This is an archive of past discussions with User:Chzz. 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.
I cant tell from your message "Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did with this edit to Second Battle of Al Faw, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Chzz ► 14:57, 18 July 2010 (UTC)" if you are a Bot, or a person? Please illuminate us...Simbagraphix (talk) 16:28, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I am a real person, Simbagraphix. Bots should have 'bot' at the end of their username, such as ChzzBot (talk·contribs). I used a standard template message, one of the 'warning' templates, see WP:WARN.
Both the Second Battle of Al Faw, and the First Battle of Al Faw needed rewriting, if there are no references for the most part, why cant I rewrite and clean up what is there and build it up till I find some basic references I can use? Simbagraphix (talk) 12:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC).
I understand what you are saying, but the responsibility for references on any edits you make is your own. So yes, the current content is awful, but adding further unreferenced info won't help, and Wikipedia articles are 'live' - so if I hadn't picked it up, someone else would, and that could keep happening. Any unreferenced additions may be removed, and you could get warning messages leading to a block.
If you are rewriting a section, you could make a copy of it in your own userspace, work on it there, and - once it has appropriate references - copy it back. Take a look at User:Simbagraphix - I just made it, and put these links;
They will be red links for now, but you can click them and create them; your own 'working area' pages. You can also, of course, edit your user page and change the names or add more.
Yes, I tried adding references but they didnt work, so I am looking to see what I did wrong. So any help or examples is appreciated. I have been working on the Persian Gulf area, and thus came across the Iran-Iraq battles which need upgrading and rewriting, as they are almost useless in their present form....Thanks for the help Simbagraphix (talk) 12:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
OK, so, sounds like an ideal case for working in userspace 'sandbox' areas. I added reference help; if you have any trouble with it, please ask. Chzz ► 12:46, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
That amendment is not neutral; that it is a "new insight" and "could shed new light" is opinion, not fact. So, I put the original suggestion back and left the alternate there too, and we'll see what the reviewers say. Chzz ► 03:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
wik article on light front holography
Chzz I changed the proposed text to follow closely the wiki article. Thanks for your comment.
OK Thanks. I just remember some admins giving a user a hard time for blanking his talk page a few years ago. Sorry about the confusion. Heavydata (talk) 10:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
You just helped me
What I am doing with the Mestizo artcle is breaking it up into two articles. The Mestiço (Brazil) article needs to be different because they are two different words, in two different languages, with two different meanings. What I did is copy the information (yes it is original research) from the Mestizo article relevant to the Portugese word Mestiço and then created the Mextiço (Brazil) article out of that. The Sri Lanka Mestiço article needs to be separate as well becauese it too is different. Please put my Mextiço (Brazil) article back. I am working to improve both the Mestizo article and the Mextiço article as well. I have been working on these articles for only 10 minutes and I feel as if I have already been sabatoged. Chicaneo (talk) 12:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there. I do understand, but, Wikipedia is 'live' - all the time - and so any article must meet the basic requirements, and must have references. I have copied the draft version to User:Chicaneo/Mestiço (Brazil), where you can work on it at your leisure. Once it is ready to be made a live article, it can simply be moved over. Thanks again, Chzz ► 12:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
(from your comment at Bridgeplayer's talkpage) You do realize that this goes farther back than your simple discussion, right? Did you bother not only to read the rationale I had for the RfD, but also took a look at this page? Or did you simply ignore my rationale?
I'm sorry; I do think I've tried to explain as best I can. Mostly, that PROD does not apply to redirects. In addition, that there is no point deleting redirects unless there is a compelling reason to do so, because it does not help improve Wikipedia, and for that reason, I consider lengthy discussion of it to be a waste of time. Chzz ► 18:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
is sara Palin email hack article supposed to be deleted?
I looked on the sara palin email hack talk page and it said that the article had be nominated for deletion. Is seems that the results are to delete. Why does it still exist ? Constitutionguard (talk) 08:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
The deletion discussion was back in Sept 2008, and at that time, the article was deleted.
Subsequently, the article was re-worked considerably. The current incarnation is totally different from the one that was chosen for deletion. Any user could, if they wished, suggest deletion of the current article - with good reasons, of course - however that article is on probation - see Talk:Sarah Palin/Article probation - which means that it is wise to discuss any potentially controversial issues on the articles talk page before taking any action. Best, Chzz ► 13:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Why is the redirect of david kernell's name allow to stand ? If the article is deleted, should the redirect be deleted as well ? Seems they are still violating policy, and branding david kernell as the only one that entered her email. Also what about all the other redirects of his name ? Constitutionguard (talk) 22:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
How would one re-work the article and put it up again legally ? Constitutionguard (talk) 22:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
The redirect seems valid to me, because if you simply search Google for that name, the vast majority of the hits concern the scandal; I do not think that David Kernell would be notable in his own right, as an article about him might fail WP:BLP1E, so it seems appropriate to have an article about the events, not the individual. That was also the consensus view shown in the recent discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Kernell. The following comes from WP:BLP1E with my own bold;
Merely being in the news does not imply someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.
If you believe that an appropriate article about Kernell could be written, I would suggest making a user space draft, and working on it there, but as it has already been deleted several times, I recommend submitting it for a review rather than making it live yourself, perhaps via the WP:AFC process. If it could avoid BLP1E and show appropriate notability independent of that specific incident, that'd be fine; I have no idea if there is appropriate significant coverage for that or not. Chzz ► 23:09, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Chzz thank you for your advice, are there any wiki members that like to take over new articals from new members? to make them right.
