User talk:DangerousPanda

This user has opted out of talkbacks

Note: please do not use talkback {{tb}} templates here unless you are referring to discussion areas that I have not yet been a part of; I do monitor my conversations

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. the panda ₯’

New question

Dear Panda, I have a question for you. I make a wikipedia page and I don't know why it dosen't appear on any search engine, even wikipedia search don't find'it.The page exist. Can you help me with some intel please? Leedskalnin (talk) 17:57, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I know I can search your contributions, but would you like to give me an idea as to what page you're talking about? the panda ₯’ 18:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

If you're talking about the Andrea...etc article, I have moved it to Draft:Andrea de Andrade Wikipedia, samba dancer as it's most certainly not ready to be online as a live article. Please follow the WP:AFC process the panda ₯’ 18:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, I want to thank you very much for time you have accorded to review my page and for fact that you have not delete it irreversible because I have made some work on it. I want to rewrite this article "Draft:Andrea de Andrade Wikipedia, samba dancer". Please, if is possible give me some clues about mistakes I made it and how I can replace it. Is my first article and I want to learn how to do it. From experts and not from tutorials. Is much effective to learn from other experience. Thank you very much for your amiability.Leedskalnin (talk) 19:05, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I haven't reviewed the content - nor the actual notability. That's why I suggested the use of WP:AFC the panda ₯’ 19:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Panda,I modified the format of the article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andrea_de_Andrade_Wikipedia,_samba_dancer#2013:_Uniados_da_Vila_Isabel) adding a summary and removing all external links. This is an domain were I not understand very well what kind of references I can use: - you tube?( I want the reader to see the parade where Andrea participate) - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/picturegalleries/8368348/Rio-de-Janeiro-carnival-2011-the-second-nights-parades-in-pictures.html?image=25 ? (is an article about her participation on 2011 carnival at Rio) - http://ego.globo.com/famosos/tudo-sobre/andrea-de-andrade.html. (is a Brazilian magazine where appears some article about Andrea)

I understand that links like that show pictures directly http://di.imguol.com/carnaval/2012/02/18/andrea-de-andrade-da-imperio-de-casa-verde-1329567592264_956x500.jpg are not admitted. Please, give me some clues about external links. In this article I need some external links is obviously. Thanks very much Leedskalnin (talk) 19:52, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Dangerous Panda, I rearranged the article and put the external references on bottom of page. Please tell me what of this references can be used and what not. This are sites of magazines which deliver public information about this person . Help me to finish this article please. Thank you very much. Leedskalnin (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Just looked at it. Wow. Um. Where do I start. First, your first two sections don't belong - Samba has its own article, as does Carnival - it's an article about a person. I'm then failing to see how they meet the notability requirements - the text and the ref's don't show it the panda ₯’ 22:43, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Sir, I apologize for mistakes, obviously it was wrong to put "samba" and "Carnival" like headings, thanks for correction. About notability I read the link about it and I found this:

"In particular, if reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having a biographical article on that individual"

Now, assuming that Andrea de Andrade is a "low-profil individual" person, considering the rate of increasing her number of instagram followers on day (aprox. 1000) is obviously that this assuming ranking is changing explosive.But Andrea is not a "low-profil individual",in my opinion si a "medium to high profil individual" wich will evolve to highest. If this is the matter of your observation about notability I can't do anything, is obviously that we have other perceptions about what means an ranking of public profile of a person and I respect your opinion.

If is not this the matter of discussion (the public ranking of Andrea), and maybe I need to describe much in detail the external references, or to find other references (is plenty of them on web) please to give me a clue. Again thanks for your availability and amiability. Leedskalnin (talk) 08:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

1,000 Instagram followers? geez, I have more than that and I'm very low profile. Remember, this is notability and not popularity - this isn't MY opinion, it's the Wikipedia notability standards set by the project/community. You were at one point trying to use an image as a reference - no, just because she's in the image and was listed in the image caption, does not make the image about her, or can it be used as a ref. You're using non-reliable sources in a couple of spots. If you have to describe a reference, it's probably not a good one. Your draft is also full of what we call "peacock words - adjectives or adverbs that are flowery and non-encyclopedic. We don't care how wonderful, lovely, passionate or pretty something was (whether a costume, a dance, a person) we need objective (not subjective) facts. the panda ₯’ 10:28, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Sir, I did not say 1000 instagram followers, but the increasing number of followers on day (that means if yesterday was 42000, today is 43000), that I mean to say. Even this rate is increasing, today 1000, tomorrow 1020 etc. She have you tube videoclips with hundreds of thousand of viewers. I understand the point with adverbs and adjectives, I am agree with you, indeed I must don't use the fulminant (and pointless of course) description of person or they actions.You are perfect right I don't think about that. You make light in my head with your obs. about references: If for example Andrea win the contest for "queen of battery(or muse)"I must references the magazine link where appear the news "Andrea Andrade has win the contest for queen (muse) battery for ...etc." not the a picture what show the dancer. I understand correct?

Please you can show the spots where you find the non reliable source (I want to clarify in my mind this thing)and where you find reliable (if this exist)in my article?

