User talk:Poodle Girl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the Dare Wright page, there is a line that says,

Julian Schnabel will direct a film based on Dare Wright's life story that is scheduled for 2007.

I've been keeping track of this movie for a while. It had been listed on the IMDB, but has been removed. That is why I removed the line from Wright's page. Syosset 02:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The movie is going to be made.Poodle Girl

Contents

[edit] Tall Cotons

Hello! I deleted your information simply because on first glance it seemed rather dubious (I've seen a bit of vandalism on that page). However, this was unexceptably hasty of me, and I apologise. I'm planning to start referencing the article (after I finish with the Doberman article), so a link or two about the tall Coton would be helpful anyways. The article could definitely use more photos, and photos of tall Cotons would certainly help illustrate them (a photo with both tall and regular Cotons would be fantastic but don't feel obliged to add one). Thanks, --Pharaoh Hound (talk) (The Game) 17:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Photos from the Commons can be added to Wikipedia just like regular photos, same coding, everything (a very nifty feature, I've always thought. By the way, she's a really cute dog!). Thanks very much for the photo, I'll put it in the article as soon as I finish this message. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) (The Game) 14:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halberstam

Go ahead and add the citation and version. The NYT said his wife had surprised Welch, but that's all I based it on. Any additional information on the case is welcome (I didn't know who he was until I read his brother's article today). Thanks for the note! Jokestress 02:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional information in that article. I added back some references that got removed. In general, we don't want to remove citations without discussing it first. In addition, if you have published sources for some of the information you added about the trial (especially the quotation), it would be ideal to add those as well. Let me know if you need help or are unfamiliar with creating citations. Thanks! Jokestress 00:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Don Seawell2 Wikipedia.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Don Seawell Wikipedia.jpg. The copy called Image:Don Seawell Wikipedia.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 05:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TallulahLittleFoxes.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:TallulahLittleFoxes.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 18:58, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:TallulahLittleFoxes.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TallulahLittleFoxes.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. BetacommandBot 19:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:TallulahTheLittleFoxes.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TallulahTheLittleFoxes.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. BetacommandBot 19:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:AaronAFSeawell.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:JudgeSeawellWikipedia.jpg. The copy called Image:JudgeSeawellWikipedia.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 03:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Garry Moore

Do you have a source for Mason being a throat surgeon? That would be a great piece of info if you have a source for it. Regards. FamicomJL (talk) 21:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Exactly what I was looking for, thanks! Should be enough for Garry's page. Regards, FamicomJL (talk) 21:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coton de Tulear

Hi I just saw that you almost asked something on my talk page and thought I would let you know that I just looked at my contributes and the list of edits for the coton page and I didn't see that I had undone your edit. I also wanted to know were you get your info on the tall coton? Smileyface 12 91 (talk) 13:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh I get why you didn't leave the message now. I too have Dr. Russell's book. I have a coton as well but my have a non-tall (what would the correct word be) coton. So I why did you chose a tall coton (not saying there is anything wrong with it just wondering).Smileyface 12 91 (talk) 23:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dare Wright

Please note that User: Qworty continues to try to remove (by what he is turning into an edit war) the Dare Wright book that her estate has made available on grounds that it is self-published. Obviously he has not taken into consideration the special circumstances here, in which the estate is making available the more or less historical document which certainly figures into any understanding of the earlier books. I'm at a loss for how to counter this nonsense, but perhaps there is some administrative body that can help? By the way, good work on the page. 72.235.20.251 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 09:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand why some folks are insisting on promoting this non-notable, vanity-press book on Wikipedia. Per WP:SPS, it is not a reliable source. There are plenty of legitimate sources used in the article, and they should be sufficient to buttress the information that is being presented. If you'd like to talk about this vanity-press book and/or promote it, please do so elsewhere on the Internet, where WP policies do not apply. This is a very odd situation, as the vanity book's main supporter is an anonymous dial-up who's been going around breaking WP:CIVIL and vandalizing an article not related to this one. Finally, while there are many assertions made for this book, not a shred of WP:RS is presented to support them. Qworty (talk) 10:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Certainly WP:CIVIL is a two-way street, and certainly Qworty's note above violates it, as well as violating the spirit of {{WP:Be Bold]]. Certainly the bulk of the argument above is ad hominem and has little to do with the substance of the issue. Here is the substance: Of course vanity press books are by and large not notable. However, in this case, we're dealing with a bona fide notable subject whose last book was published posthumously by her estate on a vanity press. That is not only hugely interesting, it is also notable to anyone interested in said subject. Furthermore, the implication made by the phrase "vanity book's main supporter is an anonymous dial-up" is that there is a WP:COI violation, when, indeed, there is not, nor is there only a single user making the same sustained argument despite Qworty's repeated edit warring. Furthermore, Wikipedia allows users to post from their dial-ups for whatever reasons they choose, as I have this evening. I'll post this here, certainly, and also cross-post on Qworty's page so he or she can see it. 72.235.20.251 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I just checked into it more fully and noticed that Dare Wright is not the author of the vanity press book, and therefore reverse my support of that entry. I think Qworty's litmus test reasoning (if it is a vanity press, it is automatically not notable) is not valid, especially when one considers that bestselling writers like Piers Anthony and Harlan Ellison have published with vanity presses, and anything they publish is notable by dint of being out there and part of their biography and oeuvre, and this was the basis for my support of your Dare Wright argument. However, in this case, she didn't write the book -- it's an imitation sequel, and that's not notable. Bummer. 72.235.20.251 (talk) 12:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)