User talk:Mark in wiki/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mark in wiki. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Is he normally known as Judge Smith or Chris Judge Smith? From Google, he seems to be known as the latter, so that should be the title of the article.

If you ever want to move an article from one title to another, please use the "Move" button at the top of the page. Don't move an article by copy-and-pasting from one page to another as you end up losing the history, and it causes this sort of confusion! JRawle 13:12, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

He called himself Chris Judge Smith initially, but later decided to drop the "Chris" and to call himself simply Judge Smith. OK, so I'm going to delete the article at Chris Judge Smith and make it a redirect to the other one. JRawle 13:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, I think it's all sorted now! Regards, JRawle 13:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi ! I saw you changed "Chris Judge Smith" into "Judge Smith" as a link within the Van der Graaf Generator article at the (in French)Wikipdia. There is nothing wrong this that since there is no "Judge Smith" page yet it doesn't change anything actually (so I reversed because nonetheless "Chris Judge Smith" sounds more cognate to VdGG than Judge Smith alone. When it comes to open the "Chris Judge Smith" page there, we will certainly add a redirection from "Jugde Smith" to "Chris Judge Smith" or backwards. Regards.--Overkilled (talk) 22:07, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello! He is known as Judge Smith now for many years (see the discussion above), so I think it would be best to have a page at "Judge Smith" and a redirect at "Chris Judge Smith". Judge Smith is a lot more than a past member of VdGG (see the page in the English wikipedia about him at Judge Smith and see his official website). But I am fine either way, really. I just wanted to draw your attention to it, and to make sure it is possible to find Judge in wikipedia. My French is not good enough to write (or read) the page anyway. ;-) Greetings. Mark in wiki (talk) 08:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Not wanting to revert to-and-fro, but he is usually referenced as "Sean Nicholas" in Crazy World of Arthur Brown (band) - for example on the LP page: The Crazy World of Arthur Brown even though later recording as "Nicholas Greenwood". Not to mention the former name will just cause confusion, so I reckon he should be called Sean Nicholas in the CWOAB page - and maybe adjust the text wording to "...Greenwood went on to Khan (as Nicholas Greenwood)..."? AllyD (talk) 18:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. Interesting. I didn't know that. I looked up both names in The God Of Hellfire - The Crazy Life And Times Of Arthur Brown, the biography by Polly Marshal and found only mention of Nicholas Greenwood. Because he is listed in other sections of Wikipedia, I think we should use one name for him. But if he called himself Sean Nicholas on the album, I think that's the name we should mention in the article, although I prefer a future article about him to be listed under the title Nick Greenwood. I tried to do justice to both names/opinions now. But go ahead and change if you want to, please! Mark in wiki (talk) 20:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your enthusiasm to my suggestion that Gong's discography and links box should be rearranged. I copied the link box to a sandbox page, but quickly found I could not change it off the top of my head. More research is required to determine what some of these albums are, when they were released, etc. I'm still looking at it. You may not see a change for a while, but I haven't abandoned it. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 10:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

That is good to hear. However complex and difficult Gong's discography is (really, I should say: the discographies of the different forms of Gong), they really deserve a good article and a correct discography. Often it's difficult to make a clear distinction between Gong/Daevid Allen/Mother Gong/New York Gong/Gongmaison releases... for instance: I think it is correct to see Gongmaison as the title of an album by Gong, but as far as I know, it was actually released as the self-titled album by the band Gongmaison. Meanwhile, I made a change to the template and to the article that I'm quite sure about: the title of the album Gong est Mort, Vive Gong. Thanks in advance for all your work! Mark in wiki (talk) 10:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I renamed that article last week, when I noticed it was wrong. Thanks for changing the link. (BTW, that was the first Gong album I heard/purchased, back when it came out.) --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 11:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Before making edits you are unsure of, you might take a moment to actually check the references provided. -- btphelps ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. I just thought it was strange The Fall of the House of Usher was "first published [..] in 1927 [and] later republished [..] in September 1839." It makes no sense at all. But it is removed now, by someone else. Mark in wiki (talk) 05:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! Would you please explain to me why Van der Graaf Generator (with a small d) would sort differently from Van Der Graaf Generator (with a capital D)? The latter is an incorrect spelling. I don't understand why for sorting purposes one would use the incorrect spelling of the name of the band. I think it just confuses people. Mark in wiki (talk) 08:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC) (I wrote this on Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars' talk page and then copied it here to have all of the discussion in one place - otherwise it makes very little sense)

