User talk:Chzz/Archive 15

Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident
Hello Chzz, would it be OK, if I ask you to give your evaluation on this issue? Thank you in advance. --HappyInGeneral (talk) 19:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

✅  Chzz  ►  00:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you (and thank WP for the helpme template)
Chzz, thank you much for your good helpme reply on my talk page. I'm still new enough at using the helpme template to still feel what a wonderful institution it is!

And I think I'll be able to remember your rule of thumb -- Bold.Revert.Discuss. -- which I'll apply in my own way, of course. And your or WP's goal of at least one source reference per paragraph -- I'm glad to see this (rule of thumb) actually stated. ... Again, much appreciation! For7thGen (talk) 20:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem at all. I think that my own most-important 'rule-of-thumb' is, if in doubt, ask! Feel free to ask for help whenever you need to; far better to do that than either a) sit wondering/scratching your head, or b) doing something you later regret. The community is here to help each other.


 * You can always get help live, with this or this. Feel free to try that and say hi.

Best of luck,  Chzz  ►  20:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

The Three Investagators
I fairly new at editing Wikipedia and it seems I made a huge mistake. I was trying to move the two lists of books English and German on to sub pages to help stream line the article. I some how crating articles that were not good and the lists and the section of the main Three Investigators where deleted. I am guessing that what I was trying to do was imposable, so can you please revert the article to before I touched it today. The other editors and fans of the the books shouldn't loose information because of my mistake. Thank You Very Much :)

Ebnielsen (talk)


 * Aha, I see, no problems at all. There's nothing wrong with being bold and trying to change things, so please don't be discouraged from it.


 * Everything can be undone; to restore that part to the article just go to the 'history' of the article. I have just restored Three Investigators to the previous version - see this edit, and please check that is what you intended (for now).


 * Now, regarding your idea; we don't split articles into 'subpages' in that way, but we can split articles by just creating a separate article entirely (such as e.g. List of Three Investigators German books), and then replacing that section in the main article with this;  - that shows up as;


 * ...then, we'd add a few sentences or a paragraph summarizing the content of the 'sub-article', for example something like "There are 42 books written in German, 3 of which have won the foo award" (or whatever).


 * For more help on this, see WP:SUMMARYSTYLE.


 * Hope that helps, cheers,  Chzz  ►  23:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you! Benp123456789 (talk) 00:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Dickey/Foss
Doh! Thanks for fixing my mistake. I thought I had proofread, but alas. Reusing one page's text for a new one sometimes results in mistakes like that. Pfly (talk) 06:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Nieva (Spanish group)
Hi, remember the Noemi Carrion listing. Here is the entry for Nieva, her rock group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nieva_%28Spanish_group%29 The album is due for release. Can you check the listing if you have time. Thanks. [||||]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanze123 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 28 September 2009 (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.


 * When you mention an article or something, please put it as a wikilink, for example just put, which will appear like this: Nieva (Spanish group)


 * I'm sorry, but a) I have a terrible memory, and b) I tend to deal with loads of articles every day; can you remind me what this is in connection with? Was it something I nominated for deletion or something? What did you want me to do?


 * Please reply below, cheers,  Chzz  ►  22:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted you to check it to make sure it's OK. It supports the work of Noemi Carrion - (you previously helped with that). Thanks. Zanze123 (talk) 12:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)]


 * Ah, so you want a quick review of Nieva (Spanish group)? OK, here goes;


 * Reference problems; for an article to meet the general notability guidelines, it needs "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the source". Currently, it has these;
 * antipop.es is a primary source; it says that it is "the Antonio Escobar music production personal studio"
 * wikipedia itself should not be used as a reference; see WP:SELFREF
 * ua.es is a press-release, so another primary source
 * The article needs some references showing press coverage, otherwise it could be deleted as not meeting the notability guidelines.


 * It is not neutral; phrases such as, for example, "dark but vibrant, epic sound, takes an innovative step" are not appropriate for Wikipedia
 * The "Reference points" - ie the other bands that influenced them - appears to be original research
 * Almost all the facts lack references; anything that is not referenced can be removed by any user. Currently, most of the article cannot be verified - for example, "Nieva was launched in 2004" - how could I, as a reader, check that fact for myself? The same applies for every fact given; we need some independent reliable sources
 * There are far too many external links; please see the external link policy to see what links are appropriate.

Please review WP:FIRST, which offers general advice about writing articles  Chzz  ►  13:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Changes are being made. How do we get Nieva to come up in the search. Currently it lists a place, not the group. How to get a choice of Nievas when typing in Nieva, like say, when typing in New Order. Thanks. {||||} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanze123 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, that's the black art of disambiguation - I've just done it for you; see Nieva. Also, I've redirected Antonio Escobar to the article (for now - they can always have an article of their own one day, over-writing the redirect).




 * I notice that you still seem to be having trouble 'signing' your messages; you should either type in ~ (four tilde signs), or you can do the same thing by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured here.  Chzz  ►  18:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, it's interesting that you redirected Antonio Escobar, because in fact, there was already a Wiki English entry for an Antonio Escobar - famous historical figure. But now, when I search, that no longer appears. It's like when you re-directed, as a result, the original page was lost. I wonder where it went. In fact this Antonio Escobar has a link here: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Escobar_N%C3%BA%C3%B1ez at Wiki Spanish. Thanks again.--Zanze123 (talk) 22:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * You probably mean Antonio Escobar y Mendoza or Luis Antonio Escobar? Previously, there was no page called "Antonio Escobar", so if a user entered that, it would take them to the search matches and show a list of articles that partially matched. That can still be seen by putting in "Antonio Escobar" and clicking 'search' instead of 'go'. As they are not actually quite the same name, I didn't think that a disambiguation would be necessary.  Chzz  ►  22:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Are you nuts?
So a legitimate commercial software package that was used on feature films, commercials, and video games does not deserve a Wikipedia entry, but the "Boothill Foottappers" and "Red Cunt Hair" do? Some band that nobody outside of the UK has ever even heard of and some completely obscure profanity? Are you serious?

People like you should not have authority to decide what does and does not get on Wikipedia. Just because you are unfamiliar with something does not render it irrelevant, and just because some band or swear word appeals to your apparently juvenile sensibilities does not make it noteworthy enough to warrant inclusion on this site. Grow up. --Ajerimez (talk) 14:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Articles for deletion/Alias Eclipse  Chzz  ►  14:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

OTRS for austinmemories.com
Go ahead and upload the images, and I'll add the ticket number once you are ready. I've replied to your e-mail via e-mail as well. Sorry for the time it took to reply, we are quite backlogged. -Andrew c [talk] 16:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No problems. Files now uploaded as;


 * File:J40 toy car lineup with children.jpg
 * File:J40 toy car engine bay.jpg
 * File:J40 toy car interior.jpg
 * File:J40 toy car police car model.jpg


 * Thanks for the help,  Chzz  ►  17:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅.-Andrew c [talk] 17:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism on the page White
Hi. I'm sorry about the vandalism on the page White. I didn't mean it. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thanks,

DarthGravy DarthGravy (talk) 21:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Answered on user talk

✅  Chzz  ►  21:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Try, try again
Dear Chzz,

Haven't talked in a while. Hope you're well.

