User talk:Cheryl Fullerton

Hello, Cheryl Fullerton, 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:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take 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! Binksternet (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:53, Saturday, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:55, Saturday, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Why were most of my edits to Craig Chaquico's page undone by Vmavanti? Some of his edits were not fact.

Please help me with...starting a dialogue with Vmavanti.

Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

/ \

This should be discussed at the article's talk page. Going by the edit summary, Vmavanti thought the edits were unduly promoting a specific point of view and not well-referenced; for example, parts of the content were based on Chaquico's own website, not on reliable secondary sources. Huon (talk) 21:49, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt answer. Can Craig himself be cited as the source of the information? Or, Is that not considered reliable? Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 21:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Chaquico is obviously a primary source about himself. Primary sources (that have been published) can be used for uncontroversial details such as a birthdate, but not for anything that may be considered controversial or promotional, and not as the sole basis of significant amounts of content. In short, if no reference other than Chaquico himself has reported on some issue, it's probably not all that important in the first place. Huon (talk) 23:59, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what this means: "Some of his edits were not fact."
–Vmavanti (talk) 00:10, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. For infobox format, see Infobox musical artist
2. Why are you using his first name? Do you know him?
3. Not sure what you mean by "most of my edits to Craig Chaquico's page undone". Most? I didn't write the whole entry. So far you've changed the location of "background" in the infobox (why?), added a "b" that was left off "band", changed BMG to BMG Music (not a big deal), changed "forming the touring band" to "joining the touring band" (OK, I don't remember if I wrote that), you started using his first name (why?), you put a comma inside a quotation mark, though on Wikipedia commas usually go outside the quotation mark.
4. You changed "went to No. 2 on the Billboard New Age Albums chart" to "was the number 1 independent New Age album of the year in Billboard Magazine and a number 1 on the Billboard New Age Albums chart". I clicked on the link (under references) that leads to the Billboard magazine New Age Albums chart for September 18, 1993. Acoustic Highway is at No. 2. You were right to find a source that showed the album reached No. 1. But what's the other chart you are referring to? Is there a New Age chart and an Independent New Age chart? Where is your source for "independent New Age album of the year in Billboard magazine". Thanks in advance for your reply.
   –Vmavanti (talk) 00:34, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to your questions. 1. I think I fixed the infobox, if it is still not to your liking, let me know what is missing. 2. Why is using a first name a problem? 3. I fixed a typo, maybe yours, where the b was left off band. Forming a band is much different than joining a band by definition. 4. In normal English grammar, punctuation is always before the closed quote. Why would Wiki go against common usage? I will work on the other questions. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 19:21, 29 June 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Why? Why ask why? I think the Brits put punctuation outside quotation marks. MOS:SURNAME, Template:Infobox musical artist
–Vmavanti (talk) 20:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misterpither: Can you provide evidence of vandalism attributed to me by my recent edits to clarify the Jefferson Starship page? All information was cited. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 16:10, 7 July 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Feel free to look at my talk page. I've responded to your question (maybe) P. S. This is not just Jefferson Starship, it's both of the article Jefferson Starship and Starship (band). It's good that you cited your sources on the Jefferson Starship article, but it remains a bit unbalanced due to the pronounced "lawsuit, lawsuit" in Jefferson Starship's article. Misterpither (talk) 21:44, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contributing to the article Starship (band). However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that material must be verifiable and attributed to reliable sources. You have recently used citations which copied, or mirrored, material from Wikipedia. This leads to a circular reference and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. Kuru (talk) 18:25, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Kurt, I will look for other sources!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 18:36, 11 July 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

I thought it was okay to copy and paste a link to the article into the automatic section of the citation tool, is this not correct?Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 18:48, 11 July 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Can you tell me which ones are not acceptable? Maybe I can figure out what I'm doing wrong from that point.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Your formatting is just fine, it's the site you're attempting to use as a reference that is an issue. Specifically, "Revolvy" is a site that makes a copy ("mirrors") of every article at Wikipedia and then adds material, usually ads or random pictures. Since the site is a copy of articles here, it cannot be used as a reference - that would create a situation where we're simply "referencing" ourselves (see WP:CIRCULAR). There are many of these sites out there, and most are done "legally" - our licenses has certain requirements such as attribution. Some other sites fail to do this and are a little harder to detect. The site you used given very clear attribution back to Wikipedia. Kuru (talk) 20:32, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you! I will try to avoid that in the future.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 22:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hello, I recently got permission (he used the interactive permission portal and received a ticket) from a photographer to use his photo of Jefferson Starship, but he sent photos which he had watermarked? This seems wrong. There is no way to use those, is there? Please advise. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 17:40, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Cheryl[reply]

According the guideline at WP:WATERMARK, it appears that the watermarked images are not useful on Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HI Wikipedians

Recently I tried citing a book as a source of information and something went wrong. I don't have a direct link to the book, but I have title, author(s), publishing company, and page number.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 21:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Some ideas about citations. Here's how I do it.

