User talk:Rmzadeh/Archives/2009/May

Gare de Pihen
Hi,

Just wanted to let you know that I improved the article a bit, add an interwiki link to the French article and removed the speedy tag. If you feel that the train station is as such non-notable, feel free to replace the speedy tag. Passportguy (talk) 18:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe the author of the page is noew to editing here. I left him a note on his talk page saying that he should include more info/context, So i hope that in future he will create more substantive articles. Passportguy (talk) 18:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

SeedSew Performance Company
Hi. The article said, "... consists of two members; Natalie Adams and Benjamin James Martin. The company's premier performance will take place on the 12th June 2009 at the University of Winchester's Arts Centre. The company follows the managing directors desires to explore the notion of the 'body.'" An article like that generally fits WP:CSD, and Passportguy tagged it as such and I deleted it, but if there's some reason you'd like to give the article creator more time, that's fine with me. - Dank (push to talk) 19:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I see no reason why the article deserves to stay as there was indeed no mention of notability. thank you. --Rmzadeh (talk) 19:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Susan Matheson
Re. , speedy deletion of Susan Matheson, and your message on the article talk page;

This user came onto IRC seeking help. They explained that they used to work for Susan Matheson, but do not any longer. They say that they have no COI. They were unable to write a message to you or see how to fix the article, etc (being a new user). I have hopefully explained to them how they can write to you - so you should get a note from them soon.

I also explained to them about notability, and it looks like they will be able to source suitable reliable sources, and fix up the article.

I will leave further advice about this on their talk page.

As this is a new user, could you, perhaps, AGF and remove the speedy deletion, to give them a chance to fix things up without the added complications of deletion, userfication, etc? The person certainly would seem (from Google News etc) to have at least some claims to notability, so I feel that a Speedy is not appropriate.

Thank you for your time, best,  Chzz  ►  10:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Rmzadeh, I am working on improving the references. I am new to Wikipedia and honestly am learning as I go. I didn't understand the show preview function initially so that is why I have submitted so many change pages.

I understand that you believe that there is a conflict of interest here. I used to work for Miss Matheson, but no longer do, but am still a fan of her work. It is unusual for a Hollywood costume designer to work with visual and performance artists outside of the realm of film and that is why I thought it would be an interesting and notable addition to Wikipedia. I am interested in the extreme work of performance artist Ron Athey and think that it is important to mention one of his significant yet often unmentioned collaborators. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crepesuze (talk • contribs) 10:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rmzadeh, I have given up on editing the page for Susan Matheson. I spent significant amounts of time making sure that indeed there were, as you suggested, references that linked to reliable print media articles including one in the Los Angeles Times as well as one from Women's Wear Daily, the single most important daily newspaper for the fashion industry. Someone went through the entire page and erased all references. I am extremely frustrated and feel that this has been a waste of time and that Wikipedia is incredibly unfriendly towards new users. I feel like I have been attacked by faceless strangers including you. Clearly I am very upset. All I was trying to do was give credit to a significant female designer who unlike most Hollywood designers, has also contributed important work to the realm of performance art, notably in her collaborations with Ron Athey and Juliana Snapper.

I wanted to thank you for making it clear that new users of Wikipedia with relevant and notable submissions are of no value. I have removed the submission for Susan Matheson. I am incredibly frustrated that you, with the stroke of a button have done exactly what I was warned by other Wikipedia users would happen. Why reign terror on new users with new submissions. It is a disgrace. — --Crepesuze (talk) 11:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I had requested a csd based on the fact that the page was not notable, Crepesuze went on to delete that csd and improve the page, when I checked the page history I noticed this, however I did not revert or replace the csd as I belived her changes to have been sufficient reason to delete the csd. I wrote this in the talk page of the article. stating that
 * "I made a request for speedy deletion, if you notice, it said that you should not delete the request. however you did. I can no longer in fairness request speedy deletion as you have sufficiently improved the sources. however the notability and point of view of the article is still very much in question. please do not remove the tags without improving the article or giving a reason as per guidelines.


