User talk:Coastda

Welcome!

Hello, Coastda, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Katr67 (talk) 21:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

/Archive

Archived some messages

Hi Coastda,

I see that all the messages in your talk page were various generic(ish) warnings, etc. Ordinarily, user talk pages are here for the purpose of collaboration, and I think this collection of messages may give you the wrong impression. We're actually a pretty friendly crowd for the most part, and very welcoming of people seeking to contribute to the project. You may be interested in the WikiProject Oregon page and its associated discussion page, or in the blog we maintain. Happy editing! -Pete (talk)

(p.s. If you want to access the old messages, just click the "Archive" link above. Feel free to revert my edit if you prefer to keep them here.)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. As for substantive debate -- it's only unwelcome when it veers away from stuff that's relevant to building articles. I don't think we have crossed that line, or that we're even very close to it; my comment was meant only as a general caution, as much for your detractor as for you. A lot of personal back-and-forth can make for an unpleasant environment for other editors. My note may have been unnecessary -- I hope so, and I apologize if that is the case. -Pete (talk) 03:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Based upon your username being the name of the blog mentioned as belonging an individual whose Wikipedia article you have edited, there is the possibility that your edits may be violating our conflict of interest policy. Editors should not edit articles about themselves or that they would have a vested interest in. Please read the policy and take the appropriate steps as described there as they apply to your case. Thanks. DreamGuy (talk) 02:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dreamguy, please look at previous discussion before issuing a warning like this. Mr. Marquis has been very forthcoming about who he is, and responsive to discussion about his page. He's also offered to help out in other areas of Wikipedia. Your message is ill-informed. -Pete (talk) 02:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, when the person archives previous discussion you can't see if he's been warned previously or not. In the past made edits that were clear violations of WP:COI, and if he has since been informed of this fact he hasn't gone back and removed these edits, so the problem is still one that needs to be resolved. And please do not call my pointing out an extremely important policy as "ill-informed". DreamGuy (talk) 03:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure you can. The link to the archive is in the message above. -Pete (talk) 03:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't normally have to poke into any archives to find discussion about COI-violations that happened on Dec. 23 when the last comment added to this talk page happened before that. Newer discussions wouldn't be archived yet, and if there is no current discussion on it it's clear that he's not been following our COI policy and needs to be told about it, whether he was told about it in the past or not. Now that we know from a prematurely archived section of this talk page that he has been warned before, there's even less reason for him to be editing the article about himself. DreamGuy (talk) 03:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the COI guidelines. Please note that I don't hide behind a pseudonym and that all references meet WP requirements for reliable sources. There are two dedicated WP editors that have made substantial changes and improvements in the page. If any information is inaccurate please note it so that it can be changed. Thanks Coastda (talk) 06:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Coastda - for old timer Wikipedians, it's a sign a person is a newbie when their name is red - it shows they have not done anything with their user page. If you have any desire to stick out less, you might want to spruce yours up a bit, perhaps tell us something about you. Or not. It's your choice. Welcome either way. --David Shankbone 06:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI is not a policy, it is a guideline. --David Shankbone 04:09, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume correcting when I did not did not volunteer as a DJ for community radio station KMUN does not vio;ate the conflict of interest policy. Coastda (talk) 19:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sprucing up user page

Coastda, all you have to do is add something to your user page, anything. Just click no the red link, type the letter x, and save page, and you will have removed the red-link from your user page. A red link just shows the page does not exist yet. In the case of user pages, you're pretty much the only one who can create yours. --KP Botany (talk) 17:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, aye - what KP said (she's an old hand around here). Simply click on your name - and it will take you to a "Create this page" window. Just type in "Hello" if you would like. It'll make your life a little easier. --David Shankbone 23:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I'm a bit of a technical idiot, so you don't want to implement it unless and until you get confirmation from someone else.... Yes, it's more straight-forward contributing without a red-linked user name. Welcome to Wikipedia. If you need any obscure ethnobotanical information translated from extinct South American Indian languages, let me know. Welcome to Wikipedia. --KP Botany (talk) 11:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...did a very basic screen name monicker equals my real name. I'm going to try to let a WP editor on the Capital Punishment page as requestedCoastda (talk) 05:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Invite

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_3Is6apqXVr1FYPP&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 13:28, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]