User talk:Clou2epstein

Welcome
helpme I just saw your response. In addition to my image questions. I also do not understand where I am suppose to put the Clou2epstein (talk) 18:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC) my username does come up...confused.
 * Hi there. You put the ~ at the end of your comment to sign it.  Like this:  GARDEN  18:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

helpme ok...I understand..I think....:) I would like some help on The Epstein School wiki page. I have an image/picture of the school exterior with logo (250 pixels wide but I do graphic design work so I can make it whatever is needed) that I would like to upload and place in the infobox. It will not give me permission to upload.

I would like to edit my info box to correct city to Sandy Springs...tried to do this in the html code but it did not work.

I have worked hard to make improvments, as I want this to be a high quality page that represents the educational community well. Any suggestions you have for enahncement would be great.

Thanks, Clou2epstein (talk) 18:09, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You cannot upload images until your account is given "autoconfirmed" status (automatically given at four days or ten edits old) I'm afraid. For help editing Wikipedia's infoboxes you can use the infobox help page.  If you want some opinions on the article you can perhaps have a look at putting through peer review.  Hope this helps you!  GARDEN  18:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

ok...thanks. I already requested peer review yesterday. Clou2epstein (talk) 18:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'll change the article for you, but it's really a case of using the edit button.  The infoboxes are a little daunting but they're easy enough to understand.  See what I did there?  :) As for improvement I can only suggest that you take a look at similar school articles and use them as a basis for this one.  Watch for conflicts of interest though and try to be as neutral as possible.  Thanks,  GARDEN  20:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Garden...I did see the difference in the code and understand what you did now. I appreciate it! Clou2epstein (talk) 20:46, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, good luck improving the article! I'm right here if you need any further help with editing.  GARDEN 20:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

adminhelpI was trying to put the Epstein image I mentioned in the info box. I tried the following code: image = 250px| The Epstein School image/logo

It did not work. Please advise.

Earlier I had an issue with uploading the image...have I corrected it now under the fair use for education institutions? The location of the upload warning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Epstein_School_wiki-250_09.jpg

I continue to try to make The Epstein School page a quality academic page...:)

Thanks, Clou2epstein (talk) 00:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The correct image code is as follows:


 * I've removed the deletion notice from the image, because you have declared it as a fair-use image. However, this means you need to immediately add it to the article, as copyrighted images need to be used in at least one article according to our non-free content criteria. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, as I've noted on Garden's talk page, the adminhelp and helpme templates are intended to be placed here, on your talk page, when you have a general question not directed at anyone in particular. Please don't put these templates on other user's talk pages (although you may of course ask them questions), as this confuses those offering help. Thanks. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Hersfold...I appreciate the assistance and advice. I added the image to The Epstein School page as requested.

Didn't mean to confuse....I thought I was suppose to place them on both the admin page and my talk page. Thanks for letting me know! Clou2epstein (talk) 02:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)



Re:Thanks
Just to tell you—I removed the "!" from the title so it wouldn't be a duplicate of another title. Just so you know... — MC10 ( T • C • GB •[ L ]• EM )  23:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Possible conflict of interest
James, I have worked very hard to make this very accurate and list supporting references. If you have specific issues with the content please let me knbow what they are. I have looked at other articles on the site that have been held up as "models." The content here is no different. My goal is to simply communicate accurately and represent the educational community well. I am removing the COI since we are now in discussion. RespectfullyClou2epstein (talk) 16:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a connection with the Epstein School? As you may well be aware Wikipedia policy is that articles should be neutral and independent of their subject, and editing articles about organisations in which you are personally involved is discouraged as representing a conflict of interest. Also you should realise that any editing which seems to be intended primarily as a means of promoting or advertising an organisation is regarded as spam, and is likely to be deleted. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Additionally: do not remove an editing tag such as the COI tag until and unless the problems have been resolved. In this case, clearly, they have not. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:55, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I have read the guidelines and while an affliation may be discouraged, there is no requirement to not have an affiliation. While I am involved with the organization, I am also aware of my responsibilities to the community to keep the content accurate and supported by the facts. I have reviewed other pages of other schools and feel strongly that the content is not only inline with the spirit of the website, but also accurate. Further, since I am also an online community editor, I feel I have the unique ability to be both accurate and neutral, despite affiliation. Additionally, I have requested review. If you have specific issues with the content, then please feel free to let me know what they are and I will be happy to discuss them. ThanksClou2epstein (talk) 23:43, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

