This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Thanks for your message. Have a question - can we change the sequence of an article? such as .44_Henry? earlier there was the cartridge's details followed by the developer. I changed it to developer first then into the details. Let me know, if I did it right. And, have also added subheads. Need your guidance. Thanks again. Thendral (talk) 12:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Well, from a quick look, it certainly looks better than before, so that's a good thing :-) A couple of comments, for your information;
The WP:lede should be a summary, and shouldn't contain anything that isn't covered in more detail within the article itself.
Those sections are a bit short; if they cannot be expanded, it might be worth considering merging them, or using a sub-subsection(s)
I'm only making those comments FYI; it was a very good edit, so I'd advise you to carry on as you are. Don't worry, be BOLD ! -- Chzz ► 13:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Uh...
...how do I go about moving the image to Commons? Is there a guide of some kind? Cheers—S MarshallTalk/Cont 16:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Never mind, I solved it. Wow, that's a pain in the neck to do...—S MarshallTalk/Cont 17:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:Electrocatalyst.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [1], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
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 that has been nominated for deletion (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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Chzz ► 16:49, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Autoconfirmation
I have been a user for four days and have made almost 20 edits, how do I know if I am autoconfirmed?
--Thenachoman 22:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
WikiLove
WhiteHandofSauramon (talk) haz givn u Cheezburgr! Cheezburgrs promot WikiLovez and hoapfuly thiz one haz made yore day bettr. Spreadd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Cheezburgr, whethr it be sumeone youz hav had disagreementz with in teh past or a gud frend. Hapy munchins!
Spredd teh goudnesz of Cheezburgerz to all lolcat buddiez by addin {{subst:Cheezburgr}} to their talk puj with friendly messuj to all.
Thanks for helping me out, this is my first day and I have absolutely nothing about editing Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by WhiteHandofSauramon (talk • contribs) 00:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Convicted and convinced
Greetings Chzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Your kind words and a very happy recovery from an infection that was making me crazy have conspired to move me to keep at Wikipedia, after all.
The Buddha teaches us that a man who can control his anger is like a man who can steer a chariot drawn by 10,000 elephants. Imagine what he knew about frustration and over-sensitivity!
And anyway, I've always been a snob myself. And I live in a stinking swamp. ;)
Let it be known, anything written here will be edited mercilessly. [A joke, of course. Recognize the phrase?]
No worries Chzz. And thanks, now I corrected it to Aesop's fables.
And, I'm searching for the illustrations done by a Russian artist called Romadin. They are fantastic (I have an old book with the stories and his illustrations, titled 'Aesop's Fables' and the publisher, Raduga Publications, Moscow). But I do not find it in the Internet. Do you know about this artist? Thendral (talk) 09:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Re: Michael Romadin / Romadin, Mikhail Nikolayevich
Chzz you are amazing! I'm so happy to see Romadin in Romadin's own page. Meanwhile I also spoke to my Russian friend in Moscow, and he is also willing to contribute to this article. We can seek his help in translating the pages. And, that's a happy news - we can use his illustration under the license. Let me scan those and upload. Thank you very much again. It's a book that my father bought in 1978. And it has been my Bible. I love the book for the stories and Romadin's illustrations. You should see them. They transport you to a different world. And, by the way, the Aesop's fables that I'm talking about is the one of Leo Tolstoy - his version. It is special in it's own way that there is no moral conclusion in the stories. They are open - each story presents a slice of life and it's upto the reader to conclude or not to conclude anything from it. I want to add some of those to Leo Tolstoy or Aesop's Fables page itself. What do you think?
Now I'm confused. You referred me to a user this morning, When I checked out her contributions, I at first thought that she had written the God_(male_deity) article, and I started writing a message to her about doing research to cite references and said the article is likely to disappear soon if she doesn't do that. Then I went to the talk page of the article and noticed that it's been around since 2005, and then I noticed that the "Unreferenced" tag has been on it for over a year. Should this article be deleted?
Please understand, it's not that I disagree with the content. I don't have any problem with an article on this subject being here. I just thought we had a requirement that articles cite references.
Thanks for creating this excellent article. I have a request for a disambiguation. The sound file points its location to Kawasaki, which is a disambiguation page pointing to several possible locations in Japan. Do you know which is the correct one? You don't appear to be uploader on Commons, but perhaps you know anyway. -Lilac Soul(talk • contribs • count) • I'm watching this page so just reply to me right here! 19:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out; I've fixed it. It's in Kawasaki,_Kanagawa, which is half-way between Tokyo and Yokohama. I used to live near it :-) -- Chzz ► 21:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and unblocked I Am Bob the VI - Assuming Good Faith, I hope I haven't done the wrong thing! I'll be keeping an eye on him, as, I'm sure will you. Regards TonywaltonTalk 20:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. I will pursue it. If you have the time though, could you possibly look over the situation? Will in China (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Of course I am happy to give any help that I can. I don't feel able to make a specific comment on your dispute, as it concerns an area with which I am unfamiliar. I have read through the discussion so far, and I believe that if you follow the suggestions in WP:DISPUTE, the situation can be resolved, in time. The procedures also detail what to do in the even of a deadlock etc, all the way up to the blocking of accounts for disruptive editing.
The basic rule is - discuss, don't revert/change things until consensus has been reached even if others do not play by those rules. If another user makes a change in opposition to consensus, revert it and ask them (politely) not to do it again. If they continue, request that their account is blocked. And so on.
Make sure that you yourself do not fall foul of the WP:3RR policy.
If I can be of any further specific assistance, e.g. in enforcing policy etc, then please ask me on my talk.
Good luck with coming to a consensus. I will try to 'keep an eye' on the progress. -- Chzz ► 22:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I found the "Editor Assistance" program which looks promising. Didn't even know such a thing existed. I thought the only recourse might be some sort of formal mediation which seemed daunting to me. Will in China (talk) 22:07, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry!
Sorry about that, I just found out about those, so I was trying them out.--WhiteHandofSauramon (talk) 22:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
The Guidance Barnstar
I just wanted to say thanks for all the help you have given me. I feel you deserve this. WhiteHandofSauramon (talk) 22:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Chzz,
I'm being bold and introducing myself. My name is Christian Hejnal and I play in a band called Scarling. with my wife Jessicka. I just wanted to put it out there that if you had any issues with any pages related to my wife, my band, our roommate Lisa Leveridge, my co-worker Rickey Goodling or myself, please don't hesitate to come to me directly. I am happy to be of any help.
I am new to wikipedia and currently trying to get familiar with all the rules and protocol here. I believe whole heartily in a neutral stance but also would like things written about any of the previously mentioned pages to be 100% factual. I'm about to do an interview with a third party publication to set some things straight. Until then I just wanted to introduce myself because I plan on sticking around awhile.
Hi there, thanks very much for making contact. Being bold is good!
I'd be very happy to help you with any problems you have on Wikipedia.
