Jump to content

User talk:Ckatz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dagrossla (talk | contribs) at 18:43, 5 November 2009 (→‎Movie Review Intelligence: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello! Thanks for dropping by... please feel free to leave me a message below. I don't have a convention as to where I'll respond, be it here, your talk page, or the talk page of the subject we're discussing - but I'll do my best to keep things clear. Let me know if you have a preference... now, get typing! Ckatz
Archive

Archives

Page One
Page Two
Page Three
Page Four
Page Five
Page Six





Frequently asked questions

  • Where can I learn more about editing Wikipedia?
  • Why was the link I added removed from an article?
    • Typically, links are removed because they fail the external links guideline. Although many links are deleted because they were placed by spammers, links to good sites are also removed on a regular basis. This is because Wikipedia isn't a directory service; the mere fact a site exists does not mean it warrants a link.
  • Why was my article deleted?
    • Pages can be deleted for many reasons; there are very specific criteria that govern the process. Please review this article for more information.
  • Why was information relating to my company or organization removed?
  • Why were my spelling changes reverted?
Wikipedia's Manual of Style recommends the use of regional varieties of English, based on the topic and the article's contribution history. Please avoid changing spellings unless they differ from the appropriate version. Most spell checking software can be configured to use British and American English; some extend this to include other varieties such as Canadian or Australian English.
Contents

Our Prattville removal after User:AniMate created the entry

On entry 07:41, 17 September 2009, Admin Animate reworked the Prattville Wiki and added the Our Prattville link where it should be under Media. Then on 10:16 of that same day IP Address 76.73.140.26 undid his revision and stated no reason. Then on 11:57 of the same day IP address 98.89.12.105 properly undid that revision and at 13:05 Admin Baseball Bugs calls 98.89.12.105 a spammer and undoes it.

Therefore, if 98.89.12.105 did not create the entry and only undid what 76.73.140.26 undid, all of this refers back to the original poster Admin Animate as the spammer, right? I highly doubt that one of your administrators could be considered a spammer? What in the world is going on here? Please, somebody clarify this for me. Should not Animate's revision stand? Why is it being removed? He said he would do that for us and he did and we thank him for that. Now it is removed...why? Please advise.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtp1960 (talk • contribs) and associated IP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.89.12.105 (talk)

I read the guidelines

Nowhere did I find information in the external links guide that would lead me to believe that the link I published was inappropriate.

What should be linked: "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons."

Links to be considered: "Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources."

The website SkiingtheBackcountry.com is a leading source of information, resources, gear reviews, where to ski and all sorts of other stuff related to ski touring. My understanding is that it's based in Jackson Hole, but I don't even know who is behind it. It's a core site, and I was simply trying to share information, as I said before, about an activity that I love, to the people who are involved in the sport.

Is ski touring something that you care deeply about? If so, have you been to the site I was linking to? And if so, why would you care to remove it? And if you are not interested in ski touring, please leave the page alone. -MBailey

AfD nomination of GiveVaccines.org

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is GiveVaccines.org. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GiveVaccines.org. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

a-ha

Agreed; I didn't like the way that looked and was considering making the edit you did. Cheers, Abrazame (talk) 07:50, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Calm and Carry On

I feel that the link to the review of the Stereophonics album should be allowed to remain for now as it currently offers more information than the wikipedia page itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.139.138 (talk) 23:32, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Razzies & other strangers

I'm not sure which article you're talking about. I deleted a lot of additions of the Razzie templates that were added yesterday. None of the Razzie templates were in use until a new editor added them, so I'm waiting for the Templates for deletion page to get straightened out and I'm going to nominate them. I would venture to say that Razzies are the only total agreement ever reached at WP:ACTOR. Let me know what page you're talking about and I'll give you my opinion. Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:25, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have much of an opinion on the inclusion of photographer credits with the image in articles. I've seen it mentioned that the credit requirement is met by it being posted on the actual image page. Sorry, I don't really have much else to say about it. I think if the photographer is notable, a mention is certainly valid. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:13, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

