User talk:Jwzoom

Speedy deletion of Heinie Hartwig

A tag has been placed on Heinie Hartwig requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Captain panda 00:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:HeinieHartwig.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:HeinieHartwig.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:52, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Joel N. Ward article

Hello Jwzoom,

Welcome to Wikipedia. There are a few rules you should know about.

1) WP:BITE "Don't bite the newbies" - please let me know if anything I say seems too scary - you definitely have some rights here! (including editing your own article, in certain cases)

2) WP:COI Conflict of interest - you seem to have a conflict of interest - if you are who you claim to be. Thus you are discouraged from editing your own article.

3) WP:BLP Biography of Living People standards. Please read, but as a quicky I'll say it discourages you from editing your own article in most cases, but allows you to remove libelous material.. But please read it on your own.

I'll notify the WP:BLPN BLP noticeboard about this article, not because I see any major problem (yet), but because I see some potential problems on the horizon. Let me know if I can help in any way.

Sincerely,

Smallbones (talk) 02:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's keep this all in one place. I'll watch this space. Yours:

Your Edit of Joel N. Ward You made a comment in reagrd to my editing Joel N. Ward. I am new to this and I appreciate the help. I happen to know him and know the case very well. So, when I saw errors of context in news media comments I feel compelled to correct them. Or, If I know something else I felt it important to put it in. I see what you are saying though about verification. What is the solution to verification? Merely referring to another cite on the web, including the over trusted news media, for facts? Here's an example. The media said that Mr. Ward wrote in a diary that he was a "financial serial killer." I happen to know personally that (1) Ward did not keep a diary, (2) he wrote a confession (I saw it), (3) in that confession he said within the context of suicidal thoughts that he 'felt' like a finaical serial killer, not that he was one (big difference), and (4) Craig Karmin of Wall Street never saw the written confession nor asked Ward about it (according to Ward), as Karmin merely assumed the Government's allegation to those words were accruately expressed so copied them. So now, two things are going on. First, there seems to be an assumption that if it's in print somewhere it makes it truth and is repeated as fact. Secondly, you allowed the edits I put in about the above matter, which clarifies the details more accurately, but you have no true basis or facts to even do that. It's like this whole idea of verasity and honest journalism is now not only lost in biased journalism, but here at Wikipedia too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting we get to write anything and everything we want without sourcing it. I'm venting here about the frustration and looking for the fair way to approach this. I guess I will learn more as I go. Thanks for reading my ramblings anyway. By user:jwzoom

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Smallbones"

The WSJ and Futures articles trump just about everything else, based on WP:RS (reliable sources) and WP:V (verifiability). The standard is "verifiability, not truth." I may have left some things in that I shouldn't have - perhaps because they look verifiable in principle. We are never able to meet all the rules exactly, but if somebody challenges something based on the rules, we pretty much have to go along. Hope this helps. Smallbones (talk) 19:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Heinie Hartwig

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Heinie Hartwig, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Smallbones (talk) 20:03, 5 November 2008 (UTC)