User talk:Jozefvanwissem

Jozef van Wissem

Hello, Jozefvanwissem. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Jozef van Wissem, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. 123.225.39.109 (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I saw that you edited or created Jozef van Wissem, and I noticed that the username you have chosen, "Jozefvanwissem", seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of something other than yourself. Please note that you may not edit on behalf of a company, group, institution, product, or website, and Wikipedia does not allow usernames that are promotional or accounts that are shared. If you are willing to use a personal account, please take a moment to create a new account or request a username change that represents only yourself as an individual. You should also read our Conflict of interest guideline and Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, and remember that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. 123.225.67.183 (talk) 23:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i am editing on behalf of myself,Jozefvanwissem (talk) 00:29, 14 March 2013 (UTC) jozef van wissem, the subject of this article.[reply]

This is exactly the kind of thing you should not be doing, as per Wikipedia's policy on autobiographies: "We have biographies here, not autobiographies. Avoid writing or editing an article about yourself, other than to correct unambiguous errors of fact." --Drm310 (talk) 05:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i amJozefvanwissem (talk) 08:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC) correcting errors yes. poorly sourced bio. Jozefvanwissem (talk) 10:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the only collaborators i am working with at the moment are jim jarmusch and tilda swinton. brethren of the free spirit broke up in 2009. etc etc. get your facts straight wikipedia.

If properly sourced and notable, your past accomplishments are also of interest. If you feel that the sources citing your past work are not reliable, it would be better to suggest another source instead of deleting the content immediately.

Also, please don't use your signature in the middle of a sentence - it makes the comment hard to read. Please use it at the very end of your comments only. --Drm310 (talk) 16:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

removed irrelevant outdated info- the subject, jozef van wissem Jozefvanwissem (talk) 10:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Jozef. We can not just add and remove info to the article, it does not make sense. We somehow need to discuss and find an appropriate solution. Could you please participate in the discussion on the talk page and/or on the COI noticeboard (the link in the topic below). We first need to understand what your arguments are, and then see what sources can we bring/produce to add/remove the material. Hartelijk dank.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hi- i would like removed the line ' jozef van wissem is one half of brethren of the free spirit'. the band DOES NOT exist anymore. bestaat niet meer. dank je. jozef Jozefvanwissem (talk) 19:37, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is fine. But (i) now it does not exist, but it existed, right? Why could we not write that you were a part of the group? (ii) my colleagues are concerned that they only know fromn you that the group does not exist. Is there any way you can mention it on your website or blog or whatever? Bedankt, groeten.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

if you are going to list all the bands i was involved in there would be a long list and it's the second line that comes up in searches. the article should focus on the composer for lute rather than the projects i did - there are many and it doesn't do justice to the overall picture. i mentioned disbanding of brethren of the free spirit here: http://www.myspace.com/thebrethrenofthefreespirit

my official bio is this : "As both an avant-garde composer and a baroque lutenist Mr. van Wissem is no stranger to dichotomy" (the new york times) His music is uncluttered and direct, with a viscerally hypnotic and emotional impact and delivered with an ascetic intensity reflected in his biblical titles Long form graceful melodies create a transcendental pastoral world, minimalist mirror images are repeated in order to slow the act of listening. An incessantly touring musician, Van Wissem's intense live shows have taken him all over the world and he has performed at prestigious festivals like All Tomorrow's Parties. Van Wissem studied lute in New York City. He lectures on ' The Liberation of the Lute' and was commissioned by London's National Gallery to compose a sound piece to Hans Holbein's painting "The Ambassadors". He is in a guitar and lute duo with Jim Jarmusch and he is scoring his vampire film "Only Lovers Left Alive. For the Mystery Of Heaven release ( on Sacred Bones Records) they worked with Tilda Swinton. Van Wissem composed and performed lute and voice pieces for the Sims Medieval video game and he is writing more and more for cinema. A one of a kind black lute was especially build for him and is featured on his upcoming solo release " Nihil Obstat". He lives in New York City.

dank je wel, groet-jozef

ps for sony music japan release see this link: http://www.amazon.com/Jozef-Van-Wissem-Jim-Jarmusch/dp/B009GN77Y4

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. 123.225.67.183 (talk) 00:46, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editors who has a conflict of interest are allowed to make non-controversial edits. However, if another editor objects for any reason, then it's a controversial edit. Such edits should be discussed on the article's talk page. 123.224.107.253 (talk) 23:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Jozef van Wissem".

Guide for participants

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:

It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:

It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:

Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~".
If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 09:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please be advised that deletion large sections of sourced material without discussion is never going to stick. You need to go to the DRN discussion and present your side of the issue. Mangoe (talk) 13:58, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Jozef van Wissem

Your addition to Jozef van Wissem has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Jvwissem (talk) 17:48, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning: Jozef van Wissem

Your recent editing history at Jozef van Wissem shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Jvwissem (talk) 18:59, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Issues with your username

Hello. I'm afraid I've had to block your access to this account due to an issue with your username. It is not a reflection of anything you've done. I have not investigated behavior in this article, but am responding to the user name issue. This is simply a protection against damaging impersonation. Because of the risk of impersonation, it is against our user name policy to edit with a name that is likely to imply that you are a specific, identifiable person, unless it is your real name. Because of your attention to the article Jozef van Wissem, your user name seems to suggest a connection to that individual.

I realize that you have probably been blocked for using your real name (I suspect it is yours). Please don't take offense; I'm trying to prevent somebody from impersonating you. The individual who left the note above on your talk page, whose name also implies he is Jozef van Wissem, has been blocked as well. As you can see, it is altogether too easy to choose a name that suggest they are you, and the user name policy was created to prevent this.

You are welcome to use your real name, but we need to ask you to verify that you are who you say you are. You can do this by sending an email to info-en@wikimedia.org from a domain clearly associated with you; be aware that emails are handled by a volunteer response team, and an immediate reply is not always possible.

I do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. If you need any assistance with the verification process or in creating a new username, please leave a note here, and I (or others) will help you as best as we can. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:54, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I have looked a little more closely, I'd like to just address a quick point. We have to ask you to be careful about copying content from other publications to Wikipedia, even if they are your own. For legal reasons, we have to verify license to this material before we can accept it. If you choose to address the user name problem by verifying that you are Jozef van Wissem, it will obviously simplify your approving content from your own websites. If you don't choose to verify your identity, you can also simply place a license release on any webpage from your official sites that you would like Wikipedia to be able to draw content - we recommend:

The text of this website [or page, if you are specifically releasing one section] is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).

You can read more about this at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials, and I'd be happy to discuss it further with you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:14, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]