User talk:Jory

This Wikipedian is deceased. Respectful comments of remembrance may be left below.
Learn more about this Wikipedian at Jory Prum.

Welcome!

Hello, Jory, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Katr67 (talk) 22:53, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BSTJ_papers as candidate for deletion

I have listed BSTJ_papers as a candidate for deletion since the information is widely available elsewhere, e.g. scholar.google.com. I just can't see what use this list will be to anyone. Please see WP:NOT#DIR to understand my reasoning. In order to disagree with the deletion, follow the link from the template at the top of the BSTJ papers page. By the way, I hadn't noticed that my WP login had timed out when I listed the