User talk:Argv1

When I crated my account, I wanted to choose "argv", but it said that account wasn't available, so I chose my backup name, "argv1". However, when I search for user:argv, it says none exists. Is that the case, and if so, why wasn't I able to get it? and if it does exist, how do you contact that user?

The account Argv does exist, but he or she hasn't written anything on the user:argv page yet (also nobody has left a message either). Special:Listusers shows all the users with accounts. Argv's edits to Wikipedia are at Special:Contributions/Argv.

You can leave a message for argv at user talk:argv. Argv will be notified of the message the next time he/she logs in... but there's no telling when that'll be. Some users allow you to email them (there's a link on the left) but not argv I'm afraid. --h2g2bob 20:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Problem

You'll run into problems like this all the time, we all do, with people removing sources and inserting either fan sources or blatant advertisement. The first thing you could do, which I see you have already done, is find out if it's an accurate source, which in your case, it seems not to be. If they removed the source, which you didn't insert in the first place, and the other site is not as factual, it's not really a conflict of interest since the other site is inaccurate and yours is the most accurate. I'll look into it further to get details. Darth Griz98 02:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not really no, everything that is on Wikipedia can be edited by somebody at any time, anything reverted can be re-reverted so on (just no edit warring). You could try to prove that the site you have is the authority on the subject, and that the other site is wrong and self promotion whereas yours is not, by trying to find other sources that agree with yours. I'm not exactly an expert on the photography world, but wouldn't there be outside sources that agree with you? Darth Griz98 04:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at the model release, the user probably deleted it without reading what it was about, thinking that it was on there twice as self-promotion. Something that may help would be using citations throughout the article, rather than having them in a source section, so it shows which material came from which site. WP:Footnotes can help, I use GSUSA's footnotes as a template (even though I wrote most of it) to help me format citations (I copy the reference part and then change the information for the correct page because I can't remember how to set the reference up all the time), but any one of the Wikipedia pages with citations on them can help you format them. Just click the edit button to take a look at the footnotes and the reference table code in the reference section. Darth Griz98 04:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]