I've reworked the Troutman draft, please take another look. I really tried to address all of your issues from September 9.

1) Troutman is a professional author, since she is paid for her writing and her books are for sale - the hallmark of a professional is that they earn their living by their activities. I think the P word is fully justified here. I took it out in "designs professional resumes" but kept it for "job searching for career professionals" because that's exactly who Troutman's clients are. This is not puffery, imho.

2) The Resume Place is officially designated by the USG as a small, woman-owned business - this is not opinion but an actual USG classification, shown in the reference (both the small and the woman-owned part).

3) I've changed the wording from "Thanks to her first book..." to "In her first book...". The references really do back this up.

4) Troutman's publications are extensively referenced in footnotes 3 and 5.

5) Took out the Monster.com since this was in the past, it turns out, no longer active.

6) I referenced mentions in Federal Diary Live, Federal News Radio, Fedmanager.com, and 40Plus of Greater Washington.

7) Took out her prior affiliations, too hard right now to dig up those old references.

Please let me know how you like this revised draft. Are we ready to go live yet?

Thank you,

--Burkeguy 19:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs)


 * 1) Can you provide an independent reliable source that states Troutman is a professional in all those fields? Otherwise it'd be tagged or just removed, per WP:V. Even if it can be sourced, I still contend that it introduces POV. I don't see featured articles starting off with "William Barley was a professional English bookseller", "Jenna Jameson was a former professional pornographic actress", "Frank Zappa was a professional guitarist" etc. See what I mean?


 * 2) That same reference states that "this business has a BBB Rating of D- on a scale from A+ to F. Reasons for this rating include: Failure to honor commitment to arbitrate or mediate disputes, One complaint filed against business that was not resolved." - so will you add that too?


 * 3) "www.federaljobs.net" are trying to sell the book, so they're not an appropriate source for the fact. "military.com/Opinions" - is that a primary source? www.abc2news.com seems to be a self-published/press-release/advert for a course; the gao.gov PDF does not contain "federal resume" or "troutman"; I cannot see in "govexec.com" where it states that Troutman popularized it; pentagon.mil doesn't mention troutman


 * 4) I can't remember what this is in connection with


 * 5,6,7 OK  Chzz  ►  23:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

He-l-en1959

 * Hi! Good day (or anything else)! Why didn't you write to me so long? I succeeded in making the "List of TF Armada episodes" like a table. I hope to finish this job very soon at last (thanks to your advices). I'll be glad to help you in turn if you once need my help User:He-l-en1959--Mirabella Star 13:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, I did reply to your last message (23 Sep, only a week ago) here only about 2 hours after you left it - but perhaps I forgot to notify you that I'd replied? Sorry about that.


 * Glad to hear things are going OK. And yes, as always, ask for help if you need it.  Chzz  ►  14:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, i didn't see the message you tell about. But you can be sure that your advices and messages are of great importance for me. Can I consider you to be my friend as well as I am your friend? (Excuse my poor English…) User:He-l-en1959--Mirabella Star 14:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I try to be friendly with all Wikipedians.- but remember that Wikipedia is not a social networking site. You might want to join one of the IRC channels, like #wikipedia-en - people chat there, although we do try to stick to the topic of Wikipedia. There are plenty of other websites designed for socializing :-)  Chzz  ►  14:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you again for the lesson. I'm eating my words :-( User:He-l-en1959--Mirabella Star 16:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC) P.S. When you answer me on your page, I don't receive a message about your answer.

Thank You
Thank you for your help and your advice. I know that the article that i submitted, Unplaced in APG II was unusually hard to deal with. 128.171.106.205 (talk) 07:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * No trouble at all; if you need more help with it (or anything else), just give me a shout here. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  07:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Casper Andreas
Hi. I know you're an experienced editor. It looks like you've added copyrighted material in the Casper Andreas article. It comes from the bio on his website. Based on the edit summary, it looks like you were trying to help User:Adambentley by adding the material because of some problem he was having. If so, it would be appropriate to inform this new user that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material. Could you explain what's happening? Thanks! -- Whpq (talk) 21:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, right, didn't notice it was copied - yes, I was trying to help them (via IRC) because they couldn't add the info due to false edit-filter hits due to certain dodgy words in the film titles etc. The easiest "norules" answer to which seemed to be for me to add it myself.


 * I will certainly advise why it was removed; thanks.  Chzz  ►  22:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

A QUESTION :)
Just a question, but are you the creator of Wikipedia? Also, I was wondering why my computer won't connect to the chat place for Wikipedia :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zurgle99 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No, I'm not, see Wikipedia.
 * I'm sorry it won't connect; there are various reasons why IRC may be blocked on your computer. Usually it is caused by firewalls or filtering software, that kind of thing.  Chzz  ►  22:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Bingley Hall, Stafford, England
HELP !! I need you to create an article about Bingley Hall in Stafford, England.

Evangp (talk) 21:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree that an article about it would be nice; I'd like to write one, but I will have to add it to my very long list of 'things to do', so I might not get to it for a very long time. You could always write it yourself?  Chzz  ►  22:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC) BUMP   Chzz  ►  21:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC) BUMP   Chzz  ►  21:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

OR tag on Search for a Method
You recently placed an original research tag on the Search for a Method article I started. When you add an OR tag to an article, you are supposed to explain your concerns on the article's talk page. I can't fix any OR problems if I don't know what they are. Most of the article is a summary of Sartre's book. I realize that working from a primary source is can be cause OR problems, but I am aware of Wikipedia's policies: I'm not analyzing or interpreting the book, only summarizing. If you think I've gone beyond summarizing, please explain why.--Bkwillwm (talk) 23:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I've just removed the tag; my concern is that it is pretty much impossible to even summarize the content of a book, and especially something about a topic like this, without introducing opinion. I've had a quick look, and I do appreciate what you said - indeed it does look like a good summary. The trouble is, by relying only on the primary source, even neutral statements constitute original research. For example - and don't take this as a literal request to change this bit - "He describes an early attraction to Marx's thought" - and that isn't quite what Satre wrote. I might agree with you that that is a fair summary, but others may not. Hence, merely summarizing, using just the primary source, inherently introduces OR. The only true solution for Wikipedia, in order to provide non-OR facts, is to use appropriate secondary reliable sources.


 * I hope this explains my tagging; as I've said, it's not a big deal, hence I removed it. I tagged it at the time as I saw the article under development, and wanted to flag up the issue to avoid more problems down the line. I don't have the time to read the book and detail my issues right now; perhaps I'll be able to another time. Thanks for responding.  Chzz  ►  22:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC) BUMP   Chzz  ►  22:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Adopt Me
Hey thanks a ton for helping me get through that hassle!!!! Hopefully whoever did this will not let it happen again. But I was interested in the wiki adoption are you familiar with this? --Cjones132002 (talk) 02:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm familiar with it; I don't go in for the formal 'adoption' thing, but, there are lots of people who I've helped out, who regularly ask me stuff, and I have no problems with that at all...I just don't bother with calling it 'adoption'. Please feel free to ask me anything you like, at any time, and I'll answer as soon as I can. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  02:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Help needed
Hi Chzz,

Hope you are ok.