Go to your home page and click on Preferences at the top. Click on Gadgets, the scroll down to Editing. Check Syntax highlighter, which makes text easier to read but putting formats in color. I use it in Firefox. You have other choices throughout that page, but to me that is the most important.

If you want to cite a book, start with the ISBN. Click edit to open an edit window where you're working>Click Cite (has a flippy triangle) on the menu bar just above the window>That opens up a new, lower bar. The left side says Templates, click on that, giving you a drop-down menu with four choices. For a book, click Cite Book>That opens a new pop up window. Quickest way for a book is to start with the ISBN. Enter the number in the blank ISBN box. Then click the magnifying glass. That should fill in the rest of the citation automatically, or at least some of it. Go over it to make sure, making any changes. It's important to have the page numbers. If you are quoting material that is on one page, enter the page number in the Page box. If material stretches over than one page, use the Pages box. You don't need an access date here, and I'm not sure why there's even a box. You only need an access date for material you found over the internet, to show the day you accessed that particular web site. Many people use access dates wrong. I've spent a lot of time correcting citations because of it.

For a book you find on Google with those long URLs, use this. Copy the long Google URL from the page you are citing, and paste it into the blank box, click Load, then make any necessary changes. Lots of choices on that page. Remember since this is information from the web, you need an access date. After all the changes, the last thing to do is click Make Citation. Then copy the text in the box and paste it into the proper place on the WP page you are editing.

For any material you find on the internet, use cite web. Doesn't matter if it's Billboard magazine. If you got the information from a web page, use cite web, even if the web page quotes a book. Cite where YOU got the information. Use cite magazine for a print copy of a magazine, cite book for a print book, cite news for a print newspaper. Print sources don't need access dates, but many people don't seem to understand that.

When the pop up box opens, first copy the URL of the page you are using into the blank cite web box, then click the magnifying glass. Sometimes it takes a while, but much of the information should fill in automatically. You usually have to make changes, as each web site fills differently, and some not at all. Remember to click the Show/Hide extra fields button at the button to get the date field (date of the article, web page your are citing). For access date, click the calendar button to the right of the blank box and today's date will fill in automatically.

For cite web you like to have last name, first name, title of article, URL, access date, article date, and ref name. Remember to name your reference. I like to use the author's last name, but circumstances can call for particular uses. This is the ref name that you use when or if you use the citation again later in the text, so make it something easy to understand. Others will need to understand it. Whatever you put in that box will be listed automatically in quotation marks. For a preview before inserting, click preview.
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information V! I did figure out the key was the ISBN number which I didn't have initially. I was able to look it up and by putting the number in the citation generator, it worked, I think.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:18, 2 September 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

I recall your questions about notable instruments. You might be interested in to know that there's a vote to delete that much maligned, often misunderstood field from infobox musical artist. I would like to see it deleted. Vote
–Vmavanti (talk) 18:59, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vmavanti, thanks for the heads up. Can I ask why this notable instruments is so contentious? I enjoy seeing the names of the different guitars that the guitarists favor. Is it because it might influence someone's buying decision?Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:22, 2 September 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hi Wikipedians, can someone help me with adding an external link at the bottom of the Jefferson Starship page. I want to add a link for Craig Chaquico at the bottom of the other featured band members. I'm not sure why Chaquico was not included. I am not having any success in trying to add the box like the other's have. Any help will be much appreciated.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 14:11, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Still looking for help with adding Chaquico to the list at the bottom of the Jefferson Starship page. I appreciate any suggestions. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 20:42, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Help! Still looking for help. I did some digging and found that a link of this type was deleted in 2010. Any help in restoring the link would be very much appreciated.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 17:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

I was not privy to your earlier discussion, but the removal of the word "evolved" was exactly the removal of content that triggered my reverting. My understanding was that the name started as a name for Paul Kantner's solo project bringing in a bunch of musician friends. After the Airplane broke into factions, Kantner's faction became Starship. That describes an evolution in my book.