The image was not the same. This new image was an image of the school building with a school logo which was approved by an wiki administrator for use. I have no problem with deleting the prior image you have placed there. But that image is dated and not suited for use any longer. I repectfully request that this be returned to its original state. thanksClou2epstein (talk) 01:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Please see COI discussion below. Garden had already indicated that he did not feel the content was out of line. I have also requested peer review. I am commited to making this a valuable page that represents the educational community well, but respectfully request that until such time as that occurs, since an administrator has already found this to be fine that this page be left as is. I would personally rather spend valuable time on improvements. Respectfully, Clou2epstein (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you have a question?  Chzz  ►  00:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello Clou2epstein. Administrators mainly just push buttons, we have for the most part no special authority over judging content. As it does not seem like an administrator is needed here, I've changed the request for help accordingly. Skomorokh  01:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Clou2epstein. Regarding your COI, it would seem to me that you are fully aware of the issues, and are doing your best to make constructive edits.  However, please see WP:OWNERSHIP.  You are free to improve the article, but so is everyone else.
 * On the other hand, if you are making a significant number of changes at a particular time, you can label the page as "in use", thereby requesting that others do not edit it for that short period. Please see WP:INUSE. Hope this helps. ∙  AJCham  (talk) 02:08, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Due to your persistent edits here, I have filed a report at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:The Epstein School wiki-250 09.jpg
A tag has been placed on File:The Epstein School wiki-250 09.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ∙  AJCham  (talk) 01:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you recently added a tag to the page The Epstein School, which was removed because that article is not up for speedy deletion.

I think you may have meant to add the tag to this image-page: File:The Epstein School wiki-250 09.jpg, as the image itself is up for deletion.

If you need a hand, feel free to ask me on my talk page ;) --Arkelweis (talk) 01:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:The Epstein School wiki-250 09.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading File:The Epstein School wiki-250 09.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ∙  AJCham  (talk) 01:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Apologies - the original speedy deletion notification above was incorrect. The image ou uploaded has been replaced by File:Epstein-School-logo.png, so will soon be deleted as an unused non-free image.  ∙  AJCham  (talk)  01:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. To clarify, as AJcham said above, the image that was originally uploaded has been replaced with another, presumably better, image. This image is now being used in the info box in the article The Epstein School. Because of that, the old image that you uploaded is no longer needed and has been deleted, which is why your old copy of the infobox code (which references the OLD, no longer existant, image) doesn't work.


 * Hope that clarifies stuff for you, if not feel free to ask again (i've moved your comments from my user page to my talk page btw; don't worry if you get confused mate, wikipedia's a bit chaotic at times) --Arkelweis (talk) 02:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * replied to your question here

Top-posting
This talk page is a bit of a mess. Are you aware that the newest content is supposed to go on the bottom, not the top, of the page? Thus, your reply to a post should be beneath, not above, the original remark. It's such a tangle now I'm almost afraid to try to help you untangle it. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  02:30, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. No I was not aware. Thank you for letting me know.Clou2epstein (talk) 02:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC) I would appreciate any assistance you could provide. Clou2epstein (talk) 02:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up: I requested prod removal and object to the deletion. I certainly do not feel ownership as implied and I believe my continued efforts in good faith as well as pleas for assistance clearly indicate such. Any assistance or admin that could be provided to undo the deletion of the school image that was there etc would be appreciated. With my appreciation for your efforts. Clou2epstein (talk) 02:40, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Regarding the deleted picture, as I noted here, the previous image included a photograph, presumably copyrighted and non-free. This was not covered by the fair use claim on the logo, hence I uploaded the logo on its own. I doubt that an admin will undelete the old picture, unless a fair-use rationale can be provided for the non-free photograph which, given that the photograph is replaceable, may be difficult.  Regards, ∙  AJCham  (talk)  02:50, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

In reply: The picture is also owned by the school and is combined for use with the logo. Further, it was approved for fair use by an admin. ThanksClou2epstein (talk) 02:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC) I respectfully request that the image be restored.Clou2epstein (talk) 02:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe whoever approved the image was mistaken. I see no indication that the photo is a part of the logo - eg. the school's website does not include it as part of the logo. I don't understand why you feel that the new image is inadequate.  If you want a photo of the school to appear on the article also, by all means do so, but it must be a freely licensed one - if the school is local to you, you could take the photo yourself in order to ensure this. ∙  AJCham  (talk)  03:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply: The image is routinely used as part of the school's image along with the logo. The image was combined with the logo to provide a single graphic to represent.If the admin would like proof of other samples where the school image has been used along with logo for school identication I am happy to provide that to them. Again, respectfully requesting the image be reverted. ThanksClou2epstein (talk) 03:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

See above.