 * I have been watching your work and you seem to be busy changing and adding to other articles to promote this person. I am not sure if you are this person or if you are advertising in their behalf but that is not the point of wikipedia. --Rmzadeh (talk) 08:49, 31 May 2009 (UTC)"


 * After which I left the article with notability, advert and coi tags as they still lacked notability and did look rather like an advertisement of the persons accomplishments. now if she had taken upon her self to revert to an earlier state with the csd and request your help or to replace the csd by her self then that I would be more than willing to delete it again as she did before.


 * Looking at the page history now, the csd's are removed from the page of the article and it is much improved. however I still believe the article to be of advert and contest the point of view. to give you an example, it says that she had received a designer of the year award from Parsons School of Design but looking at the link corresponding to this award we get a page describing how ribbons were born for an aids cause.--Rmzadeh (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

In response to your questioning of references
Regarding your comment about the link to the article in the L.A. Times having nothing to do with the citation "Looking at the page history now, the csd's are removed from the page of the article and it is much improved. however I still believe the article to be of advert and contest the point of view. to give you an example, it says that she had received a designer of the year award from Parsons School of Design[1] but looking at the link corresponding to this award we get a page describing how ribbons were born for an aids cause.--Rmzadeh (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC),

Perhaps it would be helpful if you would read the entire article: "The school's designer of the year award went to Susan Matheson, whose white and green duchesse satin gown appliqued with shamrocks was a blend of imagination and practicality." (http://articles.latimes.com/1992-05-01/news/vw-1209_1_jeweler-harry-winston)

Any reason that you continue to persist in targeting me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crepesuze (talk • contribs) 21:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * you are correct, I will remove the templates. great job on fixing the article. btw please do not copy my comments with my signature... thank you, --Rmzadeh (talk) 21:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Apology accepted, sorry about copying with your signature. I'm new and I'm trying really hard. How long have you been on Wikipedia, I'm realizing that if entries are to be put in correctly then there is quite a steep learning curve. I was clueless when I erased your tag yesterday, realize that it was wrong and apologize for that. I only starting to figure out what the formats mean and what some of the Wikipedia shorthand is, I had no idea the power of some of the shorthand in parentheses!!! I have so many friends who have been quite lackadaisical with their entries and have never encountered any comments or reviews of their postings at all. I was encouraged by one of them to quickly post something to see how Wikipedia works and of course, you know the rest of the story...thanks for your understanding.--Crepesuze (talk) 21:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

update: can you please help me with the notability factor. I have looked at other entries for costume designers, many of whom have no citations whatsoever, and they have not been tagged for notability. Is there anything in your opinion that I can do to improve this listing?--Crepesuze (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you please take a look at the entry for Juliana Snapper and if you are willing could you show me or give me suggestions on how to reformat it to a more standard Wikipedia look? Also the uploading of the photographs was a mess, as I was too inexperienced to understand all the categories of approvals, should I just erase them from the page and start all over with the photos?--[--Crepesuze (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[User:Crepesuze|Crepesuze]] (talk) 21:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I am a pretty new user my self. Wikipedia is a huge project and articles do go unchecked from time to time but I think in retrospective your article is now much better as result of the extra scrutiny and the assistance of other great editors who responded to your help request and assisted in the process. as for the notability template, you can remove it your self by saying that you believe the article has sufficient reliable sources after recent improvements. however the article is rather short and detailed information regarding the article is not available around the web so it is possible that some might still argue that the person in question is not notable enough.


 * I'll look over the article mentioned and leave any possible helpful comments in the talk page of the article, chzz is more qualified to help you but I'll try. as for the images, if you have taken them from a copyrighted source without permision, you should consider removing them. otherwise you need to explain the source of images (for example if they belong to you, in which case if you have a copyright on them or if you are sharing them with no claim of copyright). read the image copyright guidelines carefully and edit your media in order to state the source of the images. hopefully we'll see more great contributions from you, --Rmzadeh (talk) 22:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)