User talk:JonathanMFeldman
Your recent edits[edit]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
- editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
- participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
- linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.
- Possible COI violation. The case is pending at: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Swedish general election, 2010
Your recent edits[edit]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
January 2012[edit]
Please do not add promotional external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Disarmament. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. bobrayner (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Reply: What are you talking about? WHat is a PROMOTIONAL LINK? BE EXPLICIT! BE CLEAR! This amounts to INUENDO.
WHAT IS A "SOAP BOX"? Give an example?! The term "advertising" is used to refer to products. What product do you think I was selling? I haven't used Wikipedia to advertise any product? Every intellectual is PROMOTING SOMETHING. That is what intellectuals do, they promote ideas. These comments are vague and lack logic. Regards, JonathanMFeldman
Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Gerassi.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Snowysusan 01:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! JonathanMFeldman (talk) 23:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia continues to engage in academic pseudo postering when it comes to the truth. It supports propaganda and nitpicking when it is given perfectly verifiable information.
RE: More bias from wikipedia[edit]
Actually, in my view, the article just wasn't thorough nor carefully researched. John "Tito" Gerassi is a fascinating subject and deserved quite a bit more effort than you expended on this submission.
More about his life and education would have been helpful; for an example, see: http://dlib.nyu.edu/findingaids/html/tamwag/alba_018/ . Perhaps even some mention of his family and, in particular, just a bit more about his father; see for example: http://www.fernandogerassi.com/ . Maybe something about the controversy that swirled around him in 2006: http://www.bloggernews.net/12336 . Of course, a good starting point for your research might have been the detailed interview of Gerassi by Tony Monchinski. (It appears you do know of their association, having cited the work they did together as a reference without in fact having taken anything from the book for your article). The interview, in case you would like to review it, is at http://clogic.eserver.org/4-2/monchinski.html . I'm also a bit surprised that you made no reference to John Gerassi's 1966 truly wonderful "The Boys of Boise," written about the Boise Sex Scandal in 1955/56. Of course, if you had included a reference to The Boys of Boise then you would likely have come across the film made last year by Seth Randal called "The Fall of '55" which relied heavily on The Boys of Boise by Gerassi. Indeed a more complete bibliography or a bibliography at all would have likely been appropriate. The bare reference to just a few of his books, without even so much as a note about or quote from the reviews (mostly positive) those books received seemed to me to be insufficient. There are lots of reviews available online.
Your reference to Gerassi as an activist in the New Left seemed to me to be a bit simplistic without referring to his long history, work, and association with various important groups and organizations on the left. I think most people would have found his open support of FARC leader Granda and Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez in 2005 was just a little bit noteworthy. Even a nod to the many books he has written from a socialist (some might even say Marxist) perspective and his writings about socialist/communist leaders would have provided somewhat more insight for your reader.
Without question, I would have thought, since Gerassi passed away in 2012, what was written about his life after he died would help inform your reader. There is a truly remarkable obituary/memorium by Michel Contat in Le Monde. Albeit in French, it is nevertheless infused with great insight into Gerassi's life and views. (See http://www.lemonde.fr/disparitions/article/2012/08/10/john-tito-gerassi-l-ami-americain-de-sartre-mort-a-81-ans_1744962_3382.html).
I am sorry you feel that you have not been treated fairly by me but these are just some examples of information and sources that would have, in my opinion, improved your article so that it was not so devoid of content, context and references that it tended in fact to mislead, rather than inform, the reader about the subject.
All the best. Snowysusan 01:40, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Look, I don't know who you are, but you come across as an arrogant know it all. This in my opinion is par for the course in Wikipedia, which seems to attract a certain type, form over substance. First of all, I wanted to at least give a very brief mention about whom Tito Gerassi was, so that readers could turn to the page for a reference. Second, I am working on a rather long 61 page single spaces already treatment of Gerassi for a book. So, why would I dump all my material in this blurb for free? This is nothing Gerassi would have done, so why should I? He would have thought it wierd in fact. Third, if you wanted to complement what I wrote, why not simply edit my piece and make changes? Instead, because I don't self-plagiarize, you go on and on about what I did not say. If you thought it was all that important to make these additions, you could have made them. Also, you could have written the first reference to him yourself, but you did not. Why not? Because I suspect you enjoy the role of a gatekeepper more than being a researcher. Now, I can not find any Wikipedia entry for John Gerassi. So, I hope you are satisfied. Regards, JonathanMFeldman (talk) 12:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Jonathan Feldman
- Your article on the holocaust is misleading. It contains misleading information. Who can I write to so that the inaccurate impression that is left by the article can be corrected? How can you have an article about this topic and not cite:
Hannah Arendt or Zygmunt Bauman? This is not serious. Regards, JonathanMFeldman — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonathanMFeldman (talk • contribs)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Gerassi, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 15:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Your draft article, John Gerassi[edit]
Hello JonathanMFeldman. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled John Gerassi.
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Gerassi}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 14:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/John Gerassi, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: John Gerassi has been accepted[edit]
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. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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 .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 18:53, 18 June 2014 (UTC)