User talk:Wikwobble

TALK ARCHIVE /Archive1

Insert non-formatted text here == Gluten Free Beer ==

The article is needed and welcomed. Thanks.

I did go through some of your insertions in other articles to make sure they were appropriate. I removed a few.

The article on Steve Ford I have placed on your user page. I am assuming Steve Ford is yourself. Your user page is the appropriate place for an article on yourself. I did do a quick check on the internet, and the Steve Ford in the article did not show up as notable. If I am wrong in any respect, please let me know. Happy editing! SilkTork 01:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

THAT IS NOT MY NAME

User Talk
I noticed you didn't want to keep some previous discussions on your talk page. I have moved these into an archive for you. If you click on the /Archive1 link at the top of your talk page you (and others) can access previous correspondence. While you are free to delete the archive link, you would be covering up a record of correspondence that Wikipedians consider to be useful. This keeping of records does seem odd at first, and I also deleted messages in the same way I would emails, but now I like the idea that everything is kept open and accessible. SilkTork 17:47, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I will be deleting the archive as it does not represent my work, and is therefore misleading. Suffice to say I have learned not to leave a pc logged in. I do not wish to comment on any real names connected to myself as it is not my desire to have such displayed on wikipedia. I trust you will respect that desire.

Signing Your Name
It is helpful to sign your name on messages on talk pages. Type this: ~ and your User Name and the date and time will be displayed. The information can be found by looking in history, but by signing your name you are making it easier for everyone using the site. SilkTork 18:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Beer edit
The Beer article is about beer in general. A big subject as you understand. Your Gluten free beer article is, as I have indicated, an asset to the site. I have done a little work on the article, and I am encouraging others to help out. But the article does not need to be repeated on the Beer article. There are many types and varieties of beer, and we have sections on the site in which they are discussed. Your article has not been deleted - just the inappropriate repetition in the more general Beer article. I have also removed the various links to your own website that you inserted in other articles. Wikipedia is not the place to promote your own website - no matter how important you personally regard it. Where links to your website appeared appropriate I have left them. I am not trying to diminish the importance of the problem of coeliac disease, just trying to keep some sense of order to the Wiki encyclopedia. It is right and proper for you to raise the issue on the talk pages of those articles you feel have some relevance to coeliac disease - and I would encourage you to continue doing that. Also you are free to disagree with me on this and any other issue. My position here on Wiki is exactly the same as yours. I have no more authority than you. I hope you understand that my edits were done with no personal ill will toward you. However - as you might appreciate - Wiki does get more than its fair share of enthusiasts who see its value in promoting their own concerns without looking at the bigger picture of Wiki. Cheers! SilkTork 18:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk pages
Hi! It's easier to respond if you let people know who is leaving a message. Please sign your comments! It's also nicer to work together when good faith is assumed and a reasonable tone of conversation is adopted. I do not recall using an aggrieved tone with you, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to use such a tone with me. Wiki is a co-operative venture. We work together and reach a consensus. We have differences of opinion and we work through them for the benefit of the site. I did not agree with something you did. I edited the material to what I felt was an improved situation. I informed you that I had done this. I also welcomed you to Wikipedia and provided you with links to help you find your way around the site. I also gave you some suggestions on how Wikipedians prefer to do things. You deleted my welcome and the links. And you have ignored and/or gone against my advice. You have left messages on my talk page and the Beer talk page which are verging on the hostile and aggressive. Please. I mean you no ill will. I understand your situation. You have come here to inform people that there is a resource available to people who have an intolerance to the gluten in beer. You have information that you wish to share. That is good. I am only interested in making sure that such information is placed on Wiki in the best possible way. I have pointed out to you that your Gluten free beer article is very useful. My feeling, however, is that repetition of that material in the Beer article is inappropriate. And I'm not quite sure why you feel that the Gluten free beer article is not enough. The impression you are giving is that you are more concerned with having links to your website than with creating a useful article. Your behaviour continues to make me think that way. I would rather work with you on helping you create a brilliant Gluten free beer article, than argue with you about the merits of putting in inappropriate weblinks to the Beer article and others. As for my editing of the Gluten free beer section in the Beer article. I reworded it to make it more readable and understandable to the general public. If you backed off for a moment and stopped thinking this a personal pissing match you'd have noticed that I was attempting to improve the paragraph. Please stop thinking of me as your enemy here. Think of me as a friendly stranger who is simply pointing out the customs of the place in which you have arrived. If you take exception to the customs then perhaps Wikipedia is not the place for you. I look forward with interest to your next communication. SilkTork 17:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Can't drink beer
What is your point? You have mentioned that at least twice. SilkTork 20:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