Perhaps my knowledge of the band is a little too close to WP:OR, I grew up across the street from the original Airplane house. I saw all the drugs which is probably a big component to why I am a lifelong teetotaler. So I don't know all the interpersonal details any better than the press accounts, but I can state categorically that there were factions and arguments between them. In other words, the originally phrased story seems entirely more accurate, rather than your version which sounds like they popped up from nowhere. Trackinfo (talk) 00:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Cheryl Fullerton. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:30, 20 October 2017 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:17, Sunday, September 24, 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:37, Sunday, September 24, 2017 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eddie891 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Cheryl Fullerton/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Cheryl Fullerton, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Eddie891 Talk Work 17:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Whispering was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Cheryl Fullerton/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Whispering 03:11, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Acoustic Highway, from its old location at User:Cheryl Fullerton/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you.  sami  ^talk 01:01, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Samee What happened to my Sandbox since you moved my article? How can I work on another draft for a different article? Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

You can create another draft on your sandbox or @ Draft:TITLE. --  sami  ^talk 16:45, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cheryl Fullerton. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, A draft of my article was moved and I received a message that I would hear of an acceptance or rejection in two months. It has been 2 months and I haven't heard anything. SAMI moved it from my Sandbox. Can someone assist me with finding it. It is entitled "Acoustic Highway." My first attempts were rejected so, I provided more info and better sources. Please let me know how to proceed with my project. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 01:24, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MadeYourReadThis was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

With coverage in the LA Times and a few notable awards, this can meet notability guidelines for albums, but the WP:WEASEL words need to be cleaned up first and make this read like an encyclopedia article instead of a press release from the record company.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Acoustic Highway and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Acoustic Highway, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MadeYourReadThis (talk) 21:17, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Acoustic Highway, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

~Kvng (talk) 16:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cheryl Fullerton! I'm CASSIOPEIA. I have replied to your question about Acoustic_Highway at the WikiProject Articles for Creation Help Desk. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 09:55, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:CC - Acoustic Highway Album Cover.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:03, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for catching my mistake! I'm relatively new at this, and this was my first time using an album cover. I should have used "album cover free use rationale" instead of "non-free use". Can you suggest how to change the template to the correct one? I'm searching around for a "how-to" but not seeing it.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 21:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hello, Cheryl Fullerton. 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]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	@Cheryl Fullerton: congratulations on publishing your second Wikipedia article on your own! I hope you work on many more. Cloud atlas (talk) 23:22, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Cheryl Fullerton -- I'm sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I'm glad you asked at the Teahouse -- definitely do that if someone (like me) isn't getting back to you.

Adding that template you've been trying to add is definitely tricky. I had to figure it out just now, and I got it posted! Check out the Jefferson Starship page -- Chaquico's template is now at the bottom. Here's the deal:

• That kind of template is called a "navbox".
• Because it's possible that a navbox for a single person might need to be used on multiple pages -- like if Chaquico was in multiple bands -- people typically don't put the code for the template right on the page. Instead, they create a whole new page, called a "Template" page to contain the template, and then they add a short link to that page in each article where it belongs. Then then template appears in each one.
• So I tried to create this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Craig_Chaquico
• It turns out that someone had actually already tried to create the Chaquico navbox template about 10 years ago, and it got moved out of the Template namespace into the creator's User space (i.e. their sandbox) because it was full of red links. In other words, the Acoustic Highway and Acoustic Planet articles that you made didn't exist yet, and so the template was pretty much empty. Here's the discussion where people decided to move it to the creator's userspace, in case you're interested in the history.
• Now that those articles do exist, I moved the old template back into the Template namespace, and cleaned it up a little so that it only contains links to articles that exist.
• Then I went to the Jefferson Starship page and added {{Craig Chaquico}} underneath the other templates for the other people (Grace Slick, Marty Balin, etc) at the bottom of the article. That formatting, with the double curly braces around "Craig Chaquico" is basically saying to the Jefferson Airplane article: "When you display yourself, go find the Craig Chaquico template and stick it here."

So going forward, each time you create a new article about Chaquico's work, whether it's an album or a single or an EP, you should also add it to the template that I linked above, and it will show wherever that template is. If you click to edit that template, you'll see that there are some sections that are "commented out" -- it's the part of the wikitext that is inside the "<!--" and "-->" tags. When you start creating articles about those things, you can remove the comment tags and add links to display those parts.

One other thing -- I noticed that you added the Chaquico discography to the bottom of both the Acoustic Highway and Acoustic Planet articles. I think you should remove that, because that content probably belongs only in the "Craig Chaquico" article itself. In general, we don't want to duplicate content in multiple places in the encyclopedia. If people are reading the Acoustic Highway article and want to see Chaquico's whole discography, they will know to click on his name to find it.

