reference is available at archive.org. Your current contribs show more than a handful examples of you doing this. Stop. Killiondude (talk) 20:16, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, James Smith1967. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]