User:Theindianmaiden
- I Think that this is a user page...
I understand that you are new and trying to do the right thing. The removal of the director's name really isn't enough. A YouTube video generally just doesn't meet Wikipedia's guidelines for notability criteria. If you disagree, please try to get a third opinion by asking others, to avoid a conflict between the two of us; I will abide by the majority opinion. However, I would guess that the motivation for including the footnote is to get people to watch the video, rather than to inform people about a notable and significant aspect of the story under question. That's a clear violation of self-promotion standards.
Incidentally, you seem to have missed a fact I mentioned earlier, that I didn't delete your footnote, I just moved it to an article where it was more relevant. Minaker (talk) 00:51, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
OK, at least I now understand why you say that I deleted your information multiple times, and I apologize for incorrectly stating that I had done so only once. To be honest, I completely forgot about the earlier incident.
You should understand that the first time I deleted the information is because it was an unsourced claim, which is against Wikipedia policy. You actually did try to provide a source, but the link you provided went to a short film that, as far as I could tell, was not related to "The Hitch Hiker" in any way. I just tested the link again to make sure, and it still goes to a completely unrelated short film. So at the time, your only "evidence" to the claim of a short film wasn't evidence in any way. It was 100% right of me to delete your then-unsubstantiated claim. If you don't believe me, go back to the link you originally posted, click on it, and then try to explain how the existence of an online video called "The Incredible World of Florence Ford" proves the existence of your video of "The Hitch Hiker."
You later re-added the information, and provided a proper link, which was a step in the right direction. But your continued protests continue to completely ignore the guidelines about notability and self-promotion. Your argument that "the amount of self promotion from a footnote is next to nothing" is totally irrelevant. The guidelines have nothing to do with whether or not the self-promotion is effective, it's about whether or not the provided information is relevant to the topic -- something you should know if you indeed read and understood the guidelines I have already referred you to. The fact that you argue that I'm "judging the fact that it is web based and not a traditional media asset" is further proof that you are, for reasons I don't understand, choosing to ignore these guidelines, which are Wikipedia's guidelines, not mine.
Now, your argument that the short film is relevant is flawed, but at least it's more in the spirit of Wikipedia guidelines. I must again refer you to the guidelines on notability and self-promotion, because Wikipedia itself fairly clearly explains its own policies better than I could.
I also must again encourage you to seek out a third party opinion if you feel that I'm being unreasonable, and as I said before, I'll be willing to concede if other editors feel that this obscure YouTube video made by obscure artists is somehow relevant to a Twilight Zone episode.
And I also -- for a third and final time -- point out to you that I have not deleted your content, I merely moved it to another page, where I thought it was more relevant. Actually, to be honest, I don't think it's relevant there either, but I thought this was a fair compromise (in a situation where compromise isn't really appropriate, by the way, and your YouTube link really doesn't belong anywhere on Wikipedia, but in your words, I'm trying to work with you here.) Minaker (talk) 02:07, 14 October 2011 (UTC)