User talk:Schneile

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - UtherSRG (talk) 15:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Your edit to Chris Carter (producer)
Your recent edit to Chris Carter (producer) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 13:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Dramarama_1989.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Dramarama_1989.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyrighted photo
Thanks...I have updated the copyright information. Schneile 10:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)schneile

Random Smiley Award
 For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award originated by Pedia-I (Explanation and Disclaimer) ♠  TomasBat   ( @ )  ( Contribs )  ( Sign! ) 21:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dramarama circa 1989.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Dramarama circa 1989.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Chris KLSX.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Chris KLSX.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org 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 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 [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 01:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Willis Resilience Expedition logo.png


A tag has been placed on File:Willis Resilience Expedition logo.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. <span style="border:1px solid black; background-color: #EFCA37; background-image: -ms-radial-gradient(center top, circle closest-side, #FFAA3B 0%, #E3B536 0%, #EFCA37 100%); background-image: -moz-radial-gradient(center top, circle closest-side, #FFAA3B 0%, #E3B536 0%, #EFCA37 100%); background-image: -o-radial-gradient(center top, circle closest-side, #FFAA3B 0%, #E3B536 0%, #EFCA37 100%); background-image: -webkit-gradient(radial, center top, 0, center top, 0, color-stop(0, #FFAA3B), color-stop(0, #E3B536), color-stop(1, #EFCA37)); background-image: -webkit-radial-gradient(center top, circle closest-side, #FFAA3B 0%, #E3B536 0%, #EFCA37 100%); background-image: radial-gradient(circle closest-side at center top, #FFAA3B 0%, #E3B536 0%, #EFCA37 100%);padding:4px;"> Blurred   Lines  21:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Parker Liautaud, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages National Geographic, Independent and Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=576141440 your edit] to Parker Liautaud may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:23, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * issues|

Hello, I'm Shawn in Montreal. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Parker Liautaud because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. ''You have not addressed the WP:PEA issues in any significant way and the maintenance tag should not have been removed. I have retagged it as a fansite, which is it how it reads. Wording like "unassumingly ordinary boy who attended school and played football, but who also had an extraordinarily deep-rooted concern..." and "Humbled by the magnitude of the challenge and the Arctic's unpredictable nature, Parker resolved to try again" does not reflect the sort of neutral tone we use here. I would suggest you read WP:TONE -- and once again, WP:PEACOCK -- before any further editing. '' Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:13, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Willis Resilience Expedition image
Here, you state that "We would like to add back to the article the image that was removed." What is meant by "we"?--Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:49, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't know what's going on here yet but it strikes me as rather odd that that you've contracted an Intellectual property lawyer, presumably at someone's expense, to upload this logo. That, combined with the overtly promotional tone of Parker Liautaud and the expedition article (despite recent improvements) leaves me with the impression that you may be in WP:COI. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Paid editing and Conflict of Interest
It appears, from the natures of your edits and some of your comments about them, that you are an employee of a marketing or PR firm, or of another firm in a marketing or PR role or are in some similar situation where you are contributing to articles as part of your employment or as part of your association with the subjects.

If this is correct you urgently need to read our conflict of interest guideline and particularly the section on paid editing. Note that this guideline says, in significant part:

"'''If you have a financial connection to a topic – including, but not limited to, as an employee, owner or other stakeholder – you are advised to refrain from editing articles directly, and to provide full disclosure of the connection. You may use the article talk pages to suggest changes, or the request edit template to request edits. Requested edits are subject to the same editorial standards as any other, and may not be acted upon."

"'The writing of 'puff pieces' and advertisements is prohibited. '"

Many editors feel strongly about this. If in fact my assumption is correct, you would be well advised to disclose your affiliations on your own user page, or on the talk pages of any articles where you have a conflict of interest, or better yet, both. If my assumption is not correct, then you might want to explain why the general nature and tone of your edits has made my assumptions seem plausible. At least one editor has suggested that your account be blocked as a promotion-only account. I am not going to do that, although another admin could, because it seems to me that you are listening to Wikipedia policies and making some useful edits. But transparency here is vital. Please consider this a serious warning. DES (talk) 22:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Response and Thanks: Paid editing and Conflict of Interest
Thanks to both DES and Shawn in Montreal. I take your guidance very seriously and gratefully appreciate your willingness to invest the time to ensure Wikipedia remains a verifiable, trusted source of unbiased information. As you can see from the above entries on this Talk page, it has been a number of years since I have either created or edited a Wikipedia article, so I am more than a little rusty. However, I wish to edit responsibly. I am pleased to disclose anywhere necessary (here on my talk page, as well as those on relevant articles) my affiliation with the lead underwriter of this Expedition.

As you have been reading the two articles I recently contributed, Parker Liautaud and Willis Resilience Expedition, you may by now have gathered that the Expedition is a legitimate scientific, communications and record-attempting endeavor. It is not a for-profit enterprise. However, like Parker's past polar expeditions and other scientific endeavors like them, it is costly and is funded by outside parties, including NGOs, corporations, and the like. Parker is also legitimate, a serious polar explorer who is studying to be a scientist and future Ph.D.