I am still working on capitalization, especially in the pages on religion. Manual of Style states the movements should not be capitalzed. I am trying to correct "Word of Faith" movement to "Word of faith" but I need an editor to change to article name. Please check it and let me know. Thanks. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 15:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if it should be caps of not - perhaps it counts as a proper noun, if it is a registered org, etc. I had a quick look on Google and it does seem to be mostly capitalized. But anyway - if you wish to change the title, you can do so by clicking move at the top of the page, and putting in the new name. If you decide to do that, I suggest that you put in the edit summary " WP:BRD - see talk page", and then make a section on the talk page explaining your reason (with a link to the appropriate policy) - if someone disagrees with your change, then discuss it on the talk page.


 * Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  16:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Article Creation Request for In My Rosary
I think the band is notable (not to mention old) enough to have an article. Here are some sources:

http://www.public-republic.net/artist-of-the-week-in-my-rosary.php (Artist of the Week interview in an online zine) http://www.side-line.com/news_comments.php?id=4371_0_2_0_C (News release in a major dark music magazine) http://www.inmyrosary.de/discography/reviews/1.php (A whole slew of reviews for their most recent album, with links to the original sites)

On top of that, the band was already notable enough to have a German Wikipedia article:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_My_Rosary —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.123.101 (talk) 15:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks, I'll add those to the proposed article, and try to work on it a bit ASAP.  Chzz  ►  18:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Ref. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/In My Rosary  Chzz  ►  19:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The article proposal has now been relisted for another review  Chzz  ►  22:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Þjóðólfr (talk) 00:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ironic Addition! Þjóðólfr (talk) 01:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the template - my new years resloution will be to get to understand those darn things. Þjóðólfr (talk) 13:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)...now I'm going to press that button.

\o/ Oh no \o/  Chzz  ►  13:09, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Nairpriya2003
the equationa are seems to be wrong  all the editors need to be sent to primery schools  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nairpriya2003 (talk • contribs) 06:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

the Nos are seems to be wrong  all the editors need to be sent to primery schools  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nairpriya2003 (talk • contribs) 07:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know what you mean. sorry.  Chzz  ►  19:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident

 * I much appreciate the constructive criticism received in connection with this article, and have now made a number of changes to the article which hopefully addresses the concerns expressed here. Please let me know if they are still not yet addressed. In the interests of keeping all FAC related discussions in one place, I would ask interested editors to kindly list in bullet point any remaining concerns about the article at the nominations page, so that they may be dealt with, and for the evaluation/nomination to proceed. Ohconfucius (talk) 13:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Rudolf Kelber
Dear Chzz, thanks for your advice. I've added the refs to the Kelber draft, please take another look. (I have had no experience with other language versions of wikipedia up to now.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.39.136.169 (talk) 16:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

✅

Thank you ! I´ve noticed the User talk:213.39.190.166. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karla Murx (talk • contribs) 06:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Ratna Pariksha
I've just seen the message, I will try adding more details Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 06:23, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You wrote "add biblio", I will change that to proper required format Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 07:23, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll wait for sometime till you complete formatting. I will be careful with further contributions.Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 07:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for correcting . I will try maintaining article references in similar pattern. Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 08:07, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi there. You're welcome. I hope it makes sense; there are lots of different ways to do references - in that case, I thought that separating the bibliography and using the template:harvnb and template:citation would work best, because they were book sources and some were referenced multiple times with different page numbers. If you do need help with anything, please ask. Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  09:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Template:Main
No problem - we made a good team! Thanks again. Also, looking above this section - Quite honestly, I thought you were an admin. An RFA wouldn't be a bad idea, if you're up to it - and you'd have my support. Best to you, UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 14:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Morris Krok
Hi, Again another important listing. Could you help me fix this! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_krok It should be a big K for Krok. I have no idea to do that! Thanks {Zanze123 (talk) 00:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC) }

✅

Reply: The Epstein School Page
Reply: I got you message and replied but did not hear from you:

Thanks Chzz...that is very helpful solution; the user page will help me to get the whole picture and put things in context. How about this: Would you remove the COI template and I will agree to work additionally on the article and seek input on additions on the talk page, until further notice. Sound like a plan?

Additionally, I note that the Resolution 1205 (coi) information in question has been removed and is no longer on the page anyway.

Clou2epstein (talk) 19:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

✅ (discussed further via helpme on users talk page)  Chzz  ►  01:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Thekkady boat tragedy
It looks much better now and would be suitable for the Main Page if it had received some support. However, time now has apparently run out. What I mean by that is that this happened on 30 September and the last ITN listed on the Main Page is dated 2 October (see here). This makes it unlikely that an administrator will post it which is a shame. I thought maybe the recent development might help it but arrests are not usually posted either. There is still time to nominate for DYK. -- can  dle &bull; wicke  19:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response. I'm disappointed, because I worked hard on the article as soon as the user appeared on the help channel with their pictures. I posted to ITN immediately, and didn't know what was needed to make it appropriate. I'll bung it in as a DYK. Thanks for explaining, anyway.  Chzz  ►  20:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it really just needed the citations to be the way they are now. You've done great though, it looks well. :) -- can  dle &bull; wicke  20:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

direct to fan
Hi Chzz

Thanks for highlighting changes that needed to be made.

I went through and eliminated company-specific references, until the end where I added a resource list.

What more do I need to do to make it compliant and useful for the community?

Thanks,

Bob —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cramerbob (talk • contribs) 20:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Re. Direct-to-Fan


 * Answered on user talk page, and Articles for deletion/Direct-to-Fan  Chzz  ►  02:51, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Removed prod from Agnieszka Lukasiak.
I have removed the prod tag from Agnieszka Lukasiak, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! --  At am a  頭 18:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * User talk:Atama

Oh and sorry about leaving the template, I was trying to go through dozens of prods on downtime at work and it was a quick way to leave you notice, I try not to template the regulars if I can help it. :) --  At am a  頭 16:10, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * (Answered on user talk; no problems; just moved PRODs to one place)  Chzz  ►  21:31, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment request about using stamp images
As your stamp image was tagged as being unacceptable, you might like to offer an opinion about changing their guidelines for certain stamps. Any opinions on this issue could be very helpful: It's discussed here.]--Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

help request answer
Hi, thanks for your comments and suggestions on my CHUCK PARSONS article. I signed the draft in the wrong place and cut off two references. That was my starting point for the references. Should I use footnotes? I looked at one of the links in my article and I thought my article was referenced at least as well as that. Also, I have a picture, and cannot figure out how to attach it to the article. Its from one of Chuck Parson's crew members, and I have permission to use it. Much of the information is also from him and from many different sources, that reflect the types of cars he drove and his race results. Two sources of this information are listed.DGNW (talk) 06:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You don't have to use footnotes, but, to quote from WP:V, "Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed". Therefore, it is a very good idea to use them. It's not a requirement, but it is strongly recommended.


