User talk:Kamranv

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cover asobiseksu-web.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cover asobiseksu-web.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of LIVE Quadraphonic

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on LIVE Quadraphonic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.pedalfuzz.com/music-news/2018-5-16-suzanne-ciani-releases-live-quadraphonic-album-via-limited-pressing-vinyl. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:41, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Suzanne Ciani has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Suzanne Ciani was changed by Kamranv (u) (t) ANN scored at 1 on 2020-11-15T23:20:46+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:20, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KamranV moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, KamranV, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Perryprog (talk) 23:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged—please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. Perryprog (talk) 23:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: KamranV (February 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft does not appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria is satisfied. If at least one of the criteria is satisfied, please revise this draft appropriately, with a reliable source, if necessary stating on the talk page which criterion is met, and resubmit. You may ask for advice about the musical notability criteria at the Teahouse.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:KamranV and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:KamranV, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kamranv! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 01:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Email exchange

This is a copy of some of the emails I had with Kamranv, posting here with permission for the sake of transparency. Perryprog (talk) 02:34, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Email exchange

hi there perry. I'm new to all of this wikipedia stuff and I'm a little confused about what the issue is in publishing it.
It was requested that I create a short entry for myself, most specifically around spacial sound.
I have cited everything extensively with established press. I would very much appreciate any guidance in what more needs to happen so that this can post.
thank you so much for your review.
— User:Kamranv 01:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kamranv,
Thanks for reaching out! I’m sorry that your introduction to editing Wikipedia so far has been pretty confusing—all of the policies and guidelines surrounding pretty much every area of the site is pretty overwhelming, but keep in mind you aren’t expected to know them, so in the strict sense of things it’s not like you’ve done anything “wrong”.
The reason I moved your article out of the “mainspace” (the place where “live” articles are) into “draftspace” (where articles are often worked on before being put in mainspace) is because writers who have a conflict of interest (such as writing about one’s self, as you are) are that you should put new articles through the “Articles for Creation” process, instead of creating them directly.
The Articles for Creation process is basically just a way for an editor to work on a draft version of an article, and then submit it for review and feedback when they believe it’s ready to be in the mainspace. After that, an experienced editor will take a look at it and either accept it and move it into mainspace, or decline it with a reason why it’s not quite ready yet.
That’s just about the gist of it—feel free to let me know if you have further questions, or you can read the corresponding pages of what I just talked about by following the links here:

Articles for Creation

Autobiography § Creating an article about yourself

The overarching guideline page on conflicts of interest

The plain and simple version of the above

And finally, a help page on writing your first article

I’m also a bit curious as to why you say it was requested you make an article on yourself. It’s extremely discouraged to do so in the first place (and I would recommend that you don’t, too), so it’s a bit odd that someone would request you to do so.
Anyway—if you need a place to contact me, my talk page is probably the preferred location as that way our communication can stay on-wiki. You can also stop by the Teahouse, Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance.
— User:Perryprog 01:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Perry,
[...]
Thank you so much for this kind explanation. It's all a lot to digest.
As you may have seen in my article, I've had several credible press articles written about my role in rebirthing quadraphonic music. It is some of these very journalists who have asked why there isn't a wiki entry on this and me specifically. They are also not savvy with wikipedia but do like to use this as a reference and suggested that I figure out how to make sure basic information is posted.
I suppose the best question that I have is: what is it about the sources that I cited that are somehow illegitimate for the purposes of wikipedia. I've seen websites that pay to make the article for me but then I see other sites that say don't do this as it's worse... or even getting a friend to do it is shady...
In my research, I saw that it was okay to self publish so long as the conflict of interest is acknowledged, which I thought that I had done. My understanding is that the act of me creating the page, puts it out there for editors like yourself to review and edit as needed.
Also, I just posted a question in the Teahouse specifically around the Music Notability issue. From what I've read, it seems that I have a couple of the music notability requirements covered and I'm wondering what more I need to do. I have:

#1: Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.

and #7: Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
Seriously, thank you very much for your time and effort. the world is a better place with people like you editing wikipedia.
— User:Kamranv 01:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Continued discussion

