User talk:Bfigura/Archive 6

Thank you and clarification

Hi there! Thank you so much for offering your opinion and for providing some recommendations on that matter I reported at WQA. Regarding what you wrote on the editor's talk page User_talk:TheOzz I want to clarify something in case it affects what you would have said to him: the person he implied is a criminal is not a wikipedia editor. I don't know if the guidelines or your recommendations would apply differently in that case? In any case, I really appreciate your taking time to offer a third party view and the recommendations you made. Taketime (talk) 23:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Taketime. Well, either way is a violation of policy. One violates WP:HARASS and one violates WP:BLP. BLP is one of the core (ie, non-negotiable) principles governing Wikipedia, so violation of that is a Bad Thing. If it happens again, let me know, or put up a short neutral post on ANI. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 23:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Bfigura,

I wanted to update you. User:TheOzz took your advice and removed the personal name of the wikipedia editor he had "outed" (except from the edit summary where he also mentioned her name--I know she'll have to get some help from "Oversight" if she wants that scrubbed.)

I'm thankful he responded to your suggestion, however from looking at how he handled the edits, it seems as though he did not grasp the extent to which he is engaging in ad hominem attacks, personal attack, dragging in off-wiki interactions, baiting, taunting, and so on. Also he followed -- perhaps -- the letter of the instruction you gave him not to imply someone is a criminal, but did not follow the spirit of that advice. He rewrote that part a little bit and then added an inline link to a page that makes the criminal claim.

Here's the diff: [1] Do you feel he needs to be talked to again? What would you advise? Taketime (talk) 13:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on the thread over at WP:WQA. (If memory serves, that covered this instance) --Bfigura ^(talk) 20:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Priory of Sion Good Article Review

Hello Bfigura. I've left comments for you on the Talk:Priory of Sion page. --Loremaster (talk) 17:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on the talk page. (And passed the article per WP:GAN). Nice work, --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Posthuman Future.jpg

Hello Bfigura. Through extensive collaboration and compromise, I succeeded in raising the quality of the Transhumanism article enough to get Featured Article status. However, I've been informed that some fanatical transhumanists, who want to use the article as promotion tool for their ideology and subculture, are trying or will try to edit it to push their POV. The first thing they want to do is delete the Posthuman Future image in order to replace with an image that makes transhumanism look "cool". Now that you are aware of the context, I was wondering if you could help find a proper fair use rationale for that image if there is one since I haven't had the time to fully master Wikipedia guidelines regarding uploaded images. --Loremaster (talk) 21:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Loremaster. I'm not the greatest authority on our NFCC policies, but here's my thoughts: using non-free pictures is pretty much only acceptable if you're using them to illustrate commentary on the item in question. (Ie, movie posters or book covers are only okay for an article on that book or movie). While I think it's a great picture, I can't think of a fair use rational that would let it be used in Transhumanism. It might be ok if it were in an article where you were critically discussing the original article in the Chronicle of Higher Ed, but it doesn't look like any of it's current usages meet that requirement. Sorry. Have you tried looking on commons or flickr for free media that would be somewhat close (or at least acceptable?) Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 21:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any tranny fanatics out there, and I haven't heard anyone trying replace images with cooler ones. The only thing I've seen is there is a non-contextual, non-free image of a book cover placed on a macro-topic article. This violates WP policies. Furthermore the fair-use reason was found to be insufficent. I agree the image would be acceptable only on the Chronicle of Higher Ed article but even then it should use the actual cover image and not the cropped artwork. I encourge you to find a free or approved image of the book cover for use in the Chronicle article. --Lemmey talk 21:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Purse_Differences_Between_the_PGA_and_LPGA_Tour

Just letting you know that I fixed the link in the AfD message. For some reason it wasn't linking correctly to the AfD page. Enigma ^message 03:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Huh, how weird. I'll go check twinkle's bug reports. Thanks for the fix. --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Only thing I can think of is that it doesn't include the underscores when dealing with an article that has several words in the name. It won't link correctly unless the underscores are included in the space for the AfD link. I also use Twinkle for AfD listings. It's ridiculous how much faster it is than manually doing the steps yourself. Enigma ^message 03:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