I think it's only fair to say, immediately, that you need to be very cautious about conflict of interest issues; in brief, don't edit any articles relating to you, your wife, the band etc. Instead, suggest changes in the associated talk page, making it clear who you are. If you stick to that, you'll be fine. Please carefully read WP:COI and WP:BESTCOI.
You may or may not be aware that there has been a bit of dispute over some edits to the articles; however, I feel that the matter has now been resolved. One account has been blocked, and the other users involved seem extremely keen to cooperate in consensus building project.
Apologies for flooding a new user with lots of 'policy' etc; but it's best to be clear. The policies, as with everything on Wikipedia, have been agreed by all contributors, and work well. When they don't work, we can change them - and "we" includes you, of course. We're all equal on here.
Some of the policies might seem confusing or odd to you at first, so if you're ever unsure, just ask for help. There's lots of people prepared to give you a hand. For example, even if your date of birth was wrong on the article about you, you couldn't change it - unless the information could be verified from a reliable, secondary source information, such as a national newspaper interview that stated the DOB. Seems a bit odd, but consider that I can't *prove* that you are who you say you are, and I can't assume anything.
So - be bold, stick to the rules, and you'll do just fine!
Once again, welcome to Wikipedia, and I look forward to helping you out in any way I can.
Thanks! I am learning as I go.
I appreciate the heads up. I've noticed there's been a little unnecessary mud slinging in my wife's direction by a disgruntled person.
=/
But as I said once my third party interview goes up I believe all will be set right.
I am who I say I am. But I understand any skepticism.
I'll look at the policies you posted now.
Thanks again,
Xtian1313 (talk) 02:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm sending this message to all editors who have edited the Club Mahindra article this year; hopefully it'll get some activity going and maybe build up a critical mass of activity to improve the article.
Incidentally, I just removed the "Criticism" section from the article - because it was empty! That doesn't bode well, given that current concern is that the article is little more than an advert... I've left a comment on the talk page that I'd welcome it being put back. It looks like in the past it may have been used as an attack on Club Mahindra, hence my points below about sourcing.
Anyway - here's my spam ;-)
Hi
Apologies for the "spam"; I'm writing to you and other editors because you have edited the Club Mahindra Holidays article recently.
Concern has been expressed that the article is too promotional and is about a non-notable subject. I do not necessarily agree with this, however I am concerned that unless these issues are addressed then the article may be deleted. I am therefore asking for your help in improving the article, and wish to make the following suggestions:
The article should avoid being an attack on Club Mahindra: while some criticism is to be expected the article should not be an attack page.
Positive and negative comments about Club Mahindra should be referenced by reliable sources such as major newspapers and business magazines.
Controversial claims - either for or against Club Mahindra - should be discussed on the article's talk page.
Once again, apologies for disturbing you with this matter but I hope I can look forward to working with you on improving this article!
Cheers, This flag once was redpropagandadeeds 10:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Dear Chzz,sorry for bothering you so often. Recently I spoke with User:Mgm, and he told me that Dutch references can be used either, so I appreciate your opinion as for this references.
Emerce Magazine Offshoring Interview with Bernhard van Oranje, CEO of Levi9,(2005-11-11)[2]
Hello Chzz,
Thank you for responding to my help call! My apologies for logging off so quickly. I have attempted to contact User:RickeyGoodling on her talk page regarding her edits to articles related to Kyle Justin/Kyle Lime. I disagreed with her edits and wanted to come to some sort of consensus as we've edited them back and forth. I felt that she made several edits out of bad faith, removing necessary information, including removing links to other wiki articles. Is there anything further I can do as she has continued edits without contacting me back? The user is also using the name "RickeyGoodling", who is a former bandmember of Kyle Justin/Kyle Lime in Scarling (aliases Rickey Goodling/Rickey Lime), and edited articles related to Rickey Lime, Scarling, and Jessicka when I know that it isn't Rickey. Is there a way to get this person to essential stop parading around as Rickey? Is there someone she can contact? This is a sidenote to the edits. There is a history for what I initial said on these user's talk pages: Katr67, as well as mine and User:RickeyGoodling. (Sure you want to delve into this mess?) :) This user has edited various articles repeatedly under several IP address aliases (all California IP's). It's basically continual edits that I feel are sometimes almost vandalism, without being OVERLY protective of the article. Thanks so much, I look forward to your reply. Mark William 02:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
RickeyGoodling joined wikipedia on 25 February 2009, and has ONLY edited in mainspace (67 edits), zero contributions to talk or userspace.[7] There is no user page. No email address is registered on the account.
Their edits indicate a good knowledge of WP - use of redirects, knowledge of 'peacock' etc - within days of the account being created.
The problem remains, that some of the edits to articles are disputed. user:Godblessyrblackheart has tried to resolve this according to policy, but User talk:RickeyGoodling has not made any response to attempts to contact him/her, and continues to make edits.
{{adminhelp}}
I'm trying to help resolve the above (Summarising the situation), and I'd appreciate your suggestions on how to proceed. Thanks. -- Chzz ► 22:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Have a look at WP:DR. Take your pick. //roux 22:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I read WP:DR earlier; unfortunately, I can't see any recommended action for a user who does not acknowledge any requests to discuss, or respond in any way. The only policy action I can see would be an account block, per WP:REALNAME. -- Chzz ► 22:16, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
In that case, WP:AN/I is where you want to go. //roux 22:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, thanks for your input, I will take it over to ANI. think it's WP:UFA, I try that. -- Chzz ► 22:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC) EDIT -- Chzz ► 22:30, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
03:45, 15 March 2009 I moved the UAA back from the holding pen to the requests
05:40, 15 March 2009 It was moved back to the holding pen by another user.
User does not appear to have logged in yet, so waiting a little longer. -- Chzz ► 13:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
User logged on and edited from 18:41, 16 March 2009 to 19:14, 16 March 2009, similar edits, did not respond to any talk requests. Moved UAA back from holding pen and asked for admin action -- Chzz ► 00:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I replied to your message regarding this matter on my talk page. :) – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 05:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
17:02, 17 March 2009 Mangojuice (talk | contribs) blocked RickeyGoodling (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite (Potential impersonation of Rickey Goodling) -- Chzz ► 12:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I think it's obvious that our friend RickeyGoodling is back making the same edits under a similar IP. I wrote about this on my talk page. Where do I go from here? – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 16:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I replied to User:MangoJuice on my talk page. I thought you might like to see it. If I'm putting these messages in the wrong spot, please let me know. I'm not sure if I should start a new section for this. (?) – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 23:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey Chzz, the user is back at it again. I left a message for you again on my talk page. Thanks again for everything you've done to help. It's really appreciated. – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 18:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Continued sockpuppets?
