User talk:Judae1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 2 Image:SPURA_Span.jpg 3 Ronn Torossian 4 License tagging for Image:RonnT.JPG 5 LoHo 5.1 Loho Deletion attempt 6 An Automated Message from HagermanBot 7 5W Public Relations 8 Image:SPURA_Span.jpg 9 AfD Nomination: SPURA 10 RFA 11 Fair use rationale for Image:Abraham E Kazan.jpg 12 Fair use rationale for Image:Carole E Handler.jpeg 13 Herman Jessor and Abraham E. Kazan 14 page blanking 15 Deletion review comments 16 RE:SPURA 17 AfD nomination of Carole E. Handler 18 SPURA 19 Carole E. Handler 20 Barack Obama 21 Seward Park (Manhattan)

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Judae1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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!  Proto::► 16:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SPURA_Span.jpg

Image SPURA_Span.jpg - you deleted it without an explanation and before I reload it, please tell me why.

Thank you, and what is (I3 G12) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Judae1 (talk • contribs).

Hi Judae1. See Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion. I3 indicates the image was not free for Wikipedia to use (you uploaded it indicating it was only for use on Wikipedia - see GFDL for why this is not acceptable), and G12 indicates it was a blatant copyright violation from http://www.spura.org. Do not upload this image again. Proto::► 16:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

They will need to indicate on the website you took the image from that the image is fully and freely released into the public domain, with no rights reserved. They will retain attribution for the image, but cannot retain owenrship. Proto::► 16:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate your intro and direction. I understand the photo issue and will get their approval, but not necessarily with your edit chocies. I hope that is alright as I would want to have a long, posiitve and useful dialoge going forward. Juda S. Engelmayer 19:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem - good luck! Proto::► 00:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

This image page claims its owner has given up all rights. Can you please forward proof to permissions(at)wikimedia(dot)org? Thank you. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 20:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Terrific, thank you. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 04:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. I've removed Yori's e-mail address from my talk page just in case it wasn't public. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 15:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ronn Torossian

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ronn Torossian, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.5wpr.com/Company/5WPRmanagement.cfm, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:Ronn Torossian. Then you should do one of the following:

• Make a note on the original website that re-use is permitted under the GFDL and state at Talk:Ronn Torossian where we can find that note; or
• Send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Ronn Torossian.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! FreplySpang 17:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:RonnT.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:RonnT.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands 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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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. 18:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LoHo

I'm not sure what I did that was deceptive, and I'm more than happy to have a public discussion. When there was a danger of an edit war, I left a message with the user, and I laid out the reason for my edits, both in the edit summaries and in the user talk.

Accusing another use of being deceptive is clearly not WP:AGF, and it's doubly insulting when it comes from a user who has an apparent conflict of interest, and has a history of hiding links to the LoHo in several articles.

Anyway, I see you haven't participated in Talk:LoHo, which I encourage you to do. 24.215.233.72 19:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Claiming advocacy? Please explain.

Also, there is an indeed a conflict of interest when the person who created the LoHo article and has inserted links to the article in every possible article also writes or has in the past written for a newspaper published by LoHo Realty. I realize you might not be a professional journalist, but that's an obvious conflict of interest. Mosmof 20:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

When a newspaper bills itself as "LoHo Realty's Grand Street News", the relationship is more than just advertiser-medium, even if the sponsor isn't directly involved in the process. There's a huge difference between an advertiser and a firm that shows up in the masthead. To claim otherwise is either incredibly naive or disingenuous. And whether you contributed one article or more is irrelevant - you have a professional relationship with a publication whose primary sponsor is LoHo Realty. I'm not trying to be a big meanie about it - that's something you have to accept when you contribute your writing to a newspaper. Mosmof 20:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I see you've edited your comment, but my point remains the same. When a business shows up in a masthead, that's not just an advertiser. "Different ad arrangements" is understating things a little. Mosmof 20:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Loho Deletion attempt

Deletion was something that was suggested from the start, but I couldn't do it because I hadn't set up an account yet. And as I had mentioned in a discussion re: previous edits, I saw Afd as an independent issue from the article links. Mosmof 21:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Couple of things:

