User talk:Ckatz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Ckatz is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. If you have an urgent matter, it may be best to use email. |
| Hello! Thanks for dropping by... please feel free to leave me a message below. I don't have a convention as to where I'll respond, be it here, your talk page, or the talk page of the subject we're discussing - but I'll do my best to keep things clear. Let me know if you have a preference... now, get typing! Ckatz |
|---|
|
| Page One Page Two Page Three Page Four Page Five Page Six |
[edit] Frequently asked questions
- Where can I learn more about editing Wikipedia?
- The best place to start is at the Help Desk. Other useful links include the style guide, the list of policies and guidelines, and the guide to editing. Please feel free to ask on my talk page if you have any questions.
- Why was the link I added removed from an article?
- Typically, links are removed because they fail the external links guideline. Although many links are deleted because they were placed by spammers, links to good sites are also removed on a regular basis. This is because Wikipedia isn't a directory service; the mere fact a site exists does not mean it warrants a link.
- Why was my article deleted?
- Pages can be deleted for many reasons; there are very specific criteria that govern the process. Please review this article for more information.
- Why was information relating to my company or organization removed?
- This is a very common question, based on a misunderstanding of Wikipedia's purpose. This project is not a directory, forum, or search engine, and as such it is not a place for you to post advertisements about your company or your product.
- Why were my spelling changes reverted?
-
- Wikipedia's Manual of Style recommends the use of regional varieties of English, based on the topic and the article's contribution history. Please avoid changing spellings unless they differ from the appropriate version. Most spell checking software can be configured to use British and American English; some extend this to include other varieties such as Canadian or Australian English.
[edit] Solar System
I have nominated Solar System for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
[edit] braincomputerguy
there is nothing wrong with adding the details to the supreme court lawsuit against the RCMP in reference to non-consensual cranial wiretaps...not unless you think it's ok for the RCMP to be doing this to people? oh I know you must be a cop...well if you are a cop you will be bitchslapping the RCMP in Nanaimo of ever winning this lawsuit if you keep it up...so i'd just leave it if I were you
[edit] Reg Your Edit of List of Free Software Directories page
Hi Ckatz, Can you please tell why have you reverted my post in the List of Free Software projects Directories page..? You didnt answer to my earlier question in your talk page. Thanks, Balaje Sankar
[edit] International Business
I have been trying to edit the page "international business" using the book INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: ENVIRONMENTS AND OPERATIONS by DANIELS, RADEBAUGH AND SULLIVAN (11th Edition) and editors keep deleting the information. I would like to know why that is happening. The current information about international business is not organized and is very weak. Please allow me to make those changes.
JYAPOR
[edit] re link to external review on 'The Next Doctor'
I'm sorry, didn't realize that the IP had been spamming (although the links from that IP all look to be relevant external content). As I'm a member of the site linked to, I may have a conflict of interest; it still seems to be a pertinent and appropriate link. I'll leave it for you to decide, however. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pulpygraymatter (talk • contribs) 20:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Question Regarding External Links Submitted
Hi, Ckatz, just want to get clarification regarding the message you sent. My question is this: All articles are advertisements or promotions in some way or another because the viewpoint gets exposure, the subject gains press and the publisher gets acknowledgment, so why aren't the other reviews from Tv.com or Allmovies or Rottentomatoes that remain on wiki also considered advertisement or promotion? They are in essence free PR tools for the studios, and the large corporations that own those websites. More important, this policy tends to create a monopoly on viewpoints. Thanks. Callisrocks (talk) 23:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Re: User:VitasV
I notice you've had problems with this user in the past. Just wanted to give you notice I've started a thread at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:VitasV. -- Ϫ 10:31, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] (Reverted edits by Osturm (talk) to last version by 98.227.156.250)
Hi Ckatz,
I'm curious as to why you removed the link I added - XScriptorium is a valuable asset to the AE community. We cover expresssions and scripts which are integral to working with AE and of all the expressions and scripting resources out there we feature the largest collection. Please note that we are not for profit - there is no advertising whatsoever on our site - it's purely an AE community-driven project.