(new section to differentiate new concern)
Hey Chzz, please read my talk. I received an odd message from someone saying they are Christian Hejnal from Scarling. He says he is "re-introducing" himself to me, so he says. This reeks of conflict of interest, does it not? With what he said about my "issues" with certain articles, I haven't had any issues with any of the articles he mentions. The issues I have only deal with Kyle Justin, Skeleteen, TC Smith, and the removal of information regarding previous bandmates from the Scarling article and template. And, these issues are stressed on the talk pages of the users that made the edits. So, obviously this user is aware of these messages. Is this a never ending sock-puppet, or what? And, in regards to the third-party interview he mentioned, I imagine that "getting some things straight" has to do with the continued removal and dumbing-down of the articles I've created or of information I've added, re-added, undone, etc to articles by the plethora of users. Kind of like saying "we're doing an interview for Wikipedia," right? That in itself is conflict of interest, correct? I suppose we'll just wait to see what happens with this one. Like you said, it'll all come out in the wash. (BUT, I think we may need some bleach!) ;) – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 02:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
P.P.S. And now, User:Xtian1313 is contacting every person I've ever talked to (throughout the time I've created profiles on Wikipedia). Again, odd. They have left messages on the talk pages of every user on my own talk page. I'll let you deal with this one...
They speak of mudslinging on your talk below. I have not seen any mudslinging, have you? – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 03:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Given the apparent patterns of potential socks, misuse of a living person's name (that is, the Rickey Goodling issue), and general timing, would this be an appropriate case to request a checkuser? Snuppy 13:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Tanna japonensis
On March 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tanna japonensis, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
When Tanna japonensis was on the main page it got over 5,000 views, making it one of the page view leaders for March 2009; it's now listed here. Congratulations! rʨanaɢtalk/contribs 15:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi
Hi I am Bob the VI I just wantet to ask you how did you do the thing whit your signater ware it is in a box. can I cange mine to. I Am Bob the VI (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
You can go to "my preferences" (on the upper right-hand corner of any page), check the box that says "raw signature", and edit the code for your signature. Don't do it, though, until you have at least taken the Wikipedia tutorial and familiarized yourself with how the code works. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs 18:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I saw what the nice review you did for Oberon (moon), are you interested in doing one for 243 Ida? Wronkiew (talk) 04:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I'll do what I can.
I've made a new version of the first pic; I got the original TIF (higher quality), and cropped some of the black out of the border - I think it now has more impact, in the infobox. If you disagree, I've no problem with it being reverted.
New image looks good, thank you very much. Looking forward to your comments. Wronkiew (talk) 05:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
FYI re 'will likely'
Hi Chzz. Not sure if you'll remember kindly helping me by answering a helpme I'd raised re name of a template (you suggested it was wiki s/w rather than template).
Anyway, just thought you may want to know just why I was keen to ask that question.
Well, all is revealed here:
[8] .
Cheers, Trafford09 (talk) 09:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Quick question
OK, just to clarify here.
"I think it's only fair to say, immediately, that you need to be very cautious about conflict of interest issues; in brief, don't edit any articles relating to you, your wife, the band etc. Instead, suggest changes in the associated talk page, making it clear who you are. If you stick to that, you'll be fine. Please carefully read WP:COI and WP:BESTCOI."
(Understand) I'm not being confrontational -more confused? Why is ok for User:Godblessyrblackheart to create the page Kyle Justin? or Skeleteen?
He's in Kyle's band and lives with him.
I just want the rules to apply to everybody, I'm not here to start trouble. I just want fairness and neutrality.
Thanks in advance for being patient with me,
Xtian1313 (talk) 03:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I am not in the band, Xtian1313. It's not safe to assume anything on Wikipedia, other than good faith. That's something I learned quickly as a new user. I imagine you may learn that, as well. – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 04:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
A reply to both of you; the same rules certainly do apply to everyone. As far as I am aware, USer:Godblessyrblackheart has no conflict of interest with the articles; if they do, I ask them to declare it just as you have. Because of the disputed nature of these articles, I'm asking all users to discuss changes on the talk page and reach a consensus before making them. If a consensus cannot be reached, see the dispute policy.
Everything will go smoothly if you both follow the guidelines. If you're unsure of the guidelines, please ask for help.
There are several talk sections here on wikipedia where my wife Jessicka is been falsely accused of vandalism by said user user:Godblessyrblackheart aka Matthew Eilers member of the band Skeleteen. He was once a fan of our band Scarling. but that soured once we got rid of his band mate Kyle. I am asking you as a neutral third party to investigate my claims and see what "talk" links to my wife Jessicka and you will see what I mean. In doing this, user:Godblessyrblackheart is protecting his band mate Kyle Justin. He created his page and his band's page. I have not created any pages I have previously mentioned. You will see that most of what he is referring to isn't vandalism, it's others having a difference of opinion on what role Kyle played in Scarling. They did not understand the rules of wikipedia and they did not understand "talk pages". I myself had to have a long read on the rules before even introducing myself here.
I assure you, user:Godblessyrblackheart aka Matthew Eilers has a personal interest in trying to discredit my wife, myself, our friends, and our band. I'm being 100% open and honest here. He is not being truthful.
This is me asking for your help! I am normally a very chilled out individual but this slander has truly gone too far. As I told user:Rodhullandemu
"Basically, we had Kyle sign a leaving member agreement. He was never an actual member of Scarling. It's the only one I've ever had to have anybody sign because he has some axe to grind with my wife and myself. He is not a stable person.
You'll notice most of the pages that link to Kyle Justin are Scarling. related.
Also told to user:Rodhullandemu
"Our friends and ex band members have tried to correct his page ( not vandalizing it in anyway- but clearly not knowing the rules of wikipedia) He's now using a blog where he basically slanders us as a reliable third-party publications /source. I've done all I can outside of wikipedia. I've sent him several letters via email. No response. I've contacted myspace, who is in the process of reviewing/removing his myspace page. I've contacted my lawyers in order to review the leaving agreement he signed 5 years ago. I've contacted his ex band mate Mia who will serve as a witness that he did indeed sign this legal document, knowing what it meant"
I know this sounds like a big convoluted mess, but I have to go this route in order to clear things up. I want wikipedia to be neutral, fair, and factual for everybody involved.
I appreciate you even taking the time to review what I have said. This matter is important to me me. If you still have any doubts about who I say I am, please feel free to email me at [email protected]. ( listed on our myspace & webpage) It's a public email address where only band members answer email. I assure, I will answer you.
Chzz -again, I know this is not your job to do this, so I appreciate any help you can provide. He seems like you play by the rules and I am hoping you'll see what I mean.
And in the spirit of Star Wars and in order to lighten this very dark post, I say this, "Help Me, Obi-Chzz Kenobi, You're My Only hope!"
