User talk:Verbist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Contents |
[edit] Spam in Diane Arbus
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Diane Arbus. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 20:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] June 2007
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Haberarts, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A tag has been placed on Haberarts, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:Haberarts. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks. Coren 04:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with Haberarts. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You want to *add* the {{hangon}} tag, not replace the {{db-speedy}}. I've left your hangon when I added the speedy back. Coren 04:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from an article you created, as you did with Haberarts, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Coren 05:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Haberarts, you will be blocked from editing. Do not arbitrarily remove content from talk pages. Trusilver 05:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Haberarts
Hey there. The problem isn't that Haberarts is or is not interresting, but that it simply meets none of the criterion of the notability guidelines, as currently written. It may be that the website is, in fact, notable (for instance, by having significant coverage in independent secondary sources, but the article makes no claims of notability. Coren 14:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Haberarts
I've nominated Haberarts, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Haberarts 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/Haberarts and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Haberarts 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. The Sunshine Man 17:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hmm...
I take it the name of the game is plugging people's product (recently, Howard Mandel's book). Knock it off, please. --ND (talk) 02:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Persons of nobility
Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits, as you are doing in Albert Lilar . If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule (3RR) prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.
- Appended: Albert Lilar is taken up into the Belgium nobility and was granted the nobility title "baron". A nobility title is naturally part of the persons larger naming, this is a historic custom. According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles), and the discussion at the talk pages, a nobility title has to be included in the persons name in de first section of the text (but not allways in the title of the page).
- Please stop reverting my contributions on the page Albert Lilar; you're violating the Wikipedia conventions and naming conventions. Please read the conventions about naming of persons. Thank you.
{{helpme}}
Hello Demophon,
Suzanne Lilar and Albert Lilar were my grandparents. I first started the Wikipedia entry on Suzanne Lilar and have been adding pertinent information about her literary career ever since.. The entry in Wikipedia is about Suzanne Lilar as a WRITER. She signed all her books Suzanne Lilar. She would have found it ridiculous to be addressed as Baroness. She was granted a title for her artistic contributions to Belgium in 1976, just as were Marnix Gijssen and André Delvaux, for example. But nobody talks about the writer Baroness Suzanne Lilar, or the cineast Baron André Delvaux, or Baron Marnix Gijssen, for example. They all would have found the use of this title preposterous as it applies to their literaray or artistic carreer, but they may or may not have used this title in social settings. However, the Wikipedia entry is about the literary career of Suzanne Lilar and how she was known as a writer, and this must me fully acknowledged and accepted. If you, Demophon, wishes to insert a line that she was made a baroness for the the ensemble of her literary oeuvre in march 1976, that is appropriate, but it is not appropriate to add the title in the heading of SUZANNE LILAR. Please understand the difference between the writer and social status. The same is true for Gijssen and Delvaux. And for Albert Lilar. P lease remove the titles of nobility from the Heading of the names,as they are completely irrelveant in this context.
Greetings,
Verbist (talk) 16:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Verbist
-
- Hey guys. I saw the helpme tag so thought I'd give my two cents. The policies you cite - Domonphon - says basically use what they are popularly called. From Verbists message, it appears the title is correct. The MoS says that the title should be included in the first paragraph. Can we agree to having the full name bolded, and an extra sentence added the the first paragraph saying she was a Barron? Tiddly-Tom 19:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
{help me}} Suzanne Lilar would be horrified to have "Baronness" linked to her writer's name. So would Albert Lilar, Marnix Gijssen, and André Delvaux, all of whom I knew personally. They were all provided a title, but both the Lilars, Gijssen and Delvaux never did and never would have used the title in their artistic or political life. One needs to respect the wishes of the deceased. If they wanted to have used the title, they would have done so. None did! Such a honorary title is very different from old-family nobility. Again, please respect the wishes of the deceased, and understand the differences of nobility titles given.