Epstein School photo
Hello, I came here in response to the adminhelp template. AJCham is correct above as to the photo not being covered under a reasonable fair use claim. So, I won't be undeleting that image. Fortunately, the solution is simple. Clou2epstein, can you take a photo of the school and upload it here under the proper license (cc-by-sa)? Then we can all be happy, since there will be a photo of the school in the article and it will be under a free license. If you need help uploading, let me know, or use the helpme template. Thanks! kmccoy (talk) 03:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I will address this another day...as I have spent my time today instead on addressing issues and focusing on improvements, but this logo is not appropriate for the medium/style of this site...it was used for a site that has a gradient and as such has shadows etc. I will eventually request replacement with the correct no-gradient logo. I can add a picture with no problem...another day. ThanksClou2epstein (talk) 00:26, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Do not remove the COI template
The COI template at The Epstein School is intended to draw attention to your activities. If you keep trying to remove it, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A decision on the need for the template should be made by regular editors who know our policies. EdJohnston (talk) 03:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Please review discussion below.

REQUESTING COI REMOVAL AGAIN: I respectfully request that the COI be removed for four reasons:

1.The offensive Tech language is not even on the page. It was removed.

2. The technology section revision discussion was misleading and innaccurate.

3. There is now discussion about the tech section and I continue to work hard to improve the section.

4.I have acted in good faith to be informative and neutral and have invited discussion/input.

REPLY: Please show me the policy rule to indicate this. As I read through wiki policy, I see the following:

Dealing with possible COI: The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline.


 * COMMENT: Since we are in discussion I see no point in going futher and will respectfully again request removal of the template, besides the information in question has been REMOVED from the page. Please let me know what your issues are and I am happy to discuss them....assume good faith here...I have been polite and couteous.

BACK TO ...Dealing with possible COI: The next step is: If persuasion fails, consider whether you are involved in a content dispute. If so, an early recourse to dispute resolution may help. Another option is to initiate discussion at WP:COIN, where experienced editors may be able to help you resolve the matter without recourse to publishing assertions and accusations on Wikipedia. Using COI allegations to harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is prohibited, and can result in a block or ban.

Do not use conflict of interest as an excuse to gain the upper hand in a content dispute. When conflicts exist, invite the conflicted editor to contribute to the article talk page, and give their views fair consideration.


 * COMMENT: I have continually acted in good faith and have invited discussion...placing auto templates repeatedly is not in my opinion very nice. I invite discussion...and am happy to work with those who feel there is a problem. I assume good faith and I hope you will do the same.ThanksClou2epstein (talk) 04:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Rees11 (talk) 13:05, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

REPLY: I appreciate Rees11 comments as to moving for someone to revert the COI on the Conflict of interest/Noticeboard ....and Respectfully request that someone do this. I certainly have no interest in a war. I much prefer productive and peaceful environments and I believe my steadfast actions in inviting input prove that. I have truly worked diligently to enure the page represent the educational community well.

In response to Rees11: What you indicated in your statement regarding it being the same as before except the language commented on by Mike again is untrue. I VOLUNTARILY, after reading Orange Mike's comments removed substantially more that he never even discussed, as after thinking about his comments, I took them to heart, and felt other language should also be removed including the SACS language...which by the way, I could cite.

Below is the original text that Mike objected to...as well as the revised side by side. As you can see the revised text was significantly changed to be neutral in tone and discuss the topic of technology from an educational standpoint. The vodcast, I felt was educational and contained important information. I continue to act in good faith and have been polite.