 * There are lots of really bad articles on Wikipedia, but saying that other stuff exists is not a convincing argument for adding to the problem. If you want to compare other articles, then it is best to look at similar articles within the featured articles or good articles, which are more likely to follow current guidelines. One reason that older articles do not conform is, the standards of Wikipedia have increased over the years, and we haven't got around to fixing all the older ones yet. Fortunately, there is no deadline.


 * We can only use pictures if the copyright holder gives explicit permission for anyone to use it, for any purpose. That's because Wikipedia is free; we want others to be able to copy it. If it was your own picture (ie you were the copyright holder), then you could give permission by uploading it and clicking the options to say "I am the copyright holder, and I hereby declare that anyone can use it for any purpose". But, in this case, it is someone elses picture - so, there are two options;


 * The copyright holder could sign up to Wikipedia and upload it themself, or
 * You could get them to send us an email, with the picture attached. An appropriate text for this is in user:chzz/help/myboilerplate, and the address to send it to is, photosubmissions@wikimedia.org


 * Please note that, in either case, we can only accept the picture if the copyright holder is happy for anyone to use it for any purpose


 * Information 'from him' - if he has told you things - cannot be used in the article. Unless it has been published in a reliable source, then it is not verifiable.


 * I hope that this helps, best,  Chzz  ►  07:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

help request answer, Parsons article
OK, got it. Thanks much for all the information. I will add footnotes with the references, and see if it makes it through an attempt to post the article in the near future. There will not be any information from my friend, it will only be from sources referenced. My friend is quite old, and the picture issue is in the too hard category for now, I won't even attempt to add that, its likely wikipedia is not the right forum for a few of his photos, even though he has given me the permission you mentioned, proving that will be logistically too difficult. Again, thanks much for your help, and your time. I hope not to add another "bad article".DGNW (talk) 04:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Ardwick football kits
thankyou for your help with the color codes for the kits however i'm still having one ploblem - i've corrected the colors now but the question mark "?" is still showing on the kits too.

please help

From Pabmeista ~


 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pabmeista (talk • contribs) 14:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Re. Ardwick Athletic F.C., User talk:Pabmeista


 * Hi there.


 * Your signature, above, did not work; it looks like you entered  - and you only need to put ~ . Alternatively, you can click the 'sign' button, pictured here.


 * I just noticed that the article was called "Ardwick Athletic F.C" - note the lack of a dot on the end; I have renamed it by moving the article to Ardwick Athletic F.C..


 * The reason for the ? on the kits was, there was no 'patterns' specified; even if the patterns are blank, they need to be given. I changed it to this;

leftarm1=D2EEFF|body1=D2EEFF|rightarm1=D2EEFF|shorts1=FFFFE8|socks1=FFFFF9
 * pattern_la1=|pattern_b1=|pattern_ra1=
 * leftarm2=D8EE49|body2=D8EE49|rightarm2=D8EE49|shorts2=FFFFE7|socks2=FFFFF9
 * pattern_la2=|pattern_b2=|pattern_ra2=}}


 * It seems to be OK now; see this edit.


 * Please do ask any questions here, on my talk page, at any time. Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  22:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Chzz! ~

Cramerbob
I am new to this - can you please help me by giving an example of what needs to change?

This is a critical new concept in the music industry, and it is industry-wide, not company specific.

I feel strongly it's important and will do anything and everything to modify it to be beneficial to the community, but I;'m a reasonably smart guy, and don't know what specifically I can change to address your concerns.

thanks for you help and sorry for being more naive than I should about this

thanks,B —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cramerbob (talk • contribs) 14:48, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Re. Direct-to-Fan


 * Hi there!


 * When you leave a (new) message on a talk page, please put it into a section - I have done that here, by adding.


 * [[Image:Signature button.png|right]]
 * Also, 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 here.


 * Regarding Direct-to-Fan, as you say, it is a new concept; therefore, there is very little information about it on the interweb. Wikipedia articles must be verifiable - the reader should be able to 'check the facts', and we do this by providing references to reliable, secondary sources. With this new product, I cannot find such sources, therefore it fails to meet the notability requirements; Wikipedia only documents things that are already reasonably well-known; it is absolutely not for making things well-known.


 * Please review those policies, and do feel free to comment in the deletion discussion, Articles for deletion/Direct-to-Fan. All opinions are considered there, while we discuss the article, but any ultimate decision will be based on the applicable policies that I have mentioned above.


 * Above all, I strongly recommend that you read the business FAQ.  Chzz  ►  22:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

RE:Personal attacks
Thank you for your prompt response. It is highly appreciated. I warned this person as instructed and she removed the warning. Suggestions? Thanks again JoyDiamond (talk) 21:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Please refer to my earlier reply, where I suggested either Wikiquette alerts, or the Administrators' noticeboard.  Chzz  ►  22:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Try, try, try again (Troutman article)
Chzz,

Okay, I deleted the language about "professional," the Resume Place being a small, woman-owned business, and about Troutman popularizing the Federal Resume format in the 1990s. If I can dig up better references in the future, I'll post them.

The only outstanding complaint you had other than the above was about online references to Troutman's books (#4 in our last exchange). Her books are referenced in footnotes 3 and 4.

If that's ok, can we go live with the article?

Thanks, --Burkeguy 22:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs)

When you're back, could you let me know about the Troutman article?
Thanks! I hope you're having a good time wherever you are.

--Burkeguy 13:23, 5 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs)

 Chzz  ►  18:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Signature button.png|right]]

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 here.


 * Re. User:Burkeguy/Kathryn_Troutman


 * Reasons why I wouldn't currently make it live include;


 * The first para is unreferenced - the following specific 'facts' either need a reference, or need removing;
 * "assists job seekers interested in working for the U.S. government"
 * "founder and president of The Resume Place"


 * The following bit, about resume place, sounds like spam. It's probably unnecessary detail in an article which is, after all, about this person, not this company. -"writes and designs federal and private-sector resumes, provides coaching and education in the federal hiring process, and offers services for federal resume writing, coaching, resume book publishing, job searching for career professionals, and workshops"
 * "She has worked in this field since 1971" - this does not appear to be cited to an appropriate source
 * "Troutman is a Federal Career Coach and a Certified Career Management Coach." - also no ref

On the "style" side of things, you could make the references much neater. For example, you have this type of thing;

...appears as...

1. ^ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/09/07/DI2006090700886.html

...this would be much neater if you put;

...which would appear as;

1. ^ Washington Post article

...even better would be to use citation templates;

...which would appear as;

1. ^

The referencing/style thing is not a reason to stop the article being created - it is just something that would make it look better. Hope this helps.  Chzz  ►  19:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2009 Thekkady boat disaster
Hello! Your submission of 2009 Thekkady boat disaster at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 03:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

✅ I hope OK now?  Chzz  ►  05:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg accepted  Chzz  ►  19:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi and thanks for your help on the irc page. I decided to use a good template and change the colors/text/etc. Thank you again for you help! fetchcomms 03:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries, any time, &c. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  03:22, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your help. Wlshmj (talk) 04:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Just a reminder
Hi there,

A few days ago you reacted in my "helpme" tag I used in relation to my first attempt to write a wikipedia article on egovernment. Since instant messaging is very difficult for me, I would appreciate if you wrote your comments on the approach I used in my article in my talk page.