English Jim (talk) 13:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
It might be possible to make a short article, but, you do need those essential references to several independent, reliable sources, to show notability. That is, for example, 3 or more newspaper articles actually about the organization. That is the minimum requirement for any live article - general notability. Without that, it is not possible for anyone to create an accepted live article. You'd need to demonstrate exactly why this particular organization is notable enough to warrant inclusion.
You could list it in WP:RA - requested articles - but there is a huge backlog there. Of course, you could always help out by seeing if you could write any of them... Chzz ► 14:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
I would just like to say thanks for helping me with Wikipedia from when I first joined to now. It's been really helpful and I've learned a lot. So, thanks. And I'm sorry if I've said this before, but you're great. Chevymontecarlo16:13, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Dear Chzz, I wanted to thank you for all of your AFC work with this, The Articles for Creation barnstar. From helping out users on IRC to helping me when I was newer with AfC, your dedication to AfC and to the wiki as a whole is truly inspiring. The primary reason for me giving you this barnstar now is your recent work re-reviewing all of the articles that were declined (or accepted) as a hoax. Thanks again for all that you do, ~Gosox(55)(55)02:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
{{tb|JohnCD|List of words having different meanings in Spain and Latin America}}
Re: NaomiTal/LettyEisenhauer
Hi Chzz-Thanks so much for your very thorough and very helpful explanation re: Letty Eisenhauer! I think I understand now. I tried clicking on the live chat link, but it took me to what looked like the end of the internet, so I'm leaving this note here. If I have more questions, I'll let you know. Thanks again!NaomiTal (talk) 00:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Heh, OK, that's fine too :-)
The live chat is good, but the interface looks scary - you only need to put in any nickname, and click 'go' - then you're in. It's really good. But anyway, yes, feel free to ask anything here, too. Cheers, Chzz ► 00:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Yep, the deletion makes total sense. Letty looks good up there, hope she stays around. I have a couple other articles pending in article submission limbo which should be ok'ed soon (I hope!). This is my first week writing articles, but if I'm doing well, I'd love to skip that extra submission process for the next couple of articles I write and just post them directly. Judging by my contributions thus far, do you think my articles will make it out in the wild on their own? Also, I couldn't tell if I was "autoconfirmed" or not, if that's even the word I mean...am I?NaomiTal (talk) 01:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I will look at those for you now, and let you know.
Re. auto-confirmed - yes, you should be; you only need to have made 10 edits, and the account must be 4 days old; you've made 112 edits, and you registration on 14 June. You can check, by clicking "my preferences" at the top-right; it should say;
This award is given to you for helping out Motto of the day. Thanks to your effort, MOTD has brilliantly and successfully passed the most difficult period of the year. In fact, there are mottoes scheduled until the end of the summer. For this reason MOTD would like to express heartfelt thanks to you for your support. We appreciate your efforts in further helping the project! – delivered by Simply south on behalf of Wikipedia:Motto of the day18:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Pearson Canada/Bio Cutting Edge PPT: Request for Permission
Hello John,
I am coordinating permissions for a set of Powerpoint slides to accompany a collection of essays to be published by Pearson Canada.
I have marked the request as 'declined' for now, but don't worry, you can always resubmit it - you can still edit the declined submission.
I've tried to explain why in the top of the declined page.
In addition, I suggest that you might benefit from editing some other articles, to gain a broader experience in Wikipedia, which would then put you in a better position to work on that one. Perhaps you could join Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment, for example.
This is the editor I was mentioning^^, I have been helping them in help-channel. At least I think Hadianm, 86.53.148.2 , and Niirvan are all one person.
It certainly looks like Niirvan (talk·contribs), Hadianm (talk·contribs) and 86.53.148.2 (talk·contribs) are all the same person. The general rule is, one editor, one account. Using different accounts or editing while not logged in can make people think you are trying to mislead people - I don't think you are, but to avoid any problems, please be very careful. Make sure you always log in, and if you do have two accounts, close one down.
I'm sorry to have to write all these warnings and cautions, but they are very important. I hope that I will be able to help you further in the future. Best, Chzz ► 12:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
This article's names contains Shaheed which's a title.The real name of scholar,about which the article stands is Syed Ahmad Barelvi,which is redirects to Syed Ahmad Shaheed.I want to move the article to it proper name which is Syed Ahmad Barelvi,but i can't as it's a redirect.Will you delete This redirect and move the page to the deleted title?
Thanks!
OK - I understand now about "Shaheed", I think. Barelvi presumably refers to the Barelvi movement? So, should that definitely be in the title - ie should it be "Syed Ahmad Barelvi" or just "Syed Ahmad"? But Syed Ahmed redirects to Syed Ahmed Khan; perhaps it should be a disambiguation page instead?
I see that in some (most?) books, they use "Syed Ahmad Barelvi", so if you think that is the most correct, I think the title can be changed to that; please let me know. Cheers, Chzz ► 18:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
No,no,it have nothing to do with so called "barelvi" movement,rather he formed a un succesfull hetrodox movement.The reason is that he was born near Bareli,India,so his name becaune Syed Ahmad Barelvi,Shaheed was honorific term added after his death in a terrorist activity.
OK, right, so some 'disambiguation' page/pages might help.
Let me check I now have this right; this person, currently in Syed Ahmad Shaheed, is called that a) because "Shaheed" is an honorary title, and b) because they come from the place Raebareli.
