User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 6

Editing

If you read the Wikipedia page for Jim Davis you would see that the information is already there. I was trying to create a link between the two pages. But please, leave the information out for Edgerton, Missouri, god knows I don't want to be unrealiable using your own information.Bethedge (talk) 05:15, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't appreciate the way you are talking. I started editing the Conover page years ago first as an IP address, then I finically got my account. When I first came to the page it was just demographics, and I edited it by adding everything by asking the mayor, and local officials to get things started, but now you are deleting my hours and days of hard work.CFD15JR (talk) 14:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry if you feel slighted, but you can't just put whatever you want into an article. Is your problem the edit summary where you reinserted all the things that are NOT in Conover that I took a few minutes of my time to remove? Again, sorry if you are offended, but things not in the town do not belong in an article about the town. If that isn't your problem, please show me what you are talking about. Again, you can't just put whatever into an article. I have spent about three hours cleaning up the copyvio and notability problems with Conover, and it seems that every time you come on Wikipedia, you revert my proper changes to put in a bunch of stuff that just doesn't belong. Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline. Also WP:NOT.

Further, results of personal interviews you may have made are not allowable sources for material on Wikipedia. See WP:OR. The Conover page on Wikipedia does not belong to the City of Conover. They have no say in what is on it. None. Period. If that is a problem for you, I don't know what to tell you. If you want to make contributions to Wikipedia that help develop the encyclopedia into a better reference, please do. If your only interest is promoting the City of Conover, please leave the Conover article for someone who can maintain neutrality. Gtwfan52 (talk) 16:31, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

South Paulding High School got a new principal because Dr. Fraker is now my principal at East Paulding. I am in the process of changing this back, and will include a source.

The Tea Leaf - Issue Five

Stop by for a tasty glass of wiki-iced tea at the Teahouse, today!

Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

• Guest activity increased in July. Questions are up from an average of 36 per week in June to 43 per week in July, and guest profile creation has also increased. This is likely a result of the automatic invite experiments we started near the end of month, which seeks to lessen the burden on hosts and other volunteer who manually invite editors. During the last week of July, questions doubled in the Teahouse! (But don't let that deter you from inviting editors to the Teahouse, please, there are still lots of new editors who haven't found Teahouse yet.)
• More Teahouse hosts than ever. We had 12 new hosts sign up to participate at the Teahouse! We now have 35 hosts volunteering at the Teahouse. Feel free to stop by and see them all here.
• Phase two update: Host sprint. In August, the Teahouse team plans to improve the host experience by developing a simpler new-host creation process, a better way of surfacing active hosts, and a host lounge renovation. Take a look at the plan and weigh in here.
• New Teahouse guest barnstar is awarded to first recipient: Charlie Inks. Using the Teahouse barnstar designed by Heatherawalls, hosts hajatvrc and Ryan Vesey created the new Teahouse Guest Barnstar. The first recipient is Charlie Inks, for her boldness in asking questions at the Teahouse. Check out the award in action here.
• Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania! The Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania this past month, where editor retention and interface design was heavily discussed. Sarah and Jonathan presented the Teahouse during the Wikimedia Fellowships panel. Slides can be viewed here. A lunch was also held at Wikimania for Teahouse hosts.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. SarahStierch (talk) 08:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Vandalisms on Ji Dong-Won

