User talk:Gzlfb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TMET

A History of Gölök Zoltán Leenderdt Franco Buday


Election History.....
Campaigns....
Management....
1996 Also convinced candidate to run with RefBC. in Vancouver-Burrard, the Candidate was Aletta Buday

Vancouver Mayoral....
2005Results: 2005
2002 Results: 2002
1996 Results: 1996

Federal and Provincial: Sought Vancouver-Burrard and Vanouver-Centre Write-Ins Many Times; Wrote himself in all but up to now I-11=2006

From the appearent age of his last days of 1997 he was a campaign manager and independent advocate as well as mixing this with campaigns. Before hand interests in politics and the odd campaign.


Art and Humor....

He illustrates and cartoons work and humor for Cafe Press Shops he sells stuff on and sticks to his guns bye not taking a cent in government grants for his artwork.
Also for his website, The My Ego Times.


Submits a manuscript here and there but in the oligarchist world is more realistically taking his activism and work to his [1] website as well as information and usenet (NNTP) as well, he also is actively informing people on elections, cults, and espionage dangers and mental freedom. He stands as an anti-2010 olympic figure who lived in Calgary during theirs, jokingly he'd end all of it and maybe keep the amuzing part, the lazer show.

Currently he is with the Libertarian Party of Canada as the Vancouver-East Contact

Contact

Contents

[edit] Vancouver muni election

Yes, I did remove those facts, because they were a)of limited relevance to the article b)could be construed quite readily as "spam" c)crossed the line of individuals writing about themselves, which is a house no-no on Wikipedia The Tom 23:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Writing about myself....

Had no choice, I could't ignore myself, I was one of them; am one of them. I picked out articles, links, and so on that were relevant to all of them, and at the time I had only the time for Mayoral. Did you notice anyone but me? Normally I'd be flattered by this is like cyber stalking.

Gölök ZLF Buday

[edit] License tagging for Image:Gb01.small.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Gb01.small.png. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding your article on yerself.

I am glad that you have taken the effort to write the article Gölök Zoltán Buday. Please note that while I am not opposing this page you may encounter problems with people who feel you are not working within some wikipedia guidelines. The guidelines that specifically apply to this article are Wikipedia:Autobiography and possibly Wikipedia:Notability. Please do not be discouraged from using this site.

While making an article about yourself is not forbidden it is discouraged and you may find yourself being held to higher standards in the areas of Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Verifiability. This is to maintain the quality standards of this encyclopedia and is in no way designed to malign you. HighInBC 15:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

You may also find this useful Wikipedia:Manual of Style, this allows the encyclopedia to have a unified look HighInBC 15:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Gölök Zoltán Buday, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Gölök Zoltán Buday. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

If you were to re-write the article in an encyclopedic manner, and gave citations for all facts, aswell as demonstrating notability(citations to news stories) then the article will most likely pass inclusion requirements. I will gladly help you if you have any questions ask me on my talk page. HighInBC 16:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Crest_o_hungary.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Crest_o_hungary.gif. 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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signature

I think you should change it. It is inappropriate.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Disagree, entirely fine. -Mask 06:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I also disagree, I think it's fine and you shouldn't change it.--Anchoress 18:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gölök Zoltán Buday

Call me a liar, charge me with such a thing, than fact check and correct it, and show the work. In a case like this, it is a major issue, close to slander. I hate saying things about myself, yet, I have no choice but to start things to ensure, that the facts, as I know them are there. Oddly enough I left my Libertarian Party of Canada Vancouver East Contact info.