In that case, certainly they should not have the "Shaheed" part in the title. I'm not sure if they should have the "Barelvi" part in either, as it is not part of their actual name; if that is the common title used for them - per Wikipedia:Common name. I've seen both used in book searches, so I am not sure. If not, then the article title (theoretically) should be just "Syed Ahmad", but then because there are several possibilities for that name, we should disambiguate it in some way using parentheses, e.g. "Syed Ahmad (Raebareli)" or "Syed Ahmad (Islamic scholar)" or something.
My reasoning here is, e.g. someone called "John Smith" - we would not call the article "John Smith London" - we might call it "John Smith (London)" or "John Smith (doctor)".
Tnx a lot! I've already made some corrections according to Your advice!))) The administration said, that I have a week to make all the neccesary corrections. If not, they gonna delete it((((((((((( So, I would be grateful fir help in finding those reliable sources, 'cause you know, I'm not VERY expirienced in english (I live in Belarus), and now unfortunately I'm not able to differ these reliable sources from the others. Thanks anywaY!))) And by the way, in the article I provided the references, that other users advised me and that they considered these references to be reliable. Of course, it would be sad, if the article will be deleted, but anyway I will tell the guys form Iron Mask, that I did everything possible. Tons of TNX!))Dzimozz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:31, 25 July 2010 (UTC).
If the article is deleted, that isn't the end of things; you can ask for a copy in your user-space, keep working on it, and possibly make it live again when it has been improved. There is no deadline.
For "Reliable sources" - it is really common sense; would you "trust" the website(s) to be accurate? We like references to actual publications - newspapers, magazines - because those have editorial control. User-generated content, such as reviews on blog-style websites, are not reliable sources.
If you ever want to check if a specific site is, or is not, a "reliable source" you can ask on the reliable sources noticeboard".
If the band have appeared in any printed magazines or newspapers, that would help a lot. Note, they do not have to be in English, and they do not have to be online. For example,
Chzz was born in 1803. <ref> "Інтэрв'ю з Chzz" (Interview with Chzz), Page 17, Звязда, April 1st 2010 </ref>
...if that were true, it would be OK as a reference.
If you cannot find enough coverage yet, then it may be deleted. It might not be notable yet. But you can ask for a copy, and if there are some articles in newspapers/magazines later, you could improve it.
TNX a lot! I know for sure, that Iron Mask has coverage in the japanese edition of Burrn! Magazine. There the band's brand new album "Shadow of the red baron" is pictured on the INNER cover. Unortunately, I cant, find the reference for inner cover. As I understand, I can mention this magazine as a reliable source?Dzimozz (talk) 17:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
It is a reliable source, but you'd need to actually read the mag, and refer to facts it states. You can't just reference it arbitrarily because you know that there is a picture of them; you'd have to use it for fact(s) in the article. The point is, verifiability - that the person reading the article should be able to "check the facts" if they want to, by finding whatever publication we refer to. So, if for example you reference that magazine, then a reader could get hold of a copy (perhaps through a library or whatever) and check that what you state is in the mag...do you get the idea? I'm not saying that they will check it, but it has to be possible for them to check it. If you obtain a copy of some magazine, and you use it as a reference, we will mostly assume good faith, and 'trust you' that the facts you reference are in the publication. People might check it, they might not...but you need to be honest about things. You can't reference something that you have not, yourself, read. Hope this helps, Chzz ► 17:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, my friend, if it's possible pls express your point of view about my article at it's deletion page - 'cause as I understood, it's gonna be deleted anyway((((((((((((Dzimozz (talk) 19:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
First of all really thanks for your time and feedback, I was surprised when I saw the amount of work you have done on my page, Yes, both accounts are mine, I created one and changed my mind to use another id not for misleading for sure, how I can close the first one? Also I am not related to the peace centre.
OK, that's cool; the above was my starting to reply, and I got distracted by other stuff; I did intend to write a bit more.
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right. And yes, I feel a total hypocrite telling you that - because I hadn't signed my earlier response part :/ - but, like I say, I was working on it, intended to add more before letting you know I'd replied - then got distracted by other help requests!
Just make sure it is all neutral - if you stick to 'cold, hard facts' from RS, you'll be fine.
I was living in Warrington at that time, as it happens; I'm sure that the org will count as 'notable' in Wikipedia terms. Just be very careful about the conflict of interest stuff; have a read of WP:BESTCOI. Good luck with it, and feel free to ask for help at any time. Chzz ► 14:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
David Kessler page
Hi Chzz,
I have edited the 'David Kessler' article so that is has more reliable independent sources. There are now 7 sources, only 1 is still his primary. The article's status is now held. Please reconsider it for acceptance on Wikipedia.
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
First, note that it may be changed from 'hold' to 'declined' after 24 hours or so; that does not matter at all, it is just procedural; you can carry on editing it, and you can always ask for a review later - the easiest way probably being just to ask me, here. There is no deadline.
There are a few remaining concerns, mostly that not all the facts are verifiable. Some example to illustrate follow, but this isn't an exhaustive list - I hope they will illustrate the things that need fixing, so please reconsider all of the article, not just these, in working to improve it;
His experiences have taken him from Auschwitz concentration camp to Mother Teresa’s Home for the Dying Destitute in Calcutta. - the article on cvhp.org does not actually state these facts - Auschwitz is not mentioned, and the only part about Teresa is a quote.
often quoted as saying, “Fear doesn’t stop death, fear stops life.” - "often" is a matter of opinion; also, any direct quotations need a reliable source directly after the quote.
Re. Elizabeth Kübler-Ross, is the best-loved and most-respected authority - this is opinion, not fact; any such strong assertions must absolutely have a good, independent reliable source, or else they should be removed.
