User talk:Shritwod

Hello Shritwod, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! DuncanHill 18:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Susan Etok page

You have gone through the article that I wrote about Susan Etok removing credible references and trying to get the page deleted. Your efforts have been noted by other editors as well to the point that I am convinced that you have a vested interest in this article because you are a Michael Jackson fan. Your comments in the article for deletion section seem full of malice.

I do not know and have not met Dr Etok, I wrote this article because I live in the town that she is from and she is always in the local papers and local news. Most recently last week.

I have spent alot of time researching this article and will not have my work destroyed because you have a grudge against the person in the article.

You have also made some comments in the article for deletion section about the subject in the article that could land you in legal hot water, but that is not of my concern.

Lola — Preceding unsigned comment added by Respect77 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

If you are nothing to do with Ms Etok, then how come you are in possession of a studio-quality photograph of her? That seems rather odd. Shritwod (talk) 11:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Shritwood, I am not sure what is wrong with you but you have some obssession with this lady that us not healthy. Why I have a studio quality picture of this lady because I downloaded it from her website with permission on no copyright restrictions. What has that got to do with anything? Objectivity is key here and you are not being objective. Anyone would think that you were racist or a Michael Jackson fan. You are not committed to getting accurate articles out there, you are hellbent on trying to ruin people's reputation. As an editor, you shouldn't be working on this article because it is clear that you know or have been involved with this woman. Your reaction is far too emotional to be one based on good editing and accuracy. Respect77 13:00, 28 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Respect77 (talk • contribs)

You claim in the copyright details that you are the copyright owner. You must therefore know the subject, or you must be make a false assertion about ownership. End of discussion. Shritwod (talk) 13:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Vandal reporting

You have twice reported User:TruthSelfEvident to WP:AN/V. However, these edits do not meet a strict interpretation of WP:VANDAL. Furthermore, the user was not even warned today. The user is using edit summaries, and does not appear to be trying to purposely hurt the encyclopedia, so this seems like a content dispute. Please use the article talk page to discuss your concerns, and I'll tell TruthSelfEvident the same thing.-Andrew c ^[talk] 21:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi

I userfied the contents of the article at User:Shritwod/Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi (draft) per this request. -- Jreferee t/c 21:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Shritwod. I received a message from SaltyDawg regarding User:Shritwod/Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi (draft). The draft still is highly POV. The lead paragraph starts out misusing the alternate names for the article to indict El-Difrawi through "also know as" innuendo, then label's him "controversial", and then calls his model scouting company a scam without any conclusion by a court of the same - all within the first sentence! Even the Adolf Hitler article does not do that. The third sentence in the lead paragraph lists an unproven accusation and then, zamo, right into a criminal conviction. The article then goes into his criminal history instead of his biographical history, establishes a guilt by association to accused pedophiler Lou Pearlman, then goes into detail about El-Difrawi current activities, implying that everyone needs to watch out for these current activities because El-Difrawi is a bad guy. The draft article isn't a biography. It seems more of a hit piece on El-Difrawi. You've had two months to attempt to get this draft article into shape and I don't think it is there. El-Difrawi might be everything the draft article is saying he his, but the draft article is not written in a neutral, encyclopedic way. If you believe it is, you still can follow the instructions at Steps to list a new deletion review and post a request for the article to be restored using this draft as its contents. -- Jreferee t/c 16:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the word "controversial" is very NPOV for this person. I don't think controversial is as bad a word as you make it out to be - many people are not controversioal. The lists of aliases is neutral and appropriate and cited. It merely states other names this person is known as and nothing about those names being used as part of any fraud. The modeling company was labeled a scam by the New York State Consumer Protection Agency which is herein cited. Scam is not a legal term so no court could ever label the operation a scam, but a government agency looking out for consumer protection can. The accusation is clearly labelled as an accusation, and is prominent in the news since it was recently covered by local news and the Washington Post, also herein cited. Then, the subject's bigraphical information is covered. However, there are few secondary sources writing biographies of defrawy so this information is necessarily limited. His crminal history is extremely relevant because it plays into everything he has done here and is well established by multiple sources. Lou Peralman is neither a known nor convicted Pedophile, and nowhere in this article is this mentioned. Lou Pearlman was accused of pedophilia in Vanity Fair and other publications, but this article makes absolutely zero mention and there is absolutely zero attempt at guilt by association. This section is also has the label "Association with Lou Pearlman and Modeling Business" not "modeling scam". As the largest modeling scam in the history of the United States (and this is not exaggeration) this business is handled very NPOV. According to independent citation, El-Difrawi is currently operating one of the largest and most successful phishing operations in the world. If you INFER that you should stay away from that then that is on you, it is nowehere implied here. Further, invoking Hitler is just taking an extreme position, it has zero bearing on this discussion. The two topics are not the same, the biographical information available is not the same. If you can point to a Wikipedia guidline that states the the bio for Hitler is the template for bioraphis of living persons I'll buy it, otherwise I believe his invocation logically weakens your argument against inclusion. AGAIN: the original reason for deletion was non-notability, notability has been established. This person is a career criminal and scammer (although this article never states that) the entry is very NPOV in light of the majority of this person's activities.--SaltyDawg (talk) 16:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.. Jreferee, I think you're right about some of the more recent edits. It needs a more neutral POV to open with. I certainly can't find proof about many of those aliases either. Shritwod (talk) 22:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, just curious why you requested having this page deleted. It seemed like the page was startin to shape up. --Salty Dawg t/c 19:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Nokia-5800-xpressmusic.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nokia-5800-xpressmusic.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Les Henderson