• When you respond to something in Afd, don't do it inline - it gets hard to read. Start a paragraph below and indent.
• Per Wikipedia guidelines, a mention of a term isn't enough. The article has to be about the term.
• I'm not part of any group. Stop worrying about who I am - it's creepy and borderline stalker-ish. Just contest the deletion on its merits and it'll go away. Mosmof 21:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'd been too lazy to sign up. But I do live in the Lower East Side, so it's a subject I have a lot of interest and, I like to think, a little expertise in. I do plan to widen my range of subjects though. As far as the LoHo thing, if it takes hold, so be it. But right now, it's little more than a novelty used by a few locals, trying-way-too-hard types and a few writers. Yeah, it's around, but not notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article - I like my Wikipedia without trivial stuff, and I can certainly do without lies like "the area commonly known as LoHo".

And you still haven't explained the hidden Wikilinks to LoHo. What was that about?

Also, the "stalker-ish" thing was harsh. I apologize - it was unnecessary. But again, don't worry about me. If the Afd fails, I won't be happy, but my life will go on. Mosmof 21:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no such thing is a delete/keep aisle. I was responding to a comment, so my entry goes under the comment. Please look at other Afd entries and see how things work before moving other people's comments. Mosmof 23:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Again, it would really behoove you to look at other Afd entries to see how things are done, so you don't do things like move other people's comments out of context or add sections/references. And please stop creating a section every time you post a comment on my User Talk page - it's unnecessary and annoying. Please use indents instead. Mosmof 23:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 23:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 5W Public Relations

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article 5W Public Relations, 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 deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Ytny 13:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I've responded at Talk:5W Public Relations. I think it's a borderline case - I'm not sure the firm has much significance to the general public, but Agency of the Year isn't trivial either. Ytny 16:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:SPURA_Span.jpg

Check the permisisons emails, I sent in the owners' permisison as requested three weeks ago to the email given to me, and it was acknowledged. What the heck is going on.Juda S. Engelmayer 15:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't mentioned in the image text. I have restored temporarily. Proto::► 15:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Image is restored. Sorry for that. You need to refer to this image being authorised within the image's text. Proto::► 15:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Nomination: SPURA

An editor has nominated the article SPURA for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SPURA. Add four tildes like this ˜˜˜˜ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article SPURA during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. Jayden54Bot 16:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFA

Hi Judae1. To nominate yourself for adminship, you'll first have to create a subpage, as explained at WP:GRFA. After that, you can list it WP:RFA. If you have any other questions, you can ask on WT:RFA or my talkpage. Picaroon 17:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it was because your username wasn't capitalized - so I've moved it to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Judae1. Picaroon 17:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I would encourage you to withdraw the nomination. Honestly, you have no real chance of being promoted at this time. Please read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship#Things to consider before accepting a nomination. GRBerry 18:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the standards for adminship are fairly tight. The standards for participation are almost completely open - the only people who can't participate are those that did participate but proved more trouble than they were worth. (Generally, those who actively try to make the encyclopedia worse, or those who through long term sustained experience were just too much trouble to work with.) An example of someone whose starting contributions were quite painful, but who has turned over a new leaf and looks likely to become an admin, see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Daniel.Bryant 2, especially question 3. (The 2 in the link indicates his second time standing for adminship.)

We have lots (ok, way too much) guidance on how things work on pages in the Wikipedia: namespace. Some of it even conflicts, see the discussion between me and Addhoc at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of megachurches. That you don't demonstrate awareness of how things work is why you shouldn't be given the administrative tools yet.

That you want to learn more is a good sign for the future. You'll learn by clicking on links to pages in the Wikipedia space, reading them, reading in their talk pages, and watching the community function over time. Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:Consensus can change are our policies on what consensus means here. Wikipedia:Deletion policy is the general deletion policy, Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion is the policy for speedy deletions (essentially - delete on sight), Wikipedia:Proposed deletion is the policy for proposed deletion (essentially - delete if nobody objects and it has never been discussed previously), Wikipedia:Deletion process covers the multiple processes by which content can be deleted, Wikipedia:Guide to deletion tries to explain both, and Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators is the guidance for administrators on closing deletion discussions. And all of those pages have see also related content.