External links - I'm not convinced that some of those add information about the subject fo this article - ie 5 Common Deathbed Experiences MSN, AOL Health, www.Grief.com, www.elisabethkublerross.com - please refer to the WP:EL policy on this
So - I'm sure that this individual will pass the 'notability' requirements, just some edits are required to ensure it is all neutral and verifiable. I repeat, there is no deadline, no rush; please see if you can address those concerns, and let me know. Best, Chzz ► 14:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you (re Tony Davies)
Thank you for your help, It is much appreciated. I will make the changes and re-submit when the article is credible. Thanks again you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by P067874 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
OK, no problem - but note, the article has not yet been deleted. It is currently up for a 'deletion discussion', which will go on for at least 7 days; you are very welcome to try to fix the concerns during that time, and indeed to contribute to the discussion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Davies (Businessman).
If it cannot be fixed within that time, that isn't the end of the world either. There is no deadline on Wikipedia; if it is deleted, you can ask for a copy of it in your own userspace, and if later on you can improve it, it could be reconsidered.
My #1 tip is, to work on some other articles; Conflict of interest is a very tricky area, and if you edit some other things, you'll learn much more about the ways of Wikipedia.
Re. "examples of wikipedia pages I could look at for inspiration" - I suggest you browse through good articles or featured articles for such inspiration. Notice how they are factual, and based on independent reliable sources, with lots of references.
Thanks! However, the current version seems to be the one intended. Thanks for the feedback, and I would have appreciated that the particular user should have made concerns on the talk page before making a massive overhaul that could demote an article from featured status. I know they are going to go back and try to change things again to in good faith, but I don't want to see the article demoted (it was already barely hanging on from being nomination a few weeks ago), just due to an avid fan (per their username). Candyo3200:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I understand; don't panic though - no deadline, and all that.
I'm very impressed that you started talking to them on their talk page, and that they've entered discussions on Talk:Rihanna discography. Nice. I hope that doesn't sound condescending, it's just that common sense is so rare these days.
I do understand your concerns; at this srage though, it seems like all parties are prepared to work to a consensus, which is great.
If you have any problems, please give me a shout, here, and I'll try to help. We wouldn't want the wrong version would we? :-)
By which I mean...if it gets complicated, the article could just be fully-protected for a bit...and allow you all to fight it out discuss it on the talk page. WP:RPP if you need that, or give me a shout. Chzz ► 00:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Chzz, I am curious as to how to link articles. I have submitted two articles that are related and should be linked. How do I do that, one is an orphan article? Loreen Sherman (Loreensherman (talk) 02:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)).
Answered on user talk.
Mod
Are you a wikipedia moderator of sorts? I see you made a comment on a page I've edited, and I am worried about a second used constantly reverting back to an edited version of the page that is a BOLV and a)sometimes unsubstantiated and b)quite slanted/biased/libelous.
So, you go on a power trip in IRC, then you set my userpage to a redirect elsewhere, just because I said I wanted to re-do my userpage some? Congratulations. --ANowlin: talk06:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Answered via personal messages.
July 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User:Anowlin, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Redirecting my page to a policy, over the fact I wanted to re-do it a little? Thanks a lot. Kindly, do not modify my userpage again. --ANowlin: talk06:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
See response and details provided at HERE Even a simple Google seaach of "Frontera, Massacre, Chainsaw" turns up 60++ articles and mentions. Maybe a better citation is needed, but the facts are not in dispute. I'll change the citation and start over. Austex • Talk18:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
YOU! I saw your post at ANI and was relieved to see it was OK. Looks like I was fussing over nothing. Sorry for it. But thank you always. You are really a big help. Best regards. Oda Mari (talk) 16:26, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
No worries; as a copyright concern, I thought ANI might get a quick response. Shortly afterwards, MuZeMike kindly had a look, and at the same time I checked things myself. It does appear to need better attribution, but it isn't necessarily an 'emergency' concern - but still, in such high-profile matters, I think it is better to be safe than sorry; thanks again for highlighting it. Chzz ► 16:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, you did create an archive page - but I've moved your comment here, to my talk page. Also, I made a new section at the end...that is where you should put new comments on talk pages, at the end, and in a new section for a new discussion. Chzz ► 18:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
'Vacant' means that, for some reason, there was no current title holder - because they retired undefeated, or some other reason. He did indeed win the title...
The title became vacant May 29 when the WBO stripped lineal champion Sergio Martinez, who had claimed the lineage and two sanctioning organization belts by outpointing Kelly Pavlik on April 17. But because Martinez also holds a junior middleweight belt, and the WBO wanted a decision on which title he would defend before Martinez had made up his mind, he was stripped.[1]
That's absolutely fine; you put the message in the right place - on User talk:My76Strat - but, a) you didn't need to put {{helpme}}, and b) you should have put it in a 'new section' on his page. I've fixed that, with this edit.
I'm sure that My76Strat will see your message next time he logs in.
I am trying to figure out how to sound unbiased. That company was the first to prove its art-form in an often negative and biased world. Can you help me make it unbiased so that I can learn for the next article? The article pending is located at:
Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Buzz Foto.
You need to stick to 'cold hard facts' which come from independent, reliable sources. Maybe this will illustrate a bit;
Buzz Foto is a unique global photo agency based in Los Angeles. Founded by veteran photojournalist Brad Elterman and Henry Flores, between the two of them combined, they have 45 years experience in the photo industry.[citation needed]What sets Buzz Foto apart from their competition is their passion for their craft creating iconic and elegant imagery for the international media. The agency strives for a photograph that is alive and entertaining with the street as their background. The company only works with a tight network of trained photographers who also share the founders passion for the creation of iconic Paparazzi imagery.