TIA

Takis Rentzepopoulos (talk) 10:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Doing on user talk  Chzz  ►  22:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

villages
It is well established that all villages with a real existence are considered  notable at Wikipedia. See WP:COMMOBN - its one of our strongest agreements with respect to notability. I removed the prod on Urapur   DGG ( talk ) 18:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, fair enough; I knew about places/notability - it was another mistake I'm afraid. I was looking at another users edits, and was viewing this version, which didn't say it was even a village; I tried to find info about it, but was unable to do so, hence PROD. Forgot for a moment that I was not looking at the current version - hence my comment of "Lacks any context".  Chzz  ►  21:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

There is still something wrong with the footnotes in the Elizabeth Taylor article. Help please.
Thanks for your efforts, but there is still something wrong with the footnotes in the Elizabeth Taylor article. The footnotes are appearing at the bottom of the section only, not the page. Help please.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Taylor#Superstardom_.281955-1970.29

Thanks. JGKlein (talk) 22:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * That was my fault, actually, and I fixed it before I'd read this. What happened...I edited just the section, not the whole thing. When you do that, and use preview, you don't see refs - so, it is sometimes handy to put a temporary at the end of the section, so they will show up in preview. I forgot that I had done so, and saved; I removed it soon after.


 * I hope that it's all OK now. If not, or any further questions, please reply here.


 * As a tip, when linking to a wiki page (as you did above), rather than put the full URL as an external link, it is better to use short-form, ie instead of  (which shows as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Taylor#Superstardom_.281955-1970.29), just put , which displays as Elizabeth_Taylor. Best,   Chzz  ►  22:58, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * P.S. I notice that your own talk page is awfully long; would you like me to set up 'auto-archiving' for you? With an 'archives' box at the top, and everything longer than X months is auto moved into them? If so, just tell me X.  Chzz  ►  23:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, Auto-archiving would be good. How about 6 months? Thanks. JGKlein (talk) 23:09, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

✅

Just wanted to let you know :)
Hey Chzz, just wanted to let you know that your hook has been moved to Prep 1 and to again complement you on the article and the picture. Great work! –Katerenka (talk • contribs) 00:29, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Cheers!  Chzz  ►  00:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh!

 * Hi! Are you hurt with me? Sorry…-- User:He-l-en1959Mirabella Star 14:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * What do you mean? I don't understand...


 * My previous replies to your messages on this page have been archived, if that's what you were looking for - see here.  Chzz  ►  18:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I mean my answer on your remark that "Wikipedia is not a social web". Did you not read it? User:He-l-en1959--Mirabella Star 13:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (Re. User_talk:Chzz/Archive_15 Yes, I did read it - I didn't know that it needed a reply, sorry. The thing about talk page threads is...it's best to answer things underneath, indented (like this), but there is the problem that the other user isn't alerted. Usually, I try to remember to put a quick note on the other users talk page, often using the template - but sometimes I do forget. Some people use their watchlist to keep an eye out for such things, but I struggle with that, because it soon gets too large to be managable - my current watchlist has over 9000 entries :-O Anyway - I hope that all is well, and do feel free to ask anything, any time, of course. Best,   Chzz  ►  00:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I see that your talk page is too large, but my own page is not. That's why I ask you to write me on my talk page (if you want to do this, of course). Otherwise I never know if you answer me (the note about a new message for me appears only when it is placed on my page). Anyhow, I'll be glad to receive your messages and advices subsequently. You may be sure that I prize them very much :"-) User:He-l-en1959--Mirabella Star 14:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

not verifiable
The standard for deletion is "verifiable", not "verified". This means we don not delete articles for lacking references, we delete them if we cannot find references--see WP:BEFORE. For the article Sodium Working Group, 3rd party refs might be  available -- but article seems to be copied from somewhere. Since it's obvious where, even though not online, I marked it for speedy deletion accordingly.  DGG ( talk ) 23:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep, agreed. I made a mistake on that one. Sorry.  Chzz  ►  00:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

For another article you prodded, Tim Richmond (photographer) the standard is WP:CREATIVE, and works in major museums like the National Gallery are considered proofs of notabilty. You should of course look for better references.

Most of your many deletion nominations by various processes are excellent, and I see you often try to rescue articles. Just remember to always look for refs, and if you did not find them, to indicate this & say where you looked, & remember the guidelines other than GNG. Checking you contributions list, perhaps you should go a little slower and do fewer at a time. Myself, I have found that when I patrol I cannot do that much or go that fast  without error. even with semi-automated programs.

Please be careful with the template "This article does not meet the general notability guidelines - for inclusion, an article requires significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The only source here is a primary source, hence the article is not verifiable.| " -- unless you have checked and found no other sources, and no special rule other than the GNG applies-- btw, what template is that--it needs to be edited so it conforms to policy.  DGG ( talk ) 01:22, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not a template; it was something I had in notepad. I avoid using templates for such things, so that I can modify the reasoning as applicable. More recently, I have indeed been checking more, and I've been using something like, ie "no RS and I can't find any", which I hope you'll agree is better.


 * Thanks for the feedback, which I do appreciate. I slightly disagree with one thing, and that is, I consider WP:GNG to be applicable to everything, whether it is a professor, a band, a book, or whatever. I'm fully aware that they're all just guidelines, and that WP:N is too; I just have concerns that in many cases, Wikilawyering is used to circumvent deletions according to the exact wording in things such as WP:BAND (and, indeed, especially in that specific one), rather than common sense prevailing.


 * Thanks again, feedback always appreciated, and I will act upon your comments.  Chzz  ►  01:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd love to use common sense as the criterion, except that yours' and mine might be very different, & similarly for each of the 10,000 or so active Wikipedians here.   DGG ( talk ) 00:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Answers Solutions Knowledge
Hi. I've nominated Answers Solutions Knowledge, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 12:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC) Thanks, -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 12:20, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism on Barbara Walters' Wiki Article
Chzz, how do I request that Barbara Walters's article get a "semi-protect" status so that only established users can make edits? Look at these two recent vandalisms:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barbara_Walters&diff=prev&oldid=318452194

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barbara_Walters&diff=next&oldid=318832388

I am reading Barbara Walters' autobiography Audition: A Memoir, and I greatly admire her for being one of the first women to break into the previously all-male field of TV news reporting. Her Wikipedia article is being vandalized by young, immature people who think she is an object of ridicule and have no concept of how she has opened doors for other women.

I think Barbara Walters is great, and she deserves better.

Thanks! JGKlein (talk) 20:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Such requests are made in WP:RPP, but please read carefully the guide there; because Wikipedia is "the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit", it is a last resort, and only used in cases of persistent vandalism from many different addresses. If it is occasional, or from few users, then the best approach is to warn and ultimately block the individuals.  Chzz  ►  20:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. JGKlein (talk) 20:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Seeking Guidance/Input
Chzz, I am seeking input on the following and have placed this on my talk page for dialogue:

The Epstein School is an integrated bilingual school; after this page is completed, I am interested in creating the page through translation to Hebrew for international wiki use/Israel. Where can I find information/guidlines regarding this? Any advice/info you can offer is apppreciated. I am interested in placing a Hebrew caption on an image of the school building to represent the bilingualism of the school, but I do not believe the caption will take Hebrew. Would it be alright if I incorporated it into the jpg file itself? Or would it be better a a separate Hebrew text graphic apart from the school image?