Thanks in advance,
Xtian1313 (talk) 16:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I am truly puzzled as to why User:Xtian1313 assumes I'm someone I'm not. I used to know Jessicka back in the day but I can honestly say I've not been an acquaintence of her for many, many years. Regardless, I am not Matthew Eilers. The only thing I've been protecting are several articles I created with friends that are continuously being edited, often questionably, and sometimes possibly vandalized, in ways that I disagree with. When I have attempted to contact each separate account making the edits to Kyle Justin, Skeleteen, TC Smith, Robin Moulder, etc, there is no response, ever. Any person on here looking at my contributions can tell you I have never, ever vandalized any articles or made any repeated unnecessary edits. I am constantly speaking to moderators or other users for third party opinions and advice. I continue to attempt conversation, repeatedly, with the numerous users making similar edits. If you truly want me to list everything that has been done to these articles, I will, because it ain't pretty. Moving on... my question is, what does a legal document have anything to do with Wikipedia? Is this a threat? I have been nothing but neutral and I have watched these articles and users over months. MySpace, a legal document, emails to Kyle Justin and Matthew Eilers, previous bandmembers vouching for you... none of this has anything to do with Wikipedia. And, like I said, you may disagree with the role Kyle Justin played in Scarling, but the proof is everywhere on the internet and on recorded material.
I would really love to know where this mudslinging is occuring, because I have seen none of it, nor have I done any of it. You cannot accuse me of making poor, unnecessary, or negative edits (or mudslinging at that) because I have no done any of that, whatsoever, ever, period, end of discussion. I do not appreciate that assumption, accusation, any of it. Anyone who looks into what you are saying, Xtian1313, will see that you're simply not telling the truth. My big question is how do you know about these user talks (the ones where I've attempted discussion) if you aren't these previous users? And, you've mentioned you've attempted correction to these articles, stating that you simply didn't know Wikipedia's policies, so you are admitting that you are the previous users that were blocked, reported, that I attempted discussion with, that simply disappear, correct? I don't want to assume.
The cited article that you claim is "slanderous," actually contains several interview statements, being ones of opinion rather than fact or being "fair comment and criticism." The person being interviewed is Kyle Justin, and I believe Wikipedia policy agrees that he would know best about what is true about his life. On top of this, the sections of the article that you believe are slanderous are not even cited for Wikipedia, whatsoever, so I am not sure why you have a problem with it. In regards to the interview that you say you are currently doing, I hope this interview would not contain any libel or defamation, as those are very much against the law, are taken very seriously, and against the policies of Wikipedia. Wikipedia's intention has never been to shed a negative light on any person, as this could be considered possible defamation of character, and instead states fact through proven and neutral point of view.
From what I have discovered over the internet, Kyle Justin's alias Kyle Lime is plastered all over Scarling-related articles, reviews, interviews, etc, etc, etc. He is indeed a previous member. That is definitely not an assumption. Attempts (by the users I mentioned above) to erase him have failed because of this. Those are the things I have cited. The interview that I discovered through researching Skeleteen, the one that I cited on the article, contains no slander (as slander is spoken) or libel (as libel is written), and simply contains a one-sided story that is backed up by the references I have cited previously. The proof is in everything, if users look into it. I honestly do not mind listing/linking every edit on here that is questionable and I don't mind linking all of those IP's together to the same person. I honestly feel that a check user is necessary here, to reveal who is truly behind these questionable and repeated edits, and also lack of communication. I believe there is a consensus about that between myself and User:Snuppy above. It's becoming way too obvious and ridiculous, and I'm not assuming that. I have absolutely no problem with discussing edits made on the articles, or edits made to the Scarling article and template that I disagree with. (These edits were made, once again, to boost articles related to Scarling and tear down other perceived enemies.) That discussion is needed very badly. That is what I have been attempting on here for a what is nearing a month now. All I have ever done to the latter of the articles (Scarling and the template) is add previous members and re-link Wiki links that were removed.
Regardless of all the above, I am ready, willing, able, and would really, really, really like to discuss what the issues truly are here on Wikipedia, so we can hash it out, have third party opinion, and end it here. That is what I have attempted from the get-go in attempting communication with the numerous accounts making edits.
And, in the end, users can easily see from my contributions that I have never had a serious interest with discrediting your supposed wife, Jessicka. So, where that accusation comes from is seriously beyond me. I think it's obvouis that I have never wanted to negatively affect the integrity of the Wiki database, but I question the motives of others.
(Seriously, where is the Wiki bleach? We may need OxiClean, as well. I am patiently waiting for the rinse cycle to start!) – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
First and foremost, if you are indeed an old acquaintance of my wife Jessicka, let me be so bold and once again introduce myself, I am Christian Hejnal, her husband and band mate.
Once again, I am who I say I am. You can email me at [email protected] (Scarling's public email address) it has been the same address for years.
I will respond and I will actually give you a phone number where you can speak to me directly. Good enough?
What I am saying here is this: My wife and myself are Scarling., it has been that way from day one. We have explained that fact in detail to everybody whom has ever played with us. Certain people like Rickey Lime, have made larger contributions to our band and were credited. Kyle Justin, has not written a single Scarling. song and was brought on as a live bass player. If he or anybody else believes otherwise, then they have received wrong information. We aren't trying to "erase anybody "- that's ludicrous. We are simply trying to put people's roles into proper perspective and not allow them say that had a larger role in our band then they actual have, 5 years later. Kyle played with us for one year. We've been a band for 8 1/2 years. Being the core and only members of the band, isn't it our right to have factual information about Scarling. here on wikipedia?
Besides Kyle's recent interview, I'd love to see any evidence that suggests Kyle wrote anything in Scarling. I have ASCAP statements to prove that my wife and myself are the sole writers.
Perhaps you've never had serious interest in discrediting my wife but you have insinuated that she is behind certain vandalism, which she is not. I am here to set the record straight.
The legal document is just that -a legal document signed by Kyle Justin, stating facts of his involvement in our band, that's it. It's not a threat - if you are taking it as such then that's completely on you. But again, why would you care if you aren't in any way affiliated with him right?
"And, you've mentioned you've attempted correction to these articles, stating that you simply didn't know Wikipedia's policies, so you are admitting that you are the previous users that were blocked, reported, that I attempted discussion with, that simply disappear, correct? I don't want to assume."
No, I have not personally attempted to correct them myself. Do I possibly know who has, yes. Since you are not being forthcoming with your identity, then I think it only fair to protect their identities as well, right? Can several people share one IP - address, YES! No need to assume as I am being truthful on who I am and why I'm here. Is your IP address from Ohio, Los Angeles, or Orlando Florida? Wouldn't it be easy for somebody to check? My IP address is from LA where I work & live. No big secret.
Considering Kyle Justin's recent interview does contain libel & defamation, as you so eloquently pointed out- and that is very much against the law, and is taken very seriously, and against the policies of Wikipedia. Why is it quite alright to have this blog linked as neutral third party source: [9] completely trashing my wife and myself in order to substantiate and legitimize false claims made on his wikipedia?
As far as my interview goes, I would only be telling my side of the story. Is that not allowed? I'd actually be doing it in a well known national neutral third party publication, that would be the only difference. I expect that my interview addressing certain issues concerning my band will be used in the same way Kyle's blog interview is, correct?
"Wikipedia's intention has never been to shed a negative light on any person, as this could be considered possible defamation of character, and instead states fact through proven and neutral point of view."
I'd like a third party to have a look at this interview : [10] that User talk:Godblessyrblackheart linked. I believe there's quite a lot of negativity aimed at my wife and myself in it. It is in no way a neutral point of view.
In closing I'd like to point out:
Matthew Eilers's myspace Myspace address = www.myspace.com/godblessyrblackheart / wikipedia user = godblessyrblackheart????
Coincidence or fluke?
I am ready to have a third party opinion, and end it here as well.
Xtian1313 (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The moderators will handle things from this point on. This is about Wikipedia, not personal lives--I am not going to call you personally as that has nothing to do with Wikipedia and I don't know you. You can't harass or threaten anybody, it doesn't matter who it involves--it's not allowed. I care because I'm a Wikipedian and I started the article. That's fine about your former members roles in Scarling. Kyle Justin's involvement extended beyond the live or touring aspect. He recorded on material. The facts are on the internet. I won't repeat myself. End of discussion there.
I'm sorry to hear his interview upset you (there are two sides to every story, so you have to assume good faith), but the interview backs up statements made by other neutral third party sources, which Wikipedia policy allows, so I used it. Articles do not have to be neutral point of view; you will hardly find that in an interview. I've looked into it and a lot of the references used on the Scarling, Jessicka, Jack Off Jill, Christian Hejnal, and So Long, Scarecrow articles contain references that are far from being neutral point-of-view, so if you are wanting to remove all references/citations that do not have a neutral point-of-view (even if they're giving positive praise), then I would look into citations on your own articles as well. (Example, every link to the new "The Ingenues" project on these articles simply cite their MySpace account, which is not allowed on Wiki--see WP:LINKSTOAVOID, MySpace account links are not allowed at all....) It is hard to find things that only contain a neutral point of view, particularly in citing articles, review, and interviews. How it's used on Wikipedia is truly what matters. Please note, I did not use that article to cite anything negative or non-neutral about Scarling here on the Wiki database--I do not know anything about the band's writing credits and I have not linked anything about that on Wiki. With my understanding of libel, that wasn't it. The article was used in a neutral manner to back up neutral information.
I visited the MySpace account for the user "godblessyrblackheart" but that account is private... And it doesn't say a name, so, yeah, sorry, but no, and again you're assuming.
I will not reply to anything further as I do not want to take away from the real issues here (none of this has anything to do with a legal document on Wikipedia or any other nonsensical stuff). You say you want factual information and a proper perspective on Wiki, yet the history of tearing down perceived enemies/articles and building up your own is inside the Wiki database. There has been a lot of unnecessary information removal. If any moderators want to review the plethora of edits and accounts on here, they will see that. I won't further discuss this on Chzz's talk page until a moderator/mediator is involved. I also do not want to get away from the fact that User:Snuppy and I are in a consensus that we need a check user before we move on. I look forward to working this out after somebody else gets involved and investigates it thoroughly. I feel awful that all this is on Chzz's talk page all because he decided to help me out. – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 23:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I am stating this for everybody to read. I'm just stating facts. I am not tearing down perceived enemies. I am not harassing or threatening anybody. I have done nothing wrong. I am willing to cooperate with policy. I am willing to discuss changes before making them. I have openly declared my identity. I have a real desire to make my position clear in order to communicate and discuss this issue. This is why I contacted all involved prior to this exchange.
Feel free to remove "The Ingenues" project if it simply cites their MySpace account. If it's not allowed, it's not allowed. I understand. They are brand new and have little press. All Scarling. reviews are in notable national third party publications. I assure you.
"Please note, I did not use that article to cite anything negative or non-neutral about Scarling here on the Wiki database--I do not know anything about the band's writing credits and I have not linked anything about that on Wiki. With my understanding of libel, that wasn't it. The article was used in a neutral manner to back up neutral information."
You did point fingers in my wife Jessicka's direction- falsely. That's all I'm saying. I'd love it if what you wrote about her (in talk pages) was removed altogether. I am now focused on the content, concering Jessicka, not the people who posted it.
You and user:Snuppy are pals. I'd like a neutral third party please!
" Kyle Justin's involvement extended beyond the live or touring aspect. He recorded on material. The facts are on the internet. I won't repeat myself. End of discussion there. "
That is not true. Please find these facts!
Please find a link that states that Kyle Justin recorded or wrote anything for Scarling. - other then the March 2009 interview you posted. That's all I ask.
He recorded on a 7 inch- bass parts I wrote! I had to re-record his parts myself because they were not usable. I play bass on all other Scarling. recordings from 2004 - on.
Chzz- I too am truly sorry. I didn't want this to be on your talk page either. I just want my wife's name cleared and proper information about my band Scarling. given.
I look forward to becoming a helpful member of wikipedia. Hopefully a moderator/mediator will understand where I am coming from.
Again, Chzz -I am so sorry.
Xtian1313 (talk) 23:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
You and user:Snuppy are pals. I'd like a neutral third party please!
This is categorically 100% untrue. I do not know Godblessyrblackheart, his or her real name, have never spoken to this person, and to the best of my knowledge have had no contact in any way but here via Wikipedia. Our only commonality, as far as I can tell, is noting the rash of IP based editors and single-purpose accounts whose sole purpose appears to be the promotion of Jessicka and Scarling, and the tearing-down of people perceived to be her enemies.
No one has said this is Jessicka. Godblessyrblackheart has suggested that the ever-changing editor is someone close to your band, and you confirmed it above:
No, I have not personally attempted to correct them myself. Do I possibly know who has, yes.
Perhaps if you took a firmer hand with people in your circle and asked them to stop tearing others down, this situation wouldn't exist in the first place. And, incidentally, I'd like a retraction regarding your statement about Godblessyrblackheart and I being pals.
I'd also like to recommend taking this to some other talk page - Chzz doesn't need this littering his space. Snuppy 01:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
" the tearing-down of people perceived to be her enemies."
I don't know who invented this little catch phrase, but I don't appreciate it. I am not tearing down anybody. Did I not mention that I'm her husband?
I'm pretty sure I can guess who are? Michigan IP address? Nice Jack Off Jill edit btw.
"Perhaps if you took a firmer hand with people in your circle and asked them to stop tearing others down, this situation wouldn't exist in the first place."
I don't take a firm hand with anybody in my life. It's not my style. I surround myself with people I trust. I allow people to do what they wish. I allow people to make mistakes. I can only speak for myself and what I personally do. As a rule, I Assume good faith with people I care about-and if they mess up I'm there to fix it.
Again, I'm being 100% honest here. Are you?
"And, incidentally, I'd like a retraction regarding your statement about Godblessyrblackheart and I being pals."
I'm not retracting anything. Now who's being a bully? I am asking for a third party, that's not you or Godblessyrblackheart.
Fair enough?
"I used to know Jessicka back in the day but I can honestly say I've not been an acquaintance of her for many, many years." Godblessyrblackheart
How many people here on wikipedia actually know my wife??? Right, enough said!
That's all I have to say on this talk page. (Seriously)
Again, sorry Chzz
If you want help with that, then I will do everything I can.
