User talk:Kateshortforbob/Archives2010/August

Please Why did you delete page about System Explorer? It's freeware, it's same software as Process Explorer and Process Lasso....and they are in wikipedia. I don't understand it...why? why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mistercz (talk • contribs) 05:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've replied on your talk page.-- Kateshortforbob talk  09:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

System Explorer Deletion due Copyright ?
Hi, thank you very much for answer. I don't understand what copyright is disturbed ? The SystemExplorer article is created from System Explorer homepage informations. I am owner of System Explorer homepage and all text are copyrighted to me....what I did wrong? What copyright was disturbed? Thank you for answer.

Edit: I found what should I do on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DCM...... System Explorer has many independend reviews and articles on internet. I think it could be part of wikipedia. Sorry for my questions, but I am beginner in wikipedia...and here is tooooo much of rules....too much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mistercz (talk • contribs) 10:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

kateshortforbob
Kateshortforbob, thanks for the note on my talk page and for the follow-up regarding Movie Review Intelligence. If there is a particular size and shape of the logo in the infobox that works best, I would be happy to provide it; otherwise you are welcome to use the one you mentioned (although I believe the corners are not quite rounded the way they should be). I will explore Films Wikiproject and see if I can get someone's attention about who and how they post movie review information on specific movie articles. I will not do that myself, as I understand that to be considered spam. Thanks again -- you've been very helpful, David A. Gross Dagrossla (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

PS. I just noticed that I think Movie Review Intelligence is still black listed. We are reformed now and are looking forward to obeying all guidelines and regulations. Is there a way to become un-blacklisted? Thank you.

Kateshortforbob, thank you for writing the article about Movie Review Intelligence. It is fair and clear. Perhaps one day it will have more meat on its bones. Thank you for taking the time to research it and write it. I will not touch it or anything else on Wikipedia. I do have 3 questions: 1) In the References section of the article, the forth citation is a piece from the Los Angeles Times called, "Mixed reviews for Rotten Tomatoes and other aggregate websites." Should it be a link to the article itself, like the first 3 citations? 2) the Wikipedia articles for the other movie review aggregators have a box on the right side of the article that shows some basic information about the site, their URL, a little graphic, etc.; can the article about Movie Review Intelligence have something like that? If so, how does that happen? And 3) This is most important. Throughout Wikipedia, the articles written about specific movies include information about their Reception, which includes information from other movie review aggregators. There is lots of that information, with great detail. For instance, for the movie Eat Pray Love there is a 38% score from one of the other movie review aggregators. For the movie Inception, there are several scores from different aggregators. Movie Review Intelligence believes its information is more accurate and deserves to be included in the discussion. (The critics did not say Eat Pray Love is a bad movie. Nor a good movie. Its reviews were moderate, or 56% positive). Who posts that information? How does it appear? I do not wish to do it -- I assume it would be considered spam. Someone is doing it. Movie Review Intelligence is recognized as an authority in the movie business. Can we be included in these movie articles? Thank you. David A. GrossDagrossla (talk) 16:27, 21 August 2010 (UTC) Editor & Publisher, MovieReviewIntelligence.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dagrossla (talk • contribs)