User talk:Freshacconci/Archive 13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Rollback[edit]

Why did you reverted my decline of a request for page protection at WP:RPP? -- KTC (talk) 02:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know. I'm using an iPad and I think I must have clicked the rollback on my watchlist without realizing it. Sorry about that. I'll try to be more careful. freshacconci talktalk 02:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)



From Stephen Dobi (Filmdoctor1): When "Beyond my ken" does not allow my doctor dissertation to appear in the articles about Amos Vogel and Cinema 16, this is what Wikipedia users loose access to:

• Dobi, Stephen J., Cinema 16: America's Largest Film Society. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. New York University, 1984.

Contents: Introduction; The Formative Years; Something for Everyone; The Art of the Film; Conclusion. Appendices: Arthur Knight on the Experimental Film; Film Courses at New York University; Film Courses at The New School; The Children's Cinema; Films Shown at George Eastman House; The Robert J. Flaherty Awards; The Creative Film Foundation Awards; Organizational & Institutional Renters; Index of Filmmakers (Alphabetical and also Premieres); Index of Films (Alphabetical List, Features Premiered by Cinema 16, Shorts Premiered by Cinema 16, Films "re-introduced" by Cinema 16; Speakers at Cinema 16 events.

Abstract: This study examines the sixteen year history (1947-1963) of this unique film society. It looks at its beginnings, goals, motives, biases and method of operation. It examines how the organization saw its role in film art and commerce; how it defined the job it set out to do, and how it accomplished that job.

It examines in detail the many projects Cinema 16 created for its membership of over 7,000 cineastes. These included Regular Programs, Special Events, Film Appreciation Courses, The Children's Cinema, excursions to George Eastman House, Robert J. Flaherty Awards, Creative Film Awards, program notes, and its major contribution to American Avant-garde film exhibition and distribution. Cinema 16 introduced to America the works of Lindsay Anderson, Kenneth Anger, Michelangelo Antonioni, Stan Brakhage, Robert Breer, Robert Bresson, John Cassavetes, Shirley Clarke, Bruce Conner, Carmen D'Avino, Vittorio de Sica, Ed Emshwiller, Pierre Etaix, John Hubley, Tadashi Imai, Humphrey Jennings, Gavin Lambert, Jan Lenica, Norman McLaren, Andrzej Munk, Leopoldo Torre-Nilsson, Yasujiro Ozu, Roman Polanski, Karel Reisz, Tony Richardson, Jacques Rivette, Lionel Rogosin, Arne Sucksdorff, Shiro Toyoda, Stan Vanderbeek, Agnes Varda, Herbert Vesely, among others.

In sixteen years it presented over thirteen-hundred films ranging in length from sixty seconds to features, most in premiere showings. It arranged for subtitled versions, music tracks, paying for "dupe-negatives," importation costs, customs fees, and always paying rental fees.

Cinema 16 conducted symposia and lectures on films and related topics. Personal appearances were made by Rudolf Arnheim, Joseph Burstyn, Joseph Campbell, James Card, Salvador Dali, Maya Deren, Ralph Ellison, Frances Flaherty, Richard Griffith, Nat Hentoff, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kramer, Fritz Lang, Lotte Lenya, Norman McLaren, Sidney Meyers, Arthur Miller, Jean Renoir, Hans Richter, Dylan Thomas, Parker Tyler, Willard Van Dyke, King Vidor, Tennessee Williams, Archer Winsten, Robert Wise, Fred Zinneman, and others.