I think I must to replace this "peacock word" (good expression) with the description effective of parade: how much dancer passé on "avenida" the time duration of parade, the number the allegorical chariots (floats),describe the battery lead by Andrea (numbers, organization),short depict of Andrea costumes, etc. without adverbs and adjectives, just facts. I can make reference to journals which depict in words the parade (for reliable source).I'm on the good road of understanding? Thank you very much for your patient with me. Leedskalnin (talk) 11:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Panda, I found this link https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRES_Mocidade_Independente_de_Padre_Miguel. In him is quoted some references at Andrea.Is possible to use this references in my article? http://www.sidneyrezende.com/noticia/110000+andrea+de+andrade+e+coroada+rainha+da+bateria+da+mocidade http://ego.globo.com/Gente/Noticias/0,,MUL1631349-9798,00-ANDREA+ANDRADE+E+COROADA+RAINHA+DE+BATERIA+DA+MOCIDADE+NO+RIO.html

Also, is permitted to make references at this Wikipedia page in my article? Leedskalnin (talk) 13:04, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

That guy's website does not appear to meet the requirements of WP:RS. And no, since Wikipedia is user-editable, it is not possible to use other Wikipedia articles/languages as a reference the panda ₯’ 13:59, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, you have no idea how much valuable was this intel you give it to me. I sincerely appreciate your objectivity (a quality very rare in our days).Now I thing I have a clue about the spirit of a true Wikipedian. I must begin the true work to search real information (not peacock words -genial expression form ) for this article. Please let me know if, in course of this work can I ask you some questions about dilemmas which sure will appears. I hope in few days I can present you (if I may)a different article. Thank you very much for you availability and amiability!Leedskalnin (talk) 18:11, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Dangerous Panda, is it permited to make a references to a official website on facebook? https://www.facebook.com/unidosdevilaisabel/photos/a.346940525365703.85194.196230143770076/346940718699017/?type=1&permPage=1 Thank you! Leedskalnin (talk) 11:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

You have read WP:RS, right? I've linked to it many times. Of course it's not acceptable the panda ₯’ 19:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, I removed the Facebook link, indeed is not permitted and finished the work on article(it was hard because of references).I try to respect how much I can the Wikipedia spirit. Again, the problem with references, but this time I try to find some good reliable references. In limit of your time availability please take a look at this draft and give me a verdict. If you find non reliable references please simply delete it. I have great confidence in your expertize. Thank you very much for your time and apologize for my insistence.Leedskalnin (talk) 14:27, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Sir, I found a picture of Andrea on her instagram site and I want to ask you under what condition may I upload this photo on my article. I need the accord of the Andrea right? Or the accord of the photographer? I thing that because the photo was in personal cont of Andrea, she has the copyright of the photo. I am wrong? It's a little complicated for me to understand this condition of copyright. I read this chapter and in this case of photo I don't know what is the status of this picture.And who I must ask the permission to use this photo. Thank you very much.Leedskalnin (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:11, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

See the image use policy...Number 1: we never upload images to draft articles. Number 2, the copyright holder would need to release the image to Wikipedia, and seeing what many people do to such images, most won't do that the panda ₯’ 09:35, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

I understand, right, the pictures may be subject to vandalism, I never thought about it. I want to ask you(for my information),in this example, a picture from instagram account of this person is copyrighted by instagram , by the person who appear in photo (when she did make herself the pictures) or by the photographer who make it? Although, if I thinking more, if I paid something to make me a pictures the copyright belong to me (or not?).Please give me some clue. I read the copyright Wikipedia definition but I am still confuse. You say "the copyright holder would need to release the image to Wikipedia", this mean the owner must send the photo on mail to Wikipedia and accompany the picture by some written word by what it give his accord, or must send something in the paper form with signature etc.? Thank you,Sir .Leedskalnin (talk) 09:58, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Panda I discussed with the photographer of Andrea and he give permission to Wikipedia to use the photo absolute free just to mention is adress of instagram and his name.It is enough for copyright?Thank you,Sir.Leedskalnin (talk) 15:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Sir,can you tell me something about my draft? Please,when you have have some time available make a short review of the article,don't forget me. Thank you very very much!Leedskalnin (talk) 21:57, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir, I know that sometime I can be a "pain in the eyes" but I don't know if you will reviewing my draft. I must complete some format request (I don't know) for submitting you this draft for revision, or is it not necessary? I guess that is a long waiting queue of drafts for revision but can you tell me approx. how long I must waiting for an verdict? Thank you very much.Leedskalnin (talk) 08:08, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Look, I have young children, one of which starts school for the first time tomorrow - I have real life that takes much greater precedence over Wikipedia. I advised you to follow the WP:AFC process. However, a quick glance shows me that none of the notability elements have been met yet - Wikipedia articles take months to draft, so if you're in this much of a rush, it's not a good sign. the panda ₯’ 08:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Please excuse me Dear Panda, is not about rush believe me, it's like after an examine,everyone is curious to see what is his level. About "real life" you are not the only who have one, I have too a boy of 12 years, anyway, I understand you perfect. I understand what is the situation with the draft. I don't want to continue to write on it because I don't find any other information about the subject. I will find another subject "suitable" for Wikipedia. Thank you for you patient! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leedskalnin (talk • contribs) 10:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Leedskalnin: Remember in this situation you have all the time in the world well not all of it :P I believe you should focus on finding reliable sources that show the notability of Andrea de Andrade, by adding reliable sources Panda stated above, by reliable he means sources such as mainstream news articles like CNN, BBC, RT or CBC... (Book sources are perfect too but the book should be notable) the ones that aren't directly related to Andrea de Andrade but explain a lot about her. On second hand it is best that sources like wordpress, blogspot, youtube, twitter, instagram or any other social site to be strictly avoided. Remember that adding non English sources that may seem reliable in my opinion should not be there as some browsers lack the capability to directly translate the source. If you cant find any good sources its best to decide on working on a different article, one where you have interest in and one where you can find some really good sources! If you have any questions just ping me in on my talk page or continue off here. I'm willing to help you out, I too have siblings that start school tomorrow, but I may not be as busy until later this year. There are many places in Wikipedia where you can be of great help! Wikipedia is a community, a large team of editors on a mission to create the largest encyclopaedia accessible to anyone! I myself had a rough start but with the proper guidance any editor can change this place in a good way. Cheers! --Acetotyce (talk) 15:15, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Not the best advice there. "(T)he book should be notable" is nonsense. Also, your opinion about non-English sources is contradicted by policy (see WP:NOENG). Panda gave this guy sound advice, so please don't confuse him with your opinions about what constitutes an acceptable source. Joefromrandb (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

