User talk:Pragmaticstatistic

This user may have left Wikipedia. Pragmaticstatistic has not edited Wikipedia since 1 December 2015. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Hello, Pragmaticstatistic! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page List of American Civil War battles has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://myreadingmapped.blogspot.com/2011/03/interactive-map-of-geoffery-wards-book.html. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to say pretty much the same thing but the BOT beat me to it. Self-published content is not considered a reliable source for inclusion on wikipedia, the content you propose is in conflict with WP:MOS and the links are not suitable. Whilst I appreciate your enthusiasm I would request that you desist from re-adding the same material. Thank you. Wee Curry Monster talk 14:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I hope you've had a chance to read the comments above from XLinkBot and Wee Curry Monster. Notwithstanding these comments, you are still posting the same type of material to Wikipedia articles, and still re-adding repeat material after it has been legitimately removed. Yesterday PeRshGo reverted your addition of a self-published interactive map link in the article Knights Templar (Freemasonry), and today you have re-added it. I have just reverted your edit again. Like the other editors involved, I admire your enthusiasm for the topics which interest you, but your maps are not suitable for an encyclopedia as they include uncited material, controversial material (including conspiracy theory), and fantasy material - they will be useful, no doubt, in other on-line forums. Please stop adding this type of material, and stop re-adding it after it has been reverted. Thank you. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 11:17, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:ELNO, particularly counts 9 and 15, before continuing your campaign on Second voyage of HMS Beagle. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pragmaticstatistic. You have new messages at Old Moonraker's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

06:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Second voyage of HMS Beagle. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Old Moonraker (talk) 11:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Following my own suggestion, I have requested a review at WP:ELN#Second voyage of HMS Beagle. --Old Moonraker (talk) 11:59, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Moonraker, your policy is inconsistent with other Wiki editors. See the following links I already have on Wiki:

• The Lewis and Clark Expedition, just under the heading called “Journey”.
• List of Shipwrecks, 3/4 of the way down just under the headings “High Seas – Atlantic Ocean” and "High Seas - Pacific Ocean.
• List of American Revolutionary War Battles, just under the heading “Battles (in chronological order).
• The Travels of Marco Polo (on Wikisource), at the very top of the page.
• List of Egyptian Pyramids, at the very top.
• List of Environmental Disasters, just below the heading "Industrial".

Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 15:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you actually read the external links policy? The "other wiki editors" have consistently removed your contribution to Second voyage of HMS Beagle. WRT your list, the Wikipedia version of "two wrongs don't make a right" is here. After other editors have commented at WP:ELN, depending on the outcome, I may give some attention to the list you have kindly supplied, as well. --Old Moonraker (talk) 16:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you remove one, then you might as well ban them all and that would remove a valuable research tool on a wide variety of subjects. These maps do not go to my site, they go to Google just like the World Heritage Foundation's Coordinates Google Map does for their list of historic restorations. You ban my maps, then you must remove the World Heritage Foundation's as well. Oh bye the way, those maps of mine that appear at the top of the page were moved there by others. I never placed them at the top of the page. Since you removed my Darwin edits, I added links for each location contained within the map to the actual Darwin book found on Google Books to make it more credible for you. Thus, there is no copyright problem. The Google Map has free access to everyone, my input to it is free to everyone, the Darwin book is free to everyone and the Wiki links within the map are free to everyone. There is no advertising content within the map other than a link to my blog which I will remove if you demand it in order to get it to satisfy you. Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 11:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re-listed at WP:ELN --Old Moonraker (talk) 12:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will also comment that once a consensus emerges at WP:ELN, I will agree with your comment that your 11 other articles need to be reverted, and will do so. I will hold off on that until a consensus demonstrates it is not merely one or two editors who disagree with you. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 19:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)== Removal of map pointer from Hernán Cortés ==[reply]

