User talk:Artingrid~enwiki

Some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Ingrid Kamerbeek may not be sufficiently well-known to merit articles of their own. The Wikipedia community welcomes newcomers, and encourages them to become Wikipedians. On Wikipedia, each user is entitled to a user page in which they can describe themselves, and this article's content may be incorporated into that page. However, to merit inclusion in the encyclopedia proper, a subject must be notable. We encourage you to write or improve articles on notable subjects. &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 16:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia
Welcome, !

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

Also, here are some pointers to learn more about this project:
 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Wikipedia has a vibrant community of editors. The village pump is a great place to see the goings on.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!


 * Five pillars
 * Policy trifecta
 * Brilliant prose
 * Be bold in updating pages
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: &#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;&#x7e;.

Best of luck, and have fun editing! &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 15:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Webism article
Because you now also mention Webism! So you know what is going on at Wikipedia. Dr. Chang and I didn't know about Wikipedia behavior till January 4th, 2006. But we found out! Of course the admin doesn't stand for Wikipedia. But he represents Wikipedia.

The article Webism was put to Wikipedia End of 2004. Neither Dr. Chang nor myself did know this. We were not informed. We as the founders of Webism Movement never had the chance to give facts. Everybody interest should read the Webism deletion debate. It speaks for itself.

I am very glad Wikipedia (or at least some of its members) documents its impotence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artingrid (talk • contribs)


 * FYI, thousands of articles are created in Wikipedia. There is no burden to inform a living person about the creation of an article about them. If you think that the Webism article needs to be re-created, you can try and start it a new. But please be aware that the article is very likely to be nominated for deletion again, if it does not pass the notability threshold. &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 16:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Deleted article Rodney Chang
On January 4th, 2006 it was the 1st time I looked up Wikipedia.

I set up the article "Rodney Chang" in good faith. Dr. Chang is a well-known artist with good reputation and he has nothing to proof. 10 degrees including 2 doctorates. That alone is more than the usual human achieves in a lifetime. Out of the blue I found myself in court. This court calls itself Wikipedia. And claims to be an open-source. Nobody tried to assist me as newbie, vice versa.

Moreover I found out that the admin is a digital artist himself like Dr. Rodney Chang (Pygoya). Dr. Chang is worldwide known as digital artist and cyberart pioneer. Jossi Fresco, the admin, is not. Jossi Fresco has set up the below announced articles at Wikipedia. Jossi Fresco is not in the Wikipedia encyclopedia.

But he puts himself there by self-promoting his images along with texts about digital art. This is a clear conflict of interest. He cannot act from a neutral point of view. Could it be here is an admin who tries to hinder a worldwide known digital artist with good reputation and proven third-party achievements to get the place he clearly deserves?

Could it be he wants to keep his power position as an admin with special powers at Wikipedia to keep his reign over the digital artist area online at Wikipedia?

Some facts which speak for themselves. The admin Jossi is editor of the following Wikipedia entries:

Digital Art

He himself uploaded 2 of his own images to represent the theme. Is this a neutral point of view? He promotes his artwork in an article uploaded by himself using his art to demonstrates what digital art is. Is he so well-known to do so? Is his art accepted worldwide? Dr. Chang's is.

Search Google for Jossi Fresco. Search Google for Pygoya

Here's a third party view:

On the discussion page of  Jhocking says:


 * Along the same lines, however, I just realized yesterday that the example images further up the page are both by a single artist, and he added them himself. *cough* self-promotion *cough* Jhocking 

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Artingrid (talk • contribs)


 * In response to your comments above:
 * Regarding your concern about "not biting the newbies", note that I welcomed you above, and also encouraged you to read related policy so that you could be better informed about how Wikipedia works.
 * Note that as an admin I have no powers to delete an article. Any Wikipedia editor can nominate an article for deletion if he/she believs it does not comply with Wikipedia's inclusion policy.
 * I nominated that article for deletion and the article about yourself Ingrid Kamerbeek, because I believe that these were what we call "vanity" articles and are not suitable for inclusion. Read Vanity_guidelines
 * Upon the dicussions that ensued at Articles for deletion/Rodney Chang, my curiosity was picked and I further researched the subject, only to find a a large number of inconsistencies and a lack of third-party references to support many of the statements made in the article itself. For example, the obviously misleading awards such as "Man of the Year - 2005, American Biographical Institute, Raleigh, N.C.", "America's Registry of Outstanding Professionals, 2003-2004", "The Contemporary Who's Who of Professionals" that are all what is called "vanity awards"; the claims of authorship that are actually self-publishing, etc. I stoped my research then and there as I had enough.
 * Concerning your assessment that sample images added to Digital art and Digital painting are self-promotion by me, please note that (a) when I edited these articles these did not have any sample images so I added some of mine that were uploaded to WP under the GNU license (free license); and (b) I did not place my name in the caption of these images, as I do not consider myself a notable artist. I placed these in good-faith as samples of digital art. Hopefully other images will be added and hopefully mine replaced by samples of work of notable digital artist willing to upload their art under the GNU license.
 * I believe I acted in a manner consistent with the aims and objectives of Wikipedia. Of course, you are entitled to interpret my actions in whatever manner you want. &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 16:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Your user page
Please follow the guidelines at User page to refactor your user page as needed. &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 22:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I followed the Wikipedia guidelines and hope you like it.Artingrid 09:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Hope you can contribute to make Wikipedia better. &asymp; jossi &asymp; t &bull; @ 15:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

please be civil
Artingrid, Ob sie werden, es würde besser zum netter sein, wenn sie redigierten am Wikipedia und sprechen mit anderen Herausgeber. Man soll nicht sagen, Sachen wie dieses Edit. Danke, und hoffentlich mein Deutsch ist nicht zu schlecht :) --Improv 22:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC) Artingrid 17:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Artingrid. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Artingrid~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 10:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Pyg03a16small.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pyg03a16small.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:48, 18 May 2016 (UTC)