@Joefromrandb: Thanks, apologies for my "opinions" on second hand the book notability part was just book sources in general a fiction novel source used for a non fiction topic wouldn't make sense would it? that's what I meant. My use of the word notability was my mistake. As for the sources most I pointed out were right but I agree on the fact that what I said did slightly go against WP:NOENG but it states there that non English sources aren't recommended but they are allowed, as compared to the way I said it where such sources are not recommended. Again thanks for pointing that out, apologies for the confusion. :/ --Acetotyce (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't say that they're not recommended. It says that when English-language sources exist about a topic, they are preferred. Otherwise, thanks for clearing that up. Joefromrandb (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Aldota sockpuppet accounts

Hi, I can see you added tags to some of the user pages on blocked sockpuppet accounts from Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Aldota. However, it would appear that one-by-one throwaway IPs are vandalising these user pages by removing or amending the tags so the account no longer appears in the category.

I have restored all the tags on all the account I have found, however, you may wish to add the userpages to your watchlist to monitor any potential future vandalism or protect the pages, thanks take care. Tanbircdq (talk) 21:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Case Opened: Banning Policy

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 16, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon ^talk 12:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

ANI discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is DangerousPanda's latest block of Barney the barney barney. Thank you. —Msnicki (talk) 00:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

MsNicki, I'd have to say I'm incredibly surprised by your inflaming of an already afire situation, and your reaction to a statement that was in no way insulting to anyone is ... well, unbelievable really the panda ₯’ 09:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I see everyone has rushed to the ANI thread, which has then careered wildly away into allegations of "admin involvement," "admin conspiracies," and "alleged taunting." Instead of all that, it seems simpler and much less drama-filled to come here and ask if you could see your way to lifting the talk page restriction on BtBB, on the chance that the disruption that led to the block has ceased and they wish to post an unblock request.

The restriction can always be reapplied if required, but I reckon lifting it at this point might help de-escalate the issue. - Euryalus (talk) 09:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

As I just said on ANI, this is a re-imposition of a removal of talkpage access already. It was lifted once, and they went right back at it. How many strikes does one get in baseball? the panda ₯’ 09:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Umm, dunno - I'm Australian and baseball is a mystery to me. :) I appreciate the point you make. BtBB is a long term editor who I would give another chance to, but happy to leave with you either way. Euryalus (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

You want me to believe your response to me was "in no way insulting to anyone"? Oh, please. Is this a new way of insulting my intelligence? I'm pretty sure that when someone tells me I've written the "the most ridiculous paragraph ever written in the English language", that I cannot "honestly" be saying the things I do and that I should give my "head a shake", that none of that is intended as complimentary. Msnicki (talk) 10:11, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

It most certainly was not meant as an insult, nor can it be read as one. "Give your head a shake" means (at least where I grew up) to "shake the sleep/alcohol/fatigue (depending on the specific situation) from your eyes, re-focus and re-read what has been said". Nothing insulting in the least. Your "analysis" has little to do with the reality of the situation, and you're smarter than to have made such comments that were not based on the reality of the situation. Suggesting I was "involved"? Not based in reality. "Teaching a lesson"? not based in reality. You were the sole person planting any insults, and I have yet to launch a single one. If you honestly and sincerely believed I was attempted to insult you, then you were required to address it with me personally - we could have save you a hell of a lot of embarrassment by making sure we were reading from the same book the panda ɛˢˡ” 10:51, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.