Jump to content

User talk:Dennis Bratland/Archive 21

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23→Archive 25

Thanks for your help with Kelly O article

Hi Dennis, Thanks for your comments on the article I created for the artist Kelly O. This is my first entry, so I could use all the advice I can get. You raised the issue that this might be a conflict of interest. But I am not the photographer, nor do I work for her. I am familiar with her work because we worked together briefly at the same newspaper, where I was a reporter and she is still a photographer. Since then, I've kept track of her work. I got back in touch to get her permission to post some of her photos to Wikimedia commons so that I could create her entry. It's not a conflict of interest to personally know the person whose page you are creating, is it? It seems like that would be potentially helpful in fact-checking biographical details and getting copyright permissions. Sarahmirk (talk) 21:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I thought you still worked for The Stranger. So no worries there.

As far as copyright, it's simply a matter of the copyright owner communicating directly that they're donating the photo to Wikimedia. So here it says "All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC". Index Newspapers is the one -- I guess Tim Keck -- who can donate the images via OTRS. Same thing with The Bold Italic, assuming they're now the copyright owner of the photo. If the photographer retains copyright, then the permission has to come from them. For example, Danielle Truckenmiller needs to email OTRS to give permission for File:Shadi Petosky.png.

I don't know if there's anything I can do to help with the notability of the Kelly O article. I searched the usual Google News for articles about her, as well as HighBeam, ProQuest, Questia, Biography in Context, Biography and Genealogy Master Index, and General OneFile and found zero articles on Kelly O or Kelly O'Neil. Pretty much everything is what is found at the Stranger, and Wikipedia needs sources that are independent of the subject to establish notability. If this were about somebody who didn't work there, then we'd could use an article about them in the Stranger as evidence of notability, because they're independent.

Note that offline sources are just as valid as online sources. If you know of a publication that has written about her which isn't indexed in one of these online databases, or any awards or recognition she has received which wouldn't normally turn up in a search, go ahead and cite them. That might be enough. WP:Notability (people) is the operative guideline here. There's also helpful advice at Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions and Arguments to make in deletion discussions.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do. I would create an article about Eli Sanders. He won a Pulitzer, right? It's all a matter of outside attention on the article's subject. And the article The Stranger (newspaper) can mention who Kelly O is and describe her body of work, even if there might not be a separate article about her. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

User talk:Lisunina Torgloc

Hello. I understand you good intentions but there is a mistake here. I assure you that I am not Europefan. Lisunina Torgloc (talk) 17:55, 16 February 2014 (UTC).

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited KTM 690 Duke, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dunlop and Keihin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Black River map

Your "Black River pre-1916 and 2013" map incorrectly labels the White/Green tributary of the Duwamish River as the Black River. The portion between Lake Washington and the White/Green-Black confluence is correctly labeled. I have removed the map from the Black River article. --Mox La Push (talk) 22:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

See Talk:Black River (Duwamish River)#Current location of river. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
I've apologized to you and Myasuda on Talk:Black River. --Mox La Push (talk) 07:14, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

motorcycle hooliganism

Hi! I noticed you undid changes that I had made to the motorcycle hooliganism article. I am new to wikipedia so I don't quite know my way around here. Could you explain your reasoning? Also, there was a note on the page that said something about "be careful how many links you add to this page". Do you know why that is there? Thanks for your help. Bali88 (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Answered at Talk:Motorcycle hooliganism#External links. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 4

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 4, February 2014

News for February from your Wikipedia Library.

Donations drive: news on TWL's partnership efforts with publishers

Open Access: Feature from Ocaasi on the intersection of the library and the open access movement

American Library Association Midwinter Conference: TWL attended this year in Philadelphia

Royal Society Opens Access To Journals: The UK's venerable Royal Society will give the public (and Wikipedians) full access to two of their journal titles for two days on March 4th and 5th

Going Global: TWL starts work on pilot projects in other language Wikipedias

Read the full newsletter


MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:59, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

deletion of external links - Bill Van Tichelt

Dennis, I did not put most of the links in, however having read the guidelines that don't seem appropriate. I will go back in and use as source material the couple that I think are helpful. thanks, holly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclonehol (talk • contribs) 17:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Gyrobike

Hi Dennis,

Thanks for bringing these guidelines to my attention - I was aware of Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and will continue to ensure it is adhered to in future edits.