In 1985, Brad Elterman authored, SHOOT THE STARS: How To Become A Celebrity Photographer[citation needed] which brought him television appearances on Oprah, CNN and The Tom Synder Show.[citation needed] The book was featured in magazines and newspapers worldwide[peacock prose].
In 1992, he co-founded Online USA, Inc.{{fact} on his kitchen table with a couple of credit cards and then went on to sell the company to Getty Images in 2000.[citation needed] CBS Market watch hailed the deal as " Deal Of The Day".[citation needed]
Sorry I did not know that I was stealing from Amazon, I was citing it when reseaqrching the book I figured I would add in their review. now I know not to ha thank you Cjones132002 (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Round Rock,Texas
The poster you removed was from the Wikkipedia page for the movie, The Rookie, and was already licensed and in use on that page. It is on Wikimedia. I did not download it from a movie site. Austex • Talk03:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but that is not correct. It is not 'licenced'.
It is a non-free image, and as such, can only be used under strict conditions, which include the need for a specific rationale for each article it is used on.
It is OK for use on the article about the movie itself - and the rationale is given on the file, File:Rookie02poster.jpg. Please look at the "Rationale for use on wikipedia in the article The Rookie (2002 film)".
However, I do not think that we can justify the use of that image in the Round Rock, Texas article; it is not directly relevant to the subject of that article, it does not add to the understanding of the topic - and also, if it is representing the place, then a free alternative could exist, therefore we cannot use a non-free image. Chzz ► 04:15, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
On the Mat from our wonderful IP friend in AfC could be a GA, if you have time to put it up for review and watch it. Maybe it'll give you a little something to work on while trying to avoid drama? If not, I'll ask around, maybe take it on myself (although I've found from professional wrestling in New Zealand that wrestling is not my thing :P). —fetch·comms20:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Best to ask around, to be honest; I have a huge list of 'things to do', I'm not short of ideas! From a quick look...yes, it does look worthwhile. I'll help if/when I can, of course. Chzz ► 12:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, a seeming contradiction here. You removed the bit about his death, citing BLP concerns, but the article was created with that bit in there. And then if there's no info about his death, it should be subject to {{prod blp}}. What's the answer? 69.181.249.92 (talk) 04:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
When I first saw it, I actually thought it might be a hoax, because the popular computer game series The Sims is produced by EA. I checked for news and other sources, and confirmed existence, but not much else; I'm not sure of the name - if it should be "EA Sims", "E.A. Simms" or some variant; sources disagree...but I'm confident that the person exists.
My first action was to remove a recent, unreferenced claim of a death. I think that was reasonable; I couldn't find any news of the death, so it was a "BLP concern" in essence.
Whether a BLP-Prod applies or not is up for debate. Possibly a normal PROD for lack of notability could apply, thus avoiding the somewhat tricky and delicate issue of trying to BLP Prod someone who the author claims has died.
Yeah, I wondered about the hoax thing too. Might want to ping the article creator about sources while you're being so proactive about this. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 05:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC) PS - I see you already have. Shoulda known. :D 69.181.249.92 (talk) 05:10, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Delivery Successful
Hello, this is an automated message to inform you that your message delivery request (Feedback) was completed successfully. Happy editing!
Hmm... Strange, it seemed to think that every page was a redirect... Seems my recent changes introduced a bug, anyway it went okay apart from that. - EdoDodotalk12:11, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
I added you to the approved users by the way, in case you need the bot again :). That means that if you log in with your TUSC account, your requests get automatically verified, and you can run the bot. - EdoDodotalk12:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
OK, ta. Does that meant that all of those worked - it made pages that didn't exist, and worked for IPs? Ie, does the 'completed successfully' indicate all were OK, and if one or more had failed for whatever reason, it'd have told me? Chzz ► 15:17, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Yup, they all worked. If one failed for any reason (page protected, in existent username, blocked user, etc.) it would have told you in this message. - EdoDodotalk15:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Two possible 'bugs' - nothing critical, but worth mentioning, I think;
It has written "Redirected here from User talk:USERNAME." on all of them, and I can't see anything wrong with the usernames provided. Oh, struck; stupid me; you knew about that, and said so above Chzz ► 16:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
When it makes a new talk page, it leaves a blank line at the top before the section heading, which leaves some whitespace at the top of the page. (Pretty trivial, but prob also easy to fix?)
The first one is already fixed, as for the second one it's not quite so see easy to fix unfortunately :(. The blank line is needed because when it isn't creating the page it needs to put in a blank line to properly separate the new section from previous ones, so to avoid that the bot would have to know if it is creating the page or not, which at the moment it doesn't. I'll look into fixing it though, but it will require a fair bit of code. - EdoDodotalk16:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Yep, understood; I've had similar troubles myself in the past.