No kidding. I had done a few by hand before I came across TW too. Things I do not miss doing. --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Guido den Broeder

Hello. I've started this RfC/U, which contains a link to a discussion between you and the user as evidence. Fram (talk) 12:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

It's me

Please go ahead. --Bfigura ^(talk) 22:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Done, and done. My pleasure to be of assistance, and I think I understand. Please feel free to let me know if there's something else I can do to assist you. Accounting4Taste:talk 01:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a million. --Bfigura ^(talk) 02:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Re How Geothermal Energy Can Benefit Developing Countries

You might at least let me complete my deletion nom before you jump in. I edit by hand rather than with scripts, and it would be nice to have a few minutes to type in my rationale. Deor (talk) 03:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that :S I didn't even see your tag when I started mine up with twinkle. (Twinkle doesn't do anything until I finish writing up my nomination, so I didn't see the page reload with your nomination until after I submitted mine). Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

College essays

You think we should let the user(s) know that they can't just upload their essays to Wikipedia? Or has that been done already? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 03:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, it's been done. See User:Globalecon/Global_Economics and User talk:Globalecon. Apparently the students aren't reading the giant banner I stuck up there. They're all loading them individually, which I suppose is at least one policy that's being followed. I'm almost tempted to add <blink> tags to the sucker. (That or stick a gold star by the one good essay, and frowny faces next to all the ones that have been deleted / are at AfD / have been redirected). --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It's the professor who has to be told, really. The students shouldn't take the blame if the assignment has been designed (or explained) badly. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I agree. See my comments on the ANI thread. I'm going for a positive reinforcement method on the class page right now. --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The good professor

Not really, from my understanding. the guidelines of the project were to submit a new article to wikipedia, turn in the original copy to him. He told his students not to take the criticism personally, and that they would get alot of "crap" They all turned them in on the last day of class, so I guess that did not leave much time for him to share his personal feelings with the class. Apparently, the professor wrote an article himself which was swiftly deleted, I have never talked to the guy nor have I seen him, but I've heard a lot about this project which has gone so awry! Tekjester (talk) 01:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a confirmation of what in fact is rather too evident: that they ain't coming back. I say, delete 'em all. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, there's at least some that are decent. (I seem to recall that at least one of the students did some editing after the initial upload). But I still think that the prof needs to trouted. --Bfigura ^(talk) 02:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

As a proportion, for all the effort that people are going to (that magnificent table!), it's hardly encouraging. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Concur. And as far as deleting the ones in userspace - I agree, although I don't see any huge rush. --Bfigura ^(talk) 02:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Bfigura thanks for your kind comments on my talk page re the GlobalEcon Tips. I'd keep the essays that are currently userfied. The GlobalEcon 'project' is a textbook example of the worst possible way to use Wikipedia as an assignment. It will be useful to point future education projects, (especially potentially problematic ones) not only to the fate of the articles, i.e., the table, but also to concrete examples of what is truly, madly, deeply unsuitable. Having said that, I don't think admins who close deletion debates or speedy delete articles from this project should feel obliged to userfy them. We already have quite few quite spiffy examples of dire contributions from this project.;-) (This is a shortened version of my comments at the ANI). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I concur: no sense userfying everything by default, as it's likely going to be sit there unchanged until MfD'd. And I agree about the GlobalEcon class, it's probably worth keeping around in it's present form so that it can serve as a warning to others :) Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 14:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Working hard for the money?

Thanks for answering the contentious gentleman on my talk page -- I had dinner guests arriving and couldn't follow through on what I'd started. It's reassuring to know you're keeping a watchful eye on my talk page! LOL Now what I'm trying to decide -- is $50 for making a Wikipedia page way too much, or way too little? <grin> Accounting4Taste:talk 03:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Shop.com is ridiculous.