Best, Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Jyrobike (talk • contribs) 15:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dennis,

Am I able to pick your brains, quickly? Gyrobike have recently rebranded as Jyrobike, and I'm looking to set up a new page accordingly. Is this in line with Wikipedia's guidelines? From what I can gather, I should be bold and add the page, but just wanted to get your thoughts first. I'd intend to have a new page for Jyrobike, and set a redirect from the current Gyrobike page. This reflects the rebrand and what is henceforth the official product name.

Thanks, Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Jyrobike (talk • contribs) 10:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Done. I appreciate that you held back and discussed this first. I would encourage you to continue to not edit Jyrobike yourself but rather stick with making edit suggestions at Talk:Jyrobike or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling. You will avoid COI issues and lots of bad blood that way. But please do edit other articles on subjects where you don't have a close connection. Thanks! --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:33, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Deleted References for Mass finishing and a speedy deletion notice for Autophoretic coating

Hello Dennis,

You just contacted me about these two issues, and I wanted to quickly get back to you so you don't think I am some kind of bot. As for the reference to Mass finishing, I added that there because there was no talk about the types of media used in that kind of process. Upon review, I am okay with your deletion, but I would like to place that same reference in place of the final reference for media types on the same page because every time I click on it I get a 404, and my reference addresses the source. As to the speedy deletion, I want to first begin by apologizing about that. I thought that the page I was sourcing was not under copyright because it was under the blog explanation section of that site. When I got your notice I checked again, and I noticed it. I will gladly rewrite the page so it does not violate any copyright issues. I was looking around for a long while trying to find a source for Autophoretic coating, so it would be a shame if it got taken down because I missed something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Russelled (talk • contribs) 21:28, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


Quiet reflection

I've sent a message restored about archived text. Shouldn't remedial words (such as an expression of regret) be proffered before burying a live issue as though it were dead? Arrivisto (talk) 09:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

See WP:OWNTALK. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:25, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Being civil on Filipino-topic pages

I do try. Have you seen how these pages are written and maintained? There is terrible English grammar, deliberate untruths, no references, no citations, and nothing, but angry trolls. Filipino culture, history, religion, civics, etc. are a major hobby of mine. I would like to see these pages improved. Especially since many people know little about these topics. There needs to be some more policing on these pages. And not towards myself. Cheers. Presidentbalut (talk) 05:15, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zenith Motorcycles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cork, Ireland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Motorcylce Rallys

Hi Dennis,

I am curious about the deletion of content on the Motorcycle Rally page. The edits were made to include updated information relevant to the topic. The page lists a very small number of Motorcycle Rallies and does not include some major rallies that have been around for a very long time and attract 250,000 + attendees. I added a few as I feel they are relevant and because the few rallies listed do not represent the different types of rallies.

Also, I added a link to the word "bands" in the entertainment section, this is not an external link. It was going to a Wikipedia page on Bands. Would you please help me with this? I am new to Wikipedia and although I have read the suggested materials, I don't understand why these edits were undone.

Thank you in advance for your time,

24.99.49.178 (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)S. Johnson

You should find reliable sources and cite those. If you can't find good sources that are independent of the subject, then that means the information doesn't belong on Wikipedia. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, if I add outside sources such as interviews, reviews, online articles, would that suffice? I would like to enter this correctly, the Full Throttle Saloon has a Wikipedia page for the TruTV show and is also on the TruTV Wikipedia page, it lists the attendance and is a rally. Leesburg Florida has been having annual bike weeks for 18 years, adding a link to Wikipedia page "bands" seems appropriate since all rallies have bands performing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.49.178 (talk) 17:59, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Assuming you are referring to the business links? from the guidelines it looked appropriate. I had to finish my edits as I had made many changes between you making changes. Here is what I used as my guidelines for the edits.

What can normally be linked "Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, website, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any. See Official links below."

would you prefer I create separate pages and then link from there for each business?