On the + side, you might think of adding a 'feature' for new pages - O Automatically welcome users when talk page does not exist
Second bug above is fixed, and that feature has been added. See User talk:EdoDodo/5 for an example of how this looks. If you would like to change the welcome message ( you are probably know better than me what would be best for a new user :) ) feel free to do so here (that page is substituted when delivering a message to a new user), currently it's just a copy of Template:Welcome. - EdoDodotalk17:27, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
That 'welcome' is as good as any, really - well, everyone has opinions on a 'good welcome' - mine is user:chzz/w - but that one is fine. Just one thing - does it put it into a new section? I imagine not...and that often causes confusion to new users. I suggest changing the '''Welcome''' to == Welcome == as long as that won't confuse things with the bot. If welcomes are in a section, it gets users off to a good start, with 'good practice' re. sections; I find it often stops them placing help requests and suchlike at the top of their talk page instead of the end. Chzz ► 17:39, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh, also, it should stick a sig on the end of the welcome, even if it is signing as the bot; otherwise, the welcome talking about the need to sign sounds a bit hypocritical. Chzz ► 17:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Also also (sorry, but I'm sure you know only too well, bot things are never that simple) - for IP users, that 'welcome' is not appropriate; it'd have to be {{Welcome-anon}} or a variant. Chzz ► 17:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Should all be sorted. The message is now signed with the requester's name (more personal than having it signed by the bot, and gives the new user a place to ask questions), and the template will automatically identify if the user is an IP, and then substitute one of two templates accordingly. Basically the template will use the IP welcome if the username contains only numbers, this is similar to how {{Wel}} works. - EdoDodotalk18:07, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good; I'll try to give it another go some time. The only slight concern I'd have there is about users with names like our friends User:7 and User:42 etc... I'd have thought there might be some smarter way of recognizing non-registered users...but I don't know. Good stuff though. Chzz ► 18:10, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately using a template there is no way of identifying if a user is an IP or a registered user... I might write some code for it later so that the bot does it though. - EdoDodotalk18:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment on my first attempt, although encouraging I was not comfortable with the content, will reconsider (re)creating the page. Now it is tagged for deletion. I think it is better to "walk the ordinary way" with first edits before new articles etc... Thanks anyway.
OmeLuuk (talk) 21:37, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
OK...I'm not quite sure why you asked for deletion; it was fine. It was better than most articles. But anyway...that is your choice. good luck, Chzz ► 00:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Re:Harvard referencing
Hi there. Thanks for sorting them out for me. It was the first time I'd attempted to use that style of referencing so I was getting a little bit muddled. Thanks also for the explanation, it seems to be fairly straightforward once you get the hang of it. I think there's one more reference I've got to consolidate so I'll have a go in the next day or so and see if I can do it. Would it be all right to give you a shout if I get stuck? TheRetroGuy (talk) 16:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello, this is an automated message to inform you that some errors were encountered while processing your delivery request (Feedback). Please deliver the messages to the following users manually, if you wish, because the bot was not allowed to do so:
Thank you for edititng my Paul LaViolette page. I am not sure is it worthwile to put more effort to as he requested in the past to be removed from Wikipedia. I wish I knew what are the reasons?
Note, the new article was proposed for deletion [2] but I removed the proposal [3] because I think that a discussion is warranted. Best, Chzz ► 15:31, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much for all your precious help! You made me feel very welcome and comfortable on Wikipedia right from the start. I'm grateful for your support all along.
Hi, I wanted to say that the archiving on my talk page doesn't seem to be working - maybe I tampered with it or something, because there's stuff there that's 20+ days old and haven't been archived yet. So, can you please take a look? Thanks a lot, Chevymontecarlo09:42, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
OK; I think I fixed it; I don't think it had ever worked, due to an incorrect setting, probably my fault.
I set the time-period to 14 days, which was in the original request; it should work within 24 hours, so lets see. Chzz ► 17:26, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for a late thanks but i was kinda worn out yesterday. Hope will find some shots at last. Enjoy your break, but don't let us hang! Benuliak 21:39, 15 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benuliak (talk • contribs)
It is no big deal; Wikipedia should not cause personal stress, and it is doing, a bit; so, I'm stepping away - hopefully not for long. Thanks, Chzz ► 18:54, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Good to hear from you, thanks for bothering - take as long as it takes, it took me 2 years last time! With you in spirit. Nortonius (talk) 22:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
It is said The Tireless Contributor Barnstar may be awarded to especially tireless Wikipedians who contribute an especially large body of work without sacrificing quality. That being so, I see none more befitting this barnstar than you! My76Strat03:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Ditto. You did a great job archiving my talkpage and this bear has another project for you that's on the humorous side. ----moreno oso (talk) 16:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
moreno oso will be thinking about you and raiding your fridge - no charge!
Thanks, folks; these messages are appreciated. I've popped in to respond to questions/followups on my talk page, but indeed I am taking time-out to consider some things. If/when I am able to elaborate and/or return, I shall do so (or feel free to keep in touch via email). Chzz ► 19:09, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Lol at the failure to stay away completely! :P Come back soon, but only when you're ready - -en-help is not the same without you! Stwalkerster [ talk ]21:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Ever since I started on the IRC, I've seen you offer a lot of help to new and old users alike. Chzz, on behalf of all those you've helped (including me), thank you, and we hope this Wikibreak isn't forever. Come back soon man! --ANowlin: talk05:00, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Ditto here. And also know that if such an award existed, I would give you the barn itself to display the barn-stars. My76Strat05:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, too Chzz, I wouldn't have known where to begin.
Dat one is cool! Wish I'd get one mslf (on a date) ,-) Benuliak 21:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benuliak (talk • contribs)
IP user
Hi Chzz!
Sorry to hear about to hear that you're not feeling so well, I hope that you will be better soon!
I have a question for you, if you can help me I would be very grateful and happy!