I am very well aware of the correct spelling of the name, but within wikipedia categorization scheme, capitalized letters are sorted before lower-case letters. It is more confusing to look through the category of albums by artist and see Category:Van Halen albums before Category:Van der Graaf Generator albums. It does that because capital "H" comes before lower-case "d" (see Help:Category#Sort order). It is for sorting purposes only and has nothing to do with a correct way of spelling it. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 08:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I think it's quite awkward. But okay. Mark in wiki (talk) 08:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars! I see you've removed the category Progressive rock albums from all or almost all of Van der Graaf Generator's album pages. Just out of curiosity: did you do that because you feel VdGG is not progressive rock or is there another reason for this? Thanks. Mark in wiki (talk) 07:15, 2 July 2010 (UTC) (I wrote this on Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars' talk page and then copied it here to have all of the discussion in one place)

It is somewhat explained at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums#Categories with the example used for Slayer albums. The individual albums are categorized under a year category and an artist category. The artist's albums categories typically contains an "artist nationality" category and a "genre" category. In the case of Category:Van der Graaf Generator albums, it is already being categorized under Category:Progressive rock albums, so there is no need to add the prog rock category to each individual album as well. What it says is that every album by Van der Graaf Generator is a progressive rock album. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 07:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for your explanation! Mark in wiki (talk) 08:27, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Carla_Kihlstedt is the sister Rya_Kihlstedt. It says on Rya's page that she is of Swedish descent. So wouldn't her sister be of Swedish descent too? Neptunekh2 (talk) 10:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

That may be so (although there is no source given), but that is not what your edit was about. Mark in wiki (talk) 11:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

That fact is in Gallo; that is the only place I have ever seen that information.
My copy of Gallo is lost; that is why I cannot provide a page number.
Apparently Gallo is now a rare book, according to the article on Gallo. It didn't use to be; everyone I know owns or owned one.
But guys who are now 50 can't automatically find their copy of a book they read when they were 18 or 20.
Varlaam (talk) 19:24, 4 December 2010 (UTC) (listening to VDG[G] since the 1970s)

It suddenly occurs to me that I had a letter published in a VDG fanzine many years ago. I don't remember what I said, but it was something about Orme's Felona & Sorona. Now, that is something that used to be rare, and always was. Varlaam (talk) 19:32, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Would you mind cleaning up the Alexandra Powers article. I added a reference and messed up. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 05:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

"correction - the title on the front of the album is "Felona and Sorona", not Felona & Sorona"
Hi, you've got this old note in the log at the Felona e Sorona article.
Where are you getting that from?
My copy of the LP is called Felona & Sorona.
Varlaam (talk) 22:01, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm... well remarked. My source is not that very good: I only have a download (in jpg) of the front of the album. It clearly says "Felona and Sorona" but I can well imagine that it was also released as "Felona & Sorona". Interesting. Please do with it what you will. Thanks for looking into it. Mark in wiki (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you email me your image, or suggest where you got it?

My LP is in a box and not readily accessible.

But even when I bought it (1979 or 1980, Cheapies, Yonge St., Toronto, $4.99?), I thought it was clever how, to simplify work on the cover, they had simply replaced the Italian "E" with "&", thus avoiding a whole lot of effort.

Two variant covers seems crazy. Why the extra expense?

