User talk:05kinjac/Archive 1

Archive 1

{{helpme}} Hi, thankyou for the opportunity. I'm currently trying to improve an article on a band that I like that has been somewhat abandoned [[1]] and there is in fact their debut album missing from the discography area and many facts and such missing from the introduction and career highlights. I was wondering how to insert a picture of the cover of the album to the discography. Thanks

It's good to see you want to help improve Wikipedia. I have taken the liberty of copying the article across to this page for you. When I don't know how to do something on wikipedia I always try to do something; copy! As you can see, there are other Albums listed along with pictures. If you copy the bit that creates the image:
<gallery>
Image:meretheorydemo06.jpg|<center>''1.8.2006 Demo'' ([[2006]])
</gallery>

and then change the name of the image for the one that you want, it would produce what you want! :) If the image is not already up on wikipedia, you may have you upload one. Make sure you read Wikipedia:Uploading images before to learn about the legal issues (copyright related things). If you need any more help, just place a new helpme tag below this message. Happy Editing! Tiddly-Tom 08:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}} unfortunately due to the nature of my bock i am unable to upload images or edit my user page. as you can probably tell, this stops me from constructively doing anything. i have contacted john but havent had a reply after 5 days. how do i pursue this avenue further? Thanks.

The only thing that I can say is that you should create a new account, and start over, if you vandalise again then you will be blocked. You have been blocked idef The Helpful One (Talk) (Contributions) 12:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Can I suggest you stop using your other account. It is evading a block and may result in both accounts being blocked indeffinatly. You above have been asked to improve an article. I have copied the article you said you wanted to improve below. You are to make edits there, not on the actual article. I am not an administrator, but this is what I think would be prefered. Tiddly-Tom 13:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I notice you have done edits to the article using the other account. Feel free to copy them across to this article as they will help your case. Don't forget to cite reliable sources when adding information to articles. Tiddly-Tom 13:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I have read wikipedia's blocking policy very carefully. Since i have created a new account and have a different IP address due a change of residence and phone number, it is not necessarily an evasion of a block. I am starting afresh as (Talk) has advised. No wrong doing has occurred.

Even though you have changed phone number, it is still circumventing a block. The block is currently set to prohibit you editing, and you are editing, therefore you must be evading a block. What is wrong with editing the article below, as requested by the administrator? Tiddly-Tom 14:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Because John, my blocker, hasn't got back to me about lifting the block; the decision to block me in the first place was harsh as i was only experimenting, being a n00b to wikipedia. And the blocking guidelines dont make any mention of my specific circumstance. so, if i cant argue the basis behind my blocking in the first place, how fair is wikipedia really? and i couldnt actually edit my own user page at that time.

Have you read the above blue box where an admin says you can have a second chance if you do as stated? Tiddly-Tom 14:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

yes but i prefer what the helpful one said about starting again. i mean, if i "vandalise" again (if you could even call it that) well i get blocked. thats a fair deal for everyone involved is it not? i mean, over half a year of being blocked, i think ive served my time for "vandalising"

I can not agree. The whole point of the unblock request is so that you can start again. Many are not granted, and so you are lucky that yours has conditonaly been granted. What is wrong with what is asked in it? Tiddly-Tom 15:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

because i like my way better? thanks for all your help. i think i can take it from here.

Ok, thank you for being civil with this matter. I have left a message on the user talk page of the admin whom offerd you unblocking. Hopefully he will be in touch. Happy New Year. Tiddly-Tom 15:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
here is the clarification: You are not allowed to start a new account. It will be considered block evasion and sockpuppetry. and whatever The Helpful One said was not helpful at all. your other account will be blocked. next time you start a new account while this block is still active, I will revoke the conditional unblocking offer. Regards, nat.utoronto 19:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Thankyou for the clarification. Wow, I guess The Helpful One isn't who he says he is. But Thanks Nat, I will continue editing the Mere Theory page on this user page. How many pages do I need to edit constructively before block-lifting comes under considoration? And the changes I wish to advise have been ,made below to the mere theory article. I'm somewhat of an expert on them. I go to the school the front man Chris Mellow teaches at and I have all their releases and I haven't missed an Adelaide gig all year. Thankyou Nat.05kinjac (talk) 03:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

And Nat, how am I meant to propose new, constructive changes when i cant get the code for the page because im blocked from editing? Thanks.

