JBretSimmons

User talk:JBretSimmons

License free pictures

Hi, JBret. That's great news about the license free pictures. The Michael Martin Murphey article could certainly use some good images, and to have them originate from MMM directly is ideal. I included the song listings for each of the album pages I created, along with album cover images. I still plan to do full articles on each album when I get the time. For several of the earlier albums, however, I could not find cover images. Indeed, I'm a long-time fan, and I've enjoyed working on the articles. If you see MMM, tell him he's got more than a few folks up here in the northeast who'd love to see him in concert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjaklitsch (talk • contribs) 13:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Michael Martin Murphey article Project DISCOGRAPHY SECTION Guidance

THIS IS NOT AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, BUT A NOTICE TO THOSE WITH INTENT ON EDITING/VANDALIZING IT IN IT'S CURRENT FORM. PLEASE DO NOT MODIFY IT. IT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

It is mirrored on 4 other websites. An AGREMENT was reached with MICAHEL MARTIN MURPHEY November 2007 to use our format. This is by design to eliminate a lot of software maintenance for all. The Project, fortunately, has more resources to maintain it than MMM does. The fact that 7 music media changes occurred the last 60 years makes MUSIC MEDIA TYPE IRRELEVANT. What is RELEVANT to encyclopedic standards is the information it contains. The AGREEMENT spells out the year, title, songs under titles, differences between multiple releases of same title, differences between songs of same title ONLY. Charting and ranking is NOT wanted. It is a property that belongs to others, is copyrighted, and is for commercial sale. It does not meet encyclopedic standards. We have received LEGAL ADVICE on that by Project members who are also attorneys in the DMCA/Copyright area for free. Please read the above post. The charting and ranking can be found on MMM's own website now. This is by DESIGN. We have to comply with encyclopedic standards.

Pleae do not edit the DISCOGRAPHY SECTION of the Michael Martin Murphey article. We are dealing with an individual that insists that our discography match the rest of Wiki music artists. We had legal input that certain information used by other articles is in violation of copyright - especially charting and ranking. It is NOT of Encyclopedic value because it is a dynamic statistic that changes daily as well as the ownership of it is copyrighted for commercial sale by their respective owners.

This section is actually is linked to 4 of Michael Martin Murphey Websites with the WikiProjectTexas as the maintainer of it HERE. The DESIGN is different because the Project has entered into Agreeement with Michael Martin Murphey to use it in it's DESIGNED current form, as they had no discography, LOCKING the specific format and requirements of what it contains. This is why it is different from other articles. This section is very active right now as we implement the rest of the Agreement. This reduces software maintenance for 4 of his websites. Thae fact that we now have the artist actively involved with the Project now and in the future on a regular basis. This applies to the DISCOGRAPHY SECTION ONLY.

It was recognized that all in the Agreement wanted a same look acrooss all 5 websites using it, including Wiki. The Project will repeat, this section is actively under construction as we implement the rest of the Agreement. This has been a significant breakthrough having MMM onboard now as an advisor to the Project. The Project still has to maintain a dividing line between our biographical data to encyclopedic standards and his biographical data, which has information in it that doesn't and also to avoid impropriety charges. MMM is NOT allowed to edit his own biography here on Wiki. That was made CLEAR to him to avoid "selective destruction" of important biographical and historical information to encyclopedic NPOV standards. If you read his NEW abridged biography, he omits all information leading up to his college years and some working relationship details with other people. This is important because it is the very foundation his life is built on and the basis for some of his music. His NEW abridged biography reads more like life achievements omitting some of the encyplopedic content that the Project wants to keep. His has also added information that is not encyclopeidic content NPOV as his business agents biased it to extreme PPOV. He has every right to do that as it's on his own website and he has his own limits and restrictions to his agents on what's in it. The Project has a very different set of limits and restrictions. Yet we share the same base foundation article. So by reading both biographies, one will have an EXTREMELY COMPREHENSIVE information about Michael Martin Murphey that can be had no place else. Yet you will look closely at his, the Wiki ProjectTexas article on MMM is clearly the very foundation of his. He added more details and deleted some.

With that said, the rest of the article is open to all, provided that it is Original Verifiable Reseach meeting Wiki Standards and Policy as well as the DMCA. Just because it doesn't include a "singles" section, it is by DESIGN as well as well as the legal feedback we had regarding charting and ranking, which is copyrighted by their respective owners for commercial sale, which have not given the Project formal permission to use it. We follow the Wiki Policy and Standards to the letter with NO exceptions outside the DISCOGRAPHY SECTION.

As noted above, we have an AGREEMENT in place with MMM that spells out what is to be in it and no more. If there are other items you wish to consider in DISCOGRAPHY, please contact me as I am the Project lead right now driving the rest of the Project home to completion after a long 3 year journey. That input will be shared with Project members, discussed, debated, collective input analyzed, subjected to legal tests, shared with MMM, obtained his feedback, then debated again, and if approved, modify it to Wiki NPOV, and put on a TIMELINE for implementation.

The Project operates this way much like a professional working environment because the Project has that range of expertise. Treat it like as if you were actually working for a company. If you do, there are plenty of rewards to be had. The Project is quite large and we have a lot of national exposure. So a lot of what is done is and how it was done is being noticed by others in IT, Wiki Project CountryMustic, and especially Microsoft - Bill Gates commented on it Feb 2008. His comments are on CNET.COM in an interview and included 2 lines about Wikipedia. We also fully comply with the DMCA law. This is done to not bring ANYTHING in the article into question, doubt, or impropriety.

This is NOT the executive summary, but it does contain a little bit of it. The Project is trying to deal with one rogue individual who has no real world project expertise or experience and keeps on protesting. That is what prompted this post. More will follow. JBretSimmons (talk) 01:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your note. I have replied to your two posts on the talk page. And don't worry, I am not giving up on the article, just taking a break from it. Thanks again. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 20:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I do want to point out to you, that although you may have an agreement with MMM off-wiki, that is moot on Wikipedia. You do not WP:OWN any articles and any page on Wikipedia will be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others. Wikipedia is an open-content free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. The fact you made an agreement with someone off-wiki gives you no rights on-wiki. You cannot tell others that they cannot edit an article, nor can you blindly revert edits because they go against your version of the article. Remember, Wikipedia is a collaboration. I just wanted to warn you because if you do have tendencies to own an article, you may be blocked for such actions. Good luck with the article though. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 22:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, I do understand a little better. I of course have no problem with you reusing text from Wikipedia, that is what we are here for, and as long as you follow policies (which it seems you are doing a good job at) there really isn't any problems. I just want to make sure that if someone adds something to the article, that it isn't going to be removed just because it differs from what you or someone else may think the article should read as. Thanks again and good luck with the article! Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 08:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)