Does this all make some sense? I know it's confusing. -- Cloud atlas (talk) 01:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud atlas Thank you, so much! You have no idea how confused I am about templates! I even attempted to watch a video on how to do it, but it was so far beyond my understanding on the subject, I couldn't make heads or tails out of it. Thanks for the rescue. I thought it might be possible to copy and paste and then change the info in the box, but no such easy operation as with copying the article info.I will reread the information you have provided for me above. Knowing that particular template is called a 'nav' is very helpful. No need to apologize for not getting right back to me, I've sure done that on several occasions in my life! It did make me feel a little better that the video said templates are one of the most complicated things to master on Wikipedia. I feel great relief that the link has been accomplished. Now my plan is to write an article on a Chaquico's Greatest Hits album called Panorama. I'm sure I'll be in touch! Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 19:23, 19 February 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Cloud atlas Hello! I removed the discography section from each album article per your suggestion. Thank you, so much! Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 00:27, 21 February 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Cloud atlas Hi, me again. I would like to add that link to the Dragon Fly album article. So, if I understand you correctly, then I go to the article and add Chaquico's name with brackets in the "External Links" section and that will link it automatically? Or, do I add the Dragon Fly info to the template first, then add to the Dragon Flyarticle? Sorry, I'm so dense! Thanks! Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 18:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

@Cheryl Fullerton: No problem! Yes, you can add the Chaquico template to the bottom of the Dragon Fly article, down where the Grace Slick and Paul Kantner templates are. When you edit in wikitext mode, you'll see those names in double curly braces, and you can put {{Craig Chaquico}} underneath them. That will make the Chaquico navbox we made show up when people view the article. You do not need to put the Dragon Fly article in the template itself -- what that will do is list Dragon Fly as a Chaquico album, which it's not -- it's a Jefferson Starship album. But when you create new articles about Chaquico's solo work, those should go in the template itself so that they are displayed in the navbox wherever the navbox is shown. -- Cloud atlas (talk) 19:38, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud atlas Hello, again! I'm looking at other Jefferson Starship album articles, and they do not have the same kind of links we've been working with. For example: Red Octopus among others. Would it be appropriate to add the type of link we added to "Dragon Fly"? Thank you! Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 00:46, 22 February 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

@Cheryl Fullerton: I think it is appropriate to add those navboxes to other Jefferson Starship articles -- but I think you should add the other band members who have navboxes, in addition to just Chaquico. Red Octopus actually does already have one -- it's the {{Jefferson Airplane}} box that shows the band's discography, and you can add the band members under that. You can figure out whether a given band member has a navbox by going to the URL like "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:[PERSON'S NAME HERE]". -- Cloud atlas (talk) 00:55, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud atlas Yes, I was thinking that, too. It would look like something was missing without the other members navboxes, as well. Thanks so much!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 00:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! You created a thread called Adding to an existing template on Jefferson Starship Page at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud atlas

Hello Cloud atlas. You have given me such expert and reliable information whenever I've asked, I hope I can impose on you to give me some advice on article contributions. I've worked hard on adding historical accuracy, including photos, obtaining photographer's releases, to the present "Jefferson Starship" article. There has been one editor that has questioned and fought me on, just about every edit, I've tried to make. In the past few days, I tried once again, to add sourced information regarding the date the band began, and was challenged although the editor agrees that my facts are correct. Isn't it one of Wikipedia's goals to offer accurate, historically correct information to its readers? If you have any suggestions on how to deal with this, please share. I don't want to offend or make enemies with anyone, but I'm at a loss to understand this editor's objections to sharing facts. If you're interested in the history, it's on the "Jefferson Starship" article. I appreciate any input you can share! Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 19:27, 27 February 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

@Cheryl Fullerton: this sounds frustrating; I know you're working hard on these articles. It might be a couple days before I can read through what's been going on with Jefferson Starship, but I'll get back to you soon with some thoughts. -- Cloud atlas (talk) 06:41, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud atlas

Many thanks!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 16:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton -- I had a look at the history and conversation on the Jefferson Starship talk page and I see that you've been going back and forth with another editor over the last few years. It looks like both of you care a lot and know a lot about Jefferson Starship, and I would say that overall, that's a good thing! It is great to be able to collaborate with someone else who is passionate about a topic.

