User talk:Paravis

Welcome!
 Hello Paravis, 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

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
 * The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.

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 [[Image:Signature_icon.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 the Sandbox is for you.

 Good luck, and have fun.

Demographics
Is your question about New Mexico? The race percentages do add up to 100% (actually 100.01%). The Census Bureau doesn't treat Hispanic as a race so this percentage should not be added. (BTW, no one is in charge of article pages in Wikipedia; if you have a question or comment about a page, you can leave it on that article's talk page (use the Discussion button), for example Talk:New Mexico. See Talk page for more.) Hope this helps. --Uncia (talk) 00:06, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
Would recommend you file at WP:SPI -- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Exposing lower lateral cartilage during rhinoplasty.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Exposing lower lateral cartilage during rhinoplasty.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ww2censor (talk) 21:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the owner of this image, and have re-uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons so that I can use it on multiple Wikimedia projects. I am not opposed to the image being deleted at Wikipedia and using the Wikimedia Commons image for all articles that reference it.  So, do what needs to be done. Thanks. Paravis (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mid facelift (rhytidectomy) lower incision.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mid facelift (rhytidectomy) lower incision.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ww2censor (talk) 21:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the owner of this image, and have re-uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons so that I can use it on multiple Wikimedia projects. I am not opposed to the image being deleted at Wikipedia and using the Wikimedia Commons image for all articles that reference it.  So, do what needs to be done. Thanks. Paravis (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mid facelift (rhytidectomy) upper incision.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mid facelift (rhytidectomy) upper incision.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ww2censor (talk) 21:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the owner of this image, and have re-uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons so that I can use it on multiple Wikimedia projects. I am not opposed to the image being deleted at Wikipedia and using the Wikimedia Commons image for all articles that reference it.  So, do what needs to be done. Thanks. Paravis (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Upper eyelid blepharoplasty incision.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Upper eyelid blepharoplasty incision.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ww2censor (talk) 21:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the owner of this image, and have re-uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons so that I can use it on multiple Wikimedia projects. I am not opposed to the image being deleted at Wikipedia and using the Wikimedia Commons image for all articles that reference it.  So, do what needs to be done. Thanks. Paravis (talk) 22:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Fat removal using cannula during tumescent liposuction.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Fat removal using cannula during tumescent liposuction.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ww2censor (talk) 21:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the owner of this image, and have re-uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons so that I can use it on multiple Wikimedia projects. I am not opposed to the image being deleted at Wikipedia and using the Wikimedia Commons image for all articles that reference it.  So, do what needs to be done. Thanks. Paravis (talk) 22:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Possible Conflict of Interest
If you have a close connection to 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. Flowanda | Talk 20:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've started a discussion here: that contains links to other discussions as well. Flowanda | Talk 00:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Conversation between Dr. Placik and Laz
I would like to know why you continue to malign and disparage me on other users talk pages when I confronted you directly through Dr. Schwartz for whom you seem to be working and directly in violation of COI? I contacted him only because I did not initially know that you were working for him. I was notified by several editors to remove links for my images for which I promptly did comply. You, however, continue to have hyperlinks listed over his name within the source field for each image summary. Please approach me directly. I can give you my phone number or email but I would appreciate you taking up issues with me rather than a public forum to which I am new and to which you are very skilled. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Otto Placik (talk • contribs) 07:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello Dr. Placik. My intention is not to take shots at you.  I work independently from Dr. Schwartz, and after your phone call, I was placed under some serious heat from him over what he was told had happened.  It was my idea to contribute work to this network, not his.  I even reassured him that neither I, nor he, would have any problems contributing, but he had always been a little on edge about the idea.  And, quite embarrassingly, my feelings were hurt by the way he confronted me after speaking with you.  The opportunity he has given me is one of the highlights of the past 10 years of my life.  I've been a medical "fanatic" since I was six years old, when my favorite thing to do was take my parents' medical encyclopedia and read it day after day. (As the course of my life went on, however, I became engulfed in computers and the digital information world swept me away.)
 * But as I have been questioned for the same reasons as you, I have been placed in an awkward position, resulting in having to point out the differences between my work and yours. And that is because there is an extremely distinguishable contrast between your contributions and mine.  The only reason I decided to cite you as an "example" was because I was legitimately hurt by the whole situation that had happened a few weeks back (in addition to your work being the only subjective example I could find).  I am here on this network to contribute and to increase the value of the articles and the encyclopedia in general.  I am a firm believer that every valuable entity--whether tangible or intangible--in this world should be communal property, and that "personal gain" is dangerously and recklessly getting in the way of "social progression."
 * Anyways, Wikipedia and its sister networks are built on one of the greatest community "engines" this planet has ever seen. It is a collective of information, thoughts, ideas, and facts.  And this is all maintained by the community, with strict guidelines to keep the standards up to par.  I am absolutely not opposed to your contributions, nor to anyone else's.  However, it is best when the motivation behind any contribution is for the benefit of the community, and not for any one individual.
 * I am definitely interested in working with you to raise the value of these articles that we are co-contributing towards. In fact, that would be best for both of us.  I do not like to carry any bad blood between fellow Wikipedians (or anyone in general), and so I hope that we can work this out.  Since we are both technically in the hot seat for our contributions, we're in the same boat.  I made an agreement with Dr. Schwartz that I would cite him as the source of my digital media contributions, since that is exactly what the case is.  I imagine that if Dr. Schwartz was contributing this information himself, it would be a much different story (in terms of citing credit and sources).  But this is my work, and my contribution, made possible by Michael Schwartz.  And I do believe it is right to give credit where credit is due.
 * By technical definition, if you are uploading your own work (from the ground up), it is normal practice to cite the source as "Own work by uploader". Well, as far as I can tell.  Some of my contributions are currently credited as "Own work by uploader"; but I am citing Dr. Schwartz as my source for any work that is contributed as such.  I feel that is the only fair way to credit the man who is making this possible for me and for the community.
 * Just for your information, the main reason I took up these matters within the community forums is because that is precisely where these matters should be taken up. Otherwise, it would be impossible to evolve this network into a more perfect state.  There are thousands and thousands of contributing members/users to Wikipedia, and each one deserves to give their opinion or have their say.  Technically, they all should have a say in this.  And also, I might add that this subject of image quality/licensing and crediting sources was actually being discussed long before I ever began contributing any digital media.  That is why you have had problems with others in the past.
 * Please e-mail me at laz -at- paravis -dot- net and let's talk. I prefer to communicate via e-mail, since I rarely have time to have a full telephone conversation during convenient hours :).  I am sure we can meet halfway on this matter.  And I would love to offer any advice or help that you might need.  Thanks. Paravis (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate your detailed response and the colleagial tone and spirit of collaboration. However, I have one question that remains. I am in absolute agreement that Dr. Schwartz should be credited for his work. I ask the same. But, why do you have a hyperlink to his site? Why don't you simply write his name with NO LINK. Furthermore, I am not the only physician posting before and afters as you have implied. droliver also posts before and afters with himself as author. Please see the following link. He is more experienced than I and you may want to refer to him in some of your discussions such as [[[]Special:Contributions/75.63.221.230|75.63.221.230]] (talk) 22:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)