HERE IS ORIGINAL TECHNOLOGY TEXT THAT WAS CHANGED AFTER HEARING ORANGE MIKE'S COMMENTS:

Students live in a digital world where they are exposed to an extraordinary amount of information. According to SACS, Epstein's Media and Technology program was held up as a model for other schools. The Epstein school understands the importance of technology in today’s rapidly changing world and provides an innovative technology environment which can quickly adapt to new developments in the field. The goal for students is that they grow beyond the mechanics of technology and acquire advanced research and critical thinking skills to become information literate. In today’s technological environment, information literacy is essential in building a foundation for success in the 21st century. It is the core of Epstein’s Media and Technology Program. Students learn to access, evaluate and manage data as part of the research and critical thinking process.

Informational Vodcast: More than ever, children are taking part in the online techno-social world known as Web 2.0. Children today are bombarded with messages and peer pressure to engage in online social networking. The Epstein School seeks to ensure that students are educated in the safe, responsible and moral ways in which to use technology and thus, created an online multimedia vodcast to help better understand both the benefits and the potential risks of online social networking.

HERE IS THE REVISED TEXT THAT REMOVED LANGUAGE IN QUESTION AND WAS PLACE UP AFTER HEARING COMMENTS FROM ORANGE MIKE:

Students live in a digital world where they are exposed to an extraordinary amount of information. The school's goal for students is to grow beyond the mechanics of technology and acquire research and critical thinking skills in order to become information literate. In today’s technological environment, information literacy is essential in building a foundation for success in the 21st century.

Informational Vodcast: More than ever, children are taking part in the online techno-social world known as Web 2.0. Children today are bombarded with messages and peer pressure to engage in online social networking. In an effort to ensure that students are educated in the safe, responsible and moral ways in which to use technology and the school created an online multimedia vodcast to help better understand both the benefits and the potential risks of online social networking.

REQUESTING REMOVAL AGAIN: I respectfully request that the COI be removed for four reasons:

1.The offensive Tech language is not even on the page. It was removed.

2. The technology section revision discussion was misleading and innaccurate.

3. There is now discussion about the tech section and I continue to work hard to improve the section.

4.I have acted in good faith to be informative and neutral and have invited discussion/input.

ThanksClou2epstein (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Please leave the template in place for now until the discussion has ended. It's quite clear that you have a COI - while I understand that you are contributing in good faith, it is best to let the situation be reviewed by the COI-free editors. Tim Song (talk) 19:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Input/Guidance/Assitance
Apologies for not replying sooner, I have been rather busy off-Wikipedia. I'm afraid I can't really add anything that hasn't already been pointed out above me. Perhaps a thorough reading of our conflict of interest guideline would be the best option to take. As for the tag, it should stay there as this is the protocol for articles such as this.  GARDEN 20:08, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

REPLY:

Thank you for your input garden, I have reviewed the guidlines and believe I have acted within the guidelines. Further, I have removed the controversial language as requested.

Infact point 4 of the guidelines in the "how to handle conflict" states that the following is encouraged: Reverting or removing their own COI edits. Cleaning up your own mess is allowed and encouraged.

PLESE NOTE:


 * I have done that...and have requested review. Infact, I have invited suggestions for improvement.


 * I also will AGREE, as requested to keep the tech information off until there is a concensus on text changes on the issue.

REQUEST AGAIN:

I respectfully request that the COI be removed for four reasons: 1.The offensive Tech language is not on the page. It was removed. 2. The technology section revision discussion was misleading and innaccurate. 3. There is now discussion about the tech section and I continue to work hard to improve the section. 4.I have acted in good faith to be informative and neutral and have invited discussion/input.

ThanksClou2epstein (talk) 21:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Despite all of this you still have an undeniable COI and thus I don't see the tag moving for now. Maybe wait a little until it settles a bit.  GARDEN  21:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * re: your request for input, I can't really add anything that Garden hasn't already, other than it now seems to have settled down and someone else has removed the COI tag. Only real thing I can add is that it's other people that should remove a COI tag that relates to your edits, not yourself ;-) The_Epstein_School article is looking good, btw :) --Arkelweis (talk) 14:17, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

REPLY:Thank you Arkelweis. The Epstein School article is a work in progress, but I continue to work diligently toward improvement. I have made substantial progress in the last three days; and while I have a long way to go, it is my hope to deliver on my promise of an article that will represent the educaional community well. Clou2epstein (talk) 01:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The purpose of articles in Wikipedia is to present the reader with neutral, verifiable information from reliable sources. It is not to represent the subject in a way which is pleasing or gratifying to the subject. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Request
2 items:

An editor has removed the following historical statement from The Epstein School page:

In 2006, The Epstein School was recognized by Senate Resolution 1205, introduced by Senators Hill of the 32nd district, Adelman of the 42nd district and Weber of the 40th district for dedication to scholastic excellence and for its many contributions to education in Georgia.