With my continued appreciation for your assistance/advice. Clou2epstein (talk) 16:00, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is pretty good with inter-language issues; as you can see here, there is no problem in having text or captions in Hebrew. As this is the English Wikipedia, however, you should provide a translation. This can be done with code, such as;

Psalms (Tehilim, תהילים, or "praises") is a book of the Hebrew Bible...


 * This appears as;

Psalms (Tehilim, תהילים, or "praises") is a book of the Hebrew Bible...


 * With regards to translation to another Wiki, there is no problem. The WP:GFDL licence just means that you need to state who wrote it, and that is easily achieved with a note on the talk page linking back to the other wiki. The shortcut for the Hebrew Wikipedia is 'he', so links such as עמוד_ראשי will work from here: עמוד_ראשי. The code for the English Wikipedia is "en", so, from the Hebrew wiki, you link to the English pages with e.g. main.


 * I hope that this answers your questions. Best,  Chzz  ►  20:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow...excellent...I had no idea! Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clou2epstein (talk • contribs) 20:04, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow your wonderful...
Thank you again for helping me get my user page in order. I did just go back and re-edit a couple of things again, this time with no issues. I took out any refrences to Disneyland and the Castle photo as we'll (But thank you that was so cool I really liked that photo, wish I could place it on my user page) but I've decided for now to keep my employment out of my user page on wikipedia for now. I can see all the other changes you made as well that linked my words back to wikipedia, wow that was above the call of normal help and I'm so forever greatful, great first impression on me you made. I hope to be of such help to someone else in the future as well. I'm good at being an electrician and working with wires, writing is a completly new inviroment for me I can barely spell the word history on a good day. I will start to get around now and start learning and see where it takes me, hope you have a great day. Not sure how to sign a page like it says on the top of this page but here goes... Sincerly, Tinkermen (talk) 04:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)John FrancisTinkermen (talk) 04:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Great; you signed just fine. The picture was really just by way of an example, so you know how to add other pics of your choice. You can always go back in the history of any page and look at older versions, you can even edit them and see how things were done - for example, here is the history of your user page, and if you click on the little (prev) on the line where I added the picture, you see this, showing just what I changed.


 * I'm sure that you will have lots more questions, so please do feel free to ask at any time. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  04:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Deleted (AfD)

 * Bo Crese removed by Uclawrites with no edit summary)
 * Articles for deletion/Bo Crese


 * Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur) removed by Kylafornia with no edit summary
 * Articles for deletion/Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur)


 * The Real Truth About Success removed by I'm nonpartisan ' (deleted warning box, I intend to update page with reviews of the book from legitamate resources) '
 * Articles for deletion/The Real Truth About Success


 * Michael J. Wagner removed by Amcd64 ' (an additional link has been added as well as an explanation in talk page) '.
 * Articles for deletion/Michael J. Wagner

Not deleted

 * Be At TV removed by Ali.gunning with the following edit summary ' (Removal of deletion notice - addition of Guardian newspaper reference as advised ~) '.
 * Tidied up, removed promotional stuff; borderline notability. Tagged appropriately.  Chzz  ►  11:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Michael Somos, by User:Xxanthippe, '(remove prod. Noted by Mathworld. Should be AfDd.)'
 * Articles for deletion/Michael Somos


 * EMedicine, by User:Arcadian, '(if you want this deleted, please propose at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)'
 * Articles for deletion/EMedicine

Requesting assistance
Chzz, I would appreciate it if you would consider adding the information below to The Epstein School page to expand the introduction after the last sentence in that section. It is my plan to add the Eagle/crest image as well soon, at the same time as I add the school image. I hope to begin graphics enhancement sometime next week after I get text complete....been very busy:

(removed info here  Chzz  ►  08:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC))

Clou2epstein (talk) 19:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I've moved this request over to the article talk page, Talk:The Epstein School, so that others editing the article can see it. I'll answer it there.  Chzz  ►  08:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

REPLYI see your reply Chzz...I have replied to yours. Would you please re-consider the requests now? I have made adjustments etc.

Also, I was a little confused because you did not place it on the talk page...but rather the discussion page. I thought we were requested no to put these requests there...please let me know how you would like these issues addressed. However, I have responded to you. Please reconsider the request now. Thanks Clou2epstein (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Clou2epstein (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry - my fault - bit of confusion over terminology here. "Talk page" is actually synonymous with "Discussion page". Every page has a talk page - whether it's a user page, an article, a template, whatever. By default though, the menu will show that tab as "Talk" for user space pages, and as "Discussion" for article space pages. I am using a different 'skin', which shows it as "Talk" in both cases - just because it is a bit shorter.


 * So - talk page = discussion page; same thing. The correct place to discuss proposed changes to an article is on it's talk/discussion page, which is where I moved it to. Sorry about the confusing terminology. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  00:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

You have serious problems.
So now that you've failed to get my Alias Eclipse article deleted, you're exacting revenge by decimating my contributions to the Softimage|3D article? This is preposterous. You have serious emotional issues and have not business moderating this web site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajerimez (talk • contribs) 21:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

untitled
why whould they want to run into eachother? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pabmeista (talk • contribs) 18:45, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Bots/Requests for approval/ChzzBot
Hi there Chzz, just letting you know that this task is now approved. Make sure you wait until the bot is flagged before editing, the flagging will show up in this log. Also, you may want to add the bot to Category:Newsletter delivery bots and update it's userpage to explain the task. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * :) –Katerenka (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Aye, looks like the bot has now been flagged :), BTW, minor bot edits on user talk aren't meant to trigger the new messages banner, just FYI. That's fine if you use the text :). Also, thank you for helping out Flwr petal fairy :). Hope to see you at BRfA in the future (you may want to watchlist WP:BOTR if you haven't already done so). Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: speedy deletion of Woodland Fairy Acres Article
Hi Chzz,

Thank you for all of your information!

I have left a message with Hell in a Bucket and am now waiting to hear back from him. I'm not sure when he will be getting back to me, though. So, I guess I will just check back periodically to find out what I can do to get our article published.

You, Hell in a Bucket and Kingpin13 have all been very nice!

Thanks so much!

Flwr petal fairy (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You're welcome; please click this to talk to helpers. If you get the hang of that, you can get instant help at any time. Best,  Chzz  ►  20:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Rouge test assessment
Thanks much Chzz! Your help is, as always, much appreciated. PR and perhaps a muster up to GA status sounds like a fine idea. :) JoeSmack Talk 17:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur)
Another editor has created Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur), which has the same name as an article which was deleted earlier as the result of Articles for deletion/Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur). My first reaction is that the subject is notable, but the article is a mess. I am reluctant to invest time in it, though, if the article is going to be deleted. Could you take a look at the references and decide whether there is enough evidence of notability to make the article worth salvaging? -- Eastmain (talk) 23:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Previous version was written by
 * Recreated by


 * I have tagged it for speedy deletion under criterion G4: Recreation of deleted material, that is, "A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy of a page deleted via a deletion discussion". I don't consider the revised version to be sufficiently different for the original, and recreating it from a different account just a few days after a deletion decision isn't appropriate; It looks like has used another account,, to recreate the page.