talkorigins.org

In this edit you removed a reference noting that it is a "FAQ based on UseNet posts; not a reliable source". However, in this particular case, the issue has been debated quite a lot and there is wide agreement that talkorigins.org is a RS. For example, see this RSN archive. This is just FYI (and I understand that you may not find it authoritative). Johnuniq (talk) 08:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Thanks for the tip. Glancing through that archive, it seems to support the use of Talkorigins as a RS when the cite is to a particular article and the author can be verified. However, the page I reviewed is a FAQ with no indication as to where the material comes form. If you have a chance to look over the page in question, I'd appreciate your thoughts on it. Thanks in advance. --Ckatzchatspy 08:49, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I see what you mean. That particular page looks like a typical (good) personal website with no particular reliability. I have seen several other talkorigins pages that were by a particular person and were supported with references (example used at Archaeopteryx). At any rate, the particular issue in the edit that you reverted does not seem sufficiently important to me to warrant further attention, and since it is a detailed technical point (did something occur 5–7 million years ago, or was it 7 million years?), we would probably want a gold-plated reference so I intend leaving the article as is. Johnuniq (talk) 22:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MFD nomination of User:HarryAlffa/ArbCom

Hello, this page has been nominated for deletion. You may be interested in participating in the discussion, located here. Thanks, GlassCobra 18:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fan of web site

Hello,

Sometime earlier this year, I ask the editor of TV On Media, does he have anybody that submits his content to Wikipedia? He said he used to do it himself, but Wikipedia said he could not, because it was against there guidelines, because it was a conflict of interest. So I asked him, I do not know much about wikis, but I will learn it, so I can add stories from time to time to relevant articles on Wikipedia. He said that would be fine, since I have no affiliation with TV On Media. So what you are telling me, what I need to do, is to add other things in addition to TV On Media on Wikipedia. Well, I like sports, so I guess I can add edits to sports articles here on Wikipedia. Will that make you guys happy?

Jay Rogers TV On Media Fan —Preceding unsigned comment added by RogersTV (talk • contribs) 01:54, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One More Thing - I am going to undo you edits. College Basketball starts soon, I can add edit other than at TV On Media,

Jay Rogers

Thank you for your note. Unfortunately, Wikipedia has some very strict guidelines with respect to the use of external sites as either references or external links. The "TVonMedia" site does not meet the requirements of our reliable sources guideline, and we do not generally permit external links to sites unless they provide a definitive benefit to the article. This should not be misinterpreted as a slight against the site; simply put, there are millions of web sites around the planet, and we cannot act as a directory service for them. As such, I would ask that you avoid adding links to the TVonMedia site. You are, of course, encouraged to contribute to the site in other ways. Please feel free to ask more questions if you would like. Cheers. --Ckatzchatspy 02:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I decided it is best for you to undo the edits. I only did one. Jay Rogers —Preceding unsigned comment added by RogersTV (talk • contribs) 02:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the preceding note, which explains why the URLs are not suitable for inclusion. --Ckatzchatspy 02:06, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I decided it is best for you to undo the edits. I only did one. TV On Media is a neat web site, I have been reading it for years. I feel it is just as good as any web site out there regarding TV shows on DVD. If anything, you should at least leave my edits! And to think I was going to donate to the Wikipedia Foundation. I am glad I kind of didn't now. Jay RogersRogersTV (talk) 02:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is unfortunate that you feel that way, but our guidelines on external links exist for a good reason, and they are based on years of discussion and debate. You are certainly welcome to contribute in other ways, of course. --Ckatzchatspy 02:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MovieReviewIntelligence.com

Dear CKatz,

Thank you for your response to our note about MovieReviewIntelligence.com I am the editor and publisher of the site, with 25 years experience as an executive, consultant and researcher at the movie studios. We are an industry site that provides a professional approach to movies and movie reviews. The most important thing is that we cover many independent movies that are not covered otherwise. We are an important, established resource for industry professionals and serious moviegoers. We would simply like a page on Wikipedia. Is there a way you would consider that? Thank you.

Dagrossla (talk) 21:40, 4 November 2009 (UTC)David Gross[reply]

Movie Review Intelligence

Dear CKatz,

Thank you for your response to our note about Movie Review Intelligence. I am the editor and publisher of the site, with 25 years experience as an executive, consultant and researcher at the movie studios. We are an industry site that provides a professional approach to movies and movie reviews. We cover many independent movies that are not covered otherwise. We are an established resource for industry professionals and serious moviegoers, having been profiled in the New York Times and Los Angeles Times. We would simply like a page on Wikipedia. Is there a way you would consider that? Thank you.

David Gross Dagrossla (talk) 18:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ckatz&oldid=324126583"