How many copies do they expect to sell of Aldo, with his strong Italian accent, singing about "soapballs"? It's not an LP you want to hear over and over, unlike the original.

Cheers, Varlaam (talk) 06:00, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

There are a "number of reasons" you prefer enwiki over nlwiki. I am curious what those reasons are. Are those reasons private?

Also, since you're Dutch, and I'm Canadian, would you like to hear my Dutch lady on the train story from 1987?

Varlaam (talk) 06:09, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

No, nothing private about my preferences for enwiki. I just thought it might not be that interesting here. I do have an essay (in Dutch) about the flaws of the nlwiki up at my user page in nlwiki. In short, I think nlwiki looks unprofessional. The majority of the articles there read like they were written by a 13 year old, there's hardly any references (not even for bold or trivial statements), and some strange choices have been made. For instance, if you do a search for George Washington in nlwiki, you'll find a disambiguation page because there's also an inventor and an aircraft carrier by the same name. For a long time I thought I could help and change many of these articles, but now I've found that too tiring and have decided to only edit nlwiki if there is a really blatant mistake there. I'd like to concentrate my efforts on enwiki instead. Mark in wiki (talk) 08:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Hammill-Evans-Spur-of-the-Moment.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:06, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I deleted Toy Love from the wiki on Flying Nun because they never recorded for this label. During the period you state they were on the roster they recorded for Ripper and Deluxe and had some of these tracks then released also under Elektra and WEA labels.

Flying Nun did release the anthology cuts 25 years later, but by this would be the same as saying Elvis recorded for K-Tel in the fifties – in the interest of accuracy and to no further perpetuate the growing number of flying nun myths I ask that this change stand.

For reference I refer

http://www.discogs.com/artist/Toy+Love

but can supply many more references to this fact

although this does miss the Ripper releases (AK79 & Goats Milk Soap)

Elscarface (talk) 02:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I see you are right. I never knew this before. Thanks for drawing my attention to it. Mark in wiki (talk) 05:17, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

and thank you ... although it's not done for praise, just in itself that justifies it all for me. I've been around long enough now, with many years of it in the music business and the rest surrounded by muisc to want to put a little something else back in, and make things correct before it all disappears into legend and story. I was lucky enough to be there and steeped in it, and kinda hope that gives me the necessary tools to help make the various entries I rampage my way through a fitting tribute to people who have given me great pleasure down the years, some as friends or at least acquaintances.

BTW - I knew Peter Hammill many years ago when I lived in Sussex and he was a resident near Hassocks. It was post VDGG, and through a school friend who lived almost next door to him. I still have fond memories of a hot summer visiting him on Sundays (we'd left school and were working by then), and chewing the fat about many musicians on lazy afternoons lying on a hill near his house with a stunning view; and was privileged to hear his early workings on "Gog/Magog" and watch the development of "In Camera", which is still my favourite album of his as a result. He gave me an advance copy of the album on cassette, which I still have. If only I'd taped some of the conversations! (I never told him I loathed VDGG - although I've long since learned the error of my ways). As for dear Arthur Brown, somewhere in one of many unmarked boxes I still have an insane, deranged rambling hour long tape interview with him and the band that never made the magazine I did it for, owing to far too much acid and cider (on both sides); and a copy of the Kingdom Come set he gave me, straight from the mixing desk that evening. One day ...

Thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated. Brieflysentient (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you - made a mistake about him. -- Achim Raschka (talk) 10:37, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. These things can happen. That's why it is so good that Wikipedia is a community project. Greetings. Mark in wiki (talk) 10:57, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The only reason Rolls-Royce had to buy Bentley was to suppress this model which was providing strong competition for their Phantom and if (the 8 litre Bentley were) fully developed would have been clearly a better car. That's the background to my entering that remark under the image but for the moment I'm too busy to settle down and find an appropriate reference - you can if you wish. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 20:18, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

