User talk:Hoff Entertainment

Welcome!
PRINCE IS DEAD! http://kdvr.com/2016/04/21/report-singer-prince-dead-at-57/

Hello, Hoff Entertainment, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Fontanelle (album) have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place   before the question. Again, welcome! ''' Flat Out   let's discuss it   10:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

How can we verify the information? everything that I added is 100% accurate, i should know, i was there. I also have a photo that I took of my friends Sam & Kat at Kat's place in Mpls while she was writing the album. I want to post the photo in the body of the page, as it is an actual photo taken while the recorded was being written -can it get more authentic than that? -Sam called me after I started writing and said that he is mentioned by name somewhere on one of the albums -did not give me detail, said he'd try to remember where this info can be found.

Of course, this is not the first time that wikipedia has rejected facts and corrections that are important and accurate. There is a problem here. because so much of the history of punk rock was poorly recorded (if it was even recorded at all) -by the nature of it, no one really gave 2 shits back then, we were too busy having fun. because of this there are giant gaps in the history. wikipedia should be flexible and utilize sources that are available, instead of discriminating against them because they do not meet the ridged set of rules, that distroys the possibility of an accurate depiction of historical events. Think about it, why even have a page about this album if the true story will never see the light of day. It might as well be ALL fiction. This song has nothing to do with Courtney love. She was no fun to be around. a bore who was motivated by shallow self-promotion. Wikipedia should do a better job creating an accurate historical environment when tackling a difficult subject such as this. in this case, we must rely on the only sources we have.
 * Wikipedia articles summarise what reliable and verifiable sources have to say on a subject. You say they are facts, but why should anyone believe you? Do you see the problem? Also read WP:NOT. Thanks ''' Flat Out   let's discuss it   00:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Please refer to WP:RS to learn what is and is not considered a reliable source. Personal knowledge that has not been published by a reliable source is considered original research and therefore not verifiable. If you dispute the policy, then you can raise your concerns at Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources. --Drm310 (talk) 04:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

"everything that I added is 100% accurate, i should know, i was there." I don't doubt you. Nevertheless, we have a policy on verifiability that states: "Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it."

Now, this does not mean the information you wish to add can never be verified. It seems like someone should write an oral history of those times to which you refer, as a way of getting all that down on a paper, in the vein of Please Kill Me. Failing that, a magazine article or interview would make an excellent source. Daniel Case (talk) 15:43, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to add my photo to the page. it will be a matter of time before I am able to verify this additional info. I will do investigative work. -for the most part, I don't think the events during that period of time merit a book like Please Kill Me. (i've met quite a few of the people in Please Kill Me, legs mcneil hags out in a Mpls bar from time to time, just like Richard LloyD of the band tELEVISION. -although there were some unique and CRAZY characters,Mpls post-punk scene was never as vibrant as NYC mid 70's to early 80's.) maybe "someone will give it a shot in the future." there is a book in the works, but I am not at liberty to reference it, as it is still unpublished. i bet it will be a bore.Hoff Entertainment (talk) 04:48, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

How do I add the photo?

File permission problem with File:Pickman's Model Mask DU 1984.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pickman's Model Mask DU 1984.jpg, which you've attributed to Distortions Unlimited. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 14:56, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

April 2016
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Prince (musician). Thank you. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:10, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I think a "thank you Mr. Hoff" is in order from the wikipedia staff here. I corrected an inaccurate page, and this is how I am treated? I am sorry if I bruised an ego or two by updating the page before you got to it, but, I knew the man, and felt that it was my responsibility to correct your mistakes. Yes, I may have forgotten a few details, but this website is so full of inaccurate info, that it may be best to erase all of it, and start over. My edits stand as accurate, so drop the ego business, and go with the flow baby. "This IS what it sounds like, when the doves cry"


 * You added a claim stating that a person was dead without providing a reliable source. You were properly reverted. Just source your claims next time. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 17:55, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

You are forgiven Mendelive. Please be more considerate in the future. This is a project for all, not a website that is controlled by a few angry people. . Remember, knowledge is constantly evolving, and like a puff of smoke, we will all dissipate someday. Try a bit of kindness, because this rude-nerd act is not fly. §

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Grigori Rasputin with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @  05:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Vandalize? That is a matter of opinion. what did I do? EVERYTHING that I add here is well researched, and is solid facts. What vandalism do you speak of?

January 2017
Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person   on Sobriquet, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''keep slanderous politics off that page. If an article exists by that name, feel free to add it.'' Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:30, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The term CROOKED HILLARY is a good example of a sobriquet -even liberal media sources suggested that the nickname may stick -search the web, and you will see. To suggest that this name was slander, is inaccurate (it may be closer to libel, if it was an inaccurate description of the person). CROOKED HILLARY is a name based on opinion, and is a generalization -non-specific. I cannot help it if Wikipedia has a bias to the left, but at this point I hope that I am not attacked as a punishment for my edit. It is not that important to me, so I will be compliant with your wishes. Walter Görlitz as the editor who decided that my addition was wrong, does the name CROOKED HILLARY fall under the definition of a sobriquet? If accurate according to the definition, it seems as if it is a vivid and timely illustration of the definition that will help people understand the term. A lot of information may be deemed offensive, but in the spirit of education, removing an illustrative term seems counterproductive, and possibly influenced by politically correct behavior. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defeat_Crooked_Hillary_PAC&redirect=no

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Hoff Entertainment", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because the form of the name suggests that this account represents an organization. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. -- The Anome (talk) 08:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The Anome My username has nothing to do with an organization, and is simply a creative name that I came up with for my account. Why are you suddenly concerned with my username? It has been in place for years. -I hope that the seemingly negative attention that I am getting has nothing to do with my edit. It seems somewhat peculiar that I am being asked to change my name the day after I added the CROOKED HILLARY reference. I hope that this is not a roundabout punishment. If need be, I will change my username, but like I said, I want to keep it as is.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Goofy's Upper Deck (March 16)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eagleash was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Goofy's Upper Deck and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Goofy's Upper Deck, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Goofy%27s_Upper_Deck Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eagleash&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Goofy%27s_Upper_Deck reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eagleash (talk) 04:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Goofy's Upper Deck


Hello, Hoff Entertainment. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Goofy's Upper Deck".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 01:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)