Its greatest contribution was to the avant-garde--all of the leading and subsequently famous names in the film avant garde of the period were premiered at Cinema 16. It helped create reputations.Filmdoctor1 (talk) 21:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I have pointed out to Filmdoctor1 on his talk page that if he is interested in improving the Cinema 16 article, any information in his dissertation which is properly referenced can be inserted into the article using that reference. What he can't do is cite his dissertation as a source, because it does not meet our standards for a reliable source. That Filmdoctor1 has not taken up this idea and continues instead to agitate for the use of his dissertation suggests to me that he is more interested in plugging his own work than he is in improving Wikipedia. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Assessment at Talk:The Famous 1938 Carnegie Hall Jazz Concert[edit]

I would ask you to re-consider your reversion of my edit. I made this change precisely because I am familiar with the rating description. For "High Importance", which they are Criteria: Articles about albums that are historically and culturally notable. These articles have a high potential to be elevated to featured article status. This album is both historically and culturally notable. Reader's experience: Most readers will have some knowledge of these albums. Top-selling or top-charting albums may have High importance, as it is likely that a good number of reliable secondary sources exist that could be used to reference the article. Again, most readers will have some knowledge of this recording. It was a top selling and top charting album, and it has numerous reliable secondary sources available to improve this article. Editor's experience: Articles at this level use some specific and specialized terms, as they appeal to readers who are likely familiar with the terminology related to albums. Again, this article fits the criteria, as the article will most appeal to readers who are jazz and dance-band-era fans. Although I feel my assessment is correct, I will not edit war, but I respectfully request you review your reversion. All the best, 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 19:16, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

How the fuck would you get a reference to a genre? It's just a fucking genre. Would you need a fucking reference to get that Bob Dylan is a folk artist?

dsadsagfgf

April - National Contribution Month[edit]

Good day Freshacconci,

During the month of April, Wikimedia Canada is preparing the National Contribution Month, and we are looking for experienced contributors to organize a contribution day (or half-day) in their region.

Contribution days are activities where Wikipedia's contributors, students, or anybody interested in contributing to Wikipedia meets together to collectively improve a predetermined theme. This meetings generally take place in library where references are easy of access, but can be organized in any communal room. Beside improving articles, a goal of this participatory workshops is to initiate neophyte in the cooperative contribution of Wikipedia.

If you are interested in organizing or participating in a contribution day in your region, communicate witht he national team on the project's talk page. The exact agenda of each local event is left to the discretion of the organizer. Help is available for the organization from contributors who already organized these type of days, so don't be worried. If you have any questions or want more information, don't hesitate to contact us.

Amqui (talk) 00:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Talk:The Boys in the Band#Requested move (2013)[edit]

You have a reply. --George Ho (talk) 06:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment[edit]

Hey Freshacconci; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Diet of Worms?[edit]

"Mr Dimbleby also explained how each strand of a Wikipedia Main Page Talk discussion always grows to the same length thanks to years of hard work by generations of growers." lol Martinevans123 (talk) 12:39, 1 April 2013 (UTC) (marketed in the UK as "Spaghetti Hoops")

Without this as an outlet, I'd go mad. freshacconci talktalk 12:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Alas, even with, some of us already did. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC) "phoney-baloney jobs", whatever can you mean?!!

Wow...[edit]

There's abso-fuckin'-lutely nothing I can say or do to prove that my edit in the Main Page Talk was, by Internet message board terms, an 'inb4thelock,' so I'll just say that life is a real dick sometimes. You make a +1,000 byte edit to smackdown somebody making idiotic assumptions, and it's wiped from existence because you're too damn slow on the keyboard to put it up before the discussion is suddenly closed. Not even a conflict notification to tell me my edit is screwed and my time is wasted. Not saying it's your fault, though. BetrayerOfNihil (talk) 15:08, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

[edit]

What is that?

I have never seen redspotgames use the logo you have posted. You also say you have made it yourself, why have you replaced the official logo with your logo? --Cube b3 (talk) 04:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

You have posted this on the wrong page, as I have no idea what you're talking about. freshacconci talktalk 12:29, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Deleting Parviz Tanavoli's work from "Sculpture" entry[edit]

I am quite astonished at your deleting Parviz Tanavoli's work from "Sculpture" entry, firstly because it is a work of sculpture by a person renown for his skillfulness in the field, and secondly, because you deleted it without citing any reasons.

I will very much appreciate it if you contribute to the global appreciation of Iranian culture by keeping the post intact, or discuss with me your reasons why "Nothing" should not remain there.