Kamranv, as there's a lot to discuss in response to that I'll have to get to it later—it's getting a bit late for me, anyway. The main thing to answer is your understanding of the publishing standard isn't wrong, it's just that the process of creating an article should be done through the Articles for Creation process (see the fourth bullet of WP:COIEDIT). Perryprog (talk) 02:34, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, again. When I originally made the article, I thought that I was following the articles of creation guidelines. Was there a tag or some posting process technicality that I missed? When I read the instructions, it seems like I followed the guidelines. KamranV (talk) 14:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since Perryprog seems to be helping work through the AFC process, I'm just going to add that it might be a good idea for you to look at Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Law of unintended consequences, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world. If an article is created about you it will because the Wikipedia community feels that you satisfy Wikipedia:Notability to support a stand-alone article. Your permission isn't really needed for someone to create such an article, which in turn means that it won't be "your article" in the sense that you will have any kind of editorial control over it. In fact, you yourself will be expected to not directly edit the article except in some certain specific cases, but will be expected instead to seek assistance from other uninvolved editors when you have concerns about the article's content. Article content (positive or negative) will be assessed on whether it's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, not whether it's what the subject of the article wants. Many people misunderstand this when they try to create articles about themselves, or other people or things they are connected to, and they only find out later that there can be a downside to being written about on Wikipedia. Please understand that I'm not trying to discourage you, but rather only trying to point some things out about Wikipedia that you might not know. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:45, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I understand the double edged nature of Wikipedia. Again, I’m simply doing this by request and to add context to the resurgence of quadraphonic music and interest around spacial sound. I will ask them to attempt to navigate wiki if they so choose too however if one of you editors would like to instead, I suppose it would be a more credible article since we have never met. KamranV (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. You posted something similar to Again, I’m simply doing this by request and to add context to the resurgence of quadraphonic music and interest around spacial sound at the Wikipedia Teahouse, but never responded to a question about it. Who is asking you to create a Wikipedia article about KamranV? Are you the same "KamranV" you're trying to create an article about? Are you someone else and was asked by KamranV to create an article about him? If you're not the same KamranV and you want to try and create an article about him, then that's OK but you're going to need to change your username per WP:REALNAME. You'll almost certainly still have a conflict-of-interest, but at least people will not automatically assume that you're trying to create an article about yourself. If you're the same KamranV, then that's OK and you can use your real name or professional name as your user name; you might, however, want to consider emailing Wikimedia OTRS and verifying your identity. That way people will know it's really you they are discussing and not someone claiming to be you. This is optional, but sometimes it helps avoid confusion and actually makes it easier for other editors to help sort through problems. As for the draft you're working on, you can continue to do so at your own pace as long as you don't leave it unedited for more than six months; you can also re-submit it to WP:AFC for review when you think it's ready. There's no limit on the number of times a draft can be submitted for review and you should be fine as long as you don't keep re-submitting the same declined version over and over again. If you want assistance from editors who might be familiar with this genre of article or your genre of music, try looking for some WikiProjects that might cover this. You can try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians, but perhaps there are others as well. If you feel that Wikipedia has too many restrictions on what you're trying to do, then there are WP:ALTERNATIVEs that might be better suited to your needs or the needs of the people asking you to create content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @marchjuly I am indeed the same kamranv from the teahouse. Per your suggestion, I emailed OTRS to validate myself. As you may have seen the referenced articles a handful of the journalists and some of the people who have organized public speaking engagements for me have suggested that a wiki page be made. Not knowing how complicated it is, this is my attempt to fulfill that. I looked at the wikiprojects page and found quadraphonic sound to be the closest subject. What do I do to appropriately solicit editors associated with this article? How can I tell who is a legit editor or inexperienced like me? Thank you so much for the guidance. KamranV (talk) 23:21, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quadraphonic sound is an Wikipedia:Article, not a Wikipedia:WikiProject. A WikiProject is a group of editors who have joined up to work together on improving certain things about Wikipedia. Sometimes these are people who have lots of real world knowledge about a particular subject matter or maybe they're just really interested in a particular subject matter. The focus of a WikiProject can be pretty much anything from a certain type or genre of article, to certain types of maintenance or cleanup, or just a shared interest that somehow is Wikipedia related. You can find a list of current WikiProjects at Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory. If you check the top of Talk:Quadraphonic sound, you see a banner for Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional sound production. So, if you find an article that you think relates to what you do, check it's talk page for a WikiProject banner; then, check the WikiProject's page to see if covers the things you do. Some projects have lots of members and are quite active, while others not so much. Basically, if you find a WikiProject that covers the kinds of things you feel you're Wikipedia notable for, you can try posting on the project's talk page and asking for help. If you get lucky, you might find someone who would be interested in helping create an article. You can also try Wikipedia:Requested articles for a more general approach.

There's really no way to tell how experienced someone is for sure, but you can sometimes get a feel by looking at their user page or user talk page. There are editors who've been editing for years, but their experience and understanding is rather limited; on the other hand, there are editors who are relatively new who pick up things quickly and seem to have a good feel for how policies and guidelines should be applied. Generally, you tend to get a good mix of editors in a WikiProject which is why it can often be a good place to seek assistance.

Finally, please don't take this the wrong way, but the people who suggested that you create a Wikipedia article about yourself probably misunderstand what Wikipedia is about; they probably meant well, but just aren't aware of things like Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. One last thing, if an article isn't created about you, it's isn't the end of the world. As I posted previously, most people who want Wikipedia articles created about them really overestimate the benefits such a thing will bring them. In most cases, they'd be much better off having total control over what's written about them by using a WP:ALTERNATIVE instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:00, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All of this is very helpful however it doesn’t appear that the folks commenting on quadraphonic sound are also on the list of project professionals. I’m at a loss. I suppose I will just give up at this point. People can just use google, I suppose. Thank you and everyone else for the education. KamranV (talk) 16:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suzanne Ciani

Hello, Kamranv. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Suzanne Ciani, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Trying my best here. Correcting inaccuracies. KamranV (talk) 23:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK KamranV. Even though it might seems as such, nobody is really trying to make your life difficult. However, you do seem to have some kind of professional relationship with Ciani based upon some of the content you added to the article as well as some of your posts on Wikimedia Commons. So, it would probably be best for you to follow the advice given here and here and avoid directly editing the article (particularly if you're editing/adding content about you and projects you collaborated with Ciani on) and instead make edit requests on the article's talk page. This will gave another editor a chance to look over the changs you want to make and assess whether they are in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:33, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]