I went ahead and removed the business links. Lots of editing needed to be done on the page. Found it in a very out of date state. Lots of history to add as well. Will work on it as I get time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.25.19 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 27 March 2014‎

First, see WP:ELPOINTS. External links don't go in the body of the article, they go either in footnotes or at the end, in a very limited external links section. Second, links to company web sites aren't helpful. We need independent sources to verify facts in articles, so you'd want to add footnotes to sources other than the companies, like quality newspapers, magazines, books and journals. See How to cite sources and Identifying reliable sources. Remember, Wikipedia is not a directory, so we do not have any need for a list of websites of companies in a neighborhood. Featured Articles like Westgate-on-Sea, Caversham, New Zealand, Prairie Avenue or Stephens City, Virginia give examples of what an article like this should look like. It isn't a shopping guide or tourism guide.

And creating separate pages for each business would be very discouraging, since they don't meet the notability criteria in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), so they'd be deleted right away. Just keep in mind that the businesses are not the main subject here, unless third party sources provide substantial material to justify it. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dennis,

The article on CorelDRAW is quite old and needs to be updated. In the meantime, the least that we can do for people out there who would like to learn more about CorelDRAW is to point them to the most comprehensive and up-to-date version of the product documentation, which will give them an idea of all product features. The three links that I provided point to the most complete, up-to-date, and free source of information about CorelDRAW. I provided links to three different resources, so people can decide what resource they would like to use: PDF, HTML, full manual, or quick start guide (Some people may prefer to look at the quick start guide, some people may prefer the HTML-based help, some people may decide to print out the full PDF and read it.) The product page and the official website do not contain links to all these resources, so I see a lot of value to provide the links in one place. I would greatly appreciate if you could revert the changes. If you still think that providing three links is too much, I'd like to provide at least one.

Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.46.204.206 (talk) 12:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

The fact that the page is out of date isn't really relevant to the external links policy. if you read External links, and What Wikipedia is not, you'll see that we don't want collections of links, and articles should not try to be a directory or search engine, and how-to advice is not part of an encyclopedia. WP:ELOFFICIAL makes clear that more than one official site is not desirable. If you look at comparable Featured articles, like Scene7, Microsoft Security Essentials, or Opera (web browser), you'll see that the very best articles on software should tell what it is, it's history, social context, etc, but not get into how you use it, and they are not directories of related links. One link to the main site is sufficient to lead users to documentation. And if they want alternative documentation, they'll use Google, per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to JA Prestwich Industries may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • projectors]]. The [[Bioscope]] projectors for the [[Warwick Trading Company]] and [[Charles Urban]]) were produced by the company in the early part of the 20th century.<ref>[http://www.victorian-
  • This use of the JAP extended into motor racing after World War II]; most were used in specialist UK lightweight formulas, or more extensively in [[Formula 3]] racing

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:27, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

You undid my spelling correction. No problem.

Hi Dennis, I am James Blow (Jwblow). I know that in the world of off-road motorbikes, those tyres are called KNOBBLY TYRES and not KNOBBY TYRES. Maybe that is a reflection of UK English as opposed to US English. You can see from my spelling of 'tyres' that I know UK English. I don't mind if you reject my suggestion.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwblow (talk • contribs) 19:30, 31 March 2014‎

I checked the OED. It's not British spelling. Knobbly is just an affectation. Some guys think it's funny to say it that way, that's all. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Ok - very interesting. I wasn't trying to be funny. It seemed to me like a mistake. I did a little experiment. In Google Search I typed in 'KNOBBLY' and the options 'KNOBBLY KNEES' and 'KNOBBLY TYRES' were suggested. I then typed in 'KNOBBY T' and the option 'KNOBBY TIRES' was suggested. This confirms my suspicion that UK usage is typically 'KNOBBLY' in this context, whereas in the US the term 'KNOBBY' may be more common. [Apologies - My comment was unsigned because I didn't know about signing.]188.221.103.215 (talk) 01:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Garbage in citation parameters

Please stop putting garbage in citation parameters. For example "date= 29 May 2003 {{subscription required|via=General OneFile" is not a valid date. The permissible parameters for the Citation template to describe when a subscription is required are described at Template:citation/doc#Subscription or registration required. If you feel it is necessary to mention that you read the article online even though you can't give a URL, do so after the end of the citation template, but before the tag that closes the reference (</ref>).