...your post about Biondetti's XK120; and hope the IP will give up now. Also checked out your website and found we like the same cars (except the Lagonda Rapide and the Jensen CV8!)... Writegeist (talk) 19:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. That's nice to read. Amazing that it's so easy to find references for the facts and that there's users out there who keep on changing content without providing references. And yes, I like design that's bold and forces one to decide: do I like this or what? Like the Rapide and CV8. But I can well imagine the scale tipping over to the other side, the no-I-don't-like-this-side. Groet. Mark in wiki (talk) 19:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fancy_%28Idiot_Flesh_album%29&diff=479092737&oldid=479076117

Within the comment of the edit of this, what do you mean, "not original"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0ProoN0 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

What I mean is, the scan doesn't look exactly like the original cover, because in the description of the file it says: "I added my own watermarks". I think Wikipedia-users should be aware of the fact that the original cover doesn't have the letters in it. Mark in wiki (talk) 11:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

In case you want it, I've put a custom userbox in {{User:Ritchie333/User VdGG}}, which has been on my user page for some time. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Beautiful! And many thanks for your continuing effort to expand and improve the Van der Graaf Generator page. The band (and I believe each of its members and ex-members too) really deserve a good page here. Mark in wiki (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks too for also keeping an eye on it and fixing bits too. Saw them live last year in the Barbican and they can still deliver a truly unique show. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Just a head's up in case you haven't seen, the GA review of this article is now here. If you can help fix any issues that fall out of the review, it would be very much appreciated. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

The initial review is now finished. The article meets the bulk of the GA criteria, though doesn't quite meet 1B: MoS compliance for lead, and 2B: Citation of reliable sources where necessary. I've put on hold for an initial seven days to allow the work to be done. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 13:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I think I'll be able to do something about missing citations (hopefully within one week), with "Van der Graaf Generator - The Book" by Phil Smart & Jim Christopulos in hand. Mark in wiki (talk) 13:17, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

This user helped promote Van der Graaf Generator to good article status.

Well done. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 21:38, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Just for clarification, the "cuts" I can obviously see are :

• Eyewitness (first) - Pictures / Lighthouse : Clearly fades out the former while fading in the latter, with a sudden jump to Banton playing a different run.

• Custard's Last Stand - Land's End : After general mayhem (done with a straight cut on the studio version), Hammill is seen bashing away at the Pianet, then stops, and almost instantly is suddenly playing it again with the vibrato now switched on.

--Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I must admit I haven't watched it for a while. And it's something that for me requires a special occasion to watch. You may very well be right that these two cuts you see are very clear cuts. But still, I can't find any sources stating that there was more than one cut, and can only find this one source (Christopulos&Smart) stating that there was only one cut... (whichever of the two you can see that may have been...) Could it be that there were no more than one cut in the performance, but more cuts in the recording (because multiple cameras were used)...? Thanks for your willingness to delve into details like these! Mark in wiki (talk) 12:10, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

The other source I have is David Jackson's interview with Mick Dillingham which just says rather vaguely "we did it in sections and edited it together". I watched the DVD after I read another source that said it was edited, so I was watching out for it, whereas I reckon Banton might not have actually watched it at all, so is going off a 40+ year old memory. The DVD has been bootlegged all over YouTube, so it's easy to have a look, but you can't cite personal observations on a pirated video. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

At Van der Graaf Generator I decided to take out the word "two", to make for a more neutral wording (simply "sections" without naming how many there may have been) and at A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers I added some extra info, although you're right that personal conclusions drawn from watching a DVD strictly constitutes WP:OR. Mark in wiki (talk) 12:38, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

