User talk:Burntfingers/Archive 1

Peter May

This is to advise you that your unilateral move of Peter May to Peter May (cricketer) has been referred to administration with a request that the move is reversed. If you wish to take part in discussions about major cricket figures would you please do so on WT:CRIC where we shall be glad to hear from you. Thank you. --BlackJack | ^{talk page} 19:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Conflict of interest

Hello Janice. Thank you for taking the time to reference some of the claims in your husband's article. However, may I draw your attention to the policy regarding conflicts of interest here on Wikipedia, namely WP:COI. Of most relevance here is the following passage...

Adding material that appears to promote the interests or visibility of an article's author, its author's family members, employer, associates, or their business or personal interests, places the author in a conflict of interest.

Please resist the temptation to promote either your or your husband's work and achievements here on Wikipedia. Suffice to say, if they are notable enough, another editor will add the information. Feel free to give me a shout should this need further clarification. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I got myself into this situation in all innocence. I am Peter May's webmaster and thought that made me well qualified to write the article on him. In my defence I took great pains to remain objective and I made absolutely no attempt to hide my identity - as you can see by my username.

When the recent issues arose, I immediately sought help from the editors and I was in the process of discussing the conflict of interest with another editor who was giving me advice on the situation.

As a result of their advice, I had already agreed that the addition of the references would be my final contribution to the Peter May (writer) article.

However, I hope that you will judge my contributions objectively and reasonably. Janice.hally (talk) 15:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand entirely. Another policy we have here is to assume good faith and that's what I and couple of other editors have done here. I think you're right to avoid editing Peter's article from now on. All the best and, perhaps, take the advice below, don't write Wikipedia off entirely, work on some bits that interest you! All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 15:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. You know, it hurts to get your wrist slapped. But I can see now that you do it with the best of intentions. All the best to you, too! Janice.hally (talk) 15:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Peter May (writer)

Hi, I think the links you've added are helpful, although it's not immediately clear which ones are the most reliable and which are more akin to self-published. If you take a quick look at Martin Amis and check the sections for references and for external links, that might help to illustrate the distinction. An approach that seems to work in your situation is to use the talk page, ie Talk:Peter May (writer), to offer suggestions. Other editors can then review and use them as they see fit. Thanks for taking all this in good part; you seem to have attracted quite a lot of attention! --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest a careful reading of these guidelines on reliable sources, and these guidelines on formatting references. Note that publisher's blurbs are, like the subject's own website, not generally considered "reliable sources" for many things, since the conflict of interest is so strong. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, I'm strongly tempted to keep on working at this to try to please, but I just got bitten again by another editor on the Peter May (writer). Given the conflict of interest - which I can hardly deny - am I just creating more problems if I continue to be involved in this page? Janice.hally (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not like you're concealing your COI. You'd be best off simply offering suggestions on the talk page, for editors to accept or decline. Work on something else instead; if nothing appeals to you, try clicking the "Random article" button, and the odds are good you will find an article that could use a little (or a lot of) polishing and touching up from a distinterested hand. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

This is long overdue:

Welcome!

Hello, Burntfingers, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Dweller (talk) 15:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, after this recent experience, I was thinking of running a mile from Wikipedia. But it's been such a struggle getting this far, and after reading so many guidelines, it would seema shame not to put any of it to good use. Maybe I will dip a toe in the water again... but I must admit, I'm a bit scared of the sharks! Janice.hally (talk) 16:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I can sympathise. Sadly, you've gotten a bad start because of the whole COI thing. But you've clearly got skills that are needed here; and heaven knows, with over two million articles, there's always plenty of work for an editor with writing and coding experience! --Orange Mike | Talk 16:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree! Come on in, the water's lovely, so never mind the odd shark with rubber teeth! Editing existing articles is much easier than creating new ones. We've all made mistakes with the latter when we were new. And there are "WikiProjects" (collections of editors interested in the same topic) who can help newbies settle in to editing on a topic that particularly interests them. Do you have any hobbies/interests you'd like to edit about? Skiing? Croatian history? The Simpsons? Football? Dwarf-tossing? (That was a joke) --Dweller (talk) 16:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Just as well you're joking about the dwarf-tossing - that might land me in another COI problem (the least said about that, the better) ... Janice.hally (talk) 16:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