You can get the code weather you are blocked or not. Just click 'edit this page' at the top of the article (or view source if it is there, I don't know - I have never been blocked) then you can just copy the contents of the box. In Nat's most recent post he said the offer would be withdrawn if you were to create another account, which you did. Whether he wishes to keep to his word is up to him. Tiddly-Tom 07:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
P.S. See Wikipedia:Citing sources on how to do citations properly. Tiddly-Tom 07:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I created the new account before I read the message on this one. Oh well. and i cant click the edit page button or page source. it takes me back to the page that shows my blocked status

I think you can scroll down and see it cant you? If you tell me what you want copying, I'll do it. Tiddly-Tom 08:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeha if i need anything copied i might take you up on that. but, how do i get the below article i did noticed by admin?

If you are finished, you can use {{unblock|your reason here}}, however, if you need help, you can use {{helpme|your reason here}}. nat.utoronto 10:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
checkY

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

I have unblocked you, per your demonstration of your willingness to make constructive contributions. Welcome back, and be sure to make helpful edits!

Request handled by: Anthøny 12:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Can I suggest you fix the refrences to make them look like those of most other articles. See WP:CITE. Tiddly-Tom 11:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and the picture you uploaded faces deletion unless a fair use rationale is used. Tiddly-Tom 11:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I've read both the WP:CITE and the rules pertaining to licensing and such with pictures but i don't fully understand what is wrong with the references already in place, nor the information attached to the pictures. if you could explain this to me, it would be greatly appreciated. im only 15, so some of these rules and such do seem a little bamboozling to say the least. thankyou :)


I have done the first one in your article below for you. You can finish the rest. As for the picture, it is a non free image. Therefore you need to add some fair use rational. You can do this by adding to the image description page: {{Non-free use rationale |Description= |Source= |Article= |Portion= |Low_resolution= |Purpose= |Replaceability= |other_information= }} and then filling in the fields. Take a look at this for more information. If I can help further, just shout. Tiddly-Tom 13:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I think im on the right page. So what your saying is, instead of having those external links, just make reference points, and make them go to the reference section and from there link them to the external site?

Thankyou

Yup! Tiddly-Tom 15:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


Do the recent changes meet with wikipedia's approval? And I am unable to change the copyright/Non-free use rationale info i have already entered due to the constricts of my ban. If ever this ban is lifted and i learn how to give out those stars ive seen around the place ill be sure to give you one for helping me so much :) Thankyou :)

Good work with the references. Now for some minor things. References, if after a full stop should go directly after it without a space. A reference for the SAMIA Award would be great. A few more references that are independent of the subject would be great. By this I mean not from their website or myspace, something like a newspaper or Music review pages would be great. The first point could be contained in the main article. You might like to get rid of the second, as then you would not have a trivia section. Trivia sections are not encouraged in articles. The article is shaping up nicely - good work. Tiddly-Tom 16:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks,:) I just found a reference for the SAMIA award. I don't think i can muster anymore references as they are only a local band that have literally only recently exploded onto the scene. I tried even getting a few notes of interest from their old record label's website for anything pre-2006, but unfortunately, the label is now defunct. The trivia section will be removed; Chris Mellow is actually my P.E. teacher haha and the school that i attend will be the next article i plan on shaping up. Thankyou.

Sorry, after further inspection of the SAMIA Award reference, it doesn't seem independent of the subject.