Address the issues, not the people. If you wish to change the wording on one of the articles under discussion, put your suggestion on the talk page of the article - succinctly, with policy reasoning, and with references. Then we can discuss it. It is imperative to discuss matters in a civil way - to assume good faith.
If you wish action to be taken due to another user breaching policy, follow procedure.
If you have any questions regarding policy or procedure, or are uncertain how to proceed, stop and seek help.
I have no problem in discussions on my talk page, but I do object to comments directed at other users. Neither I, nor anyone else on Wikipedia, will be able to help you in resolving any personal issues. We will, however, go to any lengths to assist you in improving articles.
You may find it helpful to read the excellent essay about tigers.
Thank you for your attention. Best wishes, -- Chzz ► 18:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Gotcha! - I worked on Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, & Spider-Man 3 !!! You are setting off my post traumatic stress syndrome by mentioned him. (j/k)
I need your help. I'll put it in separate area. I think user: Snuppy and I are coming to an understanding.
Thanks for everything thus far!
Hi Chzz,
I've finished creating the casa page and had the text approved by my sub committee so now I'm not sure how to proceed. It will need to go onto a page of it's own (I think you created one but I'm not sure where) and have a link put to it from ??? Thank you for the link to the community portal. Now that this page is ready I feel a little more able to converse. Thank you again for all your help Peto Australis (talk) 09:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to take action - but I'm not sure what procedure to follow.
I'm asking for your help.
I have established who I am and my COI.
I believe user: Godblessyrblackheart has a COI as well.
My concern now is to get all negative, accusatory, maligned talk linked to my wife Jessicka & my band Scarling. removed. I think it would help improve our articles by removing all heresay and finger pointing in the talk below that links to them.
That's what I would like. I think that's fair. I need help with this.
I am not sure how to proceed.
Thanks for all of your help,
Xtian1313 (talk) 19:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
No problem. As the links above lead to long, complex discussions, I suggest:
On the articles talk page(s), provide a diff of the changes you wish to revert, or just list the bit you want to remove, along with your brief reason (e.g. "Not a reliable source". Keep your suggestion short, to the point, and policy-based. If the individual requests to change are not directly related (e.g. removal of info from one source), then add each separate request in a separate question. Then, all users can contribute their comments as to whether or not they agree with your suggestions.
Any more questions, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks, -- Chzz ► 20:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
P.S. It's a great likeness of a pussy, but is it art? (*very* obscure reference to Zork, an old computer game) -- Chzz ► 20:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Forgive me for being slow! I'm not totally understanding.
" The user 69.239.112.1 is actually a woman named Jessicka Fodera of the band Scarling (both have Wiki articles) who is a former bandmate in Scarling of Kyle Justin's. I know this because it is the same IP that she uses on an old band's message board that I moderated on. She also only edits her own pages if you see her contributions. I believe she has also has attempted to vandalize other articles. I believe she is removing information out of spite and for her own motives, not to make Wikipedia or the article better. I am seeking help in preventing further vandalism."
As you can see user:Godblessyrblackheart is falsely accusing my wife Jessicka, which I believe is against wikipedia policy?
Could you actually show me how to go about changing it since it's in clear breach of the rules here.
user: Godblessyrblackheart signs his post -Matt, M. W. Eilers 03:35, 27 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godblessyrblackheart (talk • contribs)
This of course an ""an attempted outing".
COI?
Matthew Eilers member of the band Skeleteen ????
Can I now say that it's him since he's signed his post with his name?
PS. I liked your pussy reference. I laughed.
Xtian1313 (talk) 20:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Seen something nice lately?
Come to my talk page, my friend, and see the good you have done me. And that is what the world should be all about--our looking after the wellbeing of others! I am most grateful, and look forward to future communications!
RevAntonio (talk) 23:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
All edits
Since there is such a huge conflict of interest here. I am hoping you will kindly make these edits as a neutral third party.
I would just like everything removed where user: Godblessyrblackheart is falsly accusing my wife. I know what he's written below is against wikipedia policy.
(Quoted text of actual disputed text removed -- Chzz ► 21:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC))
I think it's clear there is a real case of COI here.
That's why I am asking you to make these edits. I am of course not sure but if it's possible that user:Godblessyrblackheart is Matt M. W. Eliers -a member of Skeleteen, a band our disgrunted ex touring bassist Kyle Justin and since user:Godblessyrblackheart has admitted running our band Scarling's message board - we have a problem, no?
His words above not mine.
I believe that's sufficient evidence there's a COI!
Once all of these edits are made - I'll be satisfied.
I know this is a huge pain in the butt. But I want this these false accusations to stop.
Thank you
thanks in advance,
Xtian1313 (talk) 21:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining. I believe that you are making 2 requests here, which can both be dealt with through normal procedures;
1. Removal of certain text from talk pages. The procedure to request this is detailed in Wikipedia:Requests for oversight - please follow the instructions there to post your request. Ask me for help if you need it.
2. Re. a user with a conflict of interest making edits to an article. Please read WP:DIFF to learn how to make a link to the change itself, and - as before - put your request for the article to be amended on the talk page of the article, briefly explaining your reason (e.g. "information was added previously by a user with a conflict of interest, and is not supported by reliable sources / does not conform to WP:NPOV"). If consensus agrees, you can change the article. If an agreement cannot be reached, follow dispute policy. If you have questions, ask for help.
I hope this answers; please let me know. -- Chzz ► 22:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm still not totally understanding. I'm so sorry, I'm really not a slow adult - I'm just a few days into the whole wiki-experience. Is there any way I can get an administrator involved. Perhaps without having to re-explain the entire case again?
Do think what's on this talk page is self-explanatory enough?
I'm re-reading what you sent. I'm still not grasping exactly what to do.
Xtian1313 (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
No problems :-) All I'm trying to establish is, in simple terms, what you want to do. Each specific thing can be dealt with. There's no need to go into the whole long debate, just to briefly put in your request(s). I understood you wanted some allegedly libellous comments removed (that you listed), so I gave the procedure for doing that. I also believed you wanted to make some changes to some pages that you had a COI with, in which case I explained how to go about it (via the talk page).
The whole thing probably seems really complicated, but in terms of Wikipedia, it's really not. Whatever you want to achieve, there will be a simple way to do it; the procedures/guides are not there to make life complicated, they are as simple as possible.
What I've tried to do here is to address the specific issues. We *could* debate things over many, many more pages, but that won't butter any parsnips^ . Hence I've tried to bring things back to some action - what can be done to address the concerns of all the parties involved. If I can pin those things down, I can certainly help to get them done.
If you request deletions and just say "see this user page", then it's very difficult for the person dealing with the request to see what has been going on, and what specific action you require. Whereas, if you mail them and say "Please remove this edit because it is a libelous comment", then it will be swiftly dealt with.
And please - feel free to ask as much as you like; you're not stupid by any means. Wikipedia strives to be simple to use, but has become a big, complicated thing with a steep learning curve. Fortunately, there are lots of people here to help. -- Chzz ► 23:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, I think I am finally understanding. Thanks for being so patient.