I'm controlling back... Hmm... i've tagged 90.219.229.139 for this - 109.155.158.33 for [Special:Contributions/109.155.158.33 this] - 80.192.156.224 for this - 88.104.253.82 for this. This other is not confirmed by the BBC ref. It seems that some anons are playing with ciphers and, edits as Steve Donkey Bruce or 33,000 goals are obvious jokes. If my control was wrong or I forget something, excuse me :) ... tell me again. I preferred to rollback to the last "patrolled" version of july. At least, some cipher changes, assuming good faith, are unexplained in the edit summary and not supported by the references. Regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 19:31, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem in a multivandal assault it could be confusion and I've preferred to control again. Thanx and good editing to you too :-) --Dэя-Бøяg 19:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll watch the page. If they insist after final warning i'll report 'em at AIV. By now I'm thinking to request a temporary semi-pro to RFP. Regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 19:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi, how is it vandalism [1] to restore pages which used to have their own article and have been referred to in the Orange Order article since at least 2010 with no fuss. --Flexdream (talk) 09:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Once unsourced material is removed from an article, it is on the editor restoring them to source it. WP:BRD. You were told that, but insisted that "because I say so" was the only reason you needed. The first time you put it back, it wasn't vandalism; the second time it was. Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that but I didn't say "because I say so" did I? Even though you've quoted that. I said "These sources are accurate". Even Hackney didn't claim it was unsourced. The material is sourced. How is it any different from American_Red_Cross#Celebrity_Cabinet for example?--Flexdream (talk) 09:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Couldn't tell ya cause I have never had any reason to look at that article. You mean to tell me you can't find any source other than the organization itself for the good works they do? Self sourcing is fine for things like addresses and officers names, but for accomplishments? Notice that no-one is removing any straight factual content like I mentioned above, but for things like charitable work, you need independent sources. If I were to make a website and claim on there that I could cure cancer, would that mean I can cure cancer? Maybe a better analogy would be If I claimed on my website that I gave $5 million to cancer research, would that mean that I actually gave $5 million to cancer research? If this article was about a person, it wouldn't pass AfD, as it is entirely self sourced. You appear to care about the organization; why don't you try to find some sourcing for it? Oh, and repeatedly saying the sources are accurate as a reason for putting the content back is tantamount to "I say so". Gtwfan52 (talk) 14:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Your explanation is helpful but I'm surprised that you said earlier the material was unsourced when you hadn't even looked at the article. Myself I'd have looked before making that claim. Me saying the sources are accurate is not tantamount to saying I say so, it's quite different as I'm saying they say so. I'm not the source. At least with your explanation of referencing I do feel I'm getting somewhere. The cure for cancer analogy is ludicrous as that's an exceptional cliam but the funding for cancer analogy makes sense. Ta. --Flexdream (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for finishing my citation for my addition to Hammerskins.

I was interrupted before I could fix my citation. When I got back online to add the missing piece, you had already found and fixed it! Wow, thanks and sorry I initially omitted the citation's article title. Jesse Lane (talk) 06:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Personally, I never take the time to fill out the cite web template. I simply put the exact web address in between <ref></ref> and then go back and use the Reflinks tool to finish the job. You should try it! Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:31, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Editing

Thank for your assistance in editing the Wiki on WGMD. As you can tell by my edits I am new at this and somewhat frustrated. I am trying to help a friend who thinks I am computer literate. I am, but more so in hardware. I seem to remember editing papers in WordStar in similar environment. I am happy I no longer have to boot from 12" floppies. I am learning a lot but I am somewhat frustrated because it is taking me so long to figure out how to make a page, that the system logs me out before I save and the changes show up without my name! Another somewhat annoying thing, I have to admit, was spending all day yesterday on the schedule only to find out my friend was a sleep when I was finished. The next day I set up a conference call in the morning to go through the page and the paragraph schedule was gone. Only the table was there making me look like foolish. "No, really I remember putting it here. I learned about the code for breaks when I created it. It has to be here. Where did it go?" I was hoping the notes explaining the edits would let you know I was aware of the redundancy.

While I appreciate the edits and grammar changes (admittedly not my strong point), I have tried to keep the page in line with other stations and wow, they are far more promotional. While other pages about stations include logos, this page seams to be restricted from bolding it's own call sign! It hardly seems fair that the big radio stations aren't held to the same scrutiny! I hope I am using the talk page correctly and didn't mess up your page. EditorialNoted — Preceding unsigned comment added by EditorialNoted (talk • contribs) 23:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, EditorialNoted! I am glad you are trying to make useful contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't take the edits I made at WGMD personally. I will try to address your concerns one by one. BTW, you may want to click the edit button on this conversation so you can see how numbered lists are made.

