User talk:E-romance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, E-romance, 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:

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 ask your question there. Again, welcome!  --ImmortalGoddezz 04:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] linking

Hi, I've noticed that you've gone back and relinked things that I've unlinked. An example of this would be Patricia Maxwell. Please be aware that linking pseudonyms only causes redirects back to the Patricia Maxwell page, which is frowned upon. Why link to a page you're already at? Also please remember to use a formal tone while writing since this is an encyclopedia. The links in the welcome message should be very helpful in setting you on your way to becoming a great wikipedian. Thanks. --ImmortalGoddezz 14:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English Grammar

Hi Eromance. I have noticed that you have edited a lot of the romance novelist pages that I created. While I appreciate your input, I've noticed that the grammar you use does not always make sense. If English is not your first language and you are translating from other sites, please put the text on the talk page of the article first (or let me know on my talk page if you want) and someone can help polish the wording so that it will not confuse native English speakers. (And I would also like to second ImmortalGoddezz--please don't put links for the pseudonyms!!). Thanks. Karanacs 16:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Gracias for your cooperation! It is great that you are trying to help out the English wikipedia even though it is not your first language :) Karanacs 20:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright violation on Adriana Trigiani

Thank you for your contributions to Adriana Trigiani. While we appreciate your effort, I have reverted your changes because they were mostly copied verbatim from Trigiani's official website. Please don't use materials that infringe the copyrights of others. This could create legal liabilities and seriously hurt the project. For more information, please click here. Thank you. --Takeel 20:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Susan Longhi King

Notability of Susan Longhi King

A tag has been placed on Susan Longhi King, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. SuzanneKn 22:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it would have helped if you had put in links or references. I searched google for her a couple of times and couldn't find anything. SuzanneKn 22:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

Please be careful when adding categories. Recently you've added Category:Romantic fiction writers to a lot of articles that already have Category:American romantic fiction writers in there. American romantic fiction writers is a subcategory of the Romantic fiction writers category and it is unnecessary to have both. Sub-categories are preferred because they have more detail than parent categories. Additionally you've been using the defaultsort template. Please make sure to removed the "|lastname, firstname]]" from the existing categories when you use it since the purpose of defaultsort is to get rid of all the repetitive formatting after the categories. I hope this helps. --ImmortalGoddezz 19:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming pages

I've noticed that you've moved a couple of pages like Nora Roberts to Eleanor Marie Robertson, which is an incorrect move. You really need to stop moving these pages and read over Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) particularly the pseudonyms part. I'm going to move Eleanor Marie Robertson back to Nora Roberts in 7 days time unless there's some major disputes on the talk page. Anyway I hope this helps. --ImmortalGoddezz 22:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Be that as it may I still think that it should be moved back to Nora Roberts. Additionally if you read over the Naming Conventions you'll see that middle names are highly discouraged in the name titles. Also I've noticed that you've moved even more articles (eg. Jude Deveraux) Taking straight from the naming conventions links that I've given you it says this If people published under one or more pen names and/or their own name, the best known of these names is chosen. For example (again) Jude Deveraux. Since 1977 she's been known as Jude Deveraux; it's her best known name and her only known published name so it's unnecessary and unhelpful to move her page to Jude Gilliam even if she is married. In summary what I mean to say is that you are making unnecessary and confusing moves so I think it would be helpful if you read over the policies again. In the case of Nora Roberts since it is a disputed move I believe community consensus is the proper way to go and I will soon list it at WP:Requested Moves. Thank you. --ImmortalGoddezz 23:47, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed these moves, and I agree with ImmortalGoddezz. We'll only confuse people by listing the person under their full name rather than the name by which they are known. We need to change all of these back to the names they were listed under before. Karanacs 02:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright infringement & also verifiability

  • You are not allowed to simply copy text from other websites. This is illegal and doing so will get your contributions deleted.
  • Articles must be verifiable in published third-party sources. Even if it you were permitted to simply copy text from the subject's website, doing so would not form a legitimate encyclopedia article, and using these websites as your sources is bad practice. —Centrx→talk • 04:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Resilient Barnstar
Thank you for working so hard on the romance novel-related pages. Everyone makes mistakes, but I'm glad you haven't been discouraged! Karanacs 20:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New historical romance page

Hi E-romance! I just wanted to let you know that I created a new page for historical romance today. From now on when we create articles about historical romance authors we can link to this instead of to the romance novel page (or you can link to both). The page still needs a lot of work, but I'm going to be gradually adding to it.Karanacs 18:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A few concerns

I've come across a few of edits that you've made in authors articles, and that I've fixed, and I want to help you fix them yourself. Anyway:

  1. A person retaining residency in the United States is an American. Using [[United States|American]] is the best way, I've found, to address that and makes using U.S. American unnecessary. Likewise United States of America and USA all redirect to United States why not bypass the redirects and just call it the United States or [[United States|USA]]?
  2. Do not bold the authors name after the first paragraph; see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (text formatting). After you've introduced the author in the first paragraph there's no reason to draw the readers attention to the name again. They know who they're reading about or they wouldn't be there in the first place.
  3. Spam. You've been adding a lot of links like 'All Romance Writers' to the pages of some of these authors. Per WP:EL links that require registration should be avoided. Additionally you add these links in a way that can be considered promotion. Instead of Jill Shalvis's Webpage in Fantastic Fiction's Website try using Jill Shalvis at Fantastic Fiction instead. Also if you're going to cite these pages please link directly to the page that you got it from and not just for example, eHarlequins or Mills & Boon homepage.

I think that's it. Anyway I really do hope this helps you with your editing. --ImmortalGoddezz 16:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kathryn Ross

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have perfomed a web search with the contents of Kathryn Ross, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://freshfiction.com/author.php?id=11021. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 19:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Naming

I've noticed that you've been changing a lot of names in the romance authors pages from their commonly known names to their birth names or lesser known names. These changes are unnecessary and I know that I've gone back and reverted a few of them. Basically if the article is at 'ABC XYZ' then the article should start out 'ABC XYZ blah blah blah born as suchandsuch.' A good way to recognize what is the most recognized name is to look at the authors official website.. in the case of Diana Palmer her website is dianapalmer.com. I know a lot of these authors use pen names and for that the guideline is "If people published under one or more pen names and/or their own name, the best known of these names is chosen." Basically please read over naming conventions before changing all of these authors. Thanks and I hope this helps you with your editing. --ImmortalGoddezz 01:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I am just copying this response from Belagaile's talk page to here because it covers everything I want to say. The birth name is not lost within the article if you mention pseudonyms later; however referring to the author by a lesser known name at the beginning of an article causes a great amount of confusion, especially if that name is obscure. Take for example the article Jenna Black; right now she writes under Jenna Black; however she has written under the pen name Jennifer Barlow. The article started off referring to her as Jennifer Barlow despite the fact that the article's name is Jenna Black. You do this to avoid confusion because most people don't realize that some of these people have more than one pen name, so you stick with the one that they're commonly known as and stay with that throughout the entire article. What I mean is that most people don't know that Eleanor Marie Robertson Smith Wilder is Nora Roberts because she doesn't write under that name, she hasn't published under that name, and she rarely refers to herself by that name when interviewing. It's ok to mention it later in the article, because it is her birth/married names however per WP:NAME "Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists." The whole gist of my comment can be boiled down to: Just because you might be familiar with their given name/lesser known pen names doesn't mean that everybody else is. --ImmortalGoddezz 17:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Palmer,Diana-NowAndForever.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Palmer,Diana-NowAndForever.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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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) 14:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Quick,Amanda-Seduction.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Quick,Amanda-Seduction.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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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) 19:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Steel,Danielle-GoingHome.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Steel,Danielle-GoingHome.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jan Coffey

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Jan Coffey, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Jan Coffey.

[edit] Book cover images

Hi E-romance, I noticed that you have uploaded a few book cover images and have been adding those to the articles about the articles. Unfortunately, I don't think that these images can be used in the articles. The fair use rationale says that the article must explicitly discuss that book, and in the articles I have watchlisted the books aren't discussed. I think we would have to go into some detail about the book or its importance, and just having it listed in the bibliography does not satisfy the fair use requirements. You probably ought to remove all of the images of books that aren't specifically discussed in the articles. That will make the images orphaned and they will then be deleted. If you have any questions, let me know. Karanacs (talk) 22:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Burford,Eleanor-PassionateWitness.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Burford,Eleanor-PassionateWitness.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

The following images also have this problem:

  • Image:Courtney,Caroline-DuchessInDisguise.jpg
  • Image:Castle,Jayne-GentlePirate.JPG

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)