--G-Spot 14:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Verifiability

Your use of the phrase "properly proven errors removed" on the Talk:Zoltán Buday page, and also the above comment re fact checking, seem to indicate a misunderstanding of the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. Information does not need to be proven false to be removed, any uncited details may be removed by any editor, Removing uncited material does not imply that the information removed is necessarily incorrect, simply that it lacked a reliable source as verification. The policy goes into this in detail, but as you can see from the policy summary: "The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it." Also, it's important to remember that verifiability requires reliable sources, adding details from personal knowledge (e.g. "the facts as I know them" above) is classed as original research and will be removed for similar reasons - not because it is untrue, but because it is unverifiable. Both Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability are offical policies of wikipedia, so it's important to be follow them, I will also include the standard welcome note in a section below, which outlines many other policies and guidelines that you may come across. Regards, MartinRe 19:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Belated Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Gzlfb, 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 (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

[edit] Talk:Zoltán Buday

Your comment accusing other editors of being Nazi's is highly inappropriate and is a personal attack. If you continue to make such attacks you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Instead of attacking people, please respond politely to the arguments being put forward. It is important that you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and has certain policies and guidelines that inform what should and should not be included here. Information you add to the encyclopedia has to include verifiable sources. Unfortunately your word (or anyone else's word) alone is not enough to provide verifiability. You are free to add whatever information you like to your own website, but Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate source of information. Thanks, Gwernol 17:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal Attacks, etc....

Trancating and blocking facts is mass personal attack. Excuse me if I suspect there may be some anti-Hungarian sentiments, I've been more and more aware of them over time, I hate discussing it. If you don't even know or understand the situation or context then you need to take your pace; in fact, why not take some pace in administrating and not jump to conclusions to quickly.

--G-Spot 17:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

PS. I am very rarely willing to refer to someone as a Nazi or Racist or Communist if avoidable. Sometimes it helps a point, sometimes it brings attention to a point, at times an attack, a defence, and also an accurate literal assessment.

Accusing me of anti-Hungarian bias is just plain silly and you have no grounds for it. I have not "blocked facts", I have asked you to provide verifiable sources for the information you keep adding to Wikipedia. I am not singling out you personally, or Hungarians generally. These are the rules of Wikipedia and you need to keep to them as much as I or any other editor here does. This is entirely regardless of the content in question.
Please stop calling people racists or Nazis. This is a personal attack and is not tolerated here on Wikipedia. You have been politely warned twice now. If you persist in making these attacks, you will be blocked from editing. This is your final warning. Thanks, Gwernol 17:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Verify?

Not always possible, how much of Wikipedia is verified period? How can you say I ran in 2005 and then cut off a varified list of facts under that name, or deny the entry attached to it at all; total removal, not partial. Hey ever thought of doing some fact checking yourself, contacting my own father via his official site on the Wikipedia mention regarding First Team Talent Management (Actor and formal Clientas well). I verified plenty, but I have a life.

--G-Spot 15:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

The question of "how much of Wikipedia is verified" is a canard. Just because some other part of the encyclopedia is imperfect does not mean you can circumvent the rules. Your candidacy in an election does not make you notable and does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia. If you have accomplished something major then someone else will write an article about you. You should also be aware that vanity articles are generally disapproved of here. Your father's entry on Wikipedia is being kept, although shortened to the verifiable facts. If you have other information about him that can be backed up with reliable sources then please add it to the article. The information there that I removed was either links to irrelevant material or did not have appropriate sources. As has been explained to you on several occasions the burden to provide sources is entirely on you, not on editors who remove unsourced material. Gwernol 15:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Vancouver municipal election, 2005

Your recent edit to Vancouver municipal election, 2005 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 15:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

It's automated, its stupid at times, any luck finding cited info? -- Tawker 18:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: External links

I noticed your message on someone else's talk page. I thought I'd point you to WP:RS and WP:EL for policies regarding external links. I have no idea what the dispute is about, but maybe that can help. ---J.S (t|c) 15:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Like I said, I know nothing about the dispute. I also don't want to get in the middle of it. ---J.S (t|c) 15:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Stop making poor assumptions, I'm not an admin. Also, I don't care. Your wasting your time by posting on my talk page. I have no clue what your talking about. I'm not part of this debate. I was just doing you the favor of pointing out the policies so you might better understand the underlying philosophy of the project. Stop trying to make your case to me. ---J.S (t|c) 15:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Posted on my talk page:

Who's being vain?

