User talk:Dig79

 Hello Dig79, and Welcome to Wikipedia!  Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

--- Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:


 * Table of contents / Department directory


 * The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)

Need help?


 * Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
 * Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations


 * Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
 * The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
 * Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:


 * Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help


 * Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...


 * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[File:Button sig.png]] or [[File:Insert-signature.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
 * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Dig79, good luck, and have fun. – Hoary (talk) 06:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Burk Uzzle
I have reverted your large addition to Burk Uzzle. Duckduckgo shows that the same material was on Uzzle's website (not working right now). Much appears in various places on the web, e.g. this page of East Carolina University.

Of this edit, you wrote: "Burk Uzzle supplied information on what he wanted his Wikipedia page information to be." Of this one, you wrote: "Burk Uzzle himself asked me to update his entire Wikipedia entry to be updated in its entirety."

Anybody can write this kind of thing. But let's suppose it's true. Well then:


 * 1) Being authorized by the biographee doesn't suffice. The material must demonstrably meet copyright requirements. Here's the page on Uzzle's website, as of just a few days ago. It says at the foot: All rights reserved. That's straightforwardly, radically incompatible with Wikipedia's copyright requirements.
 * 2) It's worse: being authorized by the biographee is itself bad. Please see Conflict of interest.

That's why User:MONGO was right to revert your edits. (And why I reverted your second addition of this material.)

But what if you rewrote Uzzle's material about himself, and posted the result?

No. A photographer is not a disinterested source of information about his own achievements. Such material instead has to come from newspapers and the like. Of course, in practice newspapers and the like simply recycle what they are told; but we can say that the editorial staff of the NYT (or whatever) was satisfied.

For these reasons, you'll find that most articles on photographers are very dry, and indeed boring. (Here's one I worked on a little earlier today.) They stick closely to what others have said about the particular photographer.

Uzzle is a fine photographer and certainly merits an article vastly better than what now exists. Perhaps he can point you to articles about him in magazines and so forth. You'd be welcome to work from that. -- Hoary (talk) 06:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)