Welcome to Wikipedia!
Welcome! My name is N5iln, and I'm one of the online ambassadors, a group of experienced Wikipedians who offer mentorship to newcomers. You don't need to read anything; you can just jump right in and try to improve Wikipedia. If you need help, you can talk with us right now, or can leave me a message on my user talk page. Have fun! Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 03:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Editing cheatsheet Forgot how that code worked?	Summary of policies and guidelines A quick reference for Wikipedia's "rules"
Find the page for your course Forgot the link to your course's page?	Choose a mentor Contact an ambassador to work with
Help with article assessment Help us assess these articles!	Starting an article Guide to starting your first article

Chat with us: Ask a question on the classroom IRC channel or on the regular help chat . Are you on Facebook? Like Wikipedia on Campus for the latest news, photos, videos, and helpful tips.

Specific Wikipedia article(s) to be edited chosen by your group. Ratio of at least 1 article per 2 group members.

I found two articles on Wikipedia that I was somewhat surprised to find were very brief and non-informative. Considering the title of this course is "Politics of Piracy" and one of the major players in this controversy is the RIAA, I felt that finding more information on some of the key players within the RIAA would be both relevant and useful. One of the articles I found was on Cary Sherman, the RIAA's President, and the other was on Mitch Bainwol, the RIAA's Chairman and CEO. I plan to edit each of these articles in order to provide a more rounded profile of who these people are and what they do, not just their current job titles and the schools they went to. Although I hold a considerable amount of disdain toward each of these people, I will make sure to remain unbiased and simply present information that will be helpful in creating a more informative article. Currently, both of these articles are stubs under 500 words long, with a link from Wikipedia encouraging users to expand on them. After my work on the articles, I hope they will each give a more specific account of two of the most important people in the battle against piracy.

One or more sources as potential Wikipedia article reference that you are bringing to your groups.

http://www.riaa.com/aboutus.php?content_selector=about_us_exec_bios

http://www.viceland.com/int/v17n8/htdocs/downloading-some-bullshit-484.php

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2010/07/02/riaa_president_calls_youtube_victory_bad_public_policy

http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?id=72240403-D51A-209F-142F-98DC98F7AE18

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/070910riaa

http://www.nndb.com/people/378/000159898/

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/rogues/csherman

Summary or Transcript of communication with an online ambassador or Campus Ambassador.

Between Gunheim and TonyTheTiger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TonyTheTiger

Hello TonyTheTiger,

I am fairly new to Wikipedia and I was just wondering if you could help me out with some tips on how to edit and expand articles properly and become a more frequent user of Wikipedia. I am currently taking a class at UC Berkeley titled, "The Politics of Piracy," so I thought a good place to start would be to edit the page on Cary Sherman, President of the RIAA, and Mitch Bainwol, CEO and Chairman of the RIAA. Is there anything I should be cautious of when exposing more information on these powerful key figures? By that I mean, if I post something that could be potentially harmful to their reputation but is backed by fact and credible sources, is there any way I can get in trouble? Other than that, is there any general advice you can give me on how to be a more effective user and properly contribute to Wikipedia?

Here are the articles I am planning on editing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cary_Sherman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Bainwol

Here is a link to my discussion page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gunheim —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.121.58.36 (talk) 02:50, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please write back to me when you can. Thank you.

-Gunheim

Gunheim, Greetings. My first suggestion to becoming a better wikipedian is to always try to be signed on when you are editing. Then, whenever you participate in a talk page discussion always sign by concluding your statement with Gunheim (talk) 18:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC). These four characters together are wikipedia code that leaves a time stamp with your signature.[reply]