Don't for get to sign! ;) Try http://www.amo.org.au/artist.asp?id=2239 for a reference. A Google search should return some more usable websites. As with anywhere on the Internet, be careful about the information you give out online. I would suggest you don't tell people your full name, your school, address, phone number. Telling people your town is not to bad, nor your first name. I would not give out my date of birth, and have only described my self as a teenager. The article just keeps getting better! Good work! Tiddly-Tom 17:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the link but that was the one i deemed not independant as some of those paragraphs were direct copies of a cached version of their webpage before the release of their album. Thankyou for the encouragement :)

Good cross referencing! The article contains quotes from reviews, some links to them would be good. A ref to the bit about the name would be good. Also, there should be a space after the current reference number 2. Don't forget to sign your posts with ~~~~ as this will produce your username and the time of the message. Tiddly-Tom 17:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The advised changes have been made. Is there any other way I could improve this article? Thankyou 05kinjac (talk) 17:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Expansion would be great. Try spliting the intorduction into some sections and expanding on each. Keep up the good work! Tiddly-Tom 19:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

okay thanks :) I'll do that tomorrow. im a little tired right now. good night! and thanks for all your help.05kinjac (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm awake :) haha and the changes have been made. I have also included a caption to the picture. I feel this picture is a little dated since theyve had more photo shoots since then. Once my block is lifted do you think it would be a good idea to send an email to the band asking whether wikipedia can freely use it? I have seen the same picture ive had in mind on other wensites so i dont think they would object to it. And also, some of their older songs (pre-2005) are being streamed on the Building Records website; would it be appropriate to provide links to these?

Thankyou :) 05kinjac (talk) 08:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Even if they gave us permission to 'use it on wikipedia' it would not be allowed. We would need permission as described here for us to be able to use it. Remember - some of the copyrights on the photos might not even be owned by the band, but by the photographer. The band may just be using them 'by permission'. Are we sure the streamed songs are legal - I am not familiar with the website. Even if they are, I am not sure whether they should be linked to or not. It's great to see more references going in. The next stage in improvement would be to expand the content of the article. I realise this can be hard when the topic is not well known. I have contacted Nat, hopefuly he will come along some time to see what you've been up to. Tiddly-Tom 09:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou very much :) I attempted to expand upon the article but could not come up with anything mindblowingly different due to the lack of information on the subject readily available on the internet. after further research i found a reference for the SAMIA award wehich was not seen on the google search. Thanks :) I look forward to hearing what Nat has to say.

The pictures were just removed from the current article [2] - I am not an image expert. When/If you are unblocked, you should try to sort out some fair use ratonal. You could even make it now and insert it later. It would be further evidence to help your case for being unblocked. Tiddly-Tom 10:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Haha how convenient. They were happy enough to keep half my edit, and then block me :) Im still unsure as to what needs to entered in the fields of Portion=, Low_Resolution=, Article= and Replaceability=. Thankyou :)

As stated, I am not an expert. The portion is how much of the picture you are using. IE - Have you cropped it? Low Resolution means does it have a lot of pixels? For fair use, you want a lot resolution as then it is harder to copy for commercial benefits. Article means what article do you want to use it in. Mere Theory in this case, Replaceability means can it be replaced easily. I would say no for this I think, as it is an album cover. If you were copping a picture of for example a tree, it is easy to replace because you could easily take a picture of a tree. Don't quote me on this though ;) Tiddly-Tom 11:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Great news! Just make sure you don't get blocked again! :) I suggest you read the five pillars again, unless you have very recently. I suggest you remove the article from this page now, as it is recorded in the history of the Mere Theory page. Also, I do not think you are meant to have fair use images on pages which are not specified on the fair use rational. That reminds me - the fair use rationales look good on those pictures. I think that {{Non-free album cover}} should be added to each page (it is meant to be used along with the fair use rational. If you have any more problems, feel free to contact me on my talk page. I'll keep your pages on my watch list as well. You might like to think about making a user page, even if it is only a redirect to this page. Also, I would suggest moving the whole of our discusion to an archive soon. Good Luck! Tiddly-Tom 17:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)