User talk:Burgieman30

A tag has been placed on Odyssey Driving Around the World (TV Series), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Calton | Talk 02:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back. I see you had the good sense to take an acceptable name this time.

Please note what's at the top of every edit field:


 * Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Promotional articles about yourself, your friends, your company or products, or articles created as part of a marketing or promotional campaign, will be deleted in accordance with our deletion policies. For more information, please see Spam.

--Calton | Talk 02:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Calton, I am merely posting a new tv series titled ODYSSEY. I work in film, not on this one. I live in West Hollywood and wanted to post this series because currently its my favorite. I've seen its prescreening and its worthy of being on Wikipedia. Not sure why you keep trying to mark it for deletion. This is my first posting to wikipedia and when i first tried to do it i was confused as to whether your username is the same as the article.. it certainly looked that way when i was first creating the page because the first header said Editing User: Odyssey Driving Around the World... so i figured i was editing that site.. after reading the piles of rules and regulations i discovered that users can actually have a user page (like yours) then i realised there were differences between entries and users.. Now recently I've discovered that TV series are entered as categorically tv series. Understand that learning to use this is very complicated. I am not promoting my services all the writeups are from press release materials here in Hollywood. I would love to own a tv series, but unfortunately, like you, I'm not that cool. --Burgieman30 05:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Calton, I suggest you revisit the Wikipedia page Don't bite the newcomers under Policies and Guidelines and pay particular attention to the following:


 * 1) Avoid WikiLawyering. When linking to policies or guidelines, do so in whole phrases, not wiki shorthand.
 * 2) Avoid using bans as a first resort. Consider talking to a user before you ban them.

Try to use standard welcome/warning messages, which are both cordial and correcting, such as those in the first two columns of the chart at Template messages/User talk namespace. Other greetings can be found at Welcome templates.

Consciously choose the steadfast ground. Strive to be a responsible Wikipedian. By fostering goodwill, one will not provoke or be provoked easily, and will allow new Wikipedians to devote their time and resources towards building an encyclopedia that everyone is encouraged to improve.

Common newcomer errors
One common error among newcomers is to create an article in mainspace about themselves or their band. One way to deal gently with this is to userfy the article, and leave a note saying why. nn-userfy is designed for use when userfying autobiographical articles. The remaining redirect can be flagged for deletion using Db-rediruser. Userfied articles on bands could be tagged with PROD, since they tend to hang around and Wikipedia is not MySpace.

Ignorantia juris non excusat
The principle "Ignorantia juris non excusat" (Latin for: "ignorance of the law does not excuse") is incompatible with the policies of not biting and assuming good faith. If you prosecute and judge people because they are ignorant of our policies and guidelines, you are in fact violating our policies and guidelines!

Try instead to follow the points set forth here to relieve the new editors of their ignorance. Keep in mind that this is not the way many other things work, and even seasoned editors fail to follow our guidelines from time to time.

The point of not biting is to attract editors into Wikipedia, not to turn them away by mistreating them, even if they may have deserved it. --Burgieman30 07:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * ...but I can assure you that TV producers have better things to do than spend their evenings writing on wikipedia. 


 * Successful ones, perhaps. Or, maybe not -- though he's a movie producer, not a TV producer, so maybe that doesn't count. Well, he's been permanently banned, so it's moot, anyways.


 * I ... wanted to post this series because currently its my favorite. I've seen its prescreening and its worthy of being on Wikipedia


 * Pure of heart, no doubt, with no commercial considerations.


 * Which, however, doesn't explain how you, a disinterested media consumer, happened to find out about this, and how you were able to crank out an article with such extensive, adspeak-rich, detail. Which doesn't explain how you were utterly unaware of the fundamental and obvious differences between a user page and an article, and yet were able to put together a long, detailed, and well-formatted page on your first attempt. Which doesn't explain why you created not one, but TWO separate accounts to post the identical text. Which doesn't explain why, in one of those spammy incarnations, you asked for a name change to "remov[e] the Colon in the name for search reasons".


 * And, of course, where did you, a disinterested media consumer, happen to lay you hands on that crisp "screenshot"? --Calton | Talk 13:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You forgot Rule #7 at the top of my Talk Page, "Do not assume I'm stupid, especially when arguing for something obviously untrue. I do not respond well to having my intelligence insulted." And bonus irony points for complaining about "Wikilawyering" by, well, Wikilawyering. Or perhaps the term I'm looking for is chutzpah. --Calton | Talk 13:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Go to www.drivearoundtheworld.com and find them in the images section you'll have to register in the pressroom of the expedition website to get them. You see... there was a driving expedition for Parkinson's Disease and a production company decided to film it. It was in the news for about 3 years and they left near my town in November of 2003. I followed them online for a year and a half. Yep you can too. Should you feel inclined. Click on Journals and you can also read hundreds of their entries... I am also a land rover enthusiast as these guys are. And Yep... i was pretty stoked to see it become a tv series so I'm posting it on here. They posted full res images on their website..I have close to 100 now on my laptop. They took them, not me. There are thousands of full res images available for curious minds like yours. I would never assume you are stupid, dont worry. But i do think perhaps you might be a little self-conscious about your intellect. Remember your "Talk" Page is not the Wikipedia guidlines. I follow their rules not yours. --Burgieman30 16:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I follow their rules not yours - Actually, you don't, as the constant deletion of your spam attempts -- by other people -- should have hinted to you.


 * Remember your "Talk" Page is not the Wikipedia guidlines - I can see that, since you still seem to consider that insulting my intelligence is a valid way of interacting with me. Slow learner, I'm guessing.


 * But let's give you a hint or two. Q1: What is a "screenshot"? Q2: How is a "full res" image a "screenshot"? Q3: What does "you will need to specify the owner of the copyright" mean? And finally, in regards to your paperback psychologizing, Q4: What are the meanings of "passive-aggressive" and "psychological projection"? Take your time. --Calton | Talk 14:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Australiagroup.jpg
This is improperly tagged, as it is clearly NOT a screenshot -- unless you know of some superduper high-tech video format with a resolution of 3072 × 2048 pixels? With an aspect ratio of 1.5 x 1? --Calton | Talk 13:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Calton i figured that one out also.. and yes the image has been removed from the posting because i clicked screenshot instead of image. I have no problem with following the rules of Wikipedia and intend to. Your harassment of new and other users is excessive and will be reported. Perhaps you didnt read the above guidlines I posted. Your overpolicing attempts to new articles hurts Wikipedia and quite honestly turns prospective community members and contributors away from the site. You need to learn to look through the eyes of both sides and not solely your own and your 10 commandments on your user page. --Burgieman30 19:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Australiagroup.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Australiagroup.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Calton | Talk 13:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Australiagroup.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Australiagroup.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Advice
May I remind you of a golden rule...


 * I don't take the advice of the dishonest, incompetent, fanatical, or hypocritical ^^ and certainly not the self-serving advice of spammers looking for an edge. Can't imagine why you'd have a problem with that. --Calton | Talk 00:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Strange Person
Sorry Calton, but I think that perhaps you are a little strange. Not sure what you are on about, but good luck out there. --Burgieman30 01:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)