User talk:Nickgray
Add topic
One thing I just noticed, if anyone wants to help me undertake a MASSIVE project -- corporate Infoboxes for major tech companies have zero standardization. Looking at Google, Akamai, Apple, Cloudflare, etc. Some list co-founders, investors, products, technologies, stock prices, revenue, etc. IMHO this would benefit from standardization.
There you go, per request. See also the older versions (look in the history) of Lilting Banshees for potential material, which is a redirect page. If your article is accepted it will replace that page. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:31, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
[edit] |
Hi Nickgray! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
Your thread has been archived
[edit] |
Hi Nickgray! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
Your thread has been archived
[edit] |
Hi Nickgray! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
Question about a potential COI
[edit]Given this post: , I'm wondering if you have a WP:COI in re: Cloudflare. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
- K.e.coffman Nope, no COI, but good question considering my very pro-Cloudflare stance! To be clear on no COI: I don’t work there, have never applied to work there, never plan to work there, have never been paid by the company, am not Facebook friends with anyone who works at the company (to my knowledge), never made a VC or angel investment, etc. My editing interest is around improving the article: I’m honestly shocked how much negativity their Wikipedia page is focused on, as compared to the bulk of the company and the tech improvements they’re making to the internet and helping Wikipedia and Wikipedia. Any suggestions are appreciated to more accurately reflect a cool company with thousands of employees. Adding their product info seems to be the best route to add non-scandal stuff to beef out the article.
- Similarly interesting to me, I’ve noticed that public SaaS company websites have almost zero standardization regarding which headers are displayed and included — as you noticed, Fastly had Acquisitions, as does Akamai, and some others. It would be an interesting standardization project, as I learn more about Wikipedia, if you’re ever interested to collaborate, to propose some sort of header schema for American public software companies. Any interest, or suggestions how I would further that idea? Nickgray (talk) 01:20, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Unsourced information
[edit]Please don't add unsourced information as Wikipedia cannot host original research. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:27, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification, Justin (koavf). I've found the source easily online so I'll go back and revert your edits, then add sources. Nickgray (talk) 10:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
- Nickgray, Thank you Nick. Take a look at this method to save you a little typing for references that you repeat. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
[edit] |
Hi Nickgray! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
Your submission at Articles for creation: The Lilting Banshees (October 10)
[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Lilting Banshees 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:The Lilting Banshees, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
 |
Hello, Nickgray!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 15:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC) |
Your thread has been archived
[edit] |
Hi Nickgray! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | 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 |
A barnstar for you!
[edit] |
The Editor's Barnstar |
| For consistent updates on the page "Cloudflare" while working under a semi-hostile environment. Andrew nyrtalkcontribs 21:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC) |
Seasons Greetings
[edit]Yo Ho Ho
[edit].jpg)
Andrew nyrtalkcontribs is wishing a foaming mug of Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.
Cloudflare RfC Review
[edit]Hello, Nickgray - I saw your edits on the Cloudflare page, and was wondering if you would be willing to review the RfC discussion I began on the Talk page in December? I have reached consensus for a review and some condensing with a handful of editors, but none of my requests or proposals have been reviewed, discussed, or resolved.
(I note this everywhere, so I will note my COI here as well - I am an employee of Cloudflare, editing the page is not among my primary duties, and I am obviously not editing the page directly, or trying to push any promotional content). Thank you! Ryanknight24 (talk) 18:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- I will take a look when I have some time. The last I saw, there was consensus to condense but no clear path forward. It was a bit confusing for me to make heads or tails of it. Nickgray (talk) 19:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
May 27: WikiWednesday NYC Salon, focus on wiki+law school and wiki+ai
[edit]| May 27: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce | |
|---|---|
 You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! Featuring this salon, a presentation on on whether Wikipedia can replace law school. And also, a facilitated group discussion on the proper place of AI in the wiki-verse. All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info:
| |
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
June 24: WikiWednesday NYC Salon, Pride Month Edition
[edit]| June 24: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce | |
|---|---|
|
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! This month's salon is a special Pride Month edition. Help us contribute to the Wiki Loves Pride global campaign and discuss how we can better represent LGBTQ+ issues on Wikimedia platforms. All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info:
| |
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
July 10: Free Culture Friday / Wiki Loves Fútbol Watch Party
[edit]| July 10: Free Culture Friday @ Prime Produce | |
|---|---|
 You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our Free Culture Friday / Wiki Loves Fútbol World Cup Watch Party at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! This special event will feature starting at 1:30 pm a Wikimedia Foundation meet-and-greet bringing together local staff and community, and then at 3 pm a Wiki Loves Fútbol watch party and edit-a-thon for the Second Quarter-Final, 2026 FIFA World Cup (Q137545497). All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info:
| |
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:58, 30 June 2026 (UTC)
July 29: WikiWednesday NYC Salon, Post-Wikimania Edition
[edit]| July 29: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce | |
|---|---|
|
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome! This month's salon will feature stories from our local Wikimedia community, a session with Annie Rauwerda of Depths of Wikipedia, plus fresh recaps from members who just returned from Wikimania 2026 in Paris. All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy. Meeting info:
| |
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 25 July 2026 (UTC)
PatronView and Wikipedia
[edit]Hi Nick, hope all's well. First, just want to say up top that I respect and appreciate the work you do to help document cultural institutions and their donors/leaders. This is an important project and I admire the amount of effort that has to have gone in to gather all that data. As someone who pays probably too much attention to the American art world, such as it is, I was happy to find a place that centralized all the information you've gathered.