I am in the middle of reformatting my hard drive, which I have never done before in Windows 7. I have done this many times in Vista and XP, but I have some new things to figure out. It could be two days before my computer is in a state that enables me to compute efficiently. I honestly am not quite sure what my responsibilities are in the Ambassador program because I was signing up from my backup computer on my lap while trying to reformat my primary on my desk. I was multitasking across two machines. I have to get more acquainted with my responsibilities. You are quite free to be my guinea pig mentee if you like. Somebody has to be stuck with me while I try to learn the ropes. Please bear with me as I try to get my computer up and figure out what I have to do.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:34, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Just let me know when you have your computer up and running again and if you can think of any vital information I should know when editing an article. I'll be awaiting your reply. Gunheim (talk) 19:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still stressed with computer issues, but I took a moment to look at the articles that you mentioned. I look forward to learning about the RIAA executives as you share your knowledge. Both of the articles that you mentioned are in dire need of expansion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very impressive talk page organization for a newbie. I am wondering if you are a part of the Wikipedia:Online Ambassadors program and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. I just became listed myself as an available mentor at the time that you requested my assistance. If this is why you are requesting my assistance, please provide me with a course link.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. I have finally figured out about Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Courses/Spring 2011/Politics of Piracy (Max Klein and Patrick Berger). You are taking a course that is part of the online ambassador program. I am going to accept you as a mentee by doing some wikipaperwork.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now I am realizing that you have already started being mentored by someone else. Good luck. I am going to undo the wikipaperwork that I started.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Between Gunheim and N5iln

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:N5iln

Hello N5iln,

I am fairly new to Wikipedia and I was just wondering if you could help me out with some tips on how to edit and expand articles properly and become a more frequent user of Wikipedia. I am currently taking a class at UC Berkeley titled, "The Politics of Piracy," so I thought a good place to start would be to edit the page on Cary Sherman, President of the RIAA, and Mitch Bainwol, CEO and Chairman of the RIAA. Is there anything I should be cautious of when exposing more information on these powerful key figures? By that I mean, if I post something that could be potentially harmful to their reputation but is backed by fact and credible sources, is there any way I can get in trouble? Other than that, is there any general advice you can give me on how to be a more effective user and properly contribute to Wikipedia? Here are the articles I am planning on editing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cary_Sherman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Bainwol

Please write back to me when you can. Thank you. -Gunheim 99.121.58.36 (talk) 02:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'll suggest you start by reviewing WP:BLP. And while there's always a chance someone whose biographical information appears on Wikipedia could sue for libel, there is an absolute defense for such a charge: truth. If the information you add to an article is supported by reliable, verifiable sources, the information may be added to the article, subject of course to consensus of other editors. Regards, --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 02:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Gunheim. You have new messages at N5iln's talk page.
Message added 03:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I also left this message on the Talk page for the IP address you were using earlier. Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 03:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. The WPL BLP page will certainly help me in creating a more organized and informative page for the articles I have chosen to edit. I will make sure not to post anything that can be considered an attack on someone and that the sources I have are both reliable and verifiable (after all, I'm sure Mitch Bainwol and Cary Sherman have quite a bit of experience in suing people). Is there anything else I should know about writing about another person? I was wondering if it is allowed to include rumors about a subject on a Wikipedia page if you cite where the rumors originated, but I can see why this may be a touchy subject. What do you think? Thank you for your help. Gunheim (talk) 19:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rumors are touchy by their very nature, and doubly so in a biographical article. They're often non-neutral, which runs afoul of WP:NPOV, and even if they originate in an otherwise reliable source, they're often difficult (if not impossible) to verify independently, which breaks WP:V. I'd say discuss them with other editors before including them in the text of an article, and then only if the consensus of the group is to include them. Also take a look at WP:GOSSIP; that section specifically deals with such matters. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 19:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.152.153.52 (talk)

Yeah, I tried to edit the article on Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill, adding information about Kill Bill Vol. 3 and it was taken down almost immediately. Part of it was true (he has announced that it will happen), but some of it was speculation gathered from around the web. I didn't know Wikipedia was so strict on rumors about something that couldn't really damage one's reputation (like a movie sequel), but I'm learning. These pages you just referred to me will help guide me in the Wiki ways. I'll look over them before making any major changes to the main articles I want to edit. One question I was wondering, however, was if you have to once again include a source for information if you use one of the sources already listed below the article but extract more information from it. With the Kill Bill incident, I got my information from a source that was already listed at the bottom, but Sinebot informed me that I had to include a source if I add new information. Should I just include next to my edit the reference number to the source that is already there? Gunheim (talk) 23:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Material regarding future events is rarely allowed to remain in an article for long. Movies that have been announced but have not yet been cast or begun filming, book sequels without a publication date released by a publishing company...these all fall under WP:CRYSTAL. Reviewing the edit you made, the first paragraph was accurate and would have been properly cited by the existing reference; however, the danger sign was when you used the phrase "various speculations". So to answer your question, yes, you could re-add the first paragraph of your edit and cite the reference appropriately; by reference name, if it's been set up earlier in the article, and I believe I saw that it had.