I wrote an article about Angelo Keder for a couple of months ago. I remember that you accepted this article on Wikipedia (thanks for that). But yesterday someone called 'Sfan00 IMG' did something about the article... I'm not sure how to fix it back to the ordinary article which I wrote. Can you please help me with that when you are feeling well please? :)
I thought that the the article I wrote was accepted but he told me that I didn't have copyrights for the pictures. Even though I wrote down everything about the pictures I have put up on Wikipedia with name of the writer and when the newspaper was done and things like that from the beginning... I think that it's very sad for me to see my own article disappear because I was so proud of it...
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
Hi there! I am fine, thanks; a 'wikibreak' is not necessarily illness; sometimes, Wikipedia can be stressful - and I find it best, at such times to stand back - WP:NAM!
The links were commented, because on the face of it the source given seemed a little odd, Zippyshare seems to be a file sharing service, and in the past I've found that stuff sourced to such sites tends to have unclear status with regards to copyrights.
If it's a credible source, then I would normally expect it to have been published on a more obviously credible site.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:00, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
I did see your note just after you posted it. Perhaps he will come around eventually. So nice to see you again. Your wisdom, diligence, and consideration are missed when you take breaks. รัก-ไทย (talk) 00:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
DYK nomination for Way Off Broadway Dinner Theatre
Hi Chzz, really thanks a lot for your great help for my page user:silena/Eonon. It's really important and useful to me! Now I have revised my article according to your guidance, I've added the necessary verify references. Could you review again? Is it all ready for me to add an new orgnazation article?
Really appreciate your great effort! All the best!
Silena (talk) 08:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
New award (first transclusion)
The Barn itself
It is said The Barn itself may be awarded to Wikipedians whose contributions encompass the merit of numerous barnstars. That being so, I see none more befitting this barn than you!My76Strat23:37, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Chzz as your time permits can you review this WP:AFC. The new user who was inquiring at the en-help channel seemed to be an interested Wikipedian who might benefit from some of your guidance, Cheers. My76Strat03:14, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Article has now been accepted. Shoplifter (talk·contribs) has been around since 2005, 2000+ contribs, and generally appears to know what they're doing; they / you are quite welcome to ask for any specific types of help, of course. As always, Chzz ► 02:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Anyway, certain photos would be very useful. I don't know if all attended this year's European Go Championship, but I wonder if they could supply (with identifying captions):
Can you find specific photos from their website - URLs - so we can ask for them that way? P.S. Yes, good start; I'm secretly quite pleased about Blackpool too though, because I've watched 'em many times. Chzz ► 23:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Chzz, sorry for my delay. I realise this must be annoying when you've gone to the trouble of kindly approaching EurogoTV on our behalf. I've tried a couple of times to catch you on IRC to explain, but missed you. This delay on my part has been caused by [1] keeping up to date with the 400+ pages on my Watchlist (excl. user pages) - I'm sure yours is prob. thousands!, and [2] discovering Portals, & adding them to Go articles etc. which have been recently tagged for deletion, & others that may have also been.
Yes, I will try to find specific photos from their website - you mean the link you gave me on my Talk? One major problem may be that I don't know on the whole who is who! However, I see that some of the photos have now been tagged with names, so maybe I'll be lucky.
I'm afraid there will be a further delay on my part for this shortish period which has also meant I've had to do real-life activities more than I'm apt!. So I'll be back in touch after that, hoping your contact appreciates (prob. not the right word) WP's No Deadline stance.
As for Blackpool FC, well yes, they're doing brilliantly. Holloway used to be Argyle's manager, so I know his history a bit, & will have seen 1 or 2 Plymouth games while he was in charge there. Hope their season ends up without relegation despite the bookies.
I understand; but...it is hard to get permission for pictures. Therefore, when people are kind enough to respond, asking which we want, it is best to simply write back and list a few files. Maybe just two or three or something...not too many. Anything - doesn't matter.
Once a dialogue is established, we can always ask for more later.
So, yes...please look at the piccies on Eurogotv.com and just pick a few that might be useful.
Then we can request permission for those. Hope you'll get this before/during your trip...if I don't hear back I might try and pick a few myself, although I might not be around much either (as stated up top). Cheers, Chzz ► 02:31, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
To be honest, it is probably easier if you email them back, in follow-up to the email I sent before and passed to you - because you know a lot more about it.
I get the impression that if we ask for selected pics, they will send back the completed permission, so it is just a case of asking.
I think you should already have a copy of the email I sent them, and their reply?
Hi, you were right, I'm using the Fae nick on en-help. It's my doppelgänger here too. Drop a note any time. Thanks Fæ (talk) 15:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much for helping User:Mikebloom819 while I was away. I really appreciate it; it's good to know that there are users who care to help others when they don't have to. Have a nice day! :) --Meaghan:) ≈02:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks :-) And no problem. The user actually came into the live chat, as they had troubles because the specific Wikia didn't like them making user sub-sub-pages, so I explained how to change it to use just subpages, and they got it working. Happy customer. Chzz ► 02:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Feedback on Bird Group
Hi Chzz,
Thanks for your feedback on my article - Bird Group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_Group
As suggested, I have provided references where citations were needed and deleted facts that are not from a neutral point-of-view. Also, I've gone through the section on Conflict of Interest and would appreciate your advice - I created this page to help a former colleague who's worked with this company. Would that count as Conflict of Interest? I'd be happy to make necessary changes to ensure the article meets Wikiepdia's standards and would really value your feedback.
When you leave messages on talk pages, please put new things at the end of the page, not the beginning. keep things in chronological order...hence I moved this down here.
Now, re. Bird Group... notice, there, I just put [[Bird Group]] and it makes a link...