First things first. I'm going to email the address you sent me to in order to get those deletions made.
The only thing I'm not able to find is the actual edit on the page itself.
In these 4 talk pages- how do I find where my actual edit change is? I want any section that mention's Jessicka or Scarling. deleted.
Thanks again for walking me through this,
Xtian1313 (talk) 23:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Another question. Rather then delete them altogether, Should the names Jessicka & Scarling. just be unlinked in order to keep a record of user:Godblessyrblackheart's little problem with COI?
Or should they just be deleted? My fear is once they are deleted, he'll resurface under a new user name and start this crap all over again?
Xtian1313 (talk) 23:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Clarification please
Two choices;
Remove the blocks of text that you quoted from the current revision of the pages concerned
In this case, I can simply delete the text for you - but it will remain in the respective pages history, for anyone who cared to look back through the records.
Request that the text be expunged from the record by use of 'oversight'
The text could not then be seen in the page history. Only Wikipedia stewards (and above) will be able to see a record of the comments ever being posted. Even administrators would not be able to view it.
Please let me know how you want to proceed, or ask for further clarification if you require it.
Cool.
So in the meantime, I'd like you to remove the blocks of text that I quoted from the current revision of the pages concerned.
I have also emailed - so I'll see what will happen on that end.
Thanks again for your help. I'm hoping I won't need any further assistance.
You have been a real trouper. Wikipedia is very lucky to have people like you.
Xtian1313 (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Chzz, in an attempt to not further gunk up your talk page, I have added my reply to all of this here on my talk page! – Godblessyrblackheart (talk) 01:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the first and third items of text, as requested by User:Xtian1313 (talk·contribs). However, I have not removed the second and fourth; this is because, when I realised that the pages were in the archive of Prodego (talk·contribs), I asked that user via online chat if they minded my editing their archive, and they requested that User:Xtian1313 (talk·contribs) email them about it. -- Chzz ► 21:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Update & query re leaving messages
Hi again Chzz. Firstly, re removal of 'will likely'[24], all is now done and resolved, as evidenced here_Forced_rl, and thx again for your help along the way.
Just a couple of queries now - I know you love them!
Should I now place a 'Resolved' symbol (as here [25] ) at the start of the 'will likely' section?
Is there a protocol, would you know?
What's the best way to leave somebody messages?
Does it depend on one's own modus operandi, &/or that of the recipient?
I know there are template(s), but personally I watch (WP or self) pages where I'm half-expecting developments, so don't tend to need alert templates. But, for instance, your Talk invites one to Leave a message, which of course opens up a new section. If my message principally relates to an existing section, am I better to put it there - presumably so? But would you then notice it? Thanks, Trafford09 (talk) 10:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello again :-) Yes, I do love queries - strange, I know :-)
Re, "Resolved"
Like many things on Wikipedia, there are no fixed rule or protocol - so the simple answer is, "it's up to you".
Personally, I think that yes, it would be neat to put a 'resolved' tag or something similar on that page. I usually use {{done}}
Re, talk pages
Again, not strict rules, but there are conventions. To contact a single user, create a new section on their talk page, check back for replies, and add further comments at the end of that same section, indented.
It's easier to follow if you reply to questions underneath them, indented - otherwise the conversation can be split across two talk pages, which becomes confusing. If you're responding on a page other than the users' talk, it's best to post a quick extra note on their talk saying 'I've replied here' - or put {{talkback|yourusername}}. Yes, some uers do monitor pages, but not all - best not to assume. For example, I don't watchlist the talk pages of users I speak to, because I've got over 1000 items in my watchlist, and it's unworkable.
If your page relates to an existing topic, then yes, you could post in that section. The only problem with that is, will the user notice the comment mid-way on their talk page? They should do; if they don't, you could prod them. I only post in sections when it's a continuation of a conversation - if it's a new comment about an old matter, I tend to start a new section to make the discussion clearer.
I hope this answers your questions; you should also read WP:TALKPAGE and WP:ETIQ.
It certainly makes sense: I think it will work out but am in need of a break at this time of the week.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 14:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
A couple of tips;
It's easier if you reply to things within the same section, indented with a colon, like I have here. It avoids conversations being split over several pages. If you reply on your own talk page, drop a short note on their talk page to tell them you've replied - or you can use {{talkback|yourusername}}, which I'm going to do on your page now.
Although it is noted in the helpme template, you may not be aware that the talk to us live thing really works; there's several people, including myself, sitting there all the time, more than happy to help users with any Wikipedia questions. Pop in and say "hi" some time.
I have made 46 edits and have been a user for more than four day, and I am still not auto confirmed. What is the deal?
--WhiteHandofSauramon (talk) 18:08, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Deal is, apparently, a lovely little town in Kent.
Regarding your autoconfirmation, I note that your account was created at 23:26, 23 March 2009. As it is now 19:18, 27 March, the 4 days have not yet elapsed. Please be patient. Thank you. -- Chzz ► 19:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Help
We thought you might be interested in WikiProject Notability. Please join the WikiProject and help us to clear the backlog of articles.
Thanks again for your comments. I'd greatly appreciate it if you'd send a couple appropriate people in the direction of this problem. I did read the guidelines you suggested and see why you suggested them. And no, I didn't have any trouble not taking it the wrong way. The trees, the trees are blinding me and I can't see the forest! Will in China (talk) 21:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Question
How did you put the "Leave me a message" and "Emergency Wikipedia Shutdown" buttons on your talk page?
--WhiteHandofSauramon (talk) 22:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank-You
The Guidance Barnstar
I just wanted to say thank-you for all the help you have given me. You are an asset to wikipedia. Xtian1313 (talk) 23:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
chzz i left wiki 4 4hrs & redpen reverted every single 1 of my edits on various pages
Chzz - can you see my attempt, after your help, I made at getting an image into Yves Miéville? What have i done wrong?? Dribblingscribe (talk) 07:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Well, Image:Yves.JPG doesn't seem to exist; did you upload that file, or find it? Perhaps you've spelt the name wrong or something? I can't find it. -- Chzz ► 08:14, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
No. I didn't upload. How do I?Dribblingscribe (talk) 08:17, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Aha! That would help :-) See WP:IMAGES#Uploading_images for a guide - it's pretty easy, just make sure you get the licencing info correct - and I think someone else gave you an image that you can copy that from. Let me know if you have trouble. -- Chzz ► 09:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but we cannot just steal a picture from a copyright website and add it to an article.
The picture will be deleted very soon; I've already removed it from the article, to avoid Wikipedia being sued for a breach of copyright.
Sometimes it is possible to find a picture with a suitable licence on the internet - I spent about an hour trying to find a free to use picture of Yves Miéville, but I couldn't; I checked some French websites (with the help of another user who translated), but there were no copyright free images.