IT IS NOT TRUE Can't be much clearer than that

Following you
Yes. I noticed when you inserted what I felt to be inappropriate material and promotional links to your own website that you might have done that elsewhere. So I looked at your contributions. Some people do tend to do the same thing. Editors who have been here a while and are interested in Wikipedia being a well managed and reliable site do keep an eye out for people who might not be doing the right thing. Not doing the right thing is not a personal issue. We could meet up in the pub and drink some gluten free beer together and have a laugh over this petty spat. We are in dispute. But it is a localised dispute. It's not a personal issue. It's a disagreement over procedure. But, again - yes, I will be keeping an eye on your edits. I want to help your gluten free beer article to grow, and I want to encourage you to stay on Wiki and become an editor. You certainly have passion, and you can write. This is not the first such dispute in the history of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is full of such disputes. And I have been involved in such disputes myself. I had a similiar one recently, and that editor stayed on Wikipedia, and we remain on good terms. I hope the same can be said for you. In the case of Dermatitis herpetiformis I saw that you contributed some material. I put a capital letter on the article name Gluten free beer in the See also section. I deleted the link to your website because the article was not about gluten free beer, so such a link is inappropriate. There is a link on the Gluten free beer page where it is appropriate. I have added a couple more links to sites which have information on gluten free beer. Your site is not the only one. In fact there seems to be quite a deal of information on gluten free beers on the internet these days. I also deleted the section in which you talk about your website. The article is about a skin disorder - I feel uncomfortable in seeing a section of text promoting the positive benfits of a website which has tasting notes on a series of beers (gluten free or otherwise) rather than simply - and neutrally - providing the link to the article which then provides the link to the website. Stand back, take a breath, and see it through unbiased eyes. You are too close to the subject. The advice from other editors on referencing a website you are involved in is that you should not do it. It would be best to post a link to your website on the talk page and allow another editor to make the decision to link to your website. I have already made that decision for the Gluten free beer article. So that is OK. But for other articles in which I disagree, your best approach would be to make a note on the talk page. That would be more productive than coming to me, as we are already in dispute. This page has useful information: Spam - if you read it through you will notice that your behaviour is not unusual. You would be considered a classic spammer by most editors. You will also notice that advice given on that page is advice that I have been giving to you. Please - do explain your intentions on the Talk pages of the articles in which you want to insert a link to your website. Give clear reasons why there should be a link to your site. It would help your case considerably if you adopted a positive tone, rather than one of agrieved hostility. Something like: "Hi. I have a website which gives details of gluten free beers which might be helpful to people who suffer from gluten intolerance. The website is glutenfreebeers.com Would someone like to take a look and see if a link to the website on this article would be appropriate." It's a slower approach. But it might work. Cheers! SilkTork 20:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

'''HOW CAN I BE ANY CLEARER? IT IS NOT MY WEBSITE.'''

Gluten free beer article
Excellent work. Well done. This is developing into an excellent article. I have, however, changed the image to focus more on the beers rather than Steve Ford's face. I suggest if you are uncomfortable with beers from one particular brewery being shown (though this is not seen as a problem anywhere else), that you take a picture yourself of some beers and upload that. I also changed the cat to Brewing rather than Style as that is more appropriate as the article is about the ingredients, and gluten free beers do cover more than one beer style. The ferences to the glutenfreefestival website are integrated and appropriate. Nice work. I have, however, totally reverted your material in the main beer article. There is a reference in the starch section, and a link to the main article. That is appropriate. No more is needed. There are a variety of beer types and styles, adjuncts, pubs, beer games, etc - these are all dealt with in their own articles, not on the main beer page. Cheers! SilkTork 19:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Outside view
Hello, I happened to see your request for an advocate or mediator. I am not here in that capacicity - just another editor wandering by. You may ignore my view if you wish, but I do have some length of eperience here. (1) the Glueten free beer article looks like it is becoming an excellent article - congratulations on this work! (2) It doesn't appear to me that SilkTork is doing any bullying of you. He is quite properly ensuring that there is not too much duplication from Gluten free beer occurring at the main beer article. He is entering into lengthy dialog with you, but you reply with terse one line denials or accusations of bad conduct on his part. My unsolicited advice would be to try harder to see his viewpoint and to communicate more oppenly with him. Good luck and happy editing, Johntex\talk 08:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Good edit
... on Roman Empire. You go, guy! Sfahey 13:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Yet another view
Hello, Wikwobble. I, too, am just a wandering editor, but I've also been around for quite a long while, and even did a fair amount of work on beer quite some time ago. I know all too well how frustrating it can be when you run up against somebody who has a different vision of an article than you do, but please try to understand that this sort of disagreement is perfectly normal in an openly collaborative environment such as Wikipedia, and is in fact a vital process that helps to keep our text as balanced as possible. The only way to keep yourself sane in situations like those, I've found, is to understand that it's not personal nor bullying, and to engage your fellow editors in reasoned debate. Venting your frustration in angry and accusatory posts or posting an accusation of bulling on your user page is unlikely to change others' minds in your favor; it's far more likely to give others an unfavorable impression of you, and therefore do more harm than good to your cause. I must second Johntex's advice: communicate your best points, and listen to SilkTork's, and you may meet somewhere in the middle. – ClockworkSoul 13:05, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your note. SilkTork 09:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

TOP OF THIS PAGE - UNDER GLUTEN FREE BEER

My name on your page. Sorry if I am a bit confused. But my name appears above and it seems a coincidence as i wanted to know more about the perosn writing about GFBeer. I can't find out more as it says the article has been moved to your user page and I can't find where that is. If that is me, why are you saying that I am "not notable" Just seems a bit rude !! Only kidding but please let me know what is going on. Steve. By the way, who wrote the article? You are the only person who is writng under the discussion tab? whas it you?