It's ridiculous for this to be removed. Pricegrabber, MySimon, Shopzilla, and Nextag are on, why not Shop.Com? If we're not going to include companies then let's not include companies. But Shop.Com is a giant. Wikipedia will include tiny little web companies and brick and mortar companies but not Shop.Com??? Drewhamilton (talk) 04:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC) (talk) 04:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

If you'll look at the article, you'll note that I changed my mind and removed the deletion tag about 2 seconds after I initially tagged it. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 04:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right, my mistake. What can I add to establish more notability. It's obviously huge. I feel like adding more makes it seem like an advertisement and all it really deserves is just a stub acknowledging it's existence. Drewhamilton (talk) 05:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, my fault for tagging in the first place -- it just seemed link a standard spam article until I looked at who the CEO was in more detail, etc. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

It still has a notability tag though... Drewhamilton (talk) 05:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I know, I thought there's probably more sources out there to establish notability, so I left it up in the hope that they'd get added by someone. But if you'd prefer to take the tag down, I don't have a problem with that. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The Monitor (Kirksville, MO)

The references given were published not in a university press release as you seem to believe, but in an award-winning University and community paper. The lack of media outlets in the Kirksville area have made the Truman State University Index the most reliable online outlet for community matters. Its multiple awards speak to its credibility. As such, it should qualify as a reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skintastic666 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I really don't think a university news outlet commenting on another university publication really meets the standard in reliable sources. I also am not sure I see the harm in leaving the tags, since they make it more likely that someone else will add sourcing if they happen to know of any. (Oh, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'll drop a welcome notice below this comment). Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 23:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Closing Dell's RfA

I won't argue with the snow close, but please be careful about your edit summaries. You basically locked in a mention of racism to the history of WP:RFA for all time when you removed the RFA, and if you research it a little, it is very likely that it isn't a fair accusation. I've added a comment to the closed RFA, but that doesn't do anything to the edit summary. --barneca (talk) 03:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Crap, apologies. (Somewhat sad that I manage to create a BLP issue by trying to avoid one). Would a RFO going to mess with anything on RfA? --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

And would an RFO be overkill here? (It'd be more than one, since there are issues on the RfA page and subpage). --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I think an RFO on the edit to WP:RFA would be appropriate, and painless. I'm thinking of somehow delicately bringing this up on WT:RFA (not your edit summary; that's an understandable mistake) for how to deal with the RFA itself, but I don't think RFO is needed there; deleting the rfa and selectiely restoring should work there. --barneca (talk) 03:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

As a quibble though, I'm not sure I understand why you think it's not a fair accusation though. Unless the account was compromised, this is racist vandalism. The fact that it's followed by a Hahaha edit doesn't make it more palatable (juvenile maybe though). A second diff would seem to suggest juvenile racist remarks rather that something more serious, but I think it's still a racist remark to make. Saw the compromised account issues, although I'm somewhat unsure on how that was overcome. (I thought it was impossible to recover lost passwords. Maybe the vandal didn't change it?) Saw the explanation elsewhere. I'll put in for the RFO though. --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

RfO is in. --Bfigura ^(talk) 03:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm to the point now where I don't much care anymore whether the WP:RFA edit summary gets removed or not, but I am curious. Since it's still there, did an oversighter get back to you, and say it wasn't worth oversighting? Or are you in the dark about the status? Like I said, just curious. --barneca (talk) 18:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Barneca. Nope, haven't heard anything, oddly enough. And I concur with you: I wish I had invested my time in a more worthwhile cause. --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

breed section

I rewrote the text and I think it is improved. Could you have a look again? Karak1 (talk) 23:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

note to self: check up on this soonish --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 18	2 May 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikimedia Board to expand, restructure	Arbitrator leaves Wikipedia
Bot approvals group, checkuser nominations briefly held on RfA	WikiWorld: "World domination"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Did You Know ...	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 19	9 May 2008	About the Signpost

Sister Projects Interview: Wikiversity	WikiWorld: "They Might Be Giants"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured content from schools and universities	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Rfb participation thanks

Hello, Bfigura.