I have re-removed an inappropriate link to a google map in Hernán Cortés. The information is already present in the article, what you are doing is pointing the article at what is effectively a private blog. Neither google maps nor you can guarantee this content stays the same. In addition, Wikipedia is a tertiary reference, which means it should only report on content published elsewhere - and not in blogs. Please do not re-add that pointer, it is not appropriate for Wikipedia. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 00:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your justification that you have added this kind of material to 11 other pages, all I can say is read the policy pages. Specifically External Links, Rich Media and Original Research. I don't patrol every page in Wikipedia, I can only comment on pages that I have watchlisted - and the material you are adding to Hernán Cortés is inappropriate. You have now performed essentially the same edit three times, I'll let the administrators handle it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarlneustaedter (talk • contribs) 19:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will also note that your efforts in 11 other articles have not gone unprotested - you have an ongoing escalation at WP:ELN, which seems to be in essence someone else catching you at exactly the same thing. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 19:28, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problems with your maps:

• They are original research. Wikipedia is a tertiary reference, it only reports on what is documented elsewhere.
• They are self-published.
• They are under an account in your name, any errors require you personally to fix them. You are not immortal.
• They are in a database at a specific commercial host, which is also not guaranteed to exist forever.
• Your account at google maps is not guaranteed to exist forever. If you irritate someone, your account (and all the information in them) is deleted.

To fix these problems, you need to find a way to provide the coordinates in question in Wikipedia itself, which can be applied to _any_ of the various mapping commercial sites out there. These coordinates most not be in some private database under your personal control outside of Wikipedia. Any errors must be fixable by anyone with access to Wikipedia.

And lastly, this is original research. You are somehow converting from 16th century maps and accounts to absolute coordinates. Who has validated this research? Where was it published? Again, Wikipedia is not a venue for publishing new research, it only references what has been published elsewhere. The content in Wikipedia should be a summary of the references it points to, but those references must stand on their own, not be specific to Wikipedia.

As for UNESCO, I don't patrol the entire Wikipedia. I can only comment on the portions I do watch. And I also note that your actions have come to the unfavorable attention of other editors as well. Please resolve this by participating in the discussion at WP:ELN. And do read the Wikipedia policies on External Links and Original Research. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are my responses to the above:

• You stated: "They are self-published."

My response: My maps appear in two way in the top 10 Google searches. 1) As MyReadingMapped listings, and 2) As GoogleMap.com listings. Thus, if I die, they belong to Google who owns the server and all that is created by any of use users. The likelihood of Google going under is less of an expected event than that of Wikipedia going under.If Google goes under, so will the Internet.

• You stated: "They are under an account in your name, any errors require you personally to fix them. You are not immortal."

Response: The original Google Maps, on the Google Server, are published as a public document that can be edited by anyone who logs on via Google Map. The only version of these maps that cannot be edited are the embedded images on my blog. As for any new maps I am working on, such as the map on exploration in Siberia by Mikael Strandberg, I am sharing collaboration with him and he is providing me with authentic content and we are planning on doing the same with his upcoming exploration Arabia.

• You stated: "They are in a database at a specific commercial host, which is also not guaranteed to exist forever."

My response: Neither is Wikipedia. And, many of the edits on Wikipedia, such as the List of Ship Wrecks, have red highlighted listings that either don't exist and go nowhere or are commented as not having sufficient authenticity. So, why weren't they removed rather than remain as empty useless data?

• Your stated: "Your account at google maps is not guaranteed to exist forever. If you irritate someone, your account (and all the information in them) is deleted."

My response: Ditto for Wikipedia.

• You statred: "To fix these problems, you need to find a way to provide the coordinates in question in Wikipedia itself."

My response: Most of the maps obtained their location coordinates from Wikipedia pages. Each location I find in a book is researched on Wikipedia to obtain the location's coordinate. The only locations that do not have Wiki provided coordinates are those not found on Wiki. Thus, my map saves the visitor from having to go through the process of locating the coordinate for a long list of ship wrecks, ruin, etc. through GeoHack.

• You stated: "Wikipedia is a tertiary reference, which means it should only report on content published elsewhere - and not in blogs."