Changes to Art Research Center article.[edit]

Dear Sir or Ms.: Someone has entered this site & removed a great deal of information, including the list of Members & Associates. I am attempting to restore these unauthorized omissions on behalf of Thomas Michael Stephens, co-founder of the Art Research Center. Thank you, Jay Mandeville — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.65.118.49 (talk) 17:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know who Thomas Michael Stephens is, but has no authority over this Wikipedia article. The list of names is not appropriate and violates Wikipedia policy, as pointed out to you. Please do not re-add those names. freshacconci talktalk 17:40, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Changes to Art Research Center article.[edit]

Dear Sir, If you will refer to the earliest versions of the ARC page, before it was modified without permission, you will see Thomas Michael Stephens cited in the very first line as the founder of Art Research Center. You will also see the list of Members & Associates. This information has been on the site for a number of years, until it was quite recently maliciously vandalized from the site in a deliberate & prejudiced manner based on personal animosity. I was attempting to restore it. What is your "authorization" for preventing this material from being restored? Thank you, Jay Mandeville — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.65.118.49 (talk) 17:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Please read WP:OWN. Neither Thomas Michael Stephens nor the Art Research Center owns the article and the information was removed for legitimate reasons per Wikipedia policy. It was not "illegal". No authorization is required to edit an article other than following Wikipedia policy. I linked a number of those policies on your talk page. But this is what you want to read WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NOTE. A list of names of non-notable people goes against notability policy and any information needs to be cited by a reliable source. Anyone can edit an article using Wikipedia policy and guidelines and do not require the permission of the Art Research Center or anyone associated with it. A short list of names, with a proper source, can be added but those names need to be historically significant and preferably names of people who already have articles on Wikipedia. freshacconci talktalk 17:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
I have no idea what the changes to your comment are supposed to achieve but I have explained how things work at Wikipedia and there's really not much else I can say. freshacconci talktalk 21:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
If you want to generate a discussion on this matter, you are welcome to start a dialogue on the article talkpage and you can engage other editors working in the visual arts to weigh in here. Wikipedia operates on consensus. Feel free to seek others' opinions on the matter. freshacconci talktalk 22:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ElKevbo (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

As the other editor's actions violate WP:BLP I do not believe I am violating WP:3RR as the contentious text needs to be removed. As well, I tried to discuss this, with no response. freshacconci talktalk 14:45, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Question About Your Undo[edit]

This is a question about your Undo here. I see that you cite WP:BLP to justify your Undo, but can you please be more specific? I do not see which part of WP:BLP justifies your Undo. Thank you. 70.166.114.8 (talk) 02:44, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

IP edit[edit]

I checked out that IP. I'm not a checkuser, but I know how to detect an autoblocked IP. That IP has not been recently used by Ciresis or any of his sockpuppets, so I think we have to proceed on the assumption that it's a good faith opinion.—Kww(talk) 16:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Thanks -- I saw your revert, although I did move the comment to an appropriate spot. Too bad the IP got caught up in this. I actually feel bad about that. freshacconci talktalk 16:40, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For standing up for fellow wikipedians. Averting possible outing of another user. Ekabhishektalk 11:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! freshacconci talktalk 22:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

PinkTruffles123's Apology[edit]

Freshacconci, thank you for reminding me about my vandalism. I'm sorry that I deleted a comment on the Wiki talk page. I thought it was an article and the comment was unnecessary. Thank you again!PinkTruffles123 (talk) 02:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)PinkTruffles123

Help Me![edit]

My user page is all messed up. How can I make it look like a professional user page again? Thanks in advance! PinkTruffles123 (talk) 02:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)PinkTruffles123

You should try the User Page Design Center. There are step by step instructions and you can contact other editors to help you design a page. freshacconci talktalk 02:35, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
That was a bit useful. However, there is unnecessary text along the sides of my page, and chapter headings are incomplete and not aligned to the left. Is there any information to resolve this problem? PinkTruffles123 (talk) 02:40, 17 June 2013 (UTC)PinkTruffles123