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 19:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Bfigura, I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 23:01, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 20	12 May 2008	About the Signpost

Explicit sexual content draws fire	Sighted revisions introduced on the German Wikipedia
Foundation receives copyright claim from church	Board to update privacy policy, adopts data retention policy
Update on Citizendium	Board candidacies open through May 22
Two wiki events held in San Francisco Bay Area	New feature enables users to bypass IP blocks
WikiWorld: "Tony Clifton"	News and notes: Autoconfirmed level, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at Featured lists
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Laundry

Taken from Art LaPella's talk page. This is weird enough that I want to keep a copy on hand. --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I found 2 cases of wrong information in WP within an hour.

I started a page to tabulate it so that we could find out if these were AGF good faith errors or sneaky vandalism. Some people are strongly opposed to this, even to the point of reverting a report of an error (this is a clear case of wrong information, not POV opinion).

I am willing to just drop the matter but that means my effort to help WP has failed. BVande (talk) 22:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you found 2 cases of wrong information. I'm not glad that a new editor (only 60 edits) already wants to redesign how all of Wikipedia handles vandalism. Your edit to Johnny Unitas appears to be correct, except that you didn't preview to see how it would appear, requiring this correction. But there is a much lower chance that you already know how to improve the procedure described at Wikipedia:Vandalism without more experience. In this case, getting confrontational over a single factoid from 2005 would cause more hassle than benefit. Art LaPella (talk) 23:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Art. I'm not sure if you're already aware or not, but the above user has been indef'd as a sock of Dereks1x per CU. Since you did the this id verification thing, I thought I'd let you know. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 17:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Dereks1x, but I did get snail mail with a copy of a driver's license, showing enough to prove it has to be someone named B. Vande something, and asserting use of the username BVande. Art LaPella (talk) 18:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Wierd. I'm not sure if that should affect the block, since my understanding is that Derek seems to enjoy creating false user accounts, but I'l mention it to the blocking admin. --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

BVande (talk · contribs)

Hi. Just so you know, this isn't the only time this has come up today: this doesn't strike me as coincidence...

Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 19:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The fact that someone is running around possibly committing forgery/fraud seems somewhat worrisome. (I'm basing that on drivers license that Art got in the mail). Does anything more than usual need to be done here (more than the usual CU stuff, that is)? --Bfigura ^(talk) 20:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think this is exactly a major problem. We just know not to trust users we consider to be Dereks1x if they attempt to provide identification. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 20:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree, it seems like it keeps getting caught/detected. And since the user in question doesn't appear to be impersonating people so much as making up identities, it's probably not worth trying to get Mike Godwin involved. --Bfigura ^(talk) 20:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Derek's Laundry

Hi, Bfigura! Dereks1x scanning random licenses and mailing them to admins isn't a new problem: he's done it twice in the past week, and in the past has used the same tactic with VK35 to remain unblocked for a while. For what it's worth, the checkuser was a bulletproof {{confirmed}}; combined with the rather transparent behavior I felt it would be prudent to lay down a block. east.718 at 23:48, May 16, 2008

Hi East. Thanks for taking care of the socks. I still do think it's odd that he keeps obtaining random licenses and using them to impersonate people: largely since I can't think of a legal way to do that. Has anyone considered forwarding this on to local law enforcement or postal inspectors? I know no one's really being harmed here (yet), but given that he's used multiple real or fake licenses, the potential seems to be there. (That said, I can't see what anyone would really do, other than file a report). Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 00:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Leaks

Does wikileaks qualify as a source? Anonymous70 (talk) 19:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

As a reliable source? Nope. If the new york times covers it, it's different. --Bfigura ^(talk) 19:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah alright. Thanks Anonymous70 (talk) 19:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. --Bfigura ^(talk) 19:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: A note about your banner

Thanks. I didn't realize the link went dead because I made it look like an external link so it didn't turn red when it's G7'd OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers, --Bfigura ^(talk) 22:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Cookies!