My copy of Christopulos & Smart arrived in the post today. When I've finished reading it, do you fancy seeing if we can take Van der Graaf Generator all the way to featured article status? --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations on getting The Book! :-) Reading it, years ago now, made me enthusiastic all over again. I even compiled an index for it, which may be helpful, and which is here in pdf-format: index to Christopulos & Smart. If I can I would like to help get the article featured article status. Mark in wiki (talk) 06:29, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you for tidying my citations on the page for the Vital live album. I'm just starting out on Wikipedia, and my first goal is to expand the individual VdGG/pH albums as much as I can. Seeing how much you've contributed to the subject, we may cross paths again. Thanks again! TarkovskyFanX957 (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I feel many album articles indeed deserve an expansion (something which I as a non-native speaker haven't yet dared to do). Judging by the good start you're making, this could be the chance the articles have been waiting for! Thanks for the work so far. Groet! Mark in wiki (talk) 19:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Count me among those looking to expand the VdGG/pH pages. I'll be mainly searching for contemporaneous reviews for now. I may not have The Book, but I still think I can help. I promise to get the layout right soon, though - I've thanked you already for correcting my contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TarkovskyFanX957 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I have the book, and I think I was about halfway through citing stuff on the main VdGG article to get it up to FAC. I got sidetracked (not necessarily in a bad way) by some Who articles and Hammond Organ - where I was overjoyed that Scott Faragher's book, listing all the great Hammond players like Jimmy Smith, Jack McDuff, Jimmy McGriff, Joey DeFrancesco, Jon Lord, Steve Winwood etc etc gave a two and a bit page spread on Hugh Banton complete with a live shot from circa '72. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:31, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Mark in wiki. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit.
Message added 09:08, 13 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I deeply regret for the mistake I've done, thank you so much for letting me know. I'm a new to wikipedia, please feel free to correct me even in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preethikasanilwiki (talk • contribs) 13:43, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. It almost looked comical to me, were it not for the subject matter of a car accident. Mark in wiki (talk) 13:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

:-*

Laurier (talk) 16:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, many thanks for your edits but not sure this is a good idea, could you reconsider it? Whether Spanish composers' works are described as "3 songs"/"Tres Canciones", "4 songs"/"Quatro Canciones" in English classical music sources is largely arbitrary and unpredictable. Generally as titles of opus classical sources prefer to keep the Spanish, but it isn't absolute, and a solution such as forking the Spanish off into a separate dab page is likely to lead to duplication. Would you mind allowing the Spanish "3 songs" and English "3 songs" to rest in the same dablist? In ictu oculi (talk) 07:57, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

It's fine by me. But bear in mind that the page might get unmanageably long, because if you decide to include titles by Spanish composers I think you should for instance also include German, Icelandic and Vietnamese composers. And all others... Mark in wiki (talk) 10:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi I think it's talking about the last Kingdom Come the Band members are as i put them I was one of them I think it is Good to know the last line up.. you that's what it was talking about with Time Captive I was the Synth Player what's the problem with having the band members name there it's talking about the last band!And Time Captive that's the facts whats your problem with that.Diversionstudio (talk) 01:22, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Diversionstudio (talk) 01:19, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Diversionstudio Victor Peraino Im new to this so let me know if you get it thanks

Replied to on Diversionstudio's talk page. Mark in wiki (talk) 08:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

On 20 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article H to He, Who Am the Only One, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the title of Van der Graaf Generator's H to He, Who Am the Only One refers to the fusion of hydrogen nuclei to form helium? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/H to He, Who Am the Only One. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mark, I've just noticed your removal of the entries I added to the disambiguation page for this topic, which is still the latest edit.

I looked at WP:DABSTYLE but could find no obvious reason. As to notabilitlity, they won Best Group and Best Album in the 2014 BBC Folk awards.