I didn't go back all the way to when you were working on the article in 2017 (there's a lot to read!), but I did see the conversation about the origin of the band's name and the years the band was active. It looks like the other user reverted your addition because they didn't see a citation for the quote you were adding from the Tamarkin book, and because the sentences you added were not surrounded by quotation marks. Probably you weren't finished working on that edit yet, and so the other editor thought that's all you were going to do. Since it's important that all quotations from books are clearly shown as quotations and cited, the other editor reverted you. I think a good way to avoid that sort of issue in the future is wait to save your edit until you have all the citations and quotations in order. Working on a live article is different then working on a draft because people in the public are reading it all the time, so the standards for completeness and style are a bit higher. About 1,200 view the Jefferson Starship article each day (and that's awesome!)

And then that other editor did realize that they also had reverted your change to the "years active" in the infobox, and corrected it when you brought it up.

Beyond this one instance, it looks the other editor cares a lot about encyclopedic style and making sure the article's narrative flows well. That's something you can try to be mindful of -- things like referring to people with the last names instead of first names, not giving any member of the band unequal attention, etc. I also think you've learned a lot about this stuff while writing the Acoustic Highway and Acoustic Planet articles, and so you'll continue to make better contributions in the future.

It looks like you've been able to have civil conversations with the other user. So one idea I have is that you're planning to add something big or potentially controversial, maybe you could bring it up on the talk page before adding it, and let the other user say their perspective. That might help make it even more clear that you're trying to work in good faith and value the other user's contributions.

So in conclusion, I know it's frustrating to be disagreeing with another editor, but I think there is potential for a really good collaboration here. I think you should keep working on the article and keep communicating with and building trust with the other editors. I'll continue to watch the article so I can follow along. -- Cloud atlas (talk) 03:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cloud atlas -- Once again, you've given me excellent input! Yes, in the beginning I was cutting and inputting my ideas somewhat naively and I got schooled harshly! Yes, I realize that last edit was poorly done. By allowing a number of hours to go by without putting the citation and quotations in place, I left myself vulnerable, but I don't think I deserved her plagiarism accusation. It surprised me because I have been trying to add accurate details to the piece, and made some nice improvements to the article, before. I have brought things up prior to my edits in some cases, but, you're right, not all. I thank you for looking into this for me -- it's very dense reading, for sure! I'll try to give more background and get agreement before making changes in the future. Album articles are a lot easier than tackling the history of Jefferson Starship! Thanks, once again! I appreciate your time and effort, immensely. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 23:35, 4 March 2019 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Athousandpics.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:24, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud atlas

Hello Cloud, I tried replying to your email regarding taking the album image of A Thousand Pictures down, but I don't know if emailing a reply works? I think you said that they don't allow the album image in my sandbox but when I push it to be published it will stick? I guess I don't really understand why it was taken down since the criteria implies that album covers are okay to use if they represent what the article is about? I'm still editing the article, so if you can shed some light on things that would be great! Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Cheryl Fullerton[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton -- yeah, it's not a big deal. It's just that part of the fair-use policy is that the images can only be used in real articles. So when you push the article to be published from your sandbox, you should push it without the image (like it is now), and then add the image in after it's push -- then it will stick. Let me know if you have any other questions! -- Cloud atlas (talk) 21:38, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Athousandpictures.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, I'm having trouble uploading an album cover, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, My article was removed! Please Help!, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Cheryl

I see that you are asking at the Teahouse today regarding how to remove the redirect that is currently present for the A Thousand Pictures album. You don't need to worry about that: if the article you are now re-drafting is accepted, the accepting editor will sort out the redirect when moving the new article to Main space. Equally, you don't need to worry about whether you create the new article in your sandbox or in draft space - both are perfectly good places for drafts and you can submit them for review from either place. Finally, don't worry about the fact that the non-free image will be deleted as it isn't used in an article (yet). You can put it back once the article is accepted and moved to Main Space. So, in summary, just focus on the notability issue to get you over the hurdle of article acceptance. Everything else can wait. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the input Michael. I do appreciate any and all help. I'm not really techy so any thing out of my limited understanding of the process throws me. Thanks again for the help and support!Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, How do I undo a redirect? Follow-up to My article was removed! Please Help!, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cheryl Fullerton! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Asking for help in creating a more balanced Jefferson Starship article., has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Jefferson Starship content disputes. Thank you. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Cheryl Fullerton, I'm wondering if you might have a conflict of interest w/re: Craig Chaquico and Jefferson Starship. You seem to want very much to insert that the band had no relationship to Jefferson Airplane and that the Jefferson Starship name was "legally retired" into Jefferson Starship and have made similar edits at Craig Chaquico. These are edits that are very similar to the COI edits by the user Cajetsetter, who edited many articles for bands represented by a legacy music agent, and they're also similar to arguments made by Chaquico in interviews. Do you represent Chaquico, or is he a friend or family member? —valereee (talk) 10:55, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Valereee (talk · contribs), funny I was thinking the same thing about you and AbleGus. Seems to me like the Jefferson Starship article is skewed towards members of Jefferson Airplane and their involvement with the band with no equal time given to the other original members of Jefferson Starship. I do not dispute that there is a relationship to Jefferson Airplane, but there is too much weight given to that aspect of the history, and not enough about the history, and music of the new members of JS. I have been editing to create a neutral and balanced article over the years only to have my edits systematically deleted or reverted even though my additions have been sourced. Do you have a problem with the truth? Why did you immediately jump on the Chaquico article and not articles on Slick or Kantner or the other members of Jefferson Starship when it was originally an issue with the Jefferson Starship article for which I'd requested Dispute Resolution? Sounds fishy to me.