My response: My maps are referred my a long list of teachers and others who are free to embed the maps in their sites or just list them. For example, here is one I received today about MyReadingMapped: http://www.delicious.com/raman_sam/?page=2

As for reading the rules and communicating with Wiki, Wiki makes it way to difficult for the average person to participate. A new user must spend months learning how it works, months learning how to program and edit it, and learn its rules all of which discourage any participation. So why bother, just wipe my edits off Wikipedia and leave it at that. As a marketing communications manager, it appears to me that Wikipedia was designed and created by engineers rather than communications experts. Redesign it and allow all of us to participate, not just the elite.

Lastly, check out Wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimee This is obviously a commercial advertisement in the form of a Wiki page. It displays a commercial product, provides the manufacturer's name and provides external links to the companies web site. If you think my blog is a violation of Wiki rules, then the Mimee page is also. If this page was open access as you desire, the coordinate converter would be able to convert my coordinates on Wiki rather than just being an image that forces us visitors to buy the product. The Mimee page is flagged for needing additional citations and verification, but was not flagged for its commercial violation. The Wiki rules seem only to apply when Wiki decides to wants them on an editor by editor basis. Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We're talking about you at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard#Picture_caption_on_Second_voyage_of_HMS_Beagle. Please join the discussion there. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I thought I was banned from Wikipedia so I never responded after I was banned. But, since you contacted me about the above "The Olive Branch" I must assume some activity has changed. I now have over 90 Google Maps of Historic Events. Many of which rely on Wikipedia for quotes, photos and links. My maps to date have over 88,000 Google Map visits and over 35,000 blog visits from over 32,000 visitors from 135 countries. My maps have been recognized by The Charles Darwin Trust, the University of Alaska - Fairbanks, travel agents world wide who use them to improve their business, teachers who use them in classroom assignments, and I have tracked Royal Geographical Society explorer Mikeal Strandberg in realtime on his 2012 Yemen expedition. The maps cover such subjects as famous explorer expeditions, oceanic trenches and other undersea phenomena, sunken ships, ship grave yards, airplane and train crash sites, the works of Vincent van Gogh, Paul Cezanne and Frank Lloyd Wright, the American Civil and Revolutionary wars, WII battles, ancient ruins world wide, pyramids around the world, Ebola and SAR outbreaks, and corporate crime. I even continue to get visits from Wikipedia users via this talk page from various Wiki sites around the world. Rather than argue over placing links on Wikipedia, why don't you partner with me and find a way to embed my Google Maps in Wikipedia. I don't really care any longer if you do, but your Wiki users would greatly appreciate them. Embedding the original Google Maps in Wikipedia will side step my blog and the map can be used by the visitor right inside Wikipedia. I tried to embed them orginally, but I could not figure out how to do it since your code did not accept the embedded HTML code. Approx. half my Google Map visitors are return visitors. My Google Map visitors are twice that of my blog. So people don't need my blog to enjoy the maps. Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 20:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The message above is from a mindless bot that made a list of people who had edited certain pages related to dispute resolution. It means nothing at all about your right to participate. If you aren't interested in reading the newsletter, then I can get your name taken off the list. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove me from the list if nothing has changed in our relationship, thank you for your assistance.Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 13:33, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to the C|Net article titled above things are not so well in Wikiland. (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-wikiland-paid-pr-scandal-erupts-at-wikipedia)

Wikipedia needs to clean its own house before it challenges contributors like me who tried to offer free Google Maps of Historic Events to everyone. While you considered my contribution to be spam, like I told you back all these months ago, what is no Wikipedia is outright advertising for certain companies and politicians. And, now to find out that it is Wikipedia's own trustee and Wikipedian-in-Residence using Wikipedia as a SEO PR operation to promote their clients is far worse than what you banned me for. I feel an apology is in order.Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 00:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've brought them up at WP:ELN - you certainly have a conflict of interest and this can also be considered spam. I realise you mean well and have worked hard on these, but I really feel they fail WP:EL. Dougweller (talk) 14:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If that is what you decide eliminate them. But you are not hurting me, your hurting all the people who would learn things from these maps. Several years ago I was told on my talk page that I could place them as external links.

