User talk:AlanNShapiro

Welcome
Hi Alan,

nice to see you around - and contact me if you need help. Your article will have to be shortened (list of publications: just major). Your complete Name is desirable, exact date of birth and place etc. See here my unfortunate Richard Head for an example. (The source text offers categorisations in the end... we'lll need them as well) ("unfortunate" as the poor soul invites such an amount of anglophone vandalism thanks to his name). Take a look at other Wikipedia articles to get an impression of the standards. --Olaf Simons (talk) 13:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! - Fayenatic (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Alan N. Shapiro
I have tagged your auto-bio with a few issues. It's redeemable, if there are references in independent third-party publications to your standing in your field. I'm prepared to help with formatting, if you can justify keeping the article in line with Wikipedia policies. Have a look at WP:BIO to see the sort of evidence that counts. - Fayenatic (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have made the request that this page be deleted. It does not look good to have so many warnings at the top. I have copied and pasted the material to my user page, where perhaps it is more appropriate. Thank you. AlanNShapiro (talk) 08:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, I hadn't meant to provoke you to delete the article. It does still need more work before you consider re-creating it in article-space, as most of the evidence for notability is about your Star Trek book, making the article very unbalanced or perhaps a WP:coatrack. Is the book notable enough to have its own article? I have removed most links from other articles to your bio page, but left the links in Physics and Star Trek to the potential article on the book. Once the book has its own article, then work on your bio, including a brief summary about the book and its notability.


 * You could start the book article as a separate section on your user page, or create a user sub-page e.g. User:AlanNShapiro/Star Trek: Technologies of Disappearance or User:AlanNShapiro/Sandbox1.


 * I also note that you added Gatti's book to the bibliographies at New media art and BioArt, one effect of which was to add internal links to your bio. I'll leave it to you to decide whether that book is notable enough to remain in those lists. - Fayenatic (talk) 14:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Fayenatic london, i think that everything you wrote here is completely reasonable. I only saw what you wrote here after i read what Stephen wrote below, and after i wrote my reply to him below. So i'm going to slow down here! Let's not undelete the page yet... i'll work on for a while at my user page, and when we are all three in agreement probably (but not for sure) we'll restore it.

Your idea of making a separate page for my Star Trek book is a very good one.

Your point that my notability as the author of this one successful book may not be sufficient to make me notable is a correct point, i see the validity of what you are saying. I am working towards a second book, and i have published a number of important essays on other topics like Lost, Artificial Intelligence, Baudrillard and America in prominent journals, but it is of course very difficult to find published third-party comments on mere essays. So perhaps an article on Alan N. Shapiro has to wait until after my second book is published. AlanNShapiro (talk) 14:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OK then, go ahead when you like with an article about the book. It would be relevant for this to include a short section about the author, mentioning some other things you have published in the same or related fields. - Fayenatic (talk) 21:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Physics and Star Trek
The ISBN that you gave for your book at Physics and Star Trek links only to a German-language volume (at Amazon UK, at any rate). Is is also available in English? - Fayenatic (talk) 19:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Fayenatic_london... sorry about the message that i left at your user page, i'm just starting to learn my way around here. Do you think that the issues are cleared up now?

Regarding "Physics and Star Trek," my book is an English-language book. It only has one ISBN. AlanNShapiro (talk) 16:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Deleting your Article
I see that you have marked your article for deletion. Are you really sure you want to do that? I appreciate that it has a number of issues, but notability isn't one of them. I appreciate that you wish to tidy up the article before putting it back on mainspace, but I doin't think that will solve the main issues, and that is about being effectively an autobiography. If anything, the issue will be compounded as you are likely to be the only author working on it in your user space. If you leave it in the main space, then others will be able to work on it, and this will help with making it a more balanced article. I am going to decline your request for that reason. However, if you still feel that the article would be best deleted, please let me know why and I will reconsider. Might I suggest putting a request at places like WikiProject Star Trek and ask for help with the article? Stephen! Coming... 12:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like whilst I was writing the above message, someone has come along and deleted it! I do recommend that your article be worked on in the main space.  However, you migth also consider putting a request onto Project star trek, and asking for help; you can get them to work on your user page article, and move it when everyone thinks it is ready. If you change your mind and want the article restored, please let me know and I will be more than happy to do so. Stephen! Coming... 12:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Stephen, thanks for your message and your help and generous attitude. I admit that my actions here have not been the smoothest. I am learning. What led me to believe that i should make the request for deletion is that (1) last Saturday i saw the first 3 issues. (2) I added the 8 citations/references/footnotes which i believed would satisfy some or perhaps all 3 of these issues. As you yourself say, the notability issue can be regarded as solved. Perhaps the reference issue and the third-party issues as well? (3) In spite of my additions, no one removed any of the issues. So i thought this was a message to me that i had not done enough, and i didn't know what more to do.

So let's be pragmatic, can we make a deal? If you remove at least 2 of the 4 issues, then i'd accept restoring the page. I just don't have a good feeling when i see so many warnings (i'm a programmer!). Removing 3 of the 4 would be really good. I agree that the autobio aspect is still a real issue, and i'd then do as you suggest, get other Star Trek people who have read my book to make improvements to the page.

AlanNShapiro (talk) 14:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Stephen, please read above what i have written to Fayenatic_london. I saw that message to me, and wrote my subsequent reply message, after i wrote my message above to you. So i think what i wrote to Fayenatic_london overrides what i wrote to you above. I think that Fayenatic_london has a very valid point that the notability of my book on Star Trek does not necessarily qualify me as notable. AlanNShapiro (talk) 14:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek changes
Your well-intentioned changes to the lead in of the Star Trek article were undone by me as a violation of WP's neutral point of view policy. (See WP:NPOV and WP:Undue Weight). However, I would encourage you to write something about the academic field of "Star Trek studies" in a slightly more neutral way in the chapter entitled "Cultural impact" of the same article. It is notable that Trek is studied in colleges, as reflecting Western culture.--WickerGuy (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I think that some of my changes are about facts, and not about the academic field of "Star Trek studies." I will try to put in some of these factual changes again, one sentence at a time, and see what you think. I hope that that is OK with you. AlanNShapiro (talk) 14:51, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

After originally saying that Nicholasm79 was right about the ending date of "Star Trek: The Original Series", I have changed my mind. In the MASH article, the ending of MASH is considered to be February 28, 1983. Summer reruns are irrelevant. In the Dallas article, the ending of Dallas is considered to be May 20, 1993. Again, summer reruns are irrelevant. Therefore, Star Trek ended on March 14, 1969, with the showing of "All Our Yesterdays," before summer reruns began. The fact that an additional episode, "Turnabout Intruder," was aired at the end of summer reruns is a minor incident fact. This fact deserves to be mentioned as part of the show's history, but it does not change the ending date of the show. AlanNShapiro (talk) 16:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

July 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Android do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.  Sandstein  18:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Pics
Hi AlanNShapiro, greetings from --Sargoth (talk) 10:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC) and I wonder if you've seen the pictures from cpov:

License tagging for File:Alan-N-Shapiro.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Alan-N-Shapiro.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 10:05, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Alan-N-Shapiro.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Alan-N-Shapiro.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 08:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Acather96 (talk) 08:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)