When it comes to using your project as a citation on Wikipedia though, we run into a few issues. Citing yourself on Wikipedia is allowed, per WP:SELFCITE, but it must be done within a certain set of parameters and adhere to other guidelines. Most importantly, PatronView is a self-published project without independent editors and editorial controls other than yourself. That is not in any way meant as a negative or meant to imply that your work is not accurate or useful. But strictly speaking it exactly fits the definition of a self-published source. Reading the guidelines on that page, your use of self-published material seems to clearly fall under the third example of unacceptable usage: "Third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer." It's not appropriate to use a self-published source for information about another living person who did not author that source.
Again, I want to stress that none of this is an attack on your work at PatronView or your edits on Wikipedia; I genuinely appreciate both. But citing your own self-published material for information about a person other than yourself is generally not acceptable.
Happy to dive more into this, I realize there's a lot of nuance to these issues and situations. 19h00s (talk) 14:13, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- oh my gosh, THANK YOU so much for the kind note and suggestions ~~ I feel seen. should I generally stop editing the posts and adding links to PatronView, or maybe continue but ONLY link to the IRS 990 forms and the official museum websites?
- the issue(s) I've found is that the official museum websites often lapse, and linking to the the IRS 990 forms are... less than ideal (although now that I think about it, perhaps perfectly acceptable - I just have to find a reliable source for them that is a perma-link).
- would it be appropriate to make citations to my PatronView project as proof of existing claims on Wikipedia pages, but disclose a COI in my edit comment? would that be an acceptable way to continue doing it myself? Nickgray (talk) 15:21, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- whoops tagging @19h00s as I neglected to in my reply Nickgray (talk) 15:22, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- Happy to help! I didn't want you to get too far in adding citations to a bunch of different artist bios just to see them reverted.
- I think the 990 form route is probably the right approach - this kind of information definitely belongs in these articles, it was just the source that was the issue. Ideally we would be pointing to actual coverage of an individual's role on a board or in an organization or their status as a major donor, like a news article that mentions it or a biography that describes the individual's role. But barring finding a source like that, which often either doesn't exist or is hard to find, a 990 form is the second-best (As you note, museum websites themselves are often out of date). In terms of a permalink, ProPublica's nonprofit explorer is what I see editors use most often, as they host 990 forms theoretically in perpetuity.
- On the alternate approach, continuing to use PatronView and disclosing a sort of COI, I think you would run up against one of the guidelines in WP:SELFCITE. Repeatedly citing your own material without pointing to other sources will be interpreted by many editors as a form of ref-spamming, or citing your own website en masse in order to raise your search ranking or other web traffic metric. I want to re-emphasize that I do not think that's what you were doing here. But other editors, especially those without experience in editing arts-related articles, would probably not be as generous in their interpretation of those kinds of citations. Even if you're just using the citation to confirm information already contained in an article, the multiple usages of your own self-published site across several articles would definitely raise some red flags for others.
- Let me know if I can answer anything else! 19h00s (talk) 16:19, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- @19h00s OK this is really helpful! I think what I will do for now is pause my citations for a while and think of a better way to cite and fact check board service. That includes looking at ProPublica's permalinks, or a better 990 solution.
- Thanks for talking it through with me. This seems like one of those "easy" computer problems that just annoys me - we can actually verify Board service inside the IRS 990 data files, and yet sooo many pages on Wikipedia either (1) do not link to accurate citations, or more commonly (2) display outdated information when that person no longer serves on the board.
- None of this is meant as a defense of my actions that contradict WP:SELFCITE, tho! I'll keep that in mind going forward and make sure to also add third-party and fully independent sources whenever possible, like this one at the Met Museum announcing three new trustees in 2021. Thank you again for the thoughtful and kind pushback on my edits.
- p.s. if you have any suggestions for my PatronView project, I'm all ears! It is mainly meant as a resource to non-profit teams to see who is donating where to support arts orgs, so not a lot (or much of any, really) focus on the artists themselves. Nickgray (talk) 16:38, 9 August 2026 (UTC)