 * If you feel that a page could be written, that would be fine - you could always copy the existing page to your user space and work on it there, or, if it has been deleted, you could ask for it to be userfied. I couldn't find enough coverage before - that's why I took it to the deletion discussion.  Chzz  ►  07:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

My Tom Frost article
Hello. Thanks for reading my article of Tom Frost, and asking a question. I've responded to your concerns about whether Frost was part of the first ascent of the Salathé Wall on El Capitan. He was. Please let me know if you have any other questions. By the way, I've only been writing Wikipedia articles for a few months, so I appreciate any feedback very much. I still have a lot to learn. Jim Heaphy (talk) 01:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

✅

Sorry
I gave some more info on my talk page. Doc Quintana (talk) 02:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks again.

P.S - In this instance, outside of ignoring it, was the tone from my end appropriate here? I've run into a bunch of rather rude people on Wikipedia to be honest and I try to do my best not to exacerbate the situation while still being honest to my opinion. Doc Quintana (talk) 02:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

✅ on user talk  Chzz  ►  02:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

? Doc Quintana (talk) 04:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, I'm sorry; I marked this as 'done' because I thought that, from the discussion on your talk page, you had decided to take no further action - I didn't think you still wanted a response to this query. Sorry about that.


 * To be honest, previously I didn't examine the discussion in detail, because it wasn't relevent to answering your help request; any comment can be assessed in isolation, with regards to WP:ATTACK, and it really doesn't matter what has been said before. As it says in that link, "avoid becoming hostile and confrontational yourself, even in the face of abuse."


 * Looking now, at Talk:Wookiee, I'd really have to say that was correct; any information that is challenged needs a reliable source, and Wookiepedia is not a reliable source, because it is a tertiary information collector; in the same way, Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source.


 * With regard to the tone of the debate, it looks fine to me. Hope this helps,  Chzz  ►  07:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I don't entirely agree(I put the link to Wookiepedia for the secondary source that they used), but I said I'd let you handle it and I trust your judgement. He or she was incredibly rude, and i'm glad that in your opinion that I was not. Doc Quintana (talk) 14:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikis are not reliable sources, because anyone can edit them. If the wiki cites sources, you should track down those sources, check the facts that they verify, and cite them directly. Wikipedia makes no claims that what we write is true, just that it is verifiable; everything that we write is effectively "according to xxx" - that's what a reference is. Wookiepedia is the same; when reading a wiki, one should never trust the information provided - instead, it is necessary to check the sources and draw your own conclusions as to the validity or otherwise. IIf you're a star-wars fan, I'm sure you'll know that you can never trust a wookie!  Chzz  ►  22:37, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

could you possibly do me a favor??
I had an opportunity to go over to this person's talk page [] right notice how you had sent him your exceptional welcome to Wikipedia box basically explaining every single wiki policy around. Sadly when I joined I only got the mechanical bot. I was wondering if possibly you can send the same policy box over to my talk page? it would certainly help me out a great deal. Thank youTlatseg (talk) 06:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I seem to have many names today, ha. I hope you don't mind, Chzz, but I have gone ahead and fulfilled his request, since it was rather simple. :) Warmly, –Katerenka (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * well I asked CHZZ to give me that pretty little box, but it looks like you intercepted his message, or is it her message. Either way that was damn quick.  Much appreciated.   I almost put this message on your talk page but then I went over here instead.    Thanks againTlatseg (talk) 06:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Great stuff; thx Katerenka  Chzz  ►  07:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * well this is pretty damn embarassing. I went over to the live talk section and signed in as "uh" but I could not find the text box to respond.  Like I said pretty damn embarrassing.  Three times I tried and still could not find it.  Can anybody help??Tlatseg (talk) 07:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The textbox is right at the bottom of the screen :). Best - Kingpin13 (talk) 08:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * found it. Thank you so very much.  I keep my screen a little bright sometimes so white on white is difficult to see.  Sorry to use up so much of your talk page Chzz.  Anyway thanks for the help guys.Tlatseg (talk) 08:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you ...
for the barnstar, but I'm not sure why you gave it to me. There hasn't been a lot of activity at the article. In any event, it's much appreciated. — Malik Shabazz 19:54, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Please check Troutman article again
I scrubbed it again with your comments in mind...please advise.

Thanks, --Burkeguy 15:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I always sign my name, so why does my comments always get tagged as "the following unsigned comment..."? --Burkeguy 15:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs)


 * Re. User:Burkeguy/Kathryn Troutman - I think this would be OK to move to the live area; of course, what happens to it after that is anyones guess! Due to the COI thing, I suggest that I move it over, for you. If you would like me to do so, just confirm here. Also, please note, per WP:BESTCOI - once it is live, please do not edit it directly; instead, make any suggestions on the discussion page.

YES, Please move it to the live area for me. Thanks!!! Really appreciate your patience and working with me over these past few months. Would you let me know when the article is "live"? Have a great weekend, Alex. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs) 21:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Re. Signature - there must be something wrong in your preferences; could you please click on "my preferences", and remove anything in the 'signature' box; just leave it empty. And make sure that the "Sign my name exactly as shown" is not checked. Then test it; edit any page (perhaps WP:SANDBOX) and put the four tildes; that might fix it.

Hey, that worked!! Thanks again.--Burkeguy (talk) 22:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

 Chzz  ►  13:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

✅

8 x important redirections!
If you can and want to, please help! Regarding Walter Siegmeister, Hilton Hotema and Kenneth Hsu. You might find them interesting to read... They are not well represented. It’s important they are not forgotten.

1. Can you redirect those who type George R. Clements, George Clements, or Kenyon Klamonti, to Hilton Hotema. 2. Can you redirect those who type Raymond Bernard or Raymond W. Bernard, to Walter Siegmeister. (please note there is also ready a Raymond Bernard listed) 3. Can you redirect those who type Kenneth J. Hsu to the Kenneth Hsu listing. 4. Can you redirect those who type Naymi to Noemi Carrion. 5. Can you redirect those who type Kulvinskas to Viktoras Kulvinskas. 6. Can you redirect those who type Ehretism to Arnold Ehret. 7. Can you redirect those who type Lovewisdom to Johnny Lovewisdom. I know it's a lot, but they are important listings! Thanks a lot! Zanze123 (talk) 23:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)]

remineralization
Hi, If you have time and are inspired to help, I wish to create a remineralization article, but one already exists, for a different field. So could you create another 1 called Remineralization (mineralomics) and point it to 'rock dust' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_dust). Then I will build up the rock dust page. Thanks a lot. Zanze123 (talk) 23:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)]

Reply

 * Before we get into this;
 * A) Your signature appears to be broken. Please go to "My preferences" and, in the signatures section, un-check the box labelled "Sign my name exactly as shown" (which I *think* is the problem there)
 * B) When you mention an article name in a message, please wikilink it. For example, please put Hilton Hotema, which comes out like this; Hilton Hotema


 * OK, now, to respond to your request;


 * I have just done the first one, and therefore created redirects George R. Clements and Kenyon Klamonti. I did this as follows;

a) I put "George R. Clements" into the search box, and, when told that "There were no results matching the query. You may create the page" I clicked the redlink to create it. b) I clicked the 'redirect' icon in the edit screen, which is labelled #R, and filled in the article name. This gives;


 * 1) REDIRECT Hilton Hotema


 * And that is how to make a redirect.


