User talk:Jtfolden

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Jtfolden, 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!  GreenJoe 05:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] List of The Dresden Files episodes

Are you adding summaries copied from other web sites? For copyright reasons, this is not allowed. You can rewrite the summaries in your own words, though. - Peregrine Fisher 04:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

It's not acceptable fair use to copy a summary. Basically, the summaries have to written by you. You have two options: watch the episode and summarize it, or read the copyrighted summary, and summarize that. It's a lot of work, but we have to write the summaries ourselves. What's really important about it, is that the original summary be our own writing, so that if anyone changes or adds to it, it's still our own summary. If it starts out as a copied summary, then even if you change and add to it, it's no good, legally. - Peregrine Fisher 08:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Sounds good. It looks like a lot of it is from here. Searching for the first summary on google produces this, for instance. Thanks for helping to clear this up. I've seen whole pages deleted over this issue, which is why I try and find it first and only remove the bad summaries. - Peregrine Fisher 06:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citing sources

Please see WP:V and WP:NOR. Specifically note you should not insert challenged material until verifiable citation is given (Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden of evidence). Matthew 21:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Does it literally state "Production code: 101(etc)", and if people can't obtain these press kits then it's clearly not a verifiable source. The onus is yours to cite a verifiable source that people can use to verify. Matthew 21:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Unless it literally states "Production code" (that bit you did not add) I will remove them as per the "R&Rs". If something is not verifiable then it clearly isn't an RS. Personally I do not believe your "press kit" is verifiable as you've stated nothing more then that. If, as you say they are indeed the codes, then I believe you will be able to provide a reliable source. Until then you should not add content with disputed sourcing. Matthew 21:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Feel free to scan/photograph your own press kit if you wish, or point me in the right direction. Matthew 22:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps. A quick Google search turns up nothing (so how's it verifiable)? Matthew 22:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Production codes

I've reverted you, again. Please remember that I am disputing the validity of the information. As per the policies and guidelines you should not re-add the information until I am satisfied you have provided a verifiable source, or a consensus of editors agrees you have provided a verifiable source.

Point in fact I am not satisfied with the sources you provide, nor do I consider your press kits verifiable. Consequentially if, as you say, they do contain the production codes, then I believe you will be able to provide a verifiable secondary source Remember the onus is yours to provide a source, as you are the one seeking to include the information. I repeat: do not re-add until such a time it's appropriately sourced. Have a good day, Matthew 13:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Like I stated: "I repeat: do not re-add until such a time it's appropriately sourced". I've seen no indication of any reliable sources given. The "mediation cabal" holds no authority, they're just regular users... like yourself. Read under the edit window: "Encyclop[a]edic content must be verifiable." WP:V also states: "Editors adding new material should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor." (emphasis mine). Matthew 16:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template: Fact

(..moved from user page..) My apologies for not understanding the "Template:Fact" tag...I just read up on it and I was ignorant for just removing it without some research first. But thank you for bringing this error to my attention, and it won't be repeated. Ecnirpnaf99 20:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sign 'O' The Times special character

I tried both Internet Explorer 7 and Mozilla Firefox and both won't display the symbol that is being used as the 'O' (I assume a peace sign) in Sign 'O' The Times at several points in the Prince article. Internet Explorer 7 shows it as a "square" and Firefox shows it as a "question mark". Both browswers have no problem with the symbol that is Prince's old name though (the glyph one). I wonder if others are having this problem as well? Ecnirpnaf99 07:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Amsterdam (TV series)

Greetings Jtfolden,
One question, and one comment:
Where are you finding FOX summaries of future episodes? All I have found is recaps of the episodes after they air.
With respect to his sobriety, I saw something that said he decides to go sober in 1964 after a bender ends him up in a Psych Ward. But this only means that he started trying to stay sober in 1964, it is possible, even likely that he did not succeed until 1965 (which fits the reference we were given for when his last drink was). Almost no one succeeds the first time they try to quit an addiction. —MJBurrage(T•C) 04:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone get an account at the press site you mentioned? Or do need certain credentials? —MJBurrage(T•C) 18:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey again, I was wondering what the source was for the production codes of episodes 7 & 8 being swapped? All I have found so far says that "Reclassified" was the seventh produced. I did find one site that has this weeks and next weeks both listed as 107. Is it possible that the episodes in question were filmed as a two hour episode, and is only being shown separately? —MJBurrage(T•C) 02:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)