User talk:Keystoneridin

Leave a new message.

Speedily delete articles here.
Speak your mind!
What I've Created
Major Contributions
My Awards
Me

My sandbox

Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

|}

|maxarchivesize = 150K |counter = 1 |algo = old(48h) |archive = User talk:keystoneridin/Archive %(counter)d }}

Talkback

Hello, Keystoneridin. You have new messages at RA0808's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Patrolling

Hey, thanks for helping out with new page patrolling. I notice you marked Stavropol state medical academy as patrolled, and added an unreferenced tag to it. Turns out that page was a copyright violation of this page and should have been tagged for speedy deletion G11. Usually it's pretty easy to spot pages that have just been copied and pasted from a website. Be sure to keep an eye out for this in the future, and if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask on my talk page. Thanks. -Scottywong| chatter _ 21:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry about that. I was trying to give the article the benefit of the doubt and overlooked a possible CSD. Thank you for the note!Keystoneridin (speak) 21:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Waldo Canyon image

Well, we have stumbled into a bit of a hole in Wikipedia's copyright policy. I saw this photo on the Fox 21 site first, which is why I instantly recognized it. I have no reason to doubt you (although, out of curiosity, why is the image so small, and with no metadata?), but it is credited to two different people on Yahoo News and Fox 21. I'll restore it to the articles, but it would ease my mind if you'd send in verification of authorship through WP:ORTS; it would also keep others from making the same mistake I did. Or even better, if you have a better resolution version, I'd be ecstatic if you would upload it, as it really is a striking image! -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 01:57, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

• The image is so small because I had to edit it a bit. None of the smoke or anything else is altered. In the original photograph, a haze covered up my lens so I used a de-ionize feature on my Macbook to take away the smoke. When I re-edited the photo, I accidentally made a small resolution file which I uploaded here. I've had some photo's in the past deleted because of clarity. As far as the multiple authors, I submitted the photo to three news stations. From my understanding, there are around 11 people who claim to be authors. I'm not picky about it because I want everyone to see it. I took the picture with a Nikon D80 with a small range telephoto lens with a 2 inch clarity extension and a red light filter. I will be glad to upload all the required documents. Thanks!Keystoneridin (speak) 02:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Your recent contributions

I wanted to notify you that the "unreferenced" tag you added to Elmer Gainer and Gary Garland was removed. However, the article contained Basketball-Reference and NBA links before you tagged the articles. You have several excellent contributions, but you should be careful not to be too hasty when tagging. Earlier today, you simply added a reflist to Rotorua Golf Club but I believe you should've removed the advert-like information. Information such as "It makes playing there like no other place on earth. Playing in a volcano makes this golf course simply one of a kind" is not encyclopedic and should be removed. A user named "Rotoruagolfclub" started the article and would fuel suspicions of advertisement. SwisterTwister talk 00:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for the note. I appreciate, as I said at your RFA, that you gave a good explanation for this. My simple goal was not to "rewrite" the article, but to tag it so that others may see the problems. It's good that you let me know about this because now I will know not to tag sports pages like this. Good day to you!Keystoneridin (speak) 04:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Either ADD TO IT or LEAVE IT

Context Provided: Catholic Church and the Holocaust. References provided. Fair Use per Title 17 U.S.C

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestblock_25487:_A_Memoir_of_Dachau_:_Fr._Jean_Bernard

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopheroriger (talk • contribs) 04:46, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Centre for the Moving Image

Hey; I've declined your CSD on Centre for the Moving Image - it's an org that incorporates several notable festivals. That's a claim of significance, at least, if not notability :). Ironholds (talk) 00:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

New page for petrolling

If you don't mind can you petrol my new article Thangamani Matriculation Higher Secondary School. Ramesh Ramaiah ^talk 17:15, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Round barn

Hi. You don't seem to be that new, so I'm not going to sugarcoat this warning:

Citations must support, verbatim, the text in the article. Period. There is no wiggle room here. Most of the 'cited' statements in the round barn article were linked to references which did not say what was said in our article here.