I provide some information, you wate it with total whipes and brush strokes. I am not vain, I never expected to find myself on Answers, but I have to be if the others are, delete the fucken election history then, but don't climb up my ass bite me and then say I am making the personal attacks! Your calling me a self agrandizing liar, I am making sure facts stay in place, what I did originally is put links to some forgotten Mayoral Candidates, not myself, and that wasn't enough!

Look at past logs, research yourselves, Typical e-administrators, power mad.

Google Watch may be right about you.

I never mentioned my commentary-writer part or the idea that I am Wiki researching.

--G-Spot 15:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Did you read WP:VAIN? In Wikipedia terms, vanity means writing an article about yourself. I didn't call you self-aggrandizing. Listing mayoral candidates in an article on the Vancouver Mayoral election is fine (assuming appropriate sources are provided). That's not the same as creating an article on each of those people. Their standing in the mayoral election is not itself notable enough to merit an entire article. You are disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. You have made particularly nasty personal attacks, refering to editors at Nazis and other unnaceptable epithets. Calling admin who are trying to enforce the agreed upon rules of Wikipedia "power mad" is again a personal attack. You have been repeatedly warned not do do this. I absolutely have 'not called you a "self agrandizing liar" or any other similar term.
Again, please take a few minutes to read and understand Wikipedia's verifiability policy. This is not a negotiable policy. You are bound to it as are all other editors if you wish to contribute to Wikipedia. Its so important that its a link at the bottom of every edit box. The criterion for inclusion of information in Wikipedia is verifiability not truth. I'm sorry you are so angry, but that doesn't excuse incivil behavior and personal attacks. Best, Gwernol 16:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stop

Please refrain from making vain cross-namespace redirects to your userpage, or you will be blocked. — FireFox • 16:05, 09 June '06

They are your names. They are cross namespace redirects and are unnecessary. I would be prepared to bet that not a single person would ever type "Gölök Zoltán Leenderdt Franco Buday" into Google, let alone Wikipedia. — FireFox 10:55, 11 June '06
I could warn you for many things here. Spamming, personal attacks, adding non-notable material, recreating deleted material (and therefore breaking the three revert rule), creating vanity pages, continually creating cross-namespace redirects, being incivil... This is your final warning. Recreate any of the pages, or similar pages again, and you will be blocked. — FireFox 11:22, 11 June '06
I have no idea what you are going on about in relation to "Scroogle Scraper", that has nothing to do with me so don't take it out on me. If you're a watchdog, if you can web master, if you can write articles on the 'outside', you do that. If you decided to create useful articles on Wikipedia, I will fully welcome it. — FireFox 12:57, 11 June '06
It's just the spam blacklist that filters out certain URLs, as you are probably aware. It has nothing to do with me. — FireFox 15:03, 11 June '06
Wikipedia is not picking on anyone. I don't think I'm the right person to ask these sort of questions to. — FireFox 15:39, 11 June '06

[edit] Re: Verified (posted to my talk page)

Yes, I did look through some of the links you posted (currently available here). First putting in a long list of External links is not the same thing as sourcing the claims in the article. Second you really need to read WP:EL for information about when to use External links. But let's put those issues aside. Let's look at some of your "sources". Try: [2]. What has that got to do with Mr. Buday? [3] links to a non-existant page. [4] is in (I'm guessing) Hungarian, so shouldn't be linked to the English Wikipedia. [5] is a link to an unrelated Flickr category (what possible relevance does this have?). [6] is more irrelevant photos. [Microsoft Word is a Hungarian Word document! [7] links to a page showing that a movie that Mr. Buday was in was shown on TV. The (reduced) version of the article says he's an actor and links to his IMDB entry. No-one is disputing that (sourced) fact. Adding this link noes nothing to further that. In fact most of these links add nothing that is not already in the IMDB entry for Buday, so are not needed. Again, please read WP:EL. Gwernol 16:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User page

Hi. Your user page appears to be in violation of WP:UP and WP:NOT. You should consider removing the external links, search queries, lists of search engines, etc. WP is not a webspace provider. Thanks. --mtz206 (talk) 13:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/z/l/User_talk%7EGzlfb_5745.html"