And I third the sentiment. You're more than welcome here, nobody knows all the policies, and your humility here has clearly shown us all that there was nothing other than your best intentions involved in your edits. Trust me, I've seen much worse COI breaches so good for you for acknowledging the advice and not getting too disheartened. Dweller was right - your welcome was well overdue, stay a while and see how much fun this place can be. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 16:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops. Me and my big mouth. Hope I didn't offend anyone. --Dweller (talk) 16:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No don't worry! I only toss illiterate dwarves - so none of them would ever read wikipedia.Janice.hally (talk) 16:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Changing Username

To all of those of you I've just met - albeit in awkward circumstances - I just wanted to let it be known that I'm changing my username. I'm going to go through the process properly and it's in no way intended as obfuscation. After all, you'll all know still know who I am, right?

But I just read some Wiki advice about the fact that having your identity too obvious to people could result in problems with people tracking you and bearing grudges. It certainly sounded scary.

And so, if I'm going to stay in Wiki and try to contribute constructively, then I'd prefer to do it as all of you do, behind some appropriate nom de plume. So my real identity will just be between you and me... okay? I'm not sure how it will work, exactly, but I'm assuming that my history will switch over to the new name, so all this'll still be here, and things will just pick up afresh under the new name... I'm going to do it now...

And so you did. You've handled all this with great grace and a sense of humour; if only we could all do as much. Happy editing! --AndrewHowse (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!Burntfingers (talk) 19:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Ditto from me. Welcome to your new username! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the Novels WikiProject

Hi, and welcome to the Novels WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to fiction books often referred to as "Novels".

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated quite regularly. You can watch it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WikiProject_Novels_announcements}} there.
  While you are updating your userpage, don't forget our userbox {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Outreach/User WPNOVELS}}.
• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but other methods are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Starting some new articles? Our article structure guidelines / template outlines some things to include.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the members, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! – Liveste (talk • edits) 10:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:PeterMayExtraordinaryPeople.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:PeterMayExtraordinaryPeople.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 09:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

To see an example of a valid "fair use rationale" for a book cover, see Image:Bobbyrobson autobio.JPG. Let me know if you need any further help. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! In fact, before I came back here and saw your reply, I was digging around and I found a template that did the job - I think I filled it out correctly. Maybe you'd have a quick look at it Image:PeterMayExtraordinaryPeople.jpg Of course the template wouldn't work without me assigning the pic to an article, so I put the Peter May (writer) article, but I promise I haven't put it up there because of the COI. To tell you the truth, I've joined the Novels project - I have many images I thought I could help out with there and I was just going through the process of uploading to see how it all worked. It's only by doing the thing, you find out all the things you need to know! Burntfingers (talk) 10:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I'll go and have a look. What will happen next is that if the image isn't used in an article then sooner or later it'll be tagged for deletion by another bot as being an orphaned fair use image. If you'd like me to add the image to the article that's fine. As long as I think your rationale is ok that is! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

After a quick scan, I think you'll need to expand the section discussing the books for the fair use rationale to apply. If you re-read the template for book covers, you'll see it says "to illustrate an article discussing the book in question" - this article isn't really discussing the book in question, it merely lists it as one of Peter's works. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. You know, I just chose the wrong picture to practise with! I've promised not to touch Peter's article, so I can't really go into it and add anything. Thanks for your help, but maybe I should just let it hang there until the bots delete it... Burntfingers (talk) 12:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PeterMayExtraordinaryPeople.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:PeterMayExtraordinaryPeople.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

As if by magic, the bot appeared! If you like, I can delete it for you. Bots don't actually do the deletion, they simply tag images and then an admin deletes them once the prerequisite time has elapsed. Let me know if I can help further. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:16, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow! It's spooky - they're watching me mess up at every turn! Yes, please, delete it! Can I ask - do you ever adopt? Burntfingers (talk) 12:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Of course. I'm a little snowed under being an admin, bureaucrat and feature list director but I'd be more than glad to point you in the right direction for things. Let me know on my talk page if you'd like to pursue something like this. I'll delete the image for you. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 14:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Mentoring