Therefore, I've written an email to the club, seeking their permission to use a picture. If they will allow it, they will send the email back with a notice of copyright release. I can then forward that permission to Wikimedia Foundation, and we can add the picture to the article.
I hope you understand; as always, if you have any questions, please ask.
No worries, if you ever want a second opinion give me a shout. -- Chzz ► 19:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for advice
I understand what you have shown me but am not doing it yet: my thoughts about communication with other editors are unpredictable and things would not work well if you had to research the preferences of all those editors. I may not be doing much editing after today so anything could happen to what I have done recently.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 03:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
OTRS Permission
Hey Chzz,
I never found the new permission you asked me to keep an eye out for. Did it ever get a follow-up or have given up on trying? Regards, Ciell (talk) 12:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for keeping an eye out; I haven't heard anything further - odd; I'll send him another email now. -- Chzz ► 19:21, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Please could you read my talk from other Admin
Please could you read my talk from other Admin!
Per other admin's advise, I edit it in my sandbox.
Should'nt have copyright issue. If really have it, I will fix it. But dont delete again!
Otherwise, it is self-contradictory for your admins. It won't comply with the real spirit for Wikipedia.
The other user advised you to develop your article in your sandbox. However, nobody advised you to steal copyright material. The use of copyright material is not acceptable anywhere on Wikipedia, whether it be in your user area or elsewhere.
Please do not attempt to add any more copyright material to Wikipedia.
I found your review to be unusual in two respects. You were willing to do a lot of the cleanup legwork. Usually a reviewer just makes a list and says do it. You did a lot of stuff yourself. This made it easier for me, but it is not necessary. However, I wish more reviewers would do so. Secondly, you passed the article with many things undone. While you have an article at GACoh, you have a captive audience. Often, there is no intention of taking the article to the next level. Thus, once you pass it the article will sit with all the problems. I have intention of taking this to WP:MILHIST A-Class review once the WP:GTC nomination is completed (if not before). I will attempt to address your changes before taking it there, so that is not a problem here. However, generally, I frown upon letting a GA pass with many suggestions unresolved. Try to encourage the editor to make the changes before passing the article. Otherwise your review was fairly standard. Overall, I consider your review to be very good.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, that's useful.
I often find myself doing a lot of fixing rather than suggesting the fixes, on the basis of WP:BOLD and also because, often, it's quicker to fix something than to describe what's wrong. Sometimes it annoys me when people tell you 'such and such should be a wikilink to whatever', and the keystrokes in them telling you that could have been much more gainfully employed in making the change! However, the problem with that is, if everyone spent as much time on doing a GA review as I did on yours, the backlog would be enormous. Maybe I should, sometimes, just put a general comment saying 'the prose isn't up to the standard, please improve it and resubmit'?
I understand what you say about it being in the public eye, but feel it would be inappropriate to hold back an article from GA status pending further improvement when I freely acknowledge that the additional suggestions are merely that, and aren't a prerequisite to GA status; there is definitely a pay-off between that idea and the point you make about it stagnating, though. (In general, I mean; not as regards your article which you've explained your plan to develop).
I'm rather frustrated about an article I just put to FA. I was probably pre-emptive in putting it forward, but it received 2 very brief 'oppose' votes, and so I have very little to go on as to how to improve it. I suppose that's why, when doing your GA (and others), I'm very careful to give suggestions rather than mere complaints.
With regard to your article development, in addition to those sugestions, I did a little experimentation with the layout which you might consider. I played around with the structure, and feel it might be better structured with sections called 'Planning', 'Installation', 'Design' (and then 'restoration', as is). That might give it a more logical flow; I've put the para's in that order into User:Chzz/fount, it should give you an idea what I mean.
Good luck with it, let me know if I can do any more to help.
Cool; I'll certainly chip in to that, when I get a bit of time. Is there a deadline to that? Also, are you going over my 'suggestions'? If there's any don't make sense, ask me. Cheers, -- Chzz ► 01:27, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Unless I get a GAC on hold notice your suggestions are penciled in for the midnight hour tonight.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
I thought you said you like to make the changes instead of spending the keystrokes talking about changes that need to be made.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
I think this list may have all the citizens. You could probably google each one. I have linked three to the article already. I will probably get back to that article around 1:30. A new fire just came up.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
←←I am working on your additional comments. I have put my questions in bold.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Wow! It passed WP:MILHIST A-Class faster than any other article I have ever submitted. I think there are two or three more points left to address from the talk page discussion. I guess we can talk there again. This will be my next WP:FAC so you should be really critical.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Wow, congrats! I can do 'hyper-critical' :-) Get to you real soon. Well done mate! -- Chzz ► 21:53, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I prefer tigers on my user page to barnstars. Leave me a tiger instead.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I picked up two books at the library yesterday. I also found some vintage pictures online this morning (see the article).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Neither book makes it clear whether it is exactly 100 or more than 100. I am pretty much done with both as it relates to this fountain.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I have now nominated this at WP:FAC, please come by and paricipate in the discussion or voice your oppose/support opinion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
At one point you altered all of the Newsbank refs. Now, I am unable to open any of them. What exactly did you do?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh dear; sorry! The way they use URLs on that site is a bit odd. The reason I changed the was, when you put the original URL in, it was redirected to a different address, so I figured it was better to put the 'real' adderss in. The 'redirect' was thrown up by the FA cite checking tool. I did the change by manally visiting each on e(as flagged up in that tool) and getting the 'true' URL.
I see now that the URLs have stopped working. It's possible that the long URL has some kind of session data in it, specific to the visiting machine.
I also see that, if I use the old URL (from the diff you provided) the page has another link at the bottom, which it says, "To bookmark this article, right-click on the link below..." - I think, maybe, that would be the better link to use? Does this work for you?
I also see, now I look harder, that the ref to that first one (for example) doesn't give the date of the actual article - nor does that online source. That might be a problem for FA. I wonder if, in some cases, it might be possible to find the article via the newspapers' own website, and use that?
I don't know of a quick way to put the old versions back, no - apart from manual. I'm quite happy to do that, if you want me to.
Once again, sincere apologies; let me know what I can do to rectify it. The edits were with the best of intentions.
Please revert back to the permalinks from the bottom of the page rather than the URL that it redirects you to.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting. What do you think of the current review going on?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:17, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
(unind)
I just looked it over - haven't had time before. And I conclude that you're an extraordinarily patient person :-) Looks like you're getting there. Good luck; let me know of anything I can do. I will try to find time to review once more myself. -- Chzz ► 21:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I drove by FoT today. I am quite certain it has no more than 100 figures. I did not count up to 100, but am doubtful it has 100 figures unless about 25 of the women are holding babies. I will count figures when the weather is warmer.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Wow. I certainly applaud your enthusiasm. You'll be out there measuring it next! Great stuff. I hope the FA process isn't *too* distressing. Best wishes, Chzz ► 02:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Yesterday, a reviewer said that this will not pass without another editor reviewing the prose. Feel free to jump in.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Done
Thank you
thanks in advance,
Xtian1313 (talk) 21:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