It was sourced with the resolution document itself on the Georgia State website as proof that the resolution was made:

http://wwww.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2005_06/pdf/sr1205.pdf

The document also sourced another statement that I have temporarily removed to remove the citation template, until further notice.

I continue to work diligently and would like some input and request that the coi template be removed. Please provide input/direction. Thanks. Clou2epstein (talk) 20:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll take a look; bear with me for a few minutes.  Chzz  ►  21:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Having looked, I see that this section was removed;


 * In 2006, The Epstein School was recognized by Senate Resolution 1205, introduced by Senators Hill of the 32nd district, Adelman of the 42nd district and Weber of the 40th district for dedication to scholastic excellence and for its many contributions to education in Georgia.


 * The edit comment said, "legislative resolutions are not evidence of much of anything"


 * If you disagree with that opinion, then please discuss it on the talk page of the article, ie Talk:The Epstein School, and ask the editor concerned,, on their talk page to please contribute to the discussion.


 * I think that it is likely that the second part could be reinstated, but please discuss it.


 * Per WP:BESTCOI, I advise you to not edit the article further yourself, but instead to discuss possible changes on the talk page of the article; if you do so, then we will be able to remove the 'coi' tag.


 *  Chzz  ►  21:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

REPLY Thank you for your input. I do not agree with removal comment as the source is documenting the occurance of Resoultion 1205, referenced in the text and made by an elected governing legislative body. Further, it is cited by linking to the goverment website, a 3rd party source.

I am not sure why you added the vodcast links above the correct source link which is the 3rd one listed. Please disregard them. The vodcast was removed after previous discussion. I have and continue to asked for input, feedback and peer review of material. Clou2epstein (talk) 23:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC) Thanks.


 * It's natural that you don't agree with the removal, because it's a positive comment in the article and you can't possible be objective as to what is encyclopedic and what is simply promotional. Even information that is properly cited may not be appropriate for inclusion in articles all the time; there is a certain style to encyclopedia articles that makes them more than an indiscriminate collection of verifiable facts.  This is exactly why people with an outside interest in the success or failure of the subject of an article should not be involved in its editing. Chzz offers good advice above. kmccoy (talk) 23:41, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been active in politics for 35 years and more. Legislative resolutions like that are explicitly designed to paint a non-neutral glowing portrait of the subject in order to stroke the egos of one or more constituencies. They are certainly not reliable sources for anything, and their passage just means somebody asked a legislator for a favor. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  23:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Would it be helpful to give the editor a week or so to get the page/content up first and then work on making everyone happy? It seems no sooner something good is put up and confirmed, someone else tears it down. Is there a way to draw a cease-fire?

And no Orange - I am not CLou - I'm you. Or your friendly alter ego. Akidd71 (talk) 00:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The article's up, and should stay up; we're just trying to make it better and bring it up to our standards. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Akidd71 for your suggestion. I would greatly appreciate some time to get it all together...and continue to request feedback/input on the talk page. I think you will find that I am a pretty easy person to discuss things with. Despite coi I do remain neutral in tone and I can be objective.(As demonstrated by my agreement with Mike about the vodcast language previously discussed....and how I moved further to remove more than noted in his comments.) As I continue to work towards improving the article, I continue to invite feedback here. Thanks Clou2epstein (talk) 01:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Your lack of objectivity is demonstrated by your disagreement over the removal of the text of the senate resolution, by your claim that it is good text to include in an encyclopedia article. I would greatly appreciate you taking the good advice that you've been given and restricting your edits to the talk page of the article, rather than the article itself.  Once articles are live in the encyclopedia, they are open for editing and criticism from all.  Please take the advice of WP:BESTCOI and make your edits on the article's talk page.  Thanks.  kmccoy (talk) 05:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Nobody owns articles. Akidd, please note that Clou2epstein is not the editor, there are many editors, and each have the same status in Wikipedia. The only important thing is that Clou2epstein has a conflict of interest, and therefore should not edit the article directly.