Would you mind explaining briefly please? Thanks. Paul Magnussen (talk) 21:21, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Neither The Full English (band) nor The Full English (folk album) exist yet. Please write these articles first, and then you may add them to a disambiguation page. I quote from WP:DABSTYLE: "Each bulleted entry should have a navigable (blue) link". Mark in wiki (talk) 21:38, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Just letting you know that I am reporting 2602:306:33BD:E020:* to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring and since I am mentioning your reverts of their edits giving you a heads up. PaleAqua (talk) 05:31, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! Mark in wiki (talk) 09:59, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@Laurier: Does this work? How? Mark in wiki (talk) 13:56, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I got a message in the upper right menu bar of Wikipedia with a red square saying '1'. When I clicked it, it said Alerts: "Mark in wiki mentioned you on the Mark in wiki talk page in "Test edit".". I clicked it and landed on your talk page. :-) Laurier (talk) 10:59, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Great! So it works. Thanks. Mark in wiki (talk) 11:07, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Mark in wiki. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Sir:

Please review site I linked: http://donhollway.com/matahari/index.html

Site includes old photos, original quotes, her passport, her MI-5 file, even video. The main image is from an artist in Chile; the latest comment (today) is from a reader in Netherlands.

Yes, it's my site, but I made my money off this article when it was published in a magazine a while back. I am selling nothing now and getting no gain. I offer it in good faith to those interested in the subject.

If, after reviewing the site, you honestly think it offers nothing to those interested in Mata Hari, proceed with deleting the link.

Don Hollway (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I removed the link, because Wikipedia is a collection of knowledge, not a collection of links. If you think the information from the article is worthwhile and not already present in the article, you may want to consider adding the info to the article. But beware that you still may have a conflict of interest in editing the page about Mata Hari. I also have concerns about the necessary verifiability by reliable third-party sources. Please read the information in each of these links carefully. If after that you still feel that the information is not now present and should be present in the article, please add it to the article in your own words. It is generally not allowed to copy-paste the info from the article, because that would amount to a copyright violation. Mark in wiki (talk) 07:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I did read “not a collection of links”: “There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article.... See Wikipedia:External links for some guidelines.” And at Wikipedia:External links: “Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia (external links), but they should not normally be placed in the body of an article. All external links must conform to certain formatting restrictions.”

I'm adhering to those rules. As far as conflict of interest goes, your interpretation would imply that if I'm enough of an expert on a subject to have been published on it, I should not be permitted to edit a Wikipedia page on the same subject, but if somebody else quoted my site, inserted info from it, or linked to it, that would be OK. That makes zero sense.

Please review your decision and re-instate the link.

Don Hollway (talk) 11:10, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I meant to ask: do you think there is information in your article that is worthwhile and not already present in the Wikipedia-article? If so, it would in my opinion be best to add that information to the Wikipedia-article, with a proper source attribution of course, and not to add the link to the Wikipedia-article. If not, please do not add the link to the Wikipedia-article. Mark in wiki (talk) 11:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Sure there is: tons of photos, direct quotes taken from her MI-5 file, and more. But I've already written one article on Mata Hari and am not inclined to write another, or go to the effort of transferring all my work over to Wikipedia (and linking multiple references to my site as attributions) when I can simply, and within the rules as stated above, add a link. I repeat the Wiki rules: “There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article.” Do you disagree that mine is a useful, content-relevant link added to the external links section? Don Hollway (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I do not think that the addition of this link is a useful contribution to this Wikipedia-article. There are hundreds of links about Mata Hari to be found. I still think that it is up to you to distill useful information from the article, if any, and add it to the Wikipedia-article. So go for it. Mark in wiki (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Right, hundreds of links, but very few that have been professionally vetted, edited, and magazine-published as opposed to just dumped on the internet, right or wrong. The link right above where I posted mine goes to a page with just two dozen photos, including a topless shot which isn't even of Mata Hari, no captions, no text, no video, no quotes, and yet that link is OK. We seem to be arguing your opinion of what's a worthwhile contribution vs. the clearly stated Wikipedia rules. No offense, but I believe your opinion is not final, nor do I want to get in an edit war with you. So, if you were me, what's my next step? Re-post the link and wait for another editor to weigh in? Don Hollway (talk) 18:00, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Like I said, be bold. I won't revert you again. Mark in wiki (talk) 18:34, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mark in wiki. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.