Thank you, Verbist (talk) 21:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Verbist
{{help me}} Suzanne Lilar would be horrified to have "Baronness" linked to her writer's name. So would Albert Lilar, Marnix Gijssen, and André Delvaux, all of whom I knew personally. They were all provided a title, but both the Lilars, Gijssen and Delvaux never did and never would have used the title in their artistic or political life. One needs to respect the wishes of the deceased. If they wanted to have used the title, they would have done so. None did! Such a honorary title is very different from old-family nobility. Again, please respect the wishes of the deceased, and understand the differences of nobility titles given.
Thank you,
Verbist (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Verbist
- I'm sorry, but that doesn't change the fact that she was Baroness Lilar, so the information needs to be in her article. The same goes for all the others you mentioned. If you have reliable sources to indicate that they never used their titles in these contexts, that information can also go in the article with [WP:V|proper sourcing]]. However, Wikipedia convention is that a person's full name, including common other names, is always included in the opening of an article. - Revolving Bugbear 21:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- 1. With respect, everyone can claim that they know this and this person, but you have to come with reliable sources. It is really remarkable how many persons on Wikipedia I have debated with, who claimed they knew this famous or well-known person. Probable the number of Wikipedians is higher than the number of famous people they claim to know! :-))
- 2. Second point, this is an encyclopaedia, not a site to honour or dignify persons. It sounds harsh, but if we have to apply censorship out of respect of that person we cannot be independently anymore. Politicians also have things they don't want to see back on Wikipedia, should we just delete information about them just out of respect? But we are only talking about someone person's name and the including of their nobility title, that's hardly disrespectful. Contrary, it's disrespectful and not honoring to omit their title in their name.
- 3. You write that Suzanne Lilar would be horrified to have "Baroness" put in her name. The same with Albert Lilar, Marnix Gijssen, and André Delvaux. If they were so horrified with the title, why did they accept the title with the accompanying customs in first instance???? This is really strange, and I don’t believe that very much. But even if you are right about that, it doesn’t matter.
- 3. I do know some about the Dutch Wikipidia, and over there is some strange habit to be anti-title.
- 4. According to Wikipedia naming conventions a title should be taken up into the name in the first section of the site.
- 5. Even more, Dutch and Belgium legal conventions say that a title is part of the person's name!
- 6. A lot of writers, artists or politicians have 2, 3 or 4 given names in front of their surname. Most of them never use all their names in artistic or public life, but only one, or instead they use a pseudonym. A lot of them don't like their real or full name, but this doesn't mean that because of that we shouldn't include it.
- 7 It is custom to be as complete as possible to put all their names in the first section. Also we have to include the nobility title, because it is part of the whole name. Further in the text or in the title of the page it is sufficient to mention only their well-known name. Demophon (talk) 23:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
{{help me}} Hello Demophon, What I meant, and what you do not seem to understand, is that the Lilars, Gijssen & Delvaux would be horrified of having the title linked to their professional name, i.e. for their accomplishments as a writer, as an artist, as a politician. This is very different from a social context where they may have used their title. Please understand the difference. Go ahead, if you wish to add a sentence in the text that they were given the title of baron or baroness, but you should not use this in the heading of their professional name. This is truly uncalled for because this is not how they signed their accomplishments. It is used socially only, and it is ridiculous to use it as you do in the context of an encyclopedia. This is no social register. Just understand. This has nothing to do about being anti-title, only not to use the title in the contect the Lilars and Gijssen & Delvaux did not use it. This is not the same as Sir Elton John, Sir Anthony Caro, Sir Paul McCartney in Britain, who want to use the title in that peculiar British way. This here is very different. How ridiculous, to call "De man die zijn haar kort liet knipper" a film by Baron Delvaux, or "Aspects of Love in Western Society" a book by baroness Lilar!!! Think about this example: it is not as Marnix Gijssen, the writer's name, that Jan-Albert Goris was made a baron, but well as Jan-Abert Goris. Respect how the writer signed her books!! Verbist (talk) 00:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)Verbist
- Sorry for butting in, but please don't add the {{helpme}} template every time you reply. Also, please be mindful of having a conflict of interest, and try to keep this in a neutral point of view. What an affected party would think is not relevant in the pursuit of unbiased knowledge. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 03:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Beste Verbist,
Is de naam van je moeder misschien Françoise Lilar?