1. All your past edits are still here! Just click the history button and you will find a list of every edit made on every page. If you want to put the lists back and get rid of the box, just go back to an edit where it was and copy it, then edit the page delete the box and paste in the list. To make it a bit simpler than using the <br> code, you can put an asterisk (*) at the beginning of each line and that will give you a bulleted list.
2. Please don't feel anyone singled out the article you have been working on for any reason pertaining to the subject of the article. There are groups on Wikipedia that go through and just randomly check articles for issues such as style and promotional language, among other topics. Pages are selected in two main ways, either by pressing the "Random Page" button or by pulling up a list of "recent changes", which is how I came across your article. Mainly, when patrolling recent changes, we look for vandalism, of which there is plenty. Sometimes, frankly, I get bored doing that and I will find a page like the one that you have been working on that need help with style issues. Believe it or not, there is a standard way to make a Wikipedia page. It is outlined in general terms in the Manual of Style. Then, more particularly, there are groups called Wikiprojects that have guidelines for particular types of articles. A radio station would be covered by Wiikiproject Radio stations. Articles also get a quality rating from the projects. The lowest is Start, then Stub, then "C", then "B", then Good, then Featured. WGMD was at start. Now that the promotional language is cleared out of it, it would now be considered stub. I will try to get someone from the project to come by and look and change the rating. A little more history with the proper referencing and it could easily be a "C". Agree, I need more history, however, my friend is in his eighties so while I am confident the recollection of the history of the station from about 1980 on is correct, I am learning it from him and I am not be able to point to any references of public record. In which case, I'm not sure it is worth putting in former the names of former owners or formats of the station if I can't reference them from another source. EditorialNoted (talk) 03:31, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
3. You are more than welcome to put the stations logo in the infobox, providing you can get the proper copyright clearance. Copyright is tricky and a big pain, so I will look into that for you. I can get the copyright clearance but noticed the other images on other pages seem to link to files and I just haven't had time to learn the process. EditorialNoted (talk) 03:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
4. I agree that there are other radio station articles that are very promotional in tone. That is never a reason to make another one. At some point someone will address those issues in other articles. You can if you want! As I am sure you are aware, Wikipedia is huge and it takes time for quality to catch up to some articles.
5. A great place to go for "noobs" to Wikipedia is The Teahouse. They will answer any technical question you have with zero judgement or attitude, something that is kinda hard to find around here.
6. When you post an entry anyplace but in an article, you should sign it by typing four tildes (~~~~).
7. Lastly, I wish you happy editing and encourage you to come ask me any time you have questions. Thanks and sorry this was so long winded. Gtwfan52 (talk) 03:10, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Gtwfan52! Thank you for taking so much time to explain things. It is a big help! EditorialNoted (talk) 03:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

New Editors and how we talk to them

I was struck by the personal quality of your communication with new editors. I believe it was at User talk:Vincent80000. I want to commend you for these friendly greetings and notifications. Should the manner in which you communicate with new editors become the norm, new editor retention would improve dramatically. You may be interested in WP:WER. Thank you for taking the time to teach. ```Buster Seven Talk 13:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Teaching proceeds as evidenced below. ```Buster Seven Talk 02:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Article problems and references

Hi Gtwfan...Thanks for offering your assistance. As you can see I am quite new here and this site is a bit confusing.

As far as my own wiki page. I'm not sure where to find more references??? The sites I referenced clearly show I did photography on those bands Cds. Ive been printed in many magazines, but most print magazines don't put the same content on their websites as they do in there print issues. Not sure what you meant by providing references from those? the other reference is internet movie date base. Thought that was a good reference?

As far this sockpuppet case.. I use firefox and a lot of times if you have more then one account when you go to that page it signs you into that account. I thought when I created The Article on Gino Carlini I was signed into the carliniphoto account. I obviously was in the wrong account and then I turned the computer off, took a break and came back and signed in again..under carliniphoto. I did not realize I was signed in under 2 accounts and did not mean any deception at all on my part.

As far the photos on other Articles about Bands that I work for. Yesterday I asked to be cleared to upload images although I hadnt done 10 edits yet. The person handling that talk page asked me to chose the license in which I was going to upload them under and I chose Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial and he cleared me to upload. I'm not understanding the issue. If that was the wrong license to chose.. why did he clear me to upload images? I own the copyrights to my work. The reason I uploaded the band photos and added them to thosearticles is because my images are approved by the band in which the article is written and also that I am the photographer hired by those bands to photograph their promotional images.

I would appreciate any assistance you could give me clearing all this up. Yesterday was my first day here and I'm still trying to figure things out.. (Carliniphoto (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2012 (UTC))

Thanks for coming to talk to me, Mr. Carlini. Wikipedia is VERY daunting to the newcomer, and I work at a project here that tries to address that. I was a newcomer just six short months ago, and believe me, I know how frustrating the whole thing can be. To make matters worse, you inadvertently ended up at a noticeboard (kind of the Wikipedia version of the criminal justice system) on your very first day here. Those things drive me nuts and I do my best to avoid them. Well, since you are now blocked, the first thing we need to address is the sockpuppet case.

1. Write Dennis Brown on his talk page and explain what you told me here.
2. Ask him what to do, as you will need to abandon the two accounts in the sockpuppet case (Usernames that imply you speak for a group, or usernames that are promotional of a business are not allowed). Dennis is an administrator, and actually a very friendly guy. He will help you.