Sure thing, I'd be more than happy to provide you with a few pointers. Is there anything right now that you'd like to understand or know more about? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, this might sound stupid, but I've signed up for several projects that I think I would be interested in. Now do I just look through their list of things to be done and start working on stuff? I mean, it seems weird that no-one stops you at the door, and asks for your qualifications, first. Obviously I would only start doing things that were very simple - like, the Crime task force suggest that one of the things they need done, is to have articles tagged. That seemed pretty straightforward so I started with that. But I can translate from French and there are several articles where people have asked for proofreading on, which I could do, but some of them seemed to me to be pretty slim on references/citations, so would I be expected to assess them for that first? Burntfingers (talk) 16:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't sound stupid at all. This place is quite daunting at first and it may feel as if anything you do could ruin it. But not really. The projects are a convenient way for people with similar interests (not necessarily expertise) to focus their efforts and collaborate. No qualifications are necessary at all. As for assessing articles for references, well, WP:V needs to be followed but copyediting articles doesn't necessarily require you to go and find these references yourself. The League of Copyeditors could always use help, as could the peer review folks. Reading a few PRs would probably help you see what common problems there are with articles and how to go about remedying them. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I have a lot of reading to do! Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Burntfingers (talk) 20:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

William Kent Krueger

Hi Burntfingers, not a bad start at all! Although me to provide some pointers which will help with compliance with the manual of style.

• WP:HEAD says not to overcapitalise headings unless proper nouns are used, so "Writing Influences" should be simply "Writing influences".
• WP:CITE says to avoid spaces between citations and punctuation, place, where possible, the citations immediately after punctuation.
• Instead of adding a {{cite web}} template for the same reference a number of times, use <ref name=blah> for the first time (when you do use the cite web) and for all subsequent uses, use <ref name=blah/> - this will give you a, b, c etc for each use.
• Further information section looks like an External links - you can use the cite web template again, or link the whole "Minnesota Public Radio interview with William Kent Krueger" as the URL for instance.
• Avoid overusing bold text and avoid overcapitalising (e.g. WINNER makes me feel faint when I see it...)
• I wouldn't go so overboard on the bibilography and awards - it's half the article right now. See Carl Hiaasen for example. I know his works are possibly more notable than those of Krueger, but it's an example of how to present the information without overkill.
• I think you need to be more judicious with your "notable" awards.
• Obviously when you "move" the page, you'll need to add suitable categories as well.

A very good start in my opinion. I'm more than happy to explain further anything I haven't made clear here and anything else that may spring to mind. When you feel ready to expose the article to the "mainspace" (i.e. it's currently in your "userspace" which is fine, but for it to be out for general consumption it needs to be in the mainspace) let me know - in order for us to keep to our obligations to the GFDL, we need to "move" the page which will preserve the history of the article so far. Get in touch if and when you're ready for more! Finally, there's a nice little thing called WP:OWN which relates to the fact that nobody owns any article and you are quite within your rights here to edit any article. I understand you're nervous to upset others but they'll get over it! It's a wiki so you can be bold and go for it! All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 15:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Thanks for your good wishes, if you can get things sorted before Friday then let me know, otherwise I'll "see" you early June, all things being well! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. Before I forget, if back to back "Anthony" awards has only been matched by one other writer since the award's inception is the case, if you haven't already done it, include this and provide a citation - it's a good thing to have in the article. As for "moving" the sandbox, it's pretty straightforward. You can do it yourself or let me do it and see what it does. Basically, the sandbox gets renamed into the mainspace and the old sandbox becomes a redirect to the newly moved article. You can then request speedy deletion of your old sandbox (the redirect) and an admin will pop by and remove it for you. Then you can simply start again on your next new article. The sandbox is definitely the place to keep your work, but some people just start their new articles in the mainspace - the down side being people may take over from what you want to write, the up side being collaborations rarely take place in sandboxes! Give me a shout if you'd like me to take another look at the article before moving it, or, for that matter, if you have any other questions. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 12:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've also edited the External links section to show you that you can use the {{cite web}} template outside of <ref>'s. I didn't do them all, just one, to let you see the result. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

One more thing (!) - avoid "overlinking", that is, when you've linked the publisher once in any given section, there's no need to keep linking it thereafter. The same for the Anthony award. Otherwise, it's a great first article! Upload your image, give it the right licensing, copyright etc and you're virtually there. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Move done correctly, I've deleted your sandbox (feel free to create a new one in its place!) and all is good! The Rambling Man (talk) 12:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

