Bradfregger

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Bradfregger! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Joan Shogren

{{advert}}

Joan Shogren is an illustrator living in Santa Clara, California.

In 1963, Shogren produced the first computer program to allow computers to generate art by programming basic art principles into the San Jose State University computers. The first public showing of her computer art was in San Jose, California on May 6, 1963.

In 1984, Shogren and her two associates (Mike Mathis and Dennis Fregger) were contracted by T/Maker to produce the very first computer clip art images. These were black and white, bit mapped pictures and were sold by T/Maker through retail distribution as ClickArt, the first clip art product produced.

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN DELETED BECAUSE YOU THINK I WROTE IT. I DID NOT WRITE THIS ARTICLE. I WROTE THE ORIGINAL WHICH YOU DELETED AND THEN I DID WHAT WAS SUGGESTED. I FOUND A WIKIPEDIA EDITOR WHO BELIEVED THAT THIS ADDITION TO THE HISTORY OF COMPUTER ART WAS IMPORTANT AND HE CREATED THE NEW ARTICLE. I DID NOT PAY HIM, HE DID USE ME AS AN INFORMATION SOURCE ALONG WITH NEWSPAPER ARTICLES AND OTHER SOURCES, INCLUDING WIKIPEDIA. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE AND FLIES IN THE FACE OF YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE TRUTH.

Eclipse Entertainment

Hey, Brad, since you used to be an employee (I think) of Eclipse Entertainment, we could really use an article on them. As long as it's in a NPOV, it'd be a welcome addition. Thanks, — Frecklefoot | Talk 22:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

ARE YOU KIDDING ME. I'VE JUST BEEN HAMMERED BECAUSE I TRIED TO CORRECT SOME MISINFORMATION IN PRODUCTS I WAS INVOLVED IN. FROM MY EXPERIENCE, IF I WROTE AND ARTICLE OF ECLIPSE ENTERTAINMENT, IT WOULD BE DELETED WITHIN 24 HOURS. WIKIPEDIA COULD CARE LESS ABOUT THE TRUTH AND THEY AREN'T INTERESTED IN CHECKING THINGS OUT, THEY JUST DELETE STUFF AND BLAME THE ARTICLE WRITER.

BUT YOU ARE RIGHT, I WAS ONE OF THE FOUNDERS OF ECLIPSE ENTERTAINMENT.

New user

Brad, you seem to be a very enthuiastic new user, which is great. However, you don't seem to know how to use all the site's tools and are not yet familiar with Wikipedia's policies. That's fine, we're here to help. A few things I noticed that I'd like to bring to your attention:

• Don't sign your edits to articles. Signature are only expected on article's talk pages (like this one--each article has one too).
• Use the article's history page to see changes to the article. You can use it to compare any two versions of an article.
• Fill in your userpage if you want other users to know more about you. Like, for example, that you are (or at least were--I don't know if you still are) a game producer. You can leave it blank, but many editors (like me) assume that users who don't create a user page are potential vandals, just creating a quick account to cause havoc. Obviously, that's not you, so you may want to create your page. All you do is click on your name from a signature. The markup for your page is same as it is for the rest of Wikipedia.
• Bring up issues about a certain article on the article's talk page. Discuss a user's behavior (or some other issue related directly to them) on their talk page.
• To create an article, simply click on a broken (red) link. It will bring you to a blank page you can immediately start editing.
• To see any work that another user may have erased (reverted), look on the article's history page. All edits to articles are stored there indefinately.

I'm glad you seem to like Wikipedia and I look forward to your future contributions. If you have any further questions, feel free to post them on my talk page. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 02:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Bradfregger! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 688 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Dennis Fregger - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Joan Shogren - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:43, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I DID NOT CREATE THE ARTICLE ON JOAN SHOGREN AND THE INFORMATION REGARDING DENNIS FREGGER IS ON OTHER WIKIPEDIA PAGES. YOU GUYS ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO WORK WITH. YOU LET MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS DO WHAT THEY WANT AND SPEND ALL OF YOUR TIME CAUSING TROUBLE FOR PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT ARE JUST TRYING TO KEEP THE FACTS STRAIGHT. THEN WHEN I ASK FOR HELP, NOBODY CARES.... BOTH DENNIS AND JOAN WERE A CRITICAL PART OF THE HISTORY OF COMPUTER GRAPHICS, JOAN HAVING THE FIRST SHOWING OF COMPUTER ART IN THE WORLD.

Proposed deletion of Joan Shogren

The article Joan Shogren has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

On GNews and GBooks I find one reference, a letter to the New Scientist. This is insufficient to make a claim against the WP:GNG or WP:BIO criteria. The article was created in 2006 and tagged for sources in 2009 so improvement to address the criteria in the near future seems unlikely.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fæ (talk) 08:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

THIS IS JUST PLAIN IDIOTIC, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IMPORTANT HISTORY OF COMPUTER GRAPHICS AND THE ONLY SOURCES ARE NEWSPAPER ARTICLES WRITTEN AT THAT TIME, WHICH WERE SCANNED AND ATTACHED AS IMAGES. WHOEVER MADE THIS DECISION IS AN IDIOT WHO COULD CARE LESS ABOUT THE HISTORY OF COMPUTER ART. THE REQUIREMENTS IN THIS CASE ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO OBTAIN, BUT THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE AND WAS PRESENTED. YOU JUST DIDN'T LOOK CAREFULLY ENOUGH ... IF I WAS IN CHARGE, YOU'D BE FIRED.

