User talk:DeadCentral

Ken Foree

Thanks for your message (note my talk page is now Talk:Glen rather than Glen S). Thanks also for your contributions. Unfortunately, much like I had to do with Suzie's contributions at first, I've had to revert yours as a copyright violation from http://www.kenforee.com/viewpage.php?page_id=2.

I understand you are the webmaster, but the website clearly states that the material is under copyright. Suzie licensed the material on Sid's site for us by clearly labelling the page on her site - but you must also be aware that you cant copyright any material you add to Wikipedia (as you added a copyright tag to Ken's page- which you can't do). All material on Wiki must be licensed under the GFDL. See WP:COPY. I would also like you to read our neutral point of view policy and our autobio policy, as the material you added was very "promotional" and even if licensed correctly would most likely be reverted as being too 'advertisement' like.

Sorry to lump this on you all at once, but best we get it right from the start. Thanks again, and please msg me anytime. :) Glen 09:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

My Ears Are Burning!

LOL! =)

DC, just add a licensing statement to Ken's site like you did with Sid's, and you can use the site bio here, too.

See you on the ride! Spirot 03:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

More Foree

Alright, Mr. Official Webmaster Man. The date of Foree's birth seems to be vary on several different websites, but I think the October 9th 1946 is the most used one, and I'm quite willing to trust IMDB alone anyway. So can you provide a source for what you claim to be Foree's birthdate? Also please try to use correct spelling and grammar when you edit - February is spelt with two 'r's, and commas are not necessary when there is only one clause in your sentence. --84.68.162.114 23:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

.... Ken himself, gave me the information. Drop by his site sometime, you'll see me PLENTY. As well as Sid Haig's, though I do appreciate the heads up on the typos, I was half asleep.

You can refer to me as DC or DeadCentral... if you actually believe EVERYTHING you read on ImDB, then I don't think you're very savvy, ImDB is FULL of errors and misinformation, most of which is uploaded by misinformed users. We haven't gotten around to changing it as of yet, but his attorney & agent are working on it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by DeadCentral (talk • contribs)

Be that as it may, you still need to source it. Unfortunately, even if you did get his birthdate straight from him, you cannot prove you did so, and so we cannot use this information. Otherwise a lot of stuff on Wikipedia would be made-up on unverifiable claims like this. I trust you, but we still need a source. It's policy. --84.68.162.114 12:08, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh yes I can... considering I do speak to him on a daily basis and got it directly from him, and fixed it at HIS request, now I don't know who you are Mr. Anon. but I'll tell you what... you find another celeb site to add nonsense too and I'll take care of my clients, how's that? or perhaps I should speak to Glen again about you and ask that all editing be ceased on this page unless authorized. I would think my client knows his own birthdate and he IS the source , wouldn't you rather the info come directly from the individual that the wiki is referencing than from a possibly incorrect source, such as yourself?? I thought so. Thats the issue with wikipedia currently, Know it alls such as yourself claiming knowledge and expert fact gathering when relying on faulty sources and mis-information. DC 03:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

DeadCentral, to get along with people here at Wikipedia, you will have to learn that legal threats, personal attacks, and assuming contributors are editing in bad faith is generally frowned upon. I do not claim to "know it all"; contrary to what it may look like I am actually trying to help you with Foree's article; and neither you or Foree have any power to 'authorize' anything on Wikipedia unless libellous information is posted.

As I stated before, I believe everything you say about being best buddies with Ken Foree. However, the issue I am trying to address is that you need a verifiable source for his date of birth. What I mean by that is a reliable webpage, or published book, or something like that, to reference with his date of birth. Otherwise, unfortunately, no-one has any way of checking that you are telling the truth. If you read the policies, you will see that they state:

A fundamental threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is whether material can be reliably attributed - and this is independent of whether any individual editor holds it to be true. In particular, material that an editor believes to be true but that cannot be attributed to a reliable source should not be included in Wikipedia.

If you are such a good webmaster and biographer of Ken Foree, that I am sure you have a whole load of materials on him: just dig one out that states his birthdate, reference it in the article, and then that's the end of the problem.

Additionally, why do you refer to Foree as "my client"? Are you his friend, or his lawyer? --84.68.162.114 18:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I say client simply because he is one, as is Sid Haig and a few other celebrities,whose website I handle. I am his friend, but I am also conducting business with him by designing , maintaining and representing his website. Therefore, the term "client". Is that understandable?

I appreciate your helpful hints, and if you had not taken the time, then follow the link on "Biography" to his page, where you will find an almost identical version, only more personalized, which was written by Ken, and submitted to me by his public relations dept.

As advised by Talk:Glen, I placed a licensing statement on the official biography page on his website and linked it back here to his wiki. Any and ALL information on Kens page is "authorized by Ken" therfore the most reliable source. You will find only fallacies and errors on such sites as IMDB.com, because quite simply ...the information was not added by Ken but by users such as yourself who did not know the facts, but believed them to be true. Because Ken is not web savvy, he had no clue as to how to fix these incorrect areas, and since there are major changes evolving at IMDB and how information is submitted, the facts will be changed in the near future by his management to match what I have listed here. Until that time you will have to rely on Mr.Foree's word.