By the way, I am not a friend, related to, nor represent Chaquico, other than being a longtime fan of the music, and interested in the truth.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 18:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CF, if you'll take a look at my editing history you'll see I am not editing almost exclusively on Jefferson Airplane, Jefferson Starship, Starship, Craig Chaquico, or any other members of the band. I actually seldom edit music articles, having only a passing interest in music, so you're barking up the wrong tree. Please read WP:TRUTH, and also WP:RELIABLE SOURCES as I think you're not clear on what is required. You might also take a look at WP:BLUESKY as, from my understanding, no serious commenter thinks JA and JS aren't strongly connected. Can you provide a RS that even discusses JS without talking about JA? —valereee (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cheryl, you did state that you talked to band members (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Starship_(band)&diff=797414525&oldid=797407358), and contacted Jeff Tamarkin (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Starship_(band)&diff=797063621&oldid=796483639). I think if you are talking to them, you have to be connected somehow? AbleGus (talk) 03:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AbleGus (talk · contribs)Hello AbleGus, In the past, I’ve made queries to individuals via Facebook to support my editing and to be directed to source materials. I am not “talking to them” as you have suggested. I am doing my research in the effort to make these pages, of which I am obviously personally interested, as balanced and NPOV as possible, unlike yourself who have fought me all the way on my attempts to balance the articles with more equal and neutral information and history on the founding members of JS and their musical contributions. You have systematically deleted every effort I have made toward that end and focused most of the article on the history of Jefferson Airplane and the individual careers of Grace Slick and Paul Kantner. On that note, I ask you, as I have been asked by Valereee and seemingly accused by you, if you have a conflict of interest? Are you being paid to edit these pages? Are you a friend or family member of Slick, Kantner, Jefferson Airplane members or their agents? If so, I request that you file a COI as has been suggested to me, and reveal your conflicts. I also request that you allow myself, and others, to contribute to these pages and to bring alternative opinions and balance when reliable sources are included.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 02:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cheryl, in response to your question, I do not have a conflict of interest related to these topics. I am not being paid to edit these pages. I am not a friend or a family member of Grace Slick, Paul Kantner, any Jefferson Airplane member, any current or former Jefferson Starship member, any current or former Starship member, any current or former Hot Tuna member, or any of their agents. Regards,AbleGus (talk) 02:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I want to be clear that having a COI doesn't mean you can't work to make the article more accurate. It just means you need to disclose the conflict of interest, and then you're strongly encouraged to work on the article indirectly, through edit requests, rather than directly editing the article yourself. There are thousands of editors who work this way, and as long as they disclose their conflict of interest, they generally find other editors who are willing to help. You can read more at WP:COI. If you don't disclose, but indications of a COI seem clear, you'll likely find that your editing gets increasingly close scrutiny, as undisclosed COI editing is viewed with deep suspicion by almost all editors. It also usually means the article will get a big banner across the top of the page that says there's been COI editing, and that's never pretty. —valereee (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valereee (talk · contribs) As I have stated, I do not have a COI. I am not being paid to edit, nor do I represent Mr. Chaquico or anyone else in the band or their agents. I request that you cease and desist your pressured questions directed towards me and, noticeably, only me (vs. anyone else, including AbelGus, who have edited these pages), and answer the same questions you have posed to me, which you have not as of yet: Do you have a COI? Do you represent Grace Slick, Paul Kantner, Jefferson Airplane or their representatives? I ask this as you have only chosen to focus on Craig Chaquico’s Wikipedia page and my edits there and have not done the same to any of the other related pages which were the subject of the Dispute Resolution and the Administrators discussion.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 02:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my clear lack of a COI was what I was trying to communicate when I said if you'll take a look at my editing history you'll see I am not editing almost exclusively on Jefferson Airplane, Jefferson Starship, Starship, Craig Chaquico, or any other members of the band. I actually seldom edit music articles. No, I do not represent any of these people, nor have I ever met them, and my knowledge of their music is limited to recognizing some of it when it plays. Here is my editing history. As you can see, I edit many different topics, have been editing for over fifteen years, have made 40,000 edits, and have only recently made any edits at all to the general topic of JA/JS. That is very strong evidence that I have no conflict of interest in the area.