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Bradfregger. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Brad Fregger, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 02:15, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

CONFLICT OF INTEREST ... WHAT AN RIDICULOUS EXCUSE. CORRECTING MISINFORMATION, INCORRECT FACTS, AND ADDING CRITICAL, FACTUAL, INFORMATION IS NOT CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS MAKING CHANGES, ADDING SPIN, THAT ACTUALLY PRESENTS A POINT OF VIEW, NOT A FACT. AND, YOU DAMN WELL THAT YOU ALLOW THIS ALL OF THE TIME. ESPECIALLY WITH POLITICAL ARTICLES, GLOBAL WARMING, GUN CONTROL, ETC. ETC. YOU EVEN ALL CONFLICT OF INTEREST REGARDING MAJOR COMPANIES AND ORGANIZATIONS WHO CAN "HIRE" SOMEONE TO CREATE AND UPDATE THEIR PAGES; YOU TURN YOUR BACK REGARDING THOSE INTERESTS. BUT, IF I WANT TO CORRECT SOME MISINFORMATION OR ADD SOME CRITICAL DATA TO AN ARTICLE THAT I WAS INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH, YOU DON'T HESITATE TO THROW ME UNDER THE BUS.

YOU GUYS NEED TO GET YOU PRIORITIES STRAIGHT. THEN TO ADD INSULT TO INJURY YOU ASK ME TO WRITE AN ARTICLE ABOUT A COMPANY I HELPED FOUND, ECLIPSE ENTERTAINMENT. I GUESS IF YOU'RE INTERESTED ENOUGH YOU'LL BREAK YOU RULES, OTHERWISE ... SO DUMB.

Products Produced Eliminated... Why????

The Software Products I produced were eliminated from my Wikipedia page. Why would you do this? I was a very early contributor to the computer games industry. Producing many classic games and two of the most played games in the world; Shanghai and the first commercial version of Computer Solitaire , Solitaire Royal. In fact, I was one of the most prolific producers of computer games, actually computer entertainment, in the early years of the industry. George Lucas has an entire page designed to show his Filmography, movies he produced and/or directed. Why is my listed unacceptable?

Hello Brad,

You can kind of think of different pages on Wikipedia as different rooms in a museum. The articles are the front-end displays, the article talk pages are the backstage areas where people work on the displays, and user talk pages are like offices. Posting on your own talk page is like standing in your own office, talking to yourself. The only reason I saw this was that I check user talk pages for new users just in case they're standing there talking to themselves.

We have our conflict of interest policies because you, as a person, are not a published source that anyone can access. Unless you can answer every phone call and email that would need to come up every single time someone hovers their mouse over the citation that must be provided for new information, you're never going to match the speed and ease of access that comes from a published source. There's also the matter that we also don't really know if you really are Brad Fregger. For these reasons (as well as the fact that we don't allow promotionalism but also expected editors to try to be neutral), users are strongly discouraged from editing articles about themselves.

You can still make edit requests on relevant article talk pages. When you do so, provide an independent, professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic source to support your claim.

I see that this account is not the only one you have. You need to stick to just one account. (EDIT: Oh, I also see there's Smith on Wiki... The number of accounts you've made is concerning).

Ian.thomson (talk) 17:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

And you've been editing while logged out... This makes it very hard to keep track of your edits, which is a serious problem. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:13, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

DON'T TELL ME I CAN MAKE SUGGESTIONS OF THE TALK SECTION OF THE PAGES. NOBODY PAYS ANY ATTENTION TO WHAT IS WRITTEN THERE, NOBODY CARES TO NO THE TRUTH, THE REAL FACTS. ALL YOU GUYS DO IS DELETE AND FORGET. YOU ARE ALL IMPOSSIBLE TO DEAL WITH. YOU GOT A BUNCH OF RULES, HOOPS THAT I GUY WITH MY INFLUENCE CAN'T JUMP THROUGH.

Have you considered that the community has established policies and guidelines that maybe you could try learning about instead of just jumping to conclusions? Have you considered that maybe throwing a temper tantrum is only going to make you look like the bad guy, yet another disruptive editor with no interest in actually cooperating with the Wikipedia community? Calm down and handle this like a rational adult.

If you have found a page that is written or maintained by its company, please point it and the editors in question out for us so we can gut that article and block the editors. We're very strict about corporate accounts and paid editing because this is a volunteer project to summarize professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources. We're not a directory with listings of whoever paid someone to write.

Looking at the history for the deleted Joan Shogren article (which admins can do), I see that you did indeed start the article back in 2006. If it was not you, then your account has been compromised and we will need to block it. Also, despite your claim that you did not create the Dennis Fregger article, anyone can see from the article history that you did do so. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

December 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  -- ferret (talk) 18:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)