Drewhamilton (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Moved from user page --Bfigura's puppy (talk) 03:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing

Who is "puppy" and why the hell is he/she deleting every change I make? Everything I have done is according to wikipedia's instructions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmenino (talk • contribs) 03:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. From what I can see, it looked like you were replacing specific links (to the artists pages, detroit city, etc) with more generalized links to myspace and youtube (which we don't generally consider to be reliable sources). On one case, I think you were reverted by XLinkBot, which reverts myspace links, which probably confused things.

In general though, to establish notability, there needs to be multiple references to reliable sources, such as reviews. (The artists own webpage, and videos on youtube and myspace generally don't establish notability). There's more details on the guideline at WP:MUSIC. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 21:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Susan Hurley

She is very gifted, but very sad.  Thus, her opera on Anais.  And so, where is she now?  Will she come up to the plate without the sadness and angst?  She is, I think, a very happy, silly soul enjoying life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.94.155.70 (talk) 05:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Ummm, what? I rather sure I don't know you mean. --Bfigura ^(talk) 16:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hikingb5

So let me know when you finish looking at the requested many ref items on my http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hikingb5 area to see if it would have helped or saved it? Hikingb5 (talk) 01:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

• • Please do not forget to give me your ideas on my posted info im my area. Hikingb5 (talk) 13:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Global Economics merges

Hi. As someone who was active in the discussion about this Wikiproject, I'd thought you might be interested in my comments here. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

hi

well im responding to what u took off ... i didnt add the part about him not paying his bills ... but im also a contractor that he has ripped off ... and as for the jail sentence ... look it up ... its true ... public record .... so imma re-add what u took out because its all true thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.241.126.219 (talk) 23:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

If it's true, then it should be cited and verified by a reliable source. By definition, one's own experiences are not reliable sources, so citing yourself is not an option. (As it would be original research and non-neutral). Any negative or controversial material in biographies of living persons MUST be cited and backed up. It's not optional. Please don't re-add without sourcing. (Per recent ArbCom ruling, that may lead to you being blocked). Best, --Bfigura's puppy (talk) 23:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see you did source it now. N/m. (Although it may not be necessary to place so much emphasis on this incident, per WP:BLP1E. Best, --Bfigura's puppy (talk) 23:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you once again...yet...I'm still a little lost...

You've been so helpful in the past and since I'm almost at my goal, I thought I'd pass on the latest so that I might obtain the final link towards Wikipedia publication. My goal is to list the posting below now that I have a link (Daily Variety below) which proves the authenticity of my posting. I would like the posting to be under STEFAN LYSENKO so that when a user types in the name (Stefan Lysenko)..the posting below will appear along with the links below. I am in NO hurry and I again thank you for your time because I know you are busy. I am a novice at this so thanks again in advance for your expert guidance. Cheers-Stefan Lysenko

Stefan Lysenko

Born to European parents, Stefan Lysenko spent time on both U.S. coasts growing up. He graduated from San Jose State University with a degree in Theater/Business and spent a few years thereafter traveling the globe. Returning to the U.S in the late eighties, Lysenko set out to make a name for himself in Hollywood.

Working on the stage under the direction of Stella Adler for several years, the famous Playhouse West became Lysenko's next creative haven. During this period, he worked with such actors as Ashley Judd and Jeff Goldblum. After several New York productions, Lysenko continued his creative work with Academy Award-winning actress, Shelly Winters at The Actor’s Studio and with Lonny Chapman at the Lonny Chapman Group Repertory Theater.

Lysenko went on to star in several feature films, including Disney's MAFIA!, THE LAST WILL (opposite Goran Visnjic, “ER”), INTERCEPTORS (opposite Ernie Hudson, “Oz”), and THE STRAY (opposite Michael Madsen and Angie Everheart.)

After a chance meeting and discussion with Gena Rowlands, famous for her work with the late John Casavetes, Lysenko set out to shoot his first feature film, BETWEEN CHRISTMAS & NEW YEAR'S. Similar to Casavetes’ style, the script was entirely improvised, and was shot on 16mm film over 7 days, for under $5000 using Lysenko's 10 Commandments Of Bliss. The technique Lysenko created to shot his films is defined as "Blissing" which is when an artist creates by using what he/she has at his/her immediate disposal thus letting the creation create itself. Art is created by using what exists in one's consciousness and immediate environment.

