Jump to content

User talk:Davidwr: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
ClueBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Davidwr/Archives/Archive 18. (BOT)
→‎Lloyd Bancaire: new section
Line 312: Line 312:
</div></div> <section end="technews-2014-W22"/> 08:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
</div></div> <section end="technews-2014-W22"/> 08:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Odder@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Tech_ambassadors&oldid=8639104 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Odder@metawiki using the list at http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Tech_ambassadors&oldid=8639104 -->

== Lloyd Bancaire ==

Given that the (re)creator of this article has also been involved in gross misrepresentation of sources, I have raised the matter at WP:ANI - see here [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Gross_misrepresentation_of_sources_by_user:Tendergreens]. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 03:36, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:36, 29 May 2014


People are more important than Wikipedia.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) January 22, 2014

Topics are (or are not) notable. Articles adequately demonstrate a topic's notability, or they do not. A topic's notability does not depend on Wikipedia article content.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) February 11, 2014

{{Alarm clock}}
Dashboard

This page last updated at 2014-05-29 03:36:37 AM UTC.



To leave me a message, click on the + tab at the top of the page. Be sure to add ~~~~ to your message so I know who you are.

A brownie for you!

A brownie to you for reviewing 15 or more submissions during the WikiProject Articles for creation March 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks for your work to improve Wikipedia!
Posted by Northamerica1000 (talk) on 09:58, 12 April 2014 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation
[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Davidwr. You have new messages at Talk:Sunshine Skyway Bridge.
Message added 07:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bushranger One ping only 07:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've dug up a few more mentions of charter bole (which I spotted on the G13 AfC list). Do you think this would be better off in wiktionary, and if so what's the best way to go about that? Or otherwise, any objections to moving it to mainspace where it might get a few more eyeballs? Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 22:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If these are uncommon artifacts that have very little mention in reliable sources, then wiktionary is the place to be. If they are mentioned enough to clearly meet WP:N, then both wiktionary and wikipedia would be good places to have information about this subject. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:02, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:23, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Dragons: Real Myths and Unreal Creatures --

Hi Davidwr,

I am not familiar with the exchange system here. I understand I could have replied by editing what you wrote on my user page. I'm just not sure.

I have not written a word of the Dragons: Real Myths and Unreal Creatures page. This said I get what Wikipedia may see as a potential conflict of interest.

Thank you for pointing that out.

Very few spectators spectators will see this movie because it has a Wikipedia page. We have trailers in English, French, Spanish, Danish and Chinese. This movie plays or has played in regular programming or festivals in Quebec, Sudbury, Salt Lake City, Paris, London, Bejing, Hangzu, Mexicali, Tijuana and will soon open later this year in Montreal, Tokyo, Seoul and probably elsewhere in the world. It is available for showings on demand in AMC and Cineplex Imax venues. We have a website, a facebook page, etc. Not a single booking will come from this page. This isn't how the market works.

This page project was there for kids and teachers and because the knowledge it contained, most of which has been stripped by your fellowship recommendation, was thought to be valid and worthy by people in periphery of this production.

Many Imax movies have pages on wikipedia, including others that I have done. Those pages weren't done by retired and disinterested scholars who have no links to the productions. I don't know for the ones I am linked to, but I know many movies that have pages in Wikipedia were submitted by their PR departments or some anonymized process. Some of them are purely promotional, it makes no doubt. Ours wasn't, even in its initial version.

I don't know how I can escalate this to a formal complaint and free you from dealing with the crook you see in me. This system is byzantine and it favors anonymous and technocratic control, and strict and sometimes misinformed adherence to rules without the possiblity of a true arbitration by a neutral judge capable of putting things in context.

So, Davidwr, you have my real name. I "admitted", as it is said in this cold and unfriendly place, a "link" to this potentially contaminated thing.

I give up. You, Tokyogirl79, and anupmehra win.

I don't have time to learn the strings.

Don't publish this page.

My film just can't have a fair defense in this orwellian procedure. It can't be presented fairly and for the value of its content or form.

It's just not worth spending more time arguing. I am by definition not allowed to talk.


Regards,

Marc Fafard

Mf wik (talk) 03:58, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've replied on my page about this. In a nutshell, I'm sorry that you feel discriminated against, but we have very firm rules about notability for films. Even if we were to transfer it into the mainspace, it would still have these problems and odds are very high that it would be deleted or nominated for deletion within days of the transfer. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:51, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at this article when you get a chance? It includes some spicy issues, so I would appreciate assistance in making sure it's accurate and consistent with BLP. I notice that a lot of AfCs put the external links before the references. Can these sections be included in some sort of skeleton so people know the proper ordering? Just a suggestion. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:36, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check that article out shortly. As far as a "skeleton article" goes, if people are using the WP:Article Wizard, they should be getting a "sample" article that looks like either Template:Article wizard/skeleton or Template:Article wizard/userpageskeleton. If people do not use the Article Wizard, I'm not sure what "template," if any, is used. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:34, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would recommend asking for help at the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. I did remove a non-existent category. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:48, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:29, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

provisional oppose

At the RfC for Template:Infobox officieholder, you posted a "provisional oppose" !vote. I would trust the added comments and discussion will assist you. Collect (talk) 20:58, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is Sampsa (street artist) page now sufficiently supported by secondary sources?

Hi Davidwr, thanks for helping with the page for Sampsa (street artist). I added references to recent Guardian and Huffington Post articles about the subject. My question is, is this sufficient to warrant removal of the BFP Primary Sources warning at the head of the page? Clade Cote (talk) 14:57, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Immediately after this was moved from AFC, it had a {{reliable sources}} template on it, which was quickly changed to {{BLP primary sources}}. Except for the new "2014" section and its references, there have been no changes to the references. I'm inclined to say that the template or some similar template needs to stay until some of the less-than-ideal sources that were there on Feb. 20 are replaced with better sources or the article is increased in size so much (say, 2x) and the new material is well-sourced that the percentage of the article affected by less-than-ideal sourcing becomes low enough that the poor-referencing-template can be removed.
@Sionk, Derek R Bullamore, Magioladitis, and Clade cote: what do you guys think? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:44, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is slightly borderline at the moment, and tend to agree with davidwr's comments above. However, I have seen far worse referenced articles with no template present. Probably it is presently simply a matter of individual editor's opinions/preferences.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:35, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the help, davidwr and Derek R Bullamore. I have gone through every reference, and removed one that did not seem notable nor support the text. There are still three blogs referenced, but they are currently the sole sources for some central information about the subject's works. My gut feels that motherboard.vice, referenced numerous times, is more tabloid than legitimate reference, but is it so bad as to compromise notability standards for WP articles? I also added two new references - an Al Jaazeera article and Huffpo report - that feel solid. I feel that to pare the references further would elide some meaningful contributions to understanding the subject, and his place in the larger context of street art in the 2010's. I appeal to senior editors to reconsider whether this page still requires the {{BLP primary sources}} notice. Clade Cote (talk) 08:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have been bold, smarten up the references and removed the primary sources hatnote. If others violently disagree, then the situation can be reassessed. Regards,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

06:00, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

07:18, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Notification of a June AfC BackLog Drive

Hello Davidwr:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2600 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

The AfC helper script can assist you in tallying your edits automatically. To view a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Sent on behalf of (tJosve05a (c) by {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) using the MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent contributions. JimRenge (talk) 17:17, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

08:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Lloyd Bancaire

Given that the (re)creator of this article has also been involved in gross misrepresentation of sources, I have raised the matter at WP:ANI - see here [82]. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:36, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]