It should be noted that I have no personal connection with Parker Liautaud, so there may not be a COI issue with the article about him. My sole connection with him is through an affiliation with the lead underwriter of his upcoming expedition. I have not met Parker nor have I ever corresponded with him. I do, however, have great respect for him and find his accomplishments greatly impressive, hence the "fan" tone initially put forth in the article. I have since attempted to tone it down but may not have yet fully succeeded.

With that said, I took it upon myself to create the two articles. I was not asked by anyone to do so, and there is no profit involved. I am aware of and agree to the irrevocable licensing of this content. I do not wish to be in WP:COI and will take whatever additional steps are necessary to ensure neutrality and alignment with Wikipedia's purpose over that of any other entity. This includes removal of any inappropriate references or citations, and ensuring that any published graphics are appropriately licensed for free use by the file creator/s, ideally under the Creative Commons License.

I appreciate any further advice you are willing to provide and it is my sincere hope that Wikipedia's admin team does not see fit to block my account due to my lack of recent experience as a Wikipedia editor. With many thanks and kindest regards, Schneile (talk) 16:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)schneile
 * I've changed the maintenance tag from fansite to advert (as content issues still persist) accordingly. best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I quite accept that the expedition is a legitimate one. However, creating an article to promote a "worthy" not-for-profit enterprise is still unacceptable, unless the enterprise is Notable and the article must still be written with a neutral, encyclopedic tone.
 * You say that you have "an affiliation with the lead underwriter of his upcoming expedition." That may well be enough to give you a WP:COI for this project, depending on the nature of the affiliation. If you are an employee of the underwriter/sponsor, that may still count as paid editing, and would surely be a conflict of interest. If expect to make money through your relation with that firm, or are very closely associated with them, that might still be considered a WP:COI. In any case I urge you to clearly declare the nature of your association, or as clearly as you can without revealing personal information that you wish to keep private, on the article talk pages, or on your user page, or better, on both.
 * No one will block you for being inexperienced. However, editors who appear to edit solely for promotional purposes are often blocked on sight. Adjusting the nature of your editing, and disclosing any affiliations, after being informed of Wikipedia policies and guidelines is the best way to demonstrate good faith and a desire to constructively contribute here. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. I hope this is helpful. DES (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear DES: I continue to appreciate your guidance. To your question of whether the Willis Resilience Expedition is Notable, based on the general guideline (I'm pasting here for my own reference, as you of course are familiar) of If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list, I believe it qualifies, given recent unbiased press coverage by the following media outlets, all of which I can substantiate. (Please forgive the incorrect coding on the Correne Coetzer story; I just cannot figure out where I went wrong). Does this information help to support my claim? Many thanks.






















 * {{cite news|title= South Pole 2013-14: Doug Stoup and Parker Liautaud for Leverett Glacier route |author=Correne Coetzer |url= http://www.explorersweb.com/polar/news.php?url=south-pole-2013-14-doug-stoup-and-parker_138054059/ |publisher= explorersweb.com |date=2013-09-30 |accessdate=2013-10-11}











Broadcast coverage includes:

Schneile (talk) 19:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)schneile
 * I am sorry not to have responded sooner. Several of the above sources seem to be press releases or reprinted press releases, specifically the ones from Intelligent Insurer, Insurance Journal, Claims Journal and perhaps others. As such they would be considered primary sources, not independent, and so do not usefully contribute to notability. Such sources should be avoided if the same facts can be found in reliable sources that are Secondary. A few sources seem to be behind paywalls or require registration, I haven't taken time to asses these. The remainder, on a quick look, seem to eb enough to establish notability of both Parker Liautaud. Feel free to go ahead, but I urge you to declare your association with the expedition and with Liautaud, fully and accurately on the talk pages of those articles and on your user page. You could also seek further advice and assistance on our conflict of interest noticeboard. The COI is really a larger issue than the notability is, in this case. DES (talk) 16:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello again, DES. Thank you for your reply. I have added what I believe is an appropriate disclosure to both the Parker Liautaud and Willis Resilience Expedition articles, and would like to request your assessment of these to ensure I have followed guidance and disclosed correctly. Another admin, Sulfurboy has already expressed reservations on the Parker article talk page, stating if anything, he feels the COI tag is even more warranted. I find this discouraging as the article was written as a biographical entry with a logical and nonpromotional mention of the subject's latest expedition. As stated in the article, the primary purpose of the expedition is scientific research, with a secondary purpose of setting a world speed record. I could not help but be impressed with this young man's accomplishments, so on my own time, I wrote the article.


 * Also, many edits have been made to the Willis Resilience Expedition article to remove language that might be considered WP:NOT. I would therefore like to request your assessment on this and removal of the tag if you agree guidance has been correctly followed. Thank you, Schneile (talk) 13:01, 23 October 2013 (UTC)schneile

Disambiguation link notification for October 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Willis Resilience Expedition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thailand floods (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Parker Liautaud, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages National Geographic, Independent and Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Parker Liautaud for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Parker Liautaud is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Parker Liautaud until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  Ajaxfiore talk 03:22, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Carter head shot.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:08, 15 March 2014 (UTC)