Your own editing history is focussed almost completely on Mr. Chaquico and on making changes that Mr. Chaquico would prefer. When we see an account with that kind of editing pattern, we generally think there might be a conflict of interest, and we always try to get the user to disclose, because editing with a conflict of interest can be very tricky. Like I said, it's not impossible, and it's better if you disclose and let us try to help.

The reason I have focussed on the article about Mr. Chaquico (and it's crucial that he and you understand it is not "Craig Chaquico's Wikipedia page" and that he and his representatives do not actually have any control over it) is that an editor has been using a single-purpose account to edit about him for four years. It's as simple as that, and it's part of our process here, and you can't make it go away. The fact I'm questioning you about this is also part of our collaborative process here. —valereee (talk) 11:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valereee, I have to say that I am very uncomfortable with your persistent focus on me and my editing preferences and choices. It is clear that you are targeting me. You said, “Your own editing history is focused almost completely on Mr. Chaquico and on making changes that Mr. Chaquico would prefer.” This is not true. Have you seen my attempts to edit the Jefferson Starship article, and other articles, for years? These are not just about Mr. Chaquico. And how would you or I know what “Mr. Chaquico would prefer”? I have said that my interest is in Mr. Chaquico and his music, as he was the lead guitarist in the original bands, but I have also made edits which show my interest in other members and music of Jefferson Starship and Starship, in general. I am not biased towards Mr. Chaquico over others. I have attempted to balance the Jefferson Starship article, and other related articles (for instance, their albums) for years, and I have attempted to make edits that reflect that; however, they have been reverted or denied by AbelGus whose focus seems to be on Jefferson Airplane, Grace Slick and Paul Kantner in such a way as to all but eliminate the distinction between Airplane and Starship and to minimize the contributions of other band members to the success of Jefferson Starship. One of my most recent edits was to include John Barbata and Papa John Creach in an edit to the Jefferson Starship page when only Craig Chaquico, Pete Sears and David Freiberg were mentioned as having “joined” Grace Slick and Paul Kantner in forming the band. The other members had been excluded from the edit. Why is that? I have attempted to improve Craig Chaquico’s article, which needed improving as it was inaccurate and outdated, and as I am interested in his career, as you are, I presume, interested in food. I have tried to add balance and a NPOV to the other articles but have been shot down. I do not see you targeting AbelGus for dominating the Jefferson Starship article and other related articles. Why are you not doing that? Why are you focused on me, I wonder? I do not have an “editing pattern” for you to target. I have interests, and I believe Wikipedia has editors who are volunteers and edit out of interest, as you apparently do. I am no different. As long as I have reliable sources to back up my edits, I see no reason for your accusations and relentless focus upon my work. My focus is on accuracy and balance in these articles and, as I have explained, I have had a very difficult time doing this as I get blocked by AbelGus, and now am being targeted by you as if my right to edit the pages with accuracy and good sources, is a problem.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 01:28, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not mind your editing the article about Craig Chaquico. I do mind, and notice, that you have edited it with inaccuracy, and have targeted it over other related articles and have not attempted to edit the Jefferson Starship article which AbelGus has been dominating, along with all of the other articles, for years. It is clear you have a bias and are targeting me and my work. If this continues further, I will have to seek help from Wikipedia administration. Please stop focusing strictly on me as it appears you are attempting to intimidate me.