If you use {{CopyrightedFreeUse-Link|Name of site}}, add the website from whence the image came, and just add it to the image page (edit it like you would an article, it doesn't really matter too much where it goes, near the bottom would be best) and then delete the bot warning. Let me know how you get on. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice work! The image is tagged correctly as far as I can see and the article looks good, well done! Now you can add your Novels wikiproject banner to the talk page and see if someone at the project will assess it's class and importance for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome, don't hesitate to give me a shout if you need anything else. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:WilliamKentKrueger1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WilliamKentKrueger1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:WilliamKentKrueger1.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:WilliamKentKrueger1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:WilliamKentKrueger1.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 21:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm

Hi there. The probable reason for the speedy deletion tag is that Polly used the link you provided and was confronted, at the bottom, with "All content © 2002-08 by William Kent Krueger." This makes the images incompatible with Wikipedia policies. Really, the only way to resolve this would be to get Krueger himself to write to the Wikimedia foundation (using WP:OTRS) giving permission for the image to be used. For an example of this, see Image:Mikef.jpg. By the way, when discussing images, add a colon after the two open square brackets so you get the image name rather than the image itself. Hope some of that helps. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I've listed the image at WP:IFD.--PhilKnight (talk) 00:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:WilliamKentKrueger1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WilliamKentKrueger1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I've e-mailed William Kent Krueger re permission to use the photograph, but am still waiting for a reply. PhilKnight had removed the image from the page, although I just read the guidelines and it seems he didn't actually have to do this, he just had to add some sort of label to the image. Anyway, I've added the pic back in to the article in the meantime, as I really do expect that William Kent Krueger will give his permission. The photograph is offered to be downloaded for use as part of the media pack on his website. I thought that the "fair use" rationale I gave applies in this case, but there seems to be widespread disagreement about this. Ultimately if the pic has to be deleted, then so be it. Who am I to argue?Burntfingers (talk) 15:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey

How's it going? Been a while, I've been away in sunny Namibia for a fortnight and have just got back into the swing of things. Anything I can offer help with at the moment or are you well into it now?! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey!! How are you? How was Namibia!

Am I well into it? Hmm I don't know about that. More like adrift or even drowning at times! I missed you. I kept searching for article to work on and was shocked by how many looked like they didn't even meet "notability" criteria, never mind having proper citations! Then I spent a lot of time reading guidelines. It's been illuminating. Anyway, I plucked up the courage to make a foray into the world of proof-reading and worked on a translation from French Contrôle de vitesse par balises. I'm sure I improved the article - I even tracked down and added references (my mentor would have been proud of me!). But even though I followed all the instructions, the link I had to add at the bottom of the page doesn't seem to work properly - it's the one that's supposed to go to the original French article. I put the correct ID#, but I dunno... I'll look into it again tomorrow. Right now my brain hurts. Oh one thing, while you were away, someone made a really dopey edit to the Peter May (writer) article. Some guy went in and did some pretty strange cutting and pasting and left it without a working REFLIST. And I know I promised not to touch it again, but, well... here's the thing - I laid out on the talk page what I thought was wrong with the last edit and what I'd like to fix and I left it for a few days to see if there were any thoughts from anyone else, and... there weren't. So I went in and fixed a lot of stuff (excised weasel words and peacock terms lifted from his website) tidied it up and added proper references with a REFLIST that works now. Anyway, maybe you could have a look at it. I'm still embarrassed that it carries that COI health warning, and I really won't be touching it again. Promise! Burntfingers (talk) 17:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, Namibia was amazing. My girlfriend and I spent twelve very happy days trawling round the vastness and found nothing but beauty and friendship everywhere. It was a perfect break. As for how you're doing, glad to hear you're being bold and branching out of your comfort zone. I've tried to fix your link to the French version - capitalisation is important - follow it explicitly, and the permanent link was completely different to the one I found... let me know if I can help further on this in future - I think I've sorted it now. As for Mr May's article, I think it's sufficiently NPOV for the COI notice to be removed, I'll go do that now. If anything kicks off as a result, direct it to me by all means. Anyway, leave me a note on my talkpage if you need any help with anything, happy Sunday to you. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Burntfingers (talk) 19:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)