Having won multiple awards for his films, Stefan Lysenko is currently in pre production on his fourth feature length independent film while he continues the second year of his masters program.

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117904333.html?categoryid=33&cs=1&query=stefan+lysenko

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0529263/

www.blissing.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1blissing (talk • contribs) 18:30, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Addition of external links

Hi. You recently sent me a message regarding a number of external links that I have added to a number of pages.

The external links that I have been adding link back to a NON-PROFIT reference site on television branding and presentation. This site provides more in-depth information on the presentation and branding of the television channels concerned.

Please do not delete the links that I have added, as these references provide links to more information, on a non-profit-making website, The TV Room.

I should also point out that Wiki contains a large number of images from my website, The TV Room

TTVR (talk) 21:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC) Regards, The TV Room

http://thetvroom.com

I should probably point out our guidelines on conflict of interest at this point. You really shouldn't be adding links to your website, whether or not it is a non-profit. Even if your site is perfectly relevant to the articles, you shouldn't be the person adding the links. (This seems to reflect what 10LbHammer has stated). Further, the fact that you tacked the links onto every BBC-related article, even if branding isn't terribly relevant comes across as link-spamming.

While I'm willing to believe that you're acting out of good intentions, I'd suggest you moderate your link-addition. (Especially given the conflict of interest). Sites that are persistently spammed may be added to the spam blacklist, which will prevent the links from being added anywhere in wikipedia (and if added to the mediawiki blacklist, to any site running mediawiki). Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 21:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Topicless

stop telling me off for editing magesterum i didnt do it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.180.117 (talk) 03:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry? I think you may be reacting to a message left for an editor who made this edit from your IP. However, as IP's can be shared, it often happens that IP editors receive messages not intended for them. I'd suggest creating an account to avoid this problem in the future. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 17:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Guidance needed on a Wikipedia related Research Project

Hi,

I came across your talk page from Katie Panciera's talk page. I work with GroupLens research at the university of Minnesota and am working on a project to evaluate interfaces which would help users maintain article quality on Wikipedia. As part of this project, I need experienced editors of Wikipedia to evaluate 2 interfaces and then participate in a survey related to these interfaces.

As you might be knowing, the Wikipedia community took a stand against Katie for posting on user talkpages for a project of hers. I do not want to do that and hence need your guidance on how I can go about inviting editors to participate in my research without coming off as a vandal or spammer. Any help here would be deeply appreciated. Please do get back to me.

Avanidhar Chandrasekaran

Avanidhar (talk) 22:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Avanidhar. It looks as though you've already taken the first step, posting to the village pump. Beyond that, there really isn't a great way of soliciting opinions, at least not in a centralized way (since things like this tend to rabidly fall into disuse) . However, the folks over at Researching Wikipedia, might have some useful ideas, or might at least be willing to participate. You could also try Wikidemia, which centers around academic studies of Wikipedia (and seems moderately active). Hope that helps.

Oh, and I also did take a look at the two sites you linked to from the Pump. It seems they both break (or don't handle) templates (in one case, often enough that it damages article readability). Is that something that's easy to fix?

Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 15:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your response. I will try to post to the Wikipedia Research group to see if the folks there are interested. I havent looked into how the mediawiki instances handle templates, as I was mostly involved in developing the interface for the study, due to a severe time constraint typically associated with grad student life :D. But I will definitely look into what I can do about that.

Best

Avanidhar (talk) 19:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

• Book reviews: Reviews of The Wikipedia Revolution
• Wikipedia by numbers: Wikipedia's coverage and conflicts quantified
• News and notes: New program officer, survey results, and more
• Dispatches: Valued pictures
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Film
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

• Book reviews: Reviews of Lazy Virtues: Teaching Writing in the Age of Wikipedia
• News and notes: Usability study, Wiki Loves Art, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia Art dispute, and brief headlines
• WikiProject report: Interview on WikiProject Final Fantasy
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 03:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)