Misrepresenting sources will get you blocked, more or less permanently, from editing Wikipedia.

Are we clear?

→ ROUX ₪ 19:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• In addition, I have reopened the section you created on ANI to discuss your misrepresentation of sources. → ROUX ₪ 20:01, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• No, we are not clear. There are proper formats for issuing warnings and issuing one which is not one of the templates may contemplate harrasment. I made a serious mistake on this page, I will discuss it at ANI.Keystoneridin (speak) 20:20, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Warning templates are not required, they are merely convenient. There is no harassment here. You misrepresented sources, which is a major problem, not a 'mistake.' → ROUX ₪ 20:27, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• then push for a block. It was a mistake made in good faith. I had no intention of vandalizing Wikipedia.Keystoneridin (speak) 21:01, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• I never said you vandalised Wikipedia. I said you misrepresented sources, which is far more serious. Observe:

• Your text: The barn was built in 1916 to hold cattle for farmers traveling to the Mid-Wisconsin farmers market.

• Source text: says not even one of those things.

• Your text: In 1970, the Central Wisconsin state fair relocated from Wisconsin Rapids to Marshfield Wisconsin. During this time the barn received major renovations and became a carnival site holding cattle for sale and auction at the fair.

• Source: says not even one of those things. In fact, the link is to the top page, and I had to dig around the site to find this, which only supports the year the barn was built, and not any of the statements you attributed to that site

Do you really expect me to believe you had no idea those citations didn't support the statements you were using? None of the citations you provided supported anything in the article beyond the year it was built, and its location. You're either lying about the 'mistake' or you are not competent to edit here, as it seems you don't even understand how verifiability works (here's a hint: citations must support the statements cited to them). Which one is it? → ROUX ₪ 21:39, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Whichever you say, then let it be. I'm not going to have an edit war on my page over what is perceived to be vandalism or a misrepresentation. I created the page on a word document and the sources simply did not transfer over correctly. I would have cleaned it up right away if you would have taken the time to communicate this with me rather than running to admin to tattle on me. At the time I was concerned about merging the files to create a stronger article. But if you must assume that I made a bad faith edit, then so be it. I can only speak so much before it becomes apparent that your mind is set on your way or the high way. Good day to you!Keystoneridin (speak) 21:46, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Then by all means provide the sources you intended to use. Where are they? → ROUX ₪ 21:48, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• When I get out of class, I will upload the proper page with sources.Keystoneridin (speak) 21:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• I wish to be crystal clear, here: you are going to provide the sources which actually support the statements you originally made in the article? I have outlined, above, two which were grossly misrepresented. → ROUX ₪ 21:52, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Please divert all communication about this subject to the ANI notification so that everyone can be privy to the information. Your communication on my talk page has become grossly inappropriate.Keystoneridin (speak) 22:00, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for the class on how to edit Wikipedia. This looks kinda fun.Moveindate (talk) 21:19, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• You are welcome! I also did get your email about doing things with user names. Did I mention that in class? I don't have much experience in it, except for asking others. If you want to use my template, I'll show you on Monday how to use it. But I must warn you in advance that my account will likely be closed in the coming days as that article I created for class did not have all of the links properly located and will likely result in a block. No biggie, I'll still help you out though. Get your edits up. I think once you get to 250, you are able to do more things on Wikipedia.Keystoneridin (speak) 21:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry, but I have to intervene here. You should not be giving 'classes' on how to edit Wikipedia when your understanding of how Wikipedia works appears to be so deficient. You are unlikely to be blocked, unless you persist in misrepresenting sources in articles. It is not that the links were not 'properly located,' it is that you claimed the links said things which they categorically did not say. The fact that you don't understand this is a problem is an even bigger problem. Second, you should not be telling new users to "get [their] edits up," see here for why. Third, there is no magic threshold in one's edit count that suddenly allows one to "do more things on Wikipedia" once one has passed autoconfirmed, which for most users is 10 edits and 4 days active. → ROUX ₪ 21:45, 7 July 2012 (UTC)