User talk:Dvornicsek

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Dvornicsek! I am Occono and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

--occono (talk) 21:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009[edit]

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article László Marton, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

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

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. œ ^™ 00:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. (Zaxby (talk) 01:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

What to do.[edit]

I would recommend reading through WP:COI, making sure you follow the guidelines there. Start a talk page for the article by clicking "Talk" and explain your position. Get in touch with the editors that added the notice on their talk pages. I'll try and read up more on the exact policy for you, I don't have much experience with copy-paste claims.----occono (talk) 01:11, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't panic anyway, the article isn't up for deletion so you don't have to rush to fix it. I'm not sure on policy, but I would suggest following the style and editing guides to make the article look less copy-pasted, see the notice that was added to your article, it includes links to them.----occono (talk) 01:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Always here to help :)(Zaxby (talk) 01:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

The conflict of interest concern came up and we were trying to figure out the best way to fix the article Wikipedia:Help desk#Can someone help me give better advice?. Wanted to keep you in the loop. I laid out a few options regarding the COI concern but am worried the article will do nothing without some editors actively improving it. I recommend creating your draft of the article in a subpage than asking for it to be reviewed before moving it into the main space. Does anyone have any thoughts on adding a Wikipedia:Workpages or Wikipedia:Subpages and know the ins and outs?Cptnono (talk) 13:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I made a request at the help desk to see if a user or an article specific talk subpage is best. If it is created do as much as you can and then bring it up and I'm sure we can have it reviewed and copy and pasted in.Cptnono (talk) 13:52, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'm sure your work will make this a perfectly acceptable article which will hopefully be better (Wikipedia wise) than his peers.

Reviews are OK but they should be used to describe the subject his work. Give an example of his work or style then follow it up with a quote from a reviewer.

I was actually thinking about the list of work earlier. That will probably have to be a list and there are ways to integrate images. Let me poke around and see if I can find any ideas formatting wise.

Also try looking at other biographies of dierectors to see if you can pull some inspiration layout wise. keep in mind, some articles may be poor examples of what to do. Also poke around at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Theatre. I have added that to the talk page and it moght get some more eyes on the article.Cptnono (talk) 16:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hoped I helped as best I could, good luck with the article, I'll keep an eye out on it.----occono (talk) 17:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The layouts of Julie Taymor and Mike Nichols look like an excellent base. The "Personal life" and "Career" subsections are needed. The career section will get more weight and could even be broken into further subsections. Can you summarize the highlights without the reviews?Cptnono (talk) 00:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is fantastic. You got rid of any material that jumped out as being a concern. I haven't gone through it all yet but it looked good after a quick read. There is a place for influences, reception, and some other information if you want. Wikipedia will be much more dry than a magazine but there can always be a few more lines. I'll poke around for formatting tips and see what I can do.

Also, your images do not have copyright tags. This means the one in the article or the other ones we could pull from will be gone in a couple days (Commons:Licensing). Your article has had so much stuff over the last week so apologies for what must come across completely random!Cptnono (talk) 23:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was crazy timing and unexpected! Take a look at the tutorial and let me know which license you wish to do and I will be happy to assist in getting it in correctly. Go through the checklist at the above mentioned page Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses and then Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses#Well-known licenses.Cptnono (talk) 23:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images have so many weird guidelines so don't worry about being a little lost. As the uploader, you can edit and spelling or licensing without any concern. Let me poke around and find out the best and easiest license. It will be as simple as filling in a few lines once we find.Cptnono (talk) 01:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think Template:Cc-by-3.0 will work. You need to understand: [1]. If for any reason this is a concern, scan in a less professional picture if needed. Any picture you take and license may be sent on a DVD to Africa for kids or published in a newspaper. Just keep this in mind.Cptnono (talk) 04:25, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not completely proficient in images but it looks like you can delete the flag/noticeThis and replace it with:

== {{int:license}} ==

It will render as:

Licensing:[edit]