Best regards,
Ole
- Don't take it personally. Many hundreds of people are repeatedly trying to add links to Wikipedia and it is necessary that they be resisted. Your edit summary ("Added a new link") did not establish why the link was desirable, and the site does not strike the casual observer as suiting WP:EL. If you believe the link is useful for Wikipedia readers, a good approach would be to add a section to the talk page of the article and ask if an editor who is familiar with the article would consider adding the link. Johnuniq (talk) 11:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion on Bruno
Hi there,
I think it is important that the public knows that, at least according to one source, Bruno has been generating a critical reaction from the Hollywood gay community. Is it necessary to have more than one source verify this, if we make it clear that the information only comes from one source?
Thanks! Llama623 (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)Ben (Llama623)
[edit] Wirtland
Just in case you wondered — the move of the micronation was suggested at AFD. Nyttend (talk) 05:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the note. I noticed that, but given that the micronation was more popular in terms of Google hits, the fact that the hatnote was an aside from someone opposed to even having the micronation article, and that the house doesn't appear especially notable outside of the US (at least, as compared to the micronation) the present arrangement seemed best. Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 05:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
-
- I disagree with your unilateral move of these articles. As someone had moved them in the first place I'd have thought it would have been obvious that your move would have been contreversial and so should have had some discussion first. Personally I diasagree with your arguement about google hits for two reasons, firstly most of the 'top ten' hits appear not to be independent and second I think that the micronation is much more likely to have hits on the internet than the building possibly skewing results as there may be many offline sources that mention the building. I've started a requested move discussion - something I think you should have done. Dpmuk (talk) 10:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome to disagree, of course, but I felt it was equally fair to correct what appeared to be an improper decision to move the micronation article and replace it with one about a building. The correct procedure would have been to move the micronation article as done, create Wirtland (building), and use Wirtland as a disambiguation page for those two articles. I've proposed just such a move at the move discussion you opened. --Ckatzchatspy 10:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- I disagree with your unilateral move of these articles. As someone had moved them in the first place I'd have thought it would have been obvious that your move would have been contreversial and so should have had some discussion first. Personally I diasagree with your arguement about google hits for two reasons, firstly most of the 'top ten' hits appear not to be independent and second I think that the micronation is much more likely to have hits on the internet than the building possibly skewing results as there may be many offline sources that mention the building. I've started a requested move discussion - something I think you should have done. Dpmuk (talk) 10:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
-
- It's hardly surprising that a Web-based entity wins the ghits argument, which is why we don't use ghits to arbitrate page titles. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Vancouver article needs help
Did you know that Vancouver may lose FA status? The article was listed for FAR on June 18 but there wasn't much response. It has since been listed as a Featured Article Removal Candidate. I am contacting you because you are one of the top ten editors of the article by number of edits. Would you be willing to work on improving the article? If so, you may wish to comment on the review page and join the discussion on the talk page here. Sunray (talk) 08:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Entry deleted
Hi - to the Gibraltar entry under "communication" and Newspapers/periodicals I have added a link for The Gibraltar Magazine to the links for other publications in Gibraltar however it has been deleted twice. The Gibraltar Magazine is a legitimate publication which contains a wide variety of features and information on Gibraltar. Apparently it has been deleted because it is 'advertising" The Gibraltar Magazine contains adverts in exactly the same way The Gibraltar Chronicle and all the other publications and radio stations mentioned do so I fail to see why it is considered invalid and 'deleteable' whereas the other listings are legitimate. Please review your policy. Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meioow (talk • contribs) 14:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] External link
Okay it's now been explained that I shouldn't have put external link in the body text of my entry, so I have added again without the external link (I thought the other link was external but it's to a page). Please please don't delete it this time! The magazine is legitimate and as valid as the other entries! (okay deleted again just saying Gibraltar has a monthly magazine called The Gibraltar Magazine - nolink at all. Why is this less valid than it having a newspaper, radio station etc???? Please tell me— Meioow (talk • contribs) 08:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Advert on user page
What is the right way to handle the promo at User:PeterJames1? No need to reply if you want to handle it yourself; I'll watch with interest. Johnuniq (talk) 11:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