 * I could not make a redirect from George Clements because, as you can see, we already have an article with that name. So, in this case, I edited the existing article and added the following code to the top of it,


 * That adds this;


 * For more on that, see WP:HATNOTE


 * Please forgive the wordy explanation above; I always prefer to explain things, rather than just do them. With that in mind, I have not yet done the other things that you requested; you might wish to have a go at them yourself (per WP:BOLD). If, however, you would prefer me to make those changes for you, then please let me know, here.  Chzz  ►  02:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks
thanks. i'd prefer if you could make the changes. right now my goal is speedy content rather than slow programming. thanks anyway as i can refer back to your explanations in the future. Zanze123 (talk) 21:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)]

redirections
Hi, hope you could redirect Remineralization to Rock Dust. Also the other 8 redirections mentioned previously. Did you get my question about secondary citation? At the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenia_Lubich is:

Infobox Musical artist Name = Jenia Lubich Alias = Jenya Lubich Background = solo_singer Origin = Saint Petersburg, Russia Years_active = 1998-present Genres Pop, Rock, Jazz, Electronica Labels = Naïve Music, Peacefrog Records, Perfect Kiss/PIAS

Yet it does not all appear on the published page.

Any ideas of how to fix this?

Thanks Zanze123 (talk) 18:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)}

Replies
Please could you try to fix your signature - did you try to uncheck the box in preferences, as I said above? Or maybe there is an extra "[" in there, as you seem to be signing with three of them at the start, instead of two; User:Zanze123|Zanze123.

I fixed the infobox in Jenia Lubich - there was an equals-sign missing, and "genre=" and "label=" needed to be singular, not plural. See this edit.

Re. remineralization/Rockdust - sorry, I don't understand what you intend there. There's no point making a page called "Remineralization (mineralomics)" that points to an existing article, I don't think; it's unlikely anyone will every search for "Remineralization (mineralomics)". If you think that Rockdust should be renamed, that's another matter...you can move the page yourself.

Sorry I haven't had time to do the other redirects yet. (see below)

Regarding the citation, I'm not really clear on what you mean; could you please explain a bit more. Thanks,   Chzz  ►  11:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Redirects;


 * Raymond Bernard to Walter Siegmeister ✅ (hatnote)
 * Raymond W. Bernard to Walter Siegmeister ✅
 * Kenneth J. Hsu to Kenneth Hsu
 * Naymi to Noemi Carrion Changed to redirect to Noemí Carrión ✅
 * Kulvinskas to Viktoras Kulvinskas ✅
 * Ehretism to Arnold Ehret ✅
 * Lovewisdom to Johnny Lovewisdom ✅

 Chzz  ►  15:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

TPS thanks
Hey, thanks for the award :). Sometimes I'm not sure if users actually want me "stalking", so it's nice to be appreciated :). But methinks you mean the request that someone else left on your talk page :). Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, yeah; I went for the lazy option of the default message, although I figured that "someone else's" page made sense, in terms of it not being the page it was on. And yes...of course..having people answer questions for me is just great! Cheers,  Chzz  ►  16:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Jenia
I added a photo, but it does not appear. I do not know how to link the photo I uploaded to the space for the photo on the page. I put:

Image:|Caption1 < / gallery > }}

Zanze123 (talk) 17:02, 16 October 2009 (UTC)]


 * The actual filename you uploaded is "File:Jenia1.JPG" - the name is case-sensitive.


 * You shouldn't use 'gallery' though; that's only used for lots of pics. Instead, use;



(As shown, here)  Chzz  ►  17:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help.
Thanks. One question, how to centre a photo - the photo of Lubich is not centered under the table! I can't find a way to do that! {Zanze123 (talk) 19:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)}


 * I fixed it; as it was in an infobox, it needed to use the parameter of the infobox rather than a separate image tag; see Template:Infobox_Musical_artist  Chzz  ►  19:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Moozement tagged for deletion
Hi,

regarding tagging the Moozement for deletion... "I notice that you removed the 'proposed deletion', but, it still does not seem to have any independent reliable sources. Are you able to add any?" I wrote some comments on the Talk:Moozement talk page.

Since the first edit I added already few, so it now consists the following references/external links:

1) Moozement homepage - Obviously not independent. :)

2) Moozement in Quarkbase.com - profile page. Ok. Probably filled by the owners.

3) Killerstartups, MoozeMent.com - Social Training Log 2009-05-28. This is the biggest "authority" in following Nordic / Baltic tehcnology startups. They did an interview and a coverage story of Moozement. If this is not independent I don't know what is?

4) Artic Startup, Moozement – A Simplified Training Log For Sharing Your Activities, 2009-05-15. An article by again an independent organisation following startups in the Northern Europe.

The following ones are more individual bloggers. I'd rather leave them out, but you insisted on more references.

School library association of Victoria covering the use of Moozement for physical education. Moozement.com; something quite interesting List of top 60 social media sports sites Moozement, a social training for our sports (in Italian)

I don't understand your comment that the article doesn't consist ANY independent sources...?

best regards,

Jarno Alhonen (talk) 10:48, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * killerstartups.com doesn't look like a reliable source to me; I note the 'submit your startup' button; it looks like a site designed to allow people to promote their startup company. It really is not a claim to notability. "Posted by pbarker" with a link to another website for 'beta startups'. arcticstartup.com is very much the same sort of thing; you can pay them and be listed - that does not help pass notability requirements. And, as you rightly surmise, blogs are rarely useful. I see no evidence of the requisite "significant coverage in independent sources". On the talk page, you mention other articles - I'm fully aware that there are lots of terrible articles on Wikipedia; all we can do is try to fix that - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for an explanation of why this is not an appropriate argument for keeping a page.  Chzz  ►  21:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok, making statements on other articles doesn't really justify anything. That was immature, so I take that one back if I may...

To be listed on Articstartup you don't even need to pay. You can really do it yourself. The point was that they did a story and video interview on Moozement, which is of course not something they do for everyone...

To give an idea on the "trustworthiness" of Arcticstartup and their position in the Nordic market, here's a story in the biggest selling and oldest newspaper in Finland called "Helsingin sanomat" using Arcticstartup as a source in their story. http://www.hs.fi/talous/artikkeli/Jaikun+perustajat+ottivat+hatkat+Googlelta/1135250023315 The story itself is in Finnish, but you can run it through google translate if you want. This is like Wallstreet Journal referring to Techcrunch, on a smaller scale of course.

Jarno Alhonen (talk) 18:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * So, in other words, it's like a newspaper referring to a MySpace blog. They do that, but we wouldn't use the blog as a source. If you disagree, perhaps we could as on WP:RSN?  Chzz  ►  11:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Moozement  Chzz  ►  06:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)