As far as the pictures go, that will have to wait until you are unblocked or renamed before it can be addressed. I can't speak to what you were trying to do, but they got uploaded as "fair use" exceptions to copyright, which they are obviously not. Fair use is for things like company logos used to illustrate articles about that company and for pictures of dead people, with limited usage permitted to illustrate an article about them. They will get taken down, but you can reupload them under CC-BY-SA 3.0. Be forewarned though: as I told you earlier on your talk page, you are essentially releasing them to the public by doing that and can no longer claim rights to payment under copyright laws. I am not a lawyer and this is not to be interpreted as legal advice, but rather as an explanation.

Lastly, we are very big on civility here. Your rant at Dennis Brown was a bit over the top and you should probably go back and strike out the more blatant attacks directed at him. (You strike out by editing, and putting <s> at the beginning of what you want to strike and </s> at the end.) You stated in that rant that the only reason you created the page in question was to promote your company. That is the wrong reason. You need to approach making a page on your own firm very carefully, and bend over backwards NOT to make it sound promotional. IMdB is not considered a reliable reference as its content is user edited, not written and reviewed like a newspaper. If you have ever gotten written up in a trade publication, that would be a great reference. Obviously, books, magazines and newspapers would be too. Hope you find all this helpful and feel free to come back for clarification or with any other questions. Gtwfan52 (talk) 19:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Adding to what I have said above, what determines whether an article can stay or go is something called notability. Wikipedia's version of what is notable is determined by how much the world at large has noticed the subject of the article, which in this case is you. Unfortunately, although your work is widely used in the world of Rock Music publishing, it may be that the world at large is not all that aware of you. Your pictures are great, no doubt about that. But unfortunately, your pictures being great (Or even widely used, for that matter) are not enough to establish notability for you. You have to be written up in books, magazines or newspapers. Referencing the fact that the illustrations on certain albums are yours is really not enough. I hope you can find enough to complete your article. Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:WGMD radio logo.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:WGMD radio logo.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:WGMD radio logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:WGMD radio logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Caligola (music project)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Caligola_(music_project)#Albums Thank you very much for your reply! İt's giving me some new direction. Sorry if İ seemed to be a bit - well ;-) but İ've submitted a few times and each time I had to begin explaining again from the beginning. My problem - this project is new, and there are no secondary sources yet. İ think that has been sorted out by now. And it is like you said - it's one group of five who represent the core, and lots of other artists are participating in the recordings and the shows. It's a good cocept - makes every performance different. lDo İ have to cut out the video section compietely ore just remove the links? I'll try removing the links. İ have changed this lıst of artists and the style, I hope it's ok now. Andrea Schweinberger (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

It looks pretty good to me. A suggestion, though? You might look at other musical groups and see how the chart listings are handled. It seems it would look better in some sort of a box. If you find one you like let me know and I will help you work out the coding for it. You are doing great work. Keep it up. We need editors here that are willing to be diligent enough to see the process through. Eventually, I personally would like to see our efforts rewarded by NOT getting a funny look when you tell someone you looked it up on Wikipedia! Gtwfan52 (talk) 14:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The funny look is still killing me. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caligola_(Musikprojekt) Take a look at my article in German . There I managed to get a box of some kind, but I honestly don't know how it happened...Of course I want to see the process through, and somehow I get a liking of the whole editing process, and when this one will finally be published, I'm sure I'll find something new to write about. It's fun. And thanks again for zour help!Andrea Schweinberger (talk) 10:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

"Evolution of atheism's statistics.. and steady braking"

Hi, Gtwfan !

I thank you for your intervention.

However, if you have a look at the history of that "Atheism" page, you can see that IRWolfie began initially (that's his own word) by doing a "clean up" on the new text, mainly removing the bold types, the (Gallup report's) sections titles that I had typed in capital letters, and so on.

Then after ---and only then---, he decided to erase the whole text altogether ---which is, you'll agree with me, a very open-minded way to open a peaceful debate !.

But... I invite you to cast an eye on the last paragraph of my answer to the same IRWolfie, and you will see that I had warmly approved his "trimmings" !

I approved it so much, that I re-introduced my contribution... after having removed all the bold types etc... myself, "as a proof of good will" (that my exact words, see the cited answer..)

And, of course, some other "well thinking mind" --namely Dominus Vobisdu-- found nothing better to do... than to erase these (apparently "cursed") paragraphs again !.

It begins to look like the informations contained in it really scare some people, up to the point that they could do anything --even silly things like trying to delay by any means the publishing of those infos on WP...

Friendly yours

--Mezzkal (talk) 21:58, 25 August 2012 (UTC)