User talk:Mtking/Archives/2011/August

File:Bert Mizusawa.jpg
Hey Mtking. On July 7, 2011 you deleted for "lack of license details." I did not go through the refund request and would like your honest opinion on licensure of the picture. I am also in no hurry to have the photograph restored. The picture appears on multiple websites and all attempts to find licensing information have failed. Any suggestions on how I would formulate this on the record? I had previously put the various websites that the picture appeared, and the name of the individual who took the picture, but that discussion seems to have been deleted by Fastily. No hurry. Thank you. Missclark (talk) 22:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I did not delete the file, just the link to it from Bert Mizusawa, Fastily was the deleting administrator . I recommend that you upload a new one, however as it will be a picture of a living person, it will have to be a free one, one in which the copyright owner has freely licensed it's use. These can be hard to find, you can't just use one that you find on another website. Mt  king  (edits)  23:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Missclark (talk) 15:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again. The edit on Bert Mizusawa, I clearly see your point: The article is about Bert, not George. I am trying to link the article up to lead the history back to Hampton Roads, i.e. his father was in the Army, then Air Force which landed them in Hampton, Virginia (no other bases in Hampton besides Langley Air Force Base). Any suggestion on how I can do this? The only articles I can find link Bert to the area through his father, which is why I thought I would need that information in there. Thank you in advance. Missclark (talk) 02:27, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Providing you can find a source for it, try something like "In xxxx Bert and his family moved to Hampton, Virginia". Mt  king  (edits)  03:56, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Marisol Deluna
Dear Mtking, I appreciate your guidance. Please know this. Although "The List" I compiled was removed, my hope is that you took a glance at a few links before deleting it to begin to understand the complexity of her work and outreach. (I posted the information for this purpose) Her main focus is apparently not runway fashion. It is a bit of an unusual for a fashion path, yet she has made it work in a stylish manner unlike old school men's club items. (Which I grew up with!) Thank you again.ElizabethCB123 (talk) 07:46, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I did have a look at a number of the links, not all, due to the number of them, the ones I did look at don't help formulating an encyclopaedic entry for her. Mt  king  (edits)  08:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. As I mentioned- It is a start. She is prolific with a non traditional fashion approach. Albeit a client list, her outreach is impressive, if even by the caliber. (Those noted are solely based on what I could locate myself and therefore incomplete) In every "storefront link" I posted, she was noted whereas similar items do not give designer mentions unless it is meant to add value.

I am soon taking a break from Wiki to deal with health concerns and to spend time with my grandchildren. Knowing this, I have been focused on finding online information for the sake of "knowledge" during my absence. Please do not view this as apathy. Thank you again. ElizabethCB123 (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

CSD Dane griffiths
Per A7, I tagged... after your revert. Crazynast 23:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Glitch?
I noticed this. No action necessary on your part, just a weird glitch I think. --John (talk) 03:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes multiple reverts at or about the same time as you say fixed. Mt  king  (edits)  03:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for clearing this away.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem Mt  king  (edits)  08:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Bill & Ted (franchise)
Why are you reverting my changes on Bill & Ted (franchise)? The reason I was removing content was that the same sections were duplicated. 76.191.133.247 (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Marisol Deluna
I added sources. I have no idea if they are online. At least some of them are obviously significant. Do you mind commenting? Thanks. Jesanj (talk) 20:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I'd love your comments on the sock investigation of ElizabethCB123. It sounds like you sussed this out a long time ago. I can't seem to an admin to act on this - I was cleared on the (pretty silly) allegation against me immediately.Tao2911 (talk) 15:02, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * whoops - just saw you are away. Crappy timing for me, but have a great trip!Tao2911 (talk) 15:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Back now, but not going to be on here much till the end of the week. Seems that most have been blocked now, however think that one more is now block evading so about to re-open. Mt  king  (edits)  10:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * yeah it's been a wild ride since you were away. Now Deluna has given up her excercise in aliases and is just using her name to break wikipedia rules. Despite an overwhelming onslaught of 'delete' votes her page is still there, making action on what I agree is evading a block a possible necessity. I too have been out of pocket, and can't do much either, but when you get a chance if you can look at the situation - I've done more than I probably should have already, leading to accusations I have an axe to grind. I don't - but I do find her terrifically annoying.Tao2911 (talk) 14:49, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Olswang
Thanks for your greeting message! I am new to Wikipedia (and HTML!) and will take the time to familiarise myself with the policies and guidelines for contributors. I intend to be a contributor in the legal sector because I believe I have knowledge that could improve the referencing of articles relating to the UK top 200 law firms. I have only just started to add pages to my watchlist. I am sorry if I deleted these tags by mistake. I started the discussion around the notability of this page on the article talk page because I have added references from The Lawyer to improve the notability of the article. I thought perhaps you could guide me on how to improve the secondary referencing and let me know what's missing for the tag to be removed? Does it need more references? Different references? Let me know if I need to continue the discussion on the subject page as opposed to my page. Many thanks, Shoreditch90 11:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have looked for good secondary sourcing on the company, however I have not been able to find them, "The Lawyer" as a trade publication, is not very good guide as to a companies notability. I also doubt that there are 200 law firms in the US that are notable, let alone the UK and yes you should continue the discussion on the talk page. Mt  king  (edits)  11:23, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry I didn't mean to imply I would try to improve the references of the top 200, I will only focus on the ones that are at the top of that very list...I will continue the discussion on the talk page. Shoreditch90 13:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magherafelt Sky Blues F.C.
Um, I was just testing you, keeping you on your toes. Yes, yes... *looks shifty* GiantSnowman 11:52, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Reply
In response to your message, you can read it on my talk page. ~ Red Rover  (Talk to me!) contribs  10:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC)