User talk:Indiecat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Indiecat, 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 ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  -- Infrogmation 16:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Image tagging for Image:LastExit Jimmy.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:LastExit Jimmy.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 23:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:LastExit_Nigel.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:LastExit_Nigel.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 09:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your images

Please review Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Images to avoid problems with images you upload. It is your responsibility to establish the source and copyright of any image you upload. Deliberately uploading images under a false licence can be considered Wikipedia:Vandalism, for which users can be blocked from editing. Hope this helps. -- Infrogmation 16:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:LastExit_Tanya.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:LastExit_Tanya.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 09:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:LastExit Nigel.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:LastExit Nigel.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:

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. 21:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edits to Last Exit

The page Last Exit is not an article; it is a disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages have their own style guidelines that your edits do not adhere to. Although everyone is welcome to make contributions to Wikipedia, please do not make unconstructive edits. --ShelfSkewed Talk 16:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Conflicts of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Last Exit (film), you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Assume good faith on the part of other editors, as we should assume it on your part; and do not accuse your fellow editors of vandalism when they are attempting to maintain the standards of this project. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trying to help here

1) Yes, as executive producer, you definitely have a major conflict of interest. 2) The guidelines on external links are here; specifically, the part that says, "Links normally to be avoided... Links to blogs and personal web pages"! 3) If you cannot provide references (they don't have to have weblinks, though it helps) to articles about this film in publications or on websites that are considered reliable sources, then the general feeling is likely to be that the film lacks notability and should not have an article in Wikipedia. Are there no reviews of the film in magazines and newspapers? Is it not mentioned in books about its subgenres, or about Danish film? 4) I'm trying to help because SkewedShelf asked that other editors step in, to make sure you were getting fair treatment. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. 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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button Image:Wikisigbutton.png 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! --SineBot (talk) 18:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Last Exit (film)

The problem with the older version of Last Exit (film) is that it was written like publicity material or an advertisement, not like an encyclopedia article. Phrases such as "remarkably deft", "passionate, convincing performances", and "in your face style of psychedelic sex and stark violence" are all purely subjective and, unless they were written by an outside authority and are properly referenced, have no place in an objective article. Also, Wikipedia has guidelines about the format of articles, as detailed in the Manual of Style, and rules about what sorts of external links are allowed. The changes I made to the article were all intended to bring it closer to meeting Wikipedia standards--to make it more likely, that is, to be retained in WP and referred to with confidence by WP users.

I also want to add that no one is lying to anyone. I requested advice from two other editors, and Orangemike possibly saw one of those messages. Or it could be that he was monitoring recent changes (a common administrator activity) and noticed our exchange of contrary edits. Nothing is going on that you can't see for yourself in the page and contribution histories of everyone involved. --ShelfSkewed Talk 20:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Well it all seems funny and weird. But wholeheartedly agree with KnowledgeOfSelf, that since there is a conflict for some reason here, so we need to work on it without just reverting back and forth all the time. Since then, have worked very very hard in digging out many more references, links, interviews etc to try backup the article and its content, will try add as much more as possible when I find them, it might take time as this is an obscure and cult item. But maybe we have to go through a "mediator" as KnowledgeOfSelf states if we still have issues after a while. Good vibes hopefully for the future.

Indiecat (talk) 21:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)indiecat

The problem here in part is that a lot of the references you'd like to add (and not just on this film, but on quirky indie films in general) are to websites that are kinda marginal under Wikipedia's standards of what constitutes a "reliable source". This is not an area of my expertise, but some of these look like personal websites with pretentious names. (It's the whole "On the Internet nobody knows you're a dog" thing). There's a strong bias in favor of hardcopy publications and sites with strong verifiability. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, agree, and I guess that's why these movies are called cult items becuase they are somewhat outside of the system. They are usually not covered or even sometimes revered by the mainstream press. And just because they are obscure and only covered by cult review sites, at the end of the day it's all a matter whether it's for peoples tastes or not, these websites are niche and are well known in their particular market that they purely focus on. Once again, that is the whole defination of "cult film", we are not talking mainstream hollywood here, just tiny niche films with a small following. Hmmmm...I supposed it's all damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. Indiecat 18:40, 30 November 2007 (UTC)