I don't know if it is your intent, but the practice of putting information in any old template parameter just so long as the output looks ok is frowned upon. This produces false metadata. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Sorry, but metadata is a lower priority than displaying useful information to readers. The point of the template is explained at Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I sympathize. I have access to a database called Gale, which also ends up mentioning the OneFile service. But if I copy the URL where the article can be viewed, and try it in a different computer, it asks for a userid and password. My library gives me a different access method, and nobody seems to know what userid and password to give in response to the interruption.
I asked about what, if any, parameter to use at Template talk:Citation. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Dennis,

RE: A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. Please kindly clarify what you mean by providing arguments and examples from the article. Please provide examples why you think that the text that was added appears biased and not neutral.

RE: This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Could you please clarify what you mean by providing arguments and concrete examples from the article, so people know what to improve. Providing detailed and accurate information on a topic doesn't mean that the information is an advertisement.

RE: Features by version section > New Features in X7 (last row in table) Quote from the Wikipedia Dispute resolution guidelines: "When you find a passage in an article that is biased or inaccurate, improve it if you can; don't delete salvageable text. For example, if an article appears biased, add balancing material or make the wording more neutral." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution) The text that I added to the article was deleted with the argument that the text was copied and pasted from the press release document. Moreover, the text added by another contributor (i.e., the list of new features for X6) was deleted. That text must have been in the article for at least 2 years and I followed its logic when I added the information about the new features in X7. I admit that the text that I added was based on the press release document, but the text contained a list of new features, so I didn't think it was appropriate to paraphrase or modify the list. Instead of deleting the text, the editor could have suggested that I add a citation (as per the Wikipedia Citing sources guidelines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources: "Citations are used to identify the reliable sources on which an article is based." )

RE: External links section Three of the links that I added in the External links section were removed. I explained my rationale behind including the links to different sources of information about CorelDRAW. Here's the explanation once again: The article on CorelDRAW is quite old and needs to be updated. In the meantime, the least that we can do for people out there who would like to learn more about CorelDRAW is to point them to the most up-to-date version of the product documentation, which will give them an idea of all product features. I provided links to three resources, so people can decide what resource they would like to use: PDF, HTML, full manual, or quick start guide. Some people may prefer to look at the quick start guide, some people may prefer the HTML-based help, some people may decide to print out the PDF and read it when they are offline. I see a lot of value to provide the links in one place. I would greatly appreciate if you could revert the changes. If you still think that providing three links is too much, I'd like to provide at least one.

Please respond. I kindly ask you to reconsider putting back at least one of the links. Please provide arguments why you wouldn't do that. 'Excessive links to the same domain' is not an argument if the links add value to an article.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.46.204.206 (talk) 14:06, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

This discussion is over at Talk:CorelDRAW#CorelDRAW X7-related changes. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hey, there - thanks for your help on the Kent categories -- I'm still learning, so I do appreciate the support of the community! Also, I am trying to update the logo to Delphi Automotive's page, as it is outdated and not he current file. Could you help with some instruction?KristiAtDelphi (talk) 14:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! To upload a new file, click "Upload a new version of this file" under File history at File:Delphi logo.jpg. But the logo at delphi.com looks the same to me. Where is the new logo? Also, please carefully read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, if you haven't already. It's very difficult to edit articles where you have a close connection to the subject. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for you tireless patrolling of the List of fastest cars. I really appreciate it. NealeFamily (talk) 22:32, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Next Seattle meetup on Tuesday, April 8

See Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle. --Pine✉ 07:39, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Massimo Tamburini may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • <ref name=DePrato2014>[{Citation |titl=e Massimo Tamburini; Remembering one of the greatest innovators in motorcycle
  • }}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:44, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Massimo Tamburini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Benelli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dennis_Bratland/Archive_21&oldid=1144614159"