User talk:Tovojolo/Archive/Archive 01 Jul 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Categories

Just add the appropriate category tags at the bottom of the articles like you see in other biographical articles. Remember that people need last name first in the sort keys. --PhantomS 02:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Anna Nicole Smith

Your contributions are welcome, but please hold off on editing Anna Nicole Smith for a little while. The page is getting a lot of traffic and editors want to make sure all the facts are accurate, verifiable and properly sourced. Also, it might be hard to add tidbits of new information until any vandalism dies down. Danski14 22:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Photos

I thought I'd leave you a note about your comment "Photos that have been uploaded to the Internet can fairly be described as being in the public domain". I do not agree. Wikipedia benefits from photos but only if they are legal (under the laws of the US, where the servers are). Public domain doesn't mean "available to the public", it has a specific legal meaning, described in the article. Generally, it's stuff over about 100 years old, stuff produced by the US Federal Government (but not the British Government), and stuff specifically given away (released) by the original copyright hoder. You say "Wikipedia needs a more sensible policy" but it cannot make a policy that ignores US law. Sorry. Notinasnaid 13:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Infobox colours

Recently you changed the infobox on the Anna Nicole Smith page to silver, stating that silver was to be used for deceased people...well I checked this out and I just thought this would interest you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Infobox_colours.

Image:Smile-tpvgames.gif Seraphim Whipp 01:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Your help desk comment

On the help desk you said:

I would have done something myself but I am not a Wikipedia Admin yet. I do not have the authority to issue warnings.

This actually isn't true. If you've read a policy page and now someone is violating policy, you're certainly allowed to warn them. It's just blocking you'll have to leave to an admin. After they reach the final warning in the templated series, you can report them to WP:AIV for administrator attention. The most important thing is to know for sure they did something wrong before warning them. - Mgm|(talk) 23:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: your comments on image licensing

As a regular uploader of photos for WikiProject CSI, I have to disagree with your comments on restrictive image upload policies.

  1. Wikipedia are not above US law; they have to comply with copyright restrictions.
  2. You CAN upload anything you like, providing you add a fair use rationale that justifies its use in articlespace.
  3. Just because photos or other media are available to the public to buy/rent and upload, doesn't make them public domain; I had this problem with screenshots of characters and scenes at WP: CSI, as CBS/Jerry Bruckheimer still hold the copyright for the material, even if I have bought the DVD. Just write a fair use rationale and tag the image for fair use.
  4. Any public domain images can be uploaded to Wiki Commons instead, reducing the amount of images to be found in the encyclopedia.
  5. Adding any images to your userpage? That would use up excessive bandwidth on the Wiki servers. In any case, the primary function of Wikipedia is not like Myspace or Bebo, to allow people to express themselves on their personal pages (although you can do this a little with userboxes). Its purpose is to create a free content encyclopedia, and user pages are just a tool to help editors coordinate. If you want to share photos with friends, use a site like Photobucket.

Furthermore, your justification of a blog using cited wikipedia policy: read this article my friend. Editus Reloaded 09:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Dr. No (film)

It's good to see you making substantial edits to WikiProject James Bond's Collaboration of the fortnight (two weeks). Your may want to check out Dr. No (film)'s to do list on this page here .

Thanks. Your edits are much appreciated and welcome to WikiProject James Bond.

(Note, If you wish to reply contact me on my talk page here as I will probably not check this page again).

SpecialWindler talk 11:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I just made Dr. No more comprehensive by adding stuff. I watched the Inside Dr. No documentry and that is exactly what one of the United Artists exectutive said on the documentry. I agree, I didn't get what it was either. SpecialWindler talk 09:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels Colloborations, with WP:James Bond

I have nominated this for the WikiProject Novels, Colloboration of the Month so that with ours we can get this up to GA status. It needs a few votes, but I don't think it will get it within a day, but I'm trying. SpecialWindler talk 07:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Heres the link:Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Collaboration

Thats All right. SpecialWindler talk 00:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Live and Let Die (novel)

Your many contributions to this article are invaluable, and you've done a great job of improving it. As far as referencing goes, I direct you to WP:CITET which has templates for the proper formatting of references, since they are presently just links and cannot be left as such. It's all pretty straightforward, but if you have any questions feel free to ask!
Cheers. Cliff smith 17:47, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

Based on the report at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Tovojolo, it has been established that you've used multiple accounts in a manner forbidden by Wikipedia policy. Note that accounts held by family members or friends are constrained by the meatpuppetry policy; such accounts should not be used to double-vote or create shows of support. You have been blocked for 48 hours; when the block expires, please feel free to resume contributing, but if your wife or other family members edit Wikipedia, they should not co-edit or co-vote on controversial topics with you, to avoid breaching this policy again. If you would like to contest this block, you may do so by placing {{unblock|REASON}} on your talk page (replace REASON with the reason you believe the block to be inappropriate). MastCell Talk 16:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

My wife and I are upset by this but, nevertheless, we will abide by it. My wife is so upset that she does not want to edit further.

It never occurred to either of us that a husband and wife having two separate accounts could lead to trouble.

Caprisa 14:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC), Tovojolo 14:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Live and Let Die (novel)

You added a statement, which needs sources. The statement is "...obvious inference being ..."

Or is it original research

Please see the talk page under the "GA review comments" section

I only alert you, because the Good article status has been put on hold. SpecialWindler talk 12:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Bouchet

Hey, thanks for your message, I'd be glad to look at Barbara Bouchet for GA. I'll do it as soon as I can and give you my suggestions. All I'll say at this point is that I tend to be a bit harsh because I'm more used to getting articles straight to featured status so feel free to use some latitude when attending to my comments! All the best... The Rambling Man 17:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Bouchet comments

So, here they are:

  • Four paras in the lead are too many, aim for two per WP:LEAD. Y Done
  • "...she has never been able to identify with it...", "...she now feels the closest affinity to..." - perhaps this is referenced in the Italian citation, my Italian is poor, but this reads like original research and, in my opinion, ought to be made more neutral in tone. Y Done
  • Far, far too many single sentence paragraphs. Merge them so you get substantial paragraphs and ensure that there's a good prose flow between each sentence. Y Done
  • Ensure placement of citations are per WP:CITE. Y Done
  • Fair use rationales have to be provided for all fair use images, on an article-by-article basis. Y Done
  • Don't fall foul of overwikilinking, such as film, business & television - far too much!

Fix those, give me a shout for another look when you're ready! Y Done The Rambling Man 18:16, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Slut Night

When you get a chance, take a look at the work Benjiboi did on Slut Night. And consider reviewing your non-vote? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I concur. The article has been rewritten and bears (almost) no resemblance to the article you nominated. Pdfpdf 16:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Your thinking enwiki is a blog

While I have no doubt that this is in policy, policy uses "blog" in the loosest sense possible and the context wherein you use it, it violates WP:NOT#MYSPACE. —« ANIMUM » 17:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Flickr photo

That particular image seems to have a note on it saying "© All rights reserved". I know that people have used Flickr in the past as a good source for free images, but I'm not personally familiar with the policies of Flickr. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

  • the policies of flickr do not automatically release images into the public domain or under a free license. In this case, the image is *clearly* not free of copyright and can not be uploaded here under a free license. --Durin 18:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)