From a brief look, it is 'OK'. All articles on Wikipedia are 'works in progress', so all have scope to improve (yes, even featured articles)...so, I suggest several things;
Please try to link from some other articles to this one, so that it isn't an WP:ORPHAN.
However, more important than all of this is...your best option...edit and improve some other articles. Because all of your edits, so far, are to this one article, yours is a single purpose account. If you help improve other articles, you'll a) learn more about Wikipedia, b) meet other Wikipedians who can help you with things, c) be a much more 'valued' (for wont of a better term) member of the community. Re. COI / former colleague - yes, you do have a conflict of interest to some degree, but COI does not mean you cannot edit; it means you need to take great care to be neutral.
As suggested, i have linked one other article to this article. In addition to this, i am looking for few more articles which can be linked to this so that it is not "Orphan".
Also, i went through the pages you suggested. I will keep improving the page as and when i get an idea to do so to make page better and better.
However, wanted to check one small thing with you - Currently when i open the 'Bird Group'Page, i get a message in the beginning of the page saying "This page is a new unreviewed article." How can we remove this message? Do we need to do something from our end or will you be removing this? Look forward to your valuable guidance.
Thanks once again for your help!
Debbie
Grammar about one sentence
Hi. I want to ask you about something.
I wrote one sentence to article Świdwin and I want to ask you if it is correct.
Until 1945 town's name was Schivelbein, but since end of World War 2 Polish borders had changed and Poland got inter alia Schivelbein. Then Schivelbein was renamed to Świdwin.
Is this sencence correct? If not, please answer and explain, what is not good.
Until 1945, the town's name was Schivelbein, but at the end of World War II the Polish borders changed, and Schivelbein became part of Poland . Later, Schivelbein was renamed to Świdwin.
Hopefully that is better, but maintains the meaning. "Inter alia" is not very common, and I thik all you mean is 'legally'; I think just "became part of" is OK. Chzz ► 16:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Chzz. How do you know that Hanley Castle High School's IP is blocked from editing, and is it still blocked?--Kudpung (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
195.194.238.110 (talk·contribs) is blocked [4], and although I cannot confirm it is the school, it is marked as registered to WORCESTER-COUNTY-COUNCIL/JANET and may be shared by multiple users of an educational institution - and edited that specific article. So I guess it is.
Thanks for your support at my RfA, which has been closed as successful. Your thorough review of my contributions was much appreciated. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Re: Welcome headers - Note that I tweaked {{Welcome-anon-vandal}} with an extra parameter to suppress the standard section header as I wanted to use it within a script that alternatively adds the current month & year as a heading as per user warning standard. It might be neat to have the other welcome templates optionally do similar things. Based on your comment to Drmies I've moved to always having a section header.
My monobook.js includes a set of regex options which detect if the user talk page has nothing in it (and if the user is an anon IP) and then displays a list of alternative suitable welcomes. I created this as selecting and scrolling through choices in a pop-up was a bit of a drag if you do it often. Fæ (talk) 22:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I understand some of the things you both are talking about--such as "that's great." But I don't leave automated welcomes, I just type "subst:welcome". Chzz, I read your note--typing that header above the messages is kind of a bother (but I'll try). Can that not be included in the template? Drmies (talk) 01:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
{{subst:welcome}} does not make a header, and I'd be too worried about changing it, because it is used by lots of programs, and they add headers, so it could cause trouble. So, if using that one, you would, really, need to add the section yourself. Or you could make your own copy of it, with added header, and {{subst:User:Drmies/w}} or wherever you put it.
That's what I, personally, do; I have my own one (which others are very welcome to use), {{subst:user:chzz/w}}. You could take a look; if you wanted, you could copy that to your own, and maybe customize it...change the piccie, whatever. Please take a look at it, in User:Chzz/w.
Or, you could turn on friendly in "My preferences", "gadgets", and then you'd have a 'wel' button when on user talk pages, which lets you welcome with a couple of clicks.
Aha--after hitting CTRL Shift R a few times, and closing and opening Firefox, it miraculously appeared. Let's see:
Welcome!
Hello Chzz, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
Drmies (talk) 02:40, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Hee hee. It's cool though, Giftiger, it follows on from the previous thread, where we were discussing about how to use Friendly to 'welcome' - so, it was just a test :-) Chzz ► 23:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
...usually the answer is "just wait". If you need more frequent updates, longer lists, or some filter, Wikipedia:Database_reports (or the toolserver request page) is the way.
once or twice a week by a script...not random. I dont remember the exact schedual
I'm sorry, I never replied to your second message; I have thought it over again, but I really don't want to take on any more at the moment. I'll watch the scheme with interest, and might change my mind later. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello! I have just added a new feature to MessageDeliveryBot. It is now possible to have the message delivered on behalf of a WikiProject instead of a specific user. The user who requested the delivery will still be visible in a comment, as well as in the welcome message given to a user if the bot is creating his talk page, however, the bot's edit summary and signature will use the WikiProjects name. To use this new feature, fill in the optional 'WikiProject Name' field when making a request (leave out the Wikipedia: namespace prefix). If this field is left blank, then your username will be used to sign requests, as the bot previously did. Happy editing!
Yep, so note he wants 'option 3' - so all you need to do (if you want) is email him, saying "regarding the pics on Wikipedia, if possible, we'd really like to use THESE (6 or so?)" so please send us back the copyright release text with those pics listed" - use the URLS for the pics.
That's what I suggest anyway; just ask for a few, and then we are 'in contact' and can always ask for more later. Best, Chzz ► 17:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Alexis Cohen, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexis Cohen (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