This is what is done on a few of my favorite pages so I assume it will work just fine! I don't think I am allowed to do it or I would. Let me know if that all makes sense. See: [2] Cptnono (talk) 14:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: If you haven't yet (I haven't checked it out yet), do this to any images that are yours and I will create a commons category and then add a commons link at the bottom of the page/move them into the article.Cptnono (talk) 14:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor basically doesn't believe the images are yours. Although this spits in the face of assuming good faith in other editors, we have to be cautious to not break copyright infringement. So just to clarify, If you did not take this photos you cannot upload them. If you did then you need to tell the editor so. Here is the discussion he started. Apologies for the further hassle! Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Dvornicsek Cptnono (talk) 01:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would ask LX at the link I provided. He is probably more knowledgeable on the images and what you can do about the ones you did not actually take. I would expect it to be something like getting the original author to send in a quick email. I think it is Wikipedia:OTRS but am not sure. Although it is easy enough, is it worth bothering with it? For the ones you did take yourself, it isn't about proving a thing. The info on some of them looked off and it came to LX's attention. Simply tell him that you did take some of them and I am sure he will understand. Don't forget to respond at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Dvornicsek! Thanks for the honesty on it and I am sorry if I gave you the wrong impression on copyrights :( .Cptnono (talk) 02:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few little things. For example: "He is known for.." You need to assert who. I know that sounds strange but that is wording that jumps out at some editors. Minor, though.

Some editors might frown on the stacking of images while some lists do have it. I actually did some looking around and might format it into a table so keep it all in.

I would still like to see a short personal life paragraph. This would give some background on the biography.

Influences and the like would be interesting in the career section if you want to spend the time.

Most importantly: I was having a discussion with an admin regarding editing and conflicts of interest. The guidelines do not directly prohibit you from editing the article and you have demonstrated that you can do it without being overly promotional. The guidelines say you editing should be avoided and in practice warnings and blocks occur frequently over the concern. Be cautious but I don't expect there to be a concern if you make some edits to the article. I'll keep an eye out and assist so we should be fine. As always, let me know if you need anything at all or have any questions.Cptnono (talk) 20:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also just realized we are short on sources. We desperately need coverage from books and newspapers to assert notability. I can do all of the formatting for this since it is a pain but if you could forward over any links it would be appreciated.Cptnono (talk) 20:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Dvornicsek Cptnono (talk) 21:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's looking good now! I removed copy-paste from the sandbox :)----occono (talk) 03:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. There are a bunch of minor rules to follow on wording. I'm sure it is fine. I'll fix anything if it jumps out. 2. We will leave personal info out. Keep in mind that someone else can include it at anytime if they source it. It is a Wikipedia biography so as long as it is not libelous it is fair game. It is a Wikipedia biography so as long as it is not libelous it is fair game. I assume it won't be included by someone else but you never know. 3. Influences: I saw another article (don't recall who) that discussed a directors mentors. If this isn't important or applicable we don't need it. 4. One of the interesting things about Wikipedia is that there are very few articles that are "finished" but you have made a great base that may grow or stay as is. You can make additions in the article itself if you want. Just be cautious. 5. I don't mind doing the refs at all. 6. Don't worry about any table formatting or anything for now. Reply on the link above about the images so there are no concerns.Cptnono (talk) 05:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I already removed the tags from the main article. The only one left is the "under construction" to give everyone a heads up to discuss any changes on the talk page. I lean towards keeping the works list as is for now.Cptnono (talk)

Copy and pasted in. I have not gone through it all but don't see any glaring concerns at a glance. I am looking for the book online. Do you have a link?Cptnono (talk) 20:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an ISBN or are these brochures? Are his works listed?Cptnono (talk) 20:55, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning! I received a note here regardingh my permission request: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Uncle_Vanya_Soulpepper.JPG I am not quite sure: what is it that I need to do? Thank you, if you could just please clear it for me. 208.124.200.218 (talk) 13:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I did not see the email but it looks like it needs to be resent with:

  * Please copy the URL of this file in the email to assist OTRS volunteers to find it.
  * Do not send emails containing only the text "OTRS pending", as this is not of any use. (Provide an explanation of permission granted)

If the email was sent with the above done it might be just a place holder until an OTRS volunteer has a chance to review it.Cptnono (talk) 01:19, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I didn't do nearly as much as you! Nice work.Cptnono (talk) 21:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're good right?[edit]

Feeling fine? :)----occono (talk) 15:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]