We also have lots (again, too many) of guidelines on what is notable enough to write an article that will adhere to the core content policies. Wikipedia:Notability is the best launching point for exploring these guidelines.

As a quick synopsis, consensus here generally is determined by what gets said in the discussion, so long as the group is attempting to adhere to policy (required) and either is adhering to guidelines or alternatively is making a very compelling case for a variation. The latter is needed because guidelines reflect a larger scale consensus, usually originating in several discussions in several spheres. This is discussed more fully at Wikipedia:Consensus. Admins are encouraged to mentally overweight opinions arguing from policy and guidelines, and totally ignore bare votes. You can also read Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions.

Seeing how all this works is best done by regular participation, both in deletion discussions and in working on articles.

An admin has access to all the administrative tools, so the community has to trust them with all of them. The above is a good launching point for learning about deletions. Others would be better to guide you on other aspects of participation here, but Wikipedia:Requests for comment can be a reasonable launching point. GRBerry 22:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Abraham E Kazan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Abraham E Kazan.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Carole E Handler.jpeg

Thanks for uploading Image:Carole E Handler.jpeg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Herman Jessor and Abraham E. Kazan

Thanks for creating the articles on Herman Jessor and Abraham E. Kazan. These have been missing for far to long. -- Petri Krohn 01:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I see you have also created United Housing Foundation, also long missing. The article could benefit from material List of New York City housing cooperatives. I had to move this to my personal space after creation (Petri Krohn/List of New York City housing cooperatives) because of drive-by deletionism, but I see it has now re-entered article space :-) --- Petri Krohn 01:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

The Museum of the City of New York held an exhibition on Amalgamated Housing Cooperative between November 9, 2004 — March 20, 2005 titeled Radicals In The Bronx. [1]. Their web site contained interesting material, but most of it is now of-line. Some of it, including some old photographs can stil be found at the Way back machine [2]. -- Petri Krohn 02:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Some more references: [3] (1928 images!) [4], [5]. -- Petri Krohn 02:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] page blanking

please do not blank pages content as you did to Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations. Thanks! -- lucasbfr ^talk 16:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion review comments

Ah, I'm not good at detecting subtle humor online, and I noticed afterwards that I missed your reference to the Loho in Philippines (?).

Anyway, it looks some we have some common interest, being Lower East Siders and all, so I'm sure we'll Wiki-run into each other. Best. Ytny 19:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE:SPURA

Sorry, I forgot to do that. I've removed it now, but you are allowed to do that yourself if the AFD has been closed. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 00:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Carole E. Handler

I've nominated Carole E. Handler, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Carole E. Handler satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carole E. Handler and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Carole E. Handler during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --Edcolins 20:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SPURA

Please do not take this personally, as I assume you are the creator of the article in question...but the article does not look very well written (i.e., the acronym in the title, the awkward headings) and there isn't even an article about Seward Park itself, which calls into question the significance of the Seward Park Urban Renewal Area. Remove my tag if it should be removed, but I don't think it should be all that much of a surprise that it's often viewed as a candidate for deletion. Best, Paul 17:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC) (P.S. what is a "contact debate?") P.P.S. Please please do not take the above personally. It seems that we are of the same sentiment when it comes to housing in NYC - I'm one of the many who work there but cannot afford to live there. Paul 17:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree completely...I'd create it myself but I'm unfamiliar with the area. Paul 18:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carole E. Handler

Apologies about the brutal charge. I did not mean to be rude. The article is improving, and I am thinking about withdrawing my deletion nomination... but why on earth is she in the category Patent attorney? She seems pretty much focussed on anything but patent law? Am I right? --Edcolins 21:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you cite a source in the article for that point? She does not appear in the USPTO database of patent attorneys and agents. Thanks. --Edcolins 21:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barack Obama

I'll help you with this article. See my reply on the talk page. --sunstar net^talk 23:41, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seward Park (Manhattan)

Juda-

Excellent article - I cleaned up the wording and formatting a bit, but the references and categorization were terrific. Paul 17:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)