An article that you have been involved in editing, Les Henderson, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Henderson (2nd nomination). Thank you. --WeatherFug (talk) 23:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Cheers for the thankyou, ive had a little time off work and im trying to tidy a few things up in the Bedfordshire article after the change to unitary! Your thanks is appreciated thpugh! Bleaney (talk) 22:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Iliffe Group

I work for Bedsonsunday and made some edits on the wiki page. Firstly there was a link which was broken so I removed it, but you added it back on? Also I added some content to better the page and you just removed it. I was breaking no guidelines, it was just a paragraph about the company? It seems anytime I try to make a change it just gets reverted back? I thought this was meant to be powered by users??? --Hannahm23 (talk) 16:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)hannahm23

Errr the link is working just fine from this end! Shritwod (talk) 19:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi - thanks for getting back to me. The link didn't appear to work but it does today, this is still a direct competitor and we would prefer not to have a reference after our company name? Can it be removed in this case? I want to create better content for all of the iliffe group papers that I work with. Is there a way that when I make an ammendment it isnt just automatically removed but actually read through and approved? Everytime ive ever made changes they seem to just get removed. How can I build up a good reputation if I cant make edits for the company I work for? I can get the editors at each of the papers to write correct company content such as history etc. to build up the pages a bit. We have also added twitter pages for each of the papers so people can contact them directly, but again the link was just automtaically removed...please help.--Hannahm23 (talk) 08:39, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

BLP noticeboard

Hi there, could you comment here? The discussion seems to have petered out. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Htc-desire-2.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Htc-desire-2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Employment Website

Hi - you removed the following from Employment Website, citing "non-notable references" In response to Mobile Content as the fastest growing revenue segment in non-voice mobile services SMStheJOB.com.au was launched in Australia in 2009. SMStheJOB allows job seekers to receive and apply for jobs using SMS, starting the trend of migration from online job boards to a portable based platform.

Can you please advise me of the definition of "non-noteable" as it seems to me to be subjective and I can not find any instructional references here (although I am only new and still learning). Furthermore, my referenced entry has been replaced with a completely different topic. The purpose of my entry is to note the migration of standard job boards utilising online methods only, to new mobile based content in line increased demand for mobile content services; not discuss Job Boards for specific industry as opposed to covering a wide range of industries (which has already been referenced elsewhere in this page). I look forward to some assistance, thank you Mrs Insomnia (talk) 00:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Notability is usually established with a reference to something in the mainstream media. As far as I can see, the edit you made to SMStheJOB.com.au wasn't backed up by any references to establish that it was anything more than advertising, sorry. Just my opinion though. Shritwod (talk) 06:40, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

HTC Desire Z

Hi there. I noticed you undid my edit to HTC Desire. If you think the information is better suited in its own article (HTC Desire Z, currently a redirect), then you should add it there. But if you don't, I don't think you should remove the info from HTC Desire because it's better to have the information there than nowhere. Regards SoWhy 17:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)