On a personal note, I did not ask for your assistance, since the facts you are relying on cannot be verified, and you seem to rely soley on IMDB for these,Which is known, in fact, to be only 80% accurate in it's displaying of information, I would prefer you NOT assist me, rather I will rely on User: Glen for any wiki tips, and Ken's PR people along with Ken himself for the facts relating to his life, career and bithdate. DC 11:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Due to your unclear way of phrasing I am having trouble understanding exactly what your feelings are on this matter, but I detect a general air of dissatisfaction with me. In that case I shall refrain from contacting you as obviously we are at loggerheads, though I fail to see how you could have misunderstood my pledge for a reliable source. --84.68.162.114 21:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

As I'm trying to say, the source that you are so fond of IMDB is currently being updated , Mr Anon. The information will have a source that you so strongly feel is needed & will be provided, so do as you feel, but as I've asked before...please do not edit Mr Foree's wiki with your false information any longer. I think I've clearly stated my point this time. DC 12:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Anon, I may have been a bit heavy handed in my previous posts but I appreciate your edits, very nice and well worded. Thank you. DC 04:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Spirot...

I did & then made some subtle changes to the Biography based on Glens suggestions.DC 03:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Looking good! It's tough to get these articles NPOV, but it's worth it when the rating goes up and the page is nice and informative. =)

Btw - for replies, click on my name and add it to my "talk " page. Spirot 03:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

To Sign your comments

Hey you, to sign off at the end of a posting, you have to type four tildes at the very end. Then it logs your message. Just an FYI for ya. Page looks good. Btw, here's something to help if you need it [1]. Hopefully you won't.Spirot 03:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Image of Ken

I have no doubt that the image was released by his public relations department but if it is to be used on this page it needs to have a verifiable source. Just saying it is not good enough. Either that or a freer image (look at Christopher Meloni for an idea of this). As it is, the image itself cannot be used on the page and I have taken it off again. (Quentin X 14:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC))

I was going to say all the things that have been said below so there is no use repeating it. I would say this though: Administrators do a fantastic job but do not think that they know everything about Wikipedia and follow their guidance blindly. Secondly the page is excellent and well written and I have no doubt that you are Ken's webmaster but it is just as easy for me or anybody else to say the same thing and that would hold no sway when it comes to deleting the image.

I have marked the image as replaceable fair use and advised the uploader of this. You may want to move quickly with the Commons. Finally, if you look at my page you will see that I have two law degrees from highly regarded Universities in England. These enabled me to become a copyright lawyer. Research is, basically, all I do. (Quentin X 19:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC))

Thanks for the input Quentin, i appreciate the suggestions, I am in fact very new to this , I've uploaded the original image to my server , and wondering which course of action you would suggest? I can upload it to wikipedia if needed, but I'm not quite sure of the licensing I should use since it is the image Ken has authorized me to use for any promotional or text related articles. It's my image but free to use... the original that is, its 2000 x 1380 px.DC 10:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for protection

I have declined your request for protection for the article about Ken Foree. Please also remember that every user cannot undo the same or similar edits more than three times per day, because they can be blocked due our three-revert rule. As for the image, we must be certain the image is free. You must send the image (if possible, a high resolution one) to the Wikimedia Foundation, declaring that you are the author of the image, that you are releasing all rights for use in Wikipedia or any other place, even commercially, and taking full responsibility for any copyright violation the image may have (in example, if the image was taken by someone else who told you that it was fine, but later he says he never said so, you are responsible for the misunderstanding, not the Foundation). If you are willing to do all this, contact me at User talk:ReyBrujo, and I will give you more information about what else you need to do. For now, the image is considered a fair use image, and fair use images from living persons are considered replaceable (that is, the guy is still alive and so it should be possible to take a picture of him and release it with a free license). Thanks for understanding. -- ReyBrujo 05:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. The image generated by the digital camera is fine enough. You can read more instructions at commons:Commons:Email templates. Send a mail to permissions-commons AT wikimedia DOT org with the given text, selecting one of the possible licenses (the most used ones are Public domain, GFDL, Creative Commons Share Alike or Creative Commons Attribution). You can also upload it to Wikipedia, and then send the image with the declaration to the foundation, stating you have uploaded it at a determined URL (give them the URL!), and that you want the foundation to confirm this is your image to prevent further misunderstandings. Thanks for contributing with free images! -- ReyBrujo 14:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Note that this is usually needed for images of professional quality, or for images that can be found somewhere else (in example, websites). If the image is obviously taken by an amateur (some blur, in example), or if the image shows the subject in question in a "non promotional" image (say, the subject is surrounded by fans, or is walking towards a car, or greeting fans, etc), you can upload it directly. Just get sure to give as much information as you can (in example, date, place and situation, like "I took this picture on March 16, 2007. I was waiting to buy a book when suddenly he got out of a nearly building", or "We have been friends since child, and this picture was taken while we were traveling by bus to a convention". Check Image:Liv kristine plato helmond.JPG for a perfect example of a "casual" meeting. -- ReyBrujo 14:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Glad to hear. They should contact either contact you, or upload the image at Commons with a "ticket" and send you the place where the image has been uploaded. I am not sure how long it will take. Thanks again for helping Wikipedia grow. -- ReyBrujo 03:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice to see you have uploaded the image. I would suggest you to also upload it to Wikimedia Commons (at commons.wikimedia.org) so that every Wikipedia can use it, not just the English one. Now, about your request of protection, I am sorry, but in the spirit of Wikipedia, we accept contributions from everyone. We don't "write a perfect article" and then lock it forever so that nobody can edit it, but instead we encourage others to participate. If you don't agree with some changes, try to talk it in the talk page of the article. If you think the edits really harm the article, you can go to WP:AIV and request a protection, but you must understand that anybody should edit if his edits are well sourced, even if you don't agree with the edits. Wikipedia is not to be used as advertisement, so the article will have both things in favor and against the individual, as long as it sticks to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and it is not considered libel. I hope you can understand, and if you have any objection, you can always contact Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard to ask or indicate the article is being abused. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 22:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I have done so ReyBrujo but to no avail... again I made another request and please keep in mind the facts that I stated on your Talk page, the anon user also stated his case but insists on undermining my edits in every way shape and form ... I do not want the article "locked" for my benefit, simply to maintain some consistancy with the facts stated on Mr.Foree's site, his IMDB listing and his wiki...DC 22:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Some advice...