 * Clou2epstein, I strongly recommend that you do not edit the article further, but instead make suggestions on the talk page. I have just put a copy of the article into your user space, as User:Clou2epstein/The Epstein School. You could work on things there, and even refer to it on the talk page, for example "I have changed (some part of the article), please see my suggestion in User:Clou2epstein/The Epstein School " - or, for short suggestions, just paste it onto the talk page. But, please, to avoid problems, please follow best COI practice and refrain from editing the article directly. If you disagree with something, and you can explain why on the talk page, and if it agrees with Wikipedia policy, then the community will be quite happy to come to an agreement. If you abide by the guidelines on COI practice, your opinion will certainly be considered very carefully.


 * Further discussion about the article content belongs in Talk:The Epstein School


 * Further requests for help and advice about Wikipedia policy belong here, on your talk page


 *  Chzz  ►  06:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply 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 an editor please 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, the Resolution information in question has been removed from the page.

Clou2epstein (talk) 23:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry I didn't get a chance to respond earlier, to your note on my own talk page.


 * I'll remove the COI template; I appreciate that you are trying to act according to best practices.


 * Once you have suggestions for the article, please put them on Talk:The Epstein School. Please make them as clear and specific as possible, such as . If you want to make a large change that you've made in your userspace, that's fine, just link to it on the talk page, ie


 * Any user can consider requests on that page, but to expediate the changes, by all means ask me specifically on my talk page.


 * Thanks for working 'with us'. Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  00:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Chzz...I appreciate your assistance, tips and helpful information. Clou2epstein (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Requesting Input/Advice
I am seeking input on the following:


 * 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) 15:58, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Requesting assistance
I would like an editor to add the following to The Epstein School page to expand the introduction after the last sentence in that section:

The Main Campus is located in Sandy Springs and an additional Intown Preschool campus is located in Buckhead. The school has a summer camp that is open to the public. The school's mascot is the Eagle.

I would also like to add the following as an intro to the Technology section:

Epstein's Media and Technology program's primary focus is on information literacy. Students are immersed in technology in all subject areas across the curriculum. The school has a wireless mobile technology lab; every classroom is equiped with computers that are internet-enabled. Elective classes such as digital photography, website design and robotics offer students additional ways to enrich their studies.

(hi, i added a tag so that your citations are clearer, hope you don't mind --Arkelweis (talk) 19:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC))

Not at all....as always, I appreciate the assistance. Clou2epstein (talk) 20:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Update Reply: This discussion was moved to The Epstein School Discussion/talk page. I would appreciate it if there are editors who would now reconsider this request as it was revised as requested to meet the standards.

With my appreciation for your efforts. Clou2epstein (talk) 14:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW, my user page stuff gets archived a lot - so the reply is now in User_talk:Chzz/Archive 15. Just FYI.  Chzz  ►  07:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Not sure exactly what significance/implication that might have, but I continue to appreciate your suggestions, input and assistance. With my appreciation.... Clou2epstein (talk) 14:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Images: Need Input/Advice
I would now like to add some images:


 * The school building
 * The school's Eagle crest
 * Hebrew graphic to represent bilingualism

Please let me know the following: What proceedure would you like me to follow with respect to the images? Upload them and then post a message requesting editor to add them? Clou2epstein (talk) 14:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

 Chzz  ►  15:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Pic
I added the pic.

I moved the stuff from my talk into my archive, User talk:Chzz/Archive 16.

I also copied the request over to Talk:The Epstein School.

For any future requests, please could you ask for them on that article discussion page, and then - if you wish - also leave a note on my own talk page; that way, any editor can do them - although of course I will try to do them, whenever I have time.

Nice pic. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  06:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Emblem
I've added it; see Talk:The Epstein School.  Chzz  ►  07:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Before I move Forward
 Chzz  ►  17:02, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Picture permission
I've replied; please see user talk:chzz  Chzz  ►  00:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * One more q, same place  Chzz  ►  02:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

✅ See reply  Chzz  ►  04:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Should an appropriate caption go on the image of the person at the computer? If so, just give me a shout. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  00:06, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

 Chzz  ►  08:00, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
 AJ Cham  05:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)