I realize I'm dropping a lot of referrals to policy on you, but the policies exist to ensure the project remains as factually accurate as possible. Don't let that stop you from editing, though. If your edit is accepted, you'll rarely hear anything about it. If it isn't, someone will (or should) explain why, and that's your cue to look at what you did and improve it, and by so doing, improve the article. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 00:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Well keep dropping the referrals to policy on me because they are very helpful. I really should just read through the entire "Policies and Guidelines" and "What Wikipedia is Not" pages before making any more edits. Thank you very much for your help. I will contact you when I have more questions about how to make Wikipedia more informative and useful. One thing I'm wondering right now though: How were you able to see the edit I made when it was deleted by Sinebot yesterday? I tried looking for it in my user history tab, but I couldn't find it myself. I found the line where it marked that I had made an "unsourced rumor or speculation," but I couldn't find the original text that I contributed... Gunheim (talk) 00:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's on the specific page's History tab. I routinely review page histories both as an Online Ambassador and as a member of the countervandalism unit, but I occasionally forget that other editors don't realize it's there. I'll try to be careful in the future and give you a link to a particular diff I'm looking at when I refer to specific edits. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Midterm Grade

Check Plus (as opposed to inferior marks). Truly fantastic work, Jens. These look like two key players which makes me really appreciate the vigor with which you're approaching this. If I could offer a suggestion it would be to start creating an outline of what the new pages will look like (section titles, etc.) so that once you have the backbone of the structure you can begin to fill it in with your research. PatBerger (talk) 23:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A gentle reminder

An issue has arisen with another Ambassador's mentee which has prompted several Ambassadors, both Campus and Online, to pass a reminder to students participating in the project. This isn't something I enjoy bringing up, but I find I have little option.

Copyright violation is a very serious issue, and a violation of Wikipedia core policies. Any editor discovered to be directly copying material into an article from a copyrighted source, without proper attribution or citation, will have those edits reverted. An editor who uses copyrighted material repeatedly after being warned will find themselves blocked from editing for a time. If the violation involves students participating in the project, course instructors may be notified regarding the situation. Please note that the incident in question does NOT involve you. This is a general notification to students of all classes and campuses participating in the project.

Thank you for your attention. Regards, Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 17:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in

It's been some time since I've had any communication from you. I'm not seeing a great deal of activity from your user account in the past few weeks. Are there any issues or problems that need to be addressed? --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 21:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've been rather busy with other school-related obligations, but I have been working on the two articles more recently. How do they look? Do you see anything that could be considered against wikipedia policy? Please let me know. Thanks. Gunheim (talk) 19:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reflection on Politics of Piracy Decal

I have taken two other decals at UC Berkeley during my enrollment here and I must say that this one has topped the other two in terms of applicable knowledge and learned skills. I had never made an edit to a Wikipedia article before and, after taking this class, I now confidently feel as if I can be a valuable contributor to the organization and I plan on continuing to edit articles from this point forward. I signed up for the class hoping to learn about piracy and I did, however I also I ended up learning much more about how to be a good Wikipedia editor. It was incredibly easy to get in contact with an online ambassador and he (“Alan the Roving Ambassador”) was very helpful in getting me acquainted with Wikipedia policies and procedures. I don’t know what happened to the groups we formed, but I chose to edit the articles on Mitch Bainwol, chairman and CEO of the RIAA, and Cary Sherman, President of the RIAA, because I felt they were each relevant to the class and they were both stubs at the beginning of the semester. As much as I wanted to badmouth each of them and add a subtle little detail that might attack their reputations in some way, I chose to remain neutral on every aspect and tried to maintain an unbiased tone when adding information. I learned more about these two figures, why people see them as “evil” and how one could consider them to be just two people doing their jobs as well as they can. In the end, this class was very insightful on the use of Wikipedia and the effect of piracy on the entertainment industry and I would recommend it to anyone interested in either or both of the two topics.