You might consider placing a licensing notice for the photo and the copy on the disussion page (Ken's), with links to where the licensing is stated. It might curtail this person's antics in the future, and provide easy access to the info for others should they question it. But, if it doesn't, here are some links that might be helpful:

Wikipedia Biography of Living Persons Noticeboard

Requests for page protection

Good luck! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.83.35.178 (talk) 03:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

And:

Wiki Admin Intervention against vandalism

Not sure if this person's action constitute vandalism, but the POV reasons behind their edits may count. 75.83.35.178 03:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Have a look at the note I just posted on the other user's page - both of you could get blocked if you're not careful. Again, good luck!75.83.35.178 03:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Even More Foree

Please calm down and be reasonable. I don't disagree with the picture; in fact I think it's a better picture of Foree. But I do disagree with its licensing and purpose; it may be freely licensed but it is still a promotional picture, and it also lacks a Creative Commons licence, and that just brings up some concerns for me. I personally feel that the picture cannot be used over the other purely on its asthetic merit. If you want we could ask a third-party and establish a consensus. --84.68.162.114 15:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It already has a Commons License, or didn't you read my reply. I emailed the image to the Commons, and uploaded it to wikipedia and provided them with the source file, so there is no descrepency. See: {{GFDL-no-disclaimers}} {{PermissionOTRS}}

DC 21:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

You're either not listening to me, or you have a limited understanding of how copyright licensing works here. A Creative Commons licence template looks like this:

{{cc-by-2.5}}

And even if it did have one of those it is still a promotional picture, rather than one taken without any commercial ties involved like the one I would prefer to switch it to. I'm going to go and find someone to act as a third-party in this as I think you're not taking in what I'm saying and also unfairly holding court over this article. --84.68.126.146 01:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The Third party seems to have a similar notion as myself , now can we call it a truce? I've had enough with all this. Kens wiki sat unused and bland for so many months until I made edits in it,and it's now a thorn in my side. I've seen the edits that you made, that make the article "wiki-fied" and the assistance is very much appreciated since you do have far more knowledge than I in that regard. Please understand, the image chosen keeps the page looking professional as any article about an actor should. They are professional in their fields and like be represented as such, some shot of this person & a fan at a convention is something best used on that persons personal website, not an article thats supposed to be a factual representation of that actors career & life story, unless of course we add a section to it that shows how dedicated to the fans the actor is, and use this type of image to display the fact.JMO.DC 23:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know

Apparently it isn't over yet... [2]

Why? I don't get it, do you?

75.82.3.135 05:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Some people just never learn , they HAVE to keep things going even when proven wrong.... DC 12:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, they are now seeing me around every corner, and accusing other users of being me. This is getting kind of creepy, don't you think? Of course, if they bothered to run a checkuser, they'd see they were wrong once again. I've just had it completely with these games. 75.82.3.135 01:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Ken Foree

Like I said before, please read Wikipedia:Ownership of articles very carefully, with a key statement on that page being "If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." Anyone can make any changes they want to Wikipedia (within policies). That's the beauty of it. No one can "license" an "authorized" version of an article that can not be changed by anyone. That's not how Wikipedia works. Any administrator will tell you that. You can not write an article and then expect it to remain untouched by anyone else. If you have a problem with a specific edit of mine on that page (for example, I added the category "American film actors", placed categories in alphabetical order, added sectioning), I will be quite happy to discuss it with you. All Hallow's Wraith 00:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)