Thank you for experimenting with the page Template:Talkarchive on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. → A z a  Toth 09:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Comment on GFB Talk on your revert
Image change was done because it is conventional to put images in the top right corner. There are no hard and fast rules, but that is generally seen as the most useful and aesthetically pleasing place. Long narrow pictures are acceptable, but are awkward to place in a pleasing position. The image change was an edit of the long narrow picture, and placing the edit in the conventional position. The edit also removed some material from the picture which had references to choices and selections made by the glutenfreebeerfestival website. The article had again started to become too heavy on promotional material toward that website. The aim of Wiki is to give balanced views. My continued contention with user wikwobble is that the article is great, and I am continuing to oversee the development of the article. But that Wikipedia must be seen to be fair and unbiased at all times. Extravagant referencing to an external site can be seen to be biased. While reviewing the article I noticed that references to articles written originally for another website (Bella) had been credited to the glutenfreebeerfestival website where the articles had been reprinted. The resulting excessive and misleading use of the glutenfreebeerfestival as a reference source was then adjusted. In reverting those edits wikwobble also reverted grammatical and factual edits, such as the capitalization of wheat and barley, etc. I don't normally go into petty detail for the reason for obvious edits, nor make complaints about other users behaviour, but wikwobble seems to feel I have a personal vendetta, when I have made it clear from the start that my intention has been to ensure that the gluten free beer article is seen to develop fairly and without undue emphasis on an external website. This gluten free beer article is not wikwobble's to do with as he pleases. It is a collaborative article on Wikipedia about Gluten free beer. It should not be used to inform people about how wonderful the glutenfreebeerfestival website is. It should not be used to get as much mention of the glutenfreebeerfestival website onto Wikipedia as possible. Pictures of blue ribbons awarded to beers by the glutenfreebeerwebsite are highly suspect. Such behaviour should be avoided as much as possible. This has been a serious bone of contention from the start, and I'm sure that wikwobble is not unaware of what he is doing. At this point for wikwobble to continue promoting the glutenfreebeerfestival website against all advice to the contrary is deeply worrying. SilkTork 21:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

re the above comment
This is what I am pasting to the discussion ande to the other blokes discussin page. By the way, the article was written by Andrea who is form Chesterffield CAMRA and has been very helpful to us. I have already emailed her about s coulpe of little problems, but I think "dodgy" was going a bit far. I am not particdularly happy being dragged into a this, but here it is anyway:

Hello. I have been asked to reply to this point, though I am not sure if I am comfortable doing so as my website appears in the refrences, and I don’t want to comment on those choices, made by others, other than to note some issues. Firsly the image. I provided that as requested by someone editing Wikipedia. I sent what was asked to that representative of Wiipedia, and made it public domain, but I think it is not really ok for someone within Wikipedia to then chop it up without discussing it. I am not sure where the limits to public domain are, but I would have thought it at least a little rude. I went to the history page to see what refernces were made, and what you had changed. Can I indicate that C Samgalski writes direclty for my site and that articles on the sit3e itself were written by her and sent to me, not reprinted (as opposed to other Smagaldski articdles that are only linkied from my site). I am not sure where else you can find some of them, but they were sent to me directly for putting onto the website. One of them is a completely different article to the one you changed it to, and is more generic advice than the other.. If I undersatned what I am looking at, all the other refernces to Caroline’s articles are to Bella, aren’t they? Lastly on this, it is not my fault that there is no other site that focusses on gf beer and is independent. I wish there was. Then you could fill the page with references eh? And I wouldn’t waste my time running th site. Just one last thing. When I went iinto the history I saw a note from you dated 15 June – 19.08. Just wanted to mention that I had not planned entering any beuty competitions. steve 14:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

remove all references to me and my site righgt now. I want no more part in this. If you want to play toytowmn university then ok, but do nto involve me in it. If you do not delete all refernces to me and gfbf right now, I will. I do not have time to play silly-buggers with half-wits. steve

File permission problem with File:The Full Range of GF Beers.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:The Full Range of GF Beers.JPG, which you've sourced to glutenfreebeerfestival.com. 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 , 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 take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

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 .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File 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 created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 00:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Steve ford.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Steve ford.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 , 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 take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

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 .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File 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 created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 00:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Buckwheat and sorghum.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Buckwheat and sorghum.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. Skier Dude ( talk ) 00:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Gluten free beer image.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Gluten free beer image.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 , 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 take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

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 .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File 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 created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 00:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)