I'm not going to read that wall of text, but I think we're done here for now. —valereee (talk) 14:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. —valereee (talk) 16:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The specific link is Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Craig_Chaquico. —valereee (talk) 17:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Cheryl Fullerton. Thank you. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:44, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the discussion at WP:ANI via the this thread the community has decided you should be topic banned from from Craig Chaquico, broadly construed. The broadly construed means anything and everything related to Chaquico. Airplane, Starship, etc. Please respect the communities decision on this, and perhaps in 6 months to a year you can appeal. — Ched (talk) 21:02, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cheryl Fullerton. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:A Thousand Pictures, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:03, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• • As you can see, I have been content banned from writing about Chaquico due to a misunderstanding of my intentions to create content about Chaquico. I do not know the man as some have stated. But, I would like to continue to improve "A Thousand Pictures" article which I started some time ago and put some effort into. Please let me know if I can continue to work on the article which is still in "Draft" mode. Please let me know before my article is deleted. Regards, Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 21:03, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Cheryl, that message was from an automated bot, so you can't get a reply. The answer is unfortunately that, no, you can't work on that article here. (Technically you shouldn't even mentioning the artist.) I will go make an edit to that draft, which will start the clock again, and I'll mention it at WikiProject Albums.

    Eek, I see you've also posted at the draft talk. Don't do that again, you really could end up with someone deciding to block you. Go edit somewhere else. —valereee (talk) 12:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Ugh, and you also copied the draft into your sandbox...a topic ban means you can't go anywhere near the subject here on Wikipedia, even in your own user space. You're welcome to copy it and continue to work on it offline, and if your topic ban is lifted, you could bring it back then. And (almost) nothing's ever really gone, so you could request it be restored.

    There are in the meantime six million articles on Wikipedia that you are free to work on. It's only the very small handful surrounding this subject you can't edit. —valereee (talk) 12:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Valereee, I have already been told not to work on the article by some helpful folk. I will heed the advice. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 16:44, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• • Hey, Valereee,

I deleted my draft from my sandbox. I really didn't feel much like working on it again after the beating I took by you and other admins. Actually, it was the last thing I worked on in my sandbox before the witch hunt. I tried again to make sure I'd captured any changes to it before taking it offline. You don't have to worry, I won't be mentioning the "C" word to anyone for a long time. I might be working on other music articles shortly. So, are you going to accuse me of having an ROI because I worked at Guitar Player Magazine decades ago? Also, why don't you go work on those 6 million articles on Wikipedia? You don't have to worry about me. Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 23:26, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked on over 7,000 articles. I've created over 100, on subjects from football trafficking to feed sack dress. I'm glad you're interested in working on other music articles. I think you could be really valuable there as an expert. —valereee (talk) 23:41, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind if I backed up the draft to paste bin here: https://pastebin.com/raw/MkRJ6hU1. I sometimes archive pages that people have put a lot of work into and that may have sentimental value to others. (I feel like burning/squandering someone's creation is a crime against humanity). I don't know what to do with it after that, but at least this creates the option that one day someone might find it and derive motivation to improve it and possibly lead it to becoming a GA or FA who knows? After all, anything's possible... :) LaceyUF (talk) 23:11, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Yes, sadly, there was a misunderstanding by some admins about my work. You are kind to notice my good intentions. Regards, Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 19:58, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I appreciate that this does not mention the topic area that you are banned from by name, but I can think of not explanation for it other than as a response to this edit by Valereee. As such, it is another violation of your TBan, because you are discussing edits made by another editor to the draft in question.

This is not the first time you have been warned about breaching the TBan; future breaches may very well be met with blocks. I have not looked into the history of how the TBan was imposed, and I have no view on whether or not it was necessary at the time or whether it is still necessary now, but that is not the point: it is still in place. While it is in place, you have to act as though that draft did not exist. You can't edit it, you can't edit its talk page, and you can't comment on other people's edits to it. If you want to edit or discuss it, you will need to get the ban lifted first, by appealing at WP:AN and asking for the TBan to be lifted. I'd advise you, however, that it's very unlikely to be lifted at the present time because you haven't really done any editing since it was imposed (beyond a few questions in various locations about the ban and its implications). What editors will look for is evidence of constructive engagement in other areas. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 09:26, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Girth Summit, I was assuming it was in response to reading this very recent story (which mentions Watt was not the Stones' first drummer). The edit by me was almost a month ago. They may truly not be connected. I'm willing to treat this as a sincere request for understanding why I think that term might or might not belong in a given article lead. Unless you or someone else objects, I was going to answer her question with my general thoughts on it. —valereee (talk) 13:15, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Valereee, fair enough - you've been dealing with them, not me, so happy for you to proceed as you think best. Given some of the commentary directed towards you above, I just wanted to make it clear to them that it's not just you focussing on their edits - any administrator is going to take issue when they see someone with a topic ban in place commenting on the subject of the ban. Girth Summit _(blether) 13:27, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, GS, and that's really worth making sure you realize, Cheryl. This is by no means some personal campaign by me. —valereee (talk) 13:33, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]