But consider this, my maps are better researched than the Toolserver Google Maps at the top, in the content section, of many Wikipedia list pages like Roman Amphitheatres and Antarctic Research Stations. My explorer maps are based, quoted and page referenced on a placemarker basis and provide a link to the actual eBook written by the actual explorer, so you can follow the map as you read. My maps also come with a Google Earth KML file so that you can digitally walk the map like the explorer and climb Mount Everest following Hillary's route. The Plate Tectonics map enables you to zoom in on the actual fracture zones, mid ocean ridges, earthquakes, submarine volcanoes, ocean trenches and the like, and go under water using the Google Earth KML file. You cannot do that with any other map. The Thermohaline map enables you to see the topography that effects the Thermohaline Circulation and see the Antarctic Polar Vortex, the Surface and Deep Sea Currents, the Brine Rejection and the Antarctic Ice Cap all in one image. No where else does that exist. The Geography of the Koppen Climate Classification System map enables you to turn on the weather feature and compare the geography of the over 100 year old classification with today's weather patterns to see if climate change actually happened and where. No where else does that exist. The Rise, Fall and Migration of Civilization Due to Climate Change overcomes many of the objections of anti-climate change advocates because it contains university white papers and media articles that prove an extensive history of climate change that affected migration. The Republics map has the history of the good , bad and troubled republics and covers the types mentioned on the Republics page such as Unitary, Confederate, Federal, Arab, Islamic,etc.

Wikipedia is struggling, yet when someone offers quality content you ban it. My web site, MyReadi ngMapped, that these Google Maps appear on has a MozRank Authority of 95 out of 100, a Domain MozRank of 8.1 oiut of 10 and a Domain MozTrust of 8.7 out of 10. If you check out my About Me and MyReadingMapped page you will see that the following organizations think my maps have merit and have linked to my site:

--The United Nations Space-based Information for Disaster Management and Emergency Response (UN-SPIDER) --The Smithsonian Libraries Unbound --The University of Texas Libraries' Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection --University of Delaware Library --The National Education Association --The University of Illinois' Carbon Capture Report --The Charles Darwin Trust --The University of Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska Native Language Archive --Google Earth Blog has featured my maps in 10 separate articles --The Atlantic Cities featured my maps in an article --Marygrove College's MAT Blog featured my maps in an article

And, I have a page that proves my maps are used in the classroom by actual teachers.

So eliminate them if you have to, but that would limit the educational resources on Wikpedia that my maps offer. Especially since they link back to Wikipedia subject matter content on a placemarker basis rather than to the Wikipedia List page like the Toolsever maps on Wikipedia do. It would be better if Wikipedia gave me special consideration for quality maps.

How is it that you consider my maps spam, yet when the World Heritage Organization does it it's not? Also I fixed many of the coordinates provided by Wikipedia that go nowhere and missed the item, ruin or location they were supposed to hit. I could fix them, but why should I waste my time if you are going to eliminate my maps?

Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 17:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, for your most recent edit I've asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America#Google map added as EL to List of Alaska Native tribal entities. Dougweller (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To Doughweller: Huh? Your statement is confusing. What do you mean? Are you recommending my map to another Wikipedia page? If so thank you. However, my Google Map of Native American Settlement in Alaska is only designed to discuss the migration of Native peoples to Alaska. As for your comment on it being my map based on Wikipedia resources, you are not entirely correct. While I created the map, the map uses and cites information from a variety of sources including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the National Council of State Legislatures (NCSL) List of Federally Recognized Tribes, the Department of Justice and various Wikipedia resources for the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and census data for those locations that had links on the List of Alaska Native tribal entities (which seems to match the list Federally Recognized Tribes on the NCSL site). The NCSL list seemed more credible since it did not have all those red tribe names/links that go no where on the Wikipedia page. And , I requested the reproduction of a Native Language map from the University of Alaska, with whom I already have a relationship with in that they have a referral on their university web site to my site's Google Map of Herron's 1899 Alaska Expedition. Thus, my placing all these Google Maps on Wikipedia are more educational than spam. I have over 150 Google Maps of historic and scientific events, can I now put them all on Wikipedia?Pragmaticstatistic (talk) 01:32, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jackmcbarn. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Ouara, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pragmaticstatistic. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]