User talk:CutOffTies

This is CutOffTies's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|CutOffTies}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

Archive 1, Archive 2

Edit this box

New to Wikipedia

Hi Omarcheeseboro, Can wikipedia editors not link to videos from sites like yahoo video and youtube? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakerockwellsax (talk • contribs) 23:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jakerock, I would suggest reading WP:YOUTUBE. Thanks for your inquiry and welcome. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 00:01, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Vovak changes

Today you have taken a great interest in extensively updating my page on Wikipedia, which I appreciate. However, I want to fairly give you the chance to correct a few errors you have made. First, the link regarding my monthly column should not be deleted, since it is monthly and our parent groups has well over 1000 members. Secondly, your tag for reliable third-party sources should be removed since extensive articles about me appear vastly through the internet and there are now 25+ references on my page. Thirdly, Ballot Access News is a thoroughly reliable website with links put on it daily by an expert in the field: http://www.ballot-access.org/. Fourthly, the tag about me editing my own page should be removed because my changes are usually neutral. Lastly, your push for "goof" and "joke" is not unbiased of yourself, which you can see through sizable coverage here: http://bluedressmovie.com/about/. Regardless, I think you will be surprised at how much of your changes I will allow, though please do not diminish my accomplishments and extensive media coverage, which seems to be what you are trying to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielVovak (talk • contribs) 19:28, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply.

About the monthly column, the info you gave to me does not indicate to me that the club is notable at all for several reasons (first and foremost, it is not covered by a reliable source).

Third Party sources - yes there are some third-party sources but the article also uses primary sources. See all the refs for "Greenwich.." However, Since there are plenty of third party sources, I removed the tag.

Ballot Access News - The info you gave me does not indicate that it is a reliable source. You need neutral verification of this rather than just telling me it is reliable.

The autobio tag - I don't see what you are saying has to do with what the tag says, which is basically nothing more than that the subject has extensively edited the article.

"Goof and Joke" - Taken right from the wp:reliable sources. It is not a push.. I'm just reflecting information taken from the sources. The movie link you gave goes back to the primary source issue.

About "changes you will allow".. Hmmm, perhaps you should read wp:ownership.. Even bringing up what you will "allow" is a ridiculous notion that is completely against the pillars of this project. If you're interested in having full control of web content about yourself, perhaps your own website is what you want.

--Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:42, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's begin with a simple argument. Are you claiming the Washington DC Film Society is not a reliable source: http://www.dcfilmsociety.org/ ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielVovak (talk • contribs) 19:47, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never said anything about the club being a reliable source. I said it is not a notable club. At the very least it goes against the guidelines of the wp:lead. The fact that the subject leads a group that meets weekly at Barnes and Noble is not exactly a summary of the "important aspects of the subject". Perhaps it has a place somewhere else in the article. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:54, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you been to the website I have referenced again and again? This "club" is bigger than weekly, as we are the largest "club" in Washington, D.C., the nation's capital. Please look at the multiple pages within our website and the access to unreleased movies that we have before you respond. By contrast, you are telling the Wiki world that my monthly column is not worth noting.DanielVovak (talk) 20:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I've been to the website. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 20:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good! Thus, it is a notable club. Further, it verifies my credentials within the movie industry, thus belonging in a lead. Personally, I have been a newspaper editor and am quite familiar on the topic of leads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielVovak (talk • contribs) 20:13, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, I am thankful that you value the importance of journalists and sources. Following many stellar reports from paid journalists, a college student wrote "obviously a goof" in his online campaign diary. Though I accept the account of his observation and believe he is certainly allowed to editorialize in his online diary, I disagree with your push to use a diary comment in this paragraph, since it discounts the state-wide award from a serious journalist editor of a daily newspaper. It's possible you can work in the college student's comment, though it would have to weigh less heavily in the paragraph. I also stress that Ballot Access is a great source for multiple campaigns, mine being only one of them. Actually, you and I may share similar outlooks and I am welcome your additions, most of which I will keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielVovak (talk • contribs) 21:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your continuation of the "I welcome your additions, most of which I will keep" (along your earlier "changes I will allow") shows to me that you either haven't read, and/or understand this project's guidelines on wp:ownership, or wp:autobiography. In addition, your comments regarding what makes a club notable, how to write a lead, and reliable sources shows a lack of understanding on the wp:notability, wp:lead and wp:reliable sources guidelines. I suggest you take time to read these links in order to understand this project better. One more thing– regarding the Iowa Newspaper award, there's a clear issue of verifiability. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 22:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that this daily newspaper state-wide award is not real? I assure you Randy Cauthron is a real editor who received a real award in February 2004. Please suggest 5 more notable movie clubs in Washington, D.C. In addition, I am reviewing your comments on major sites, though I have no interest in a Wiki war, and see few aside from articles aimed at a young generation. I tried to reason with you, which has little value. You will notice that a number of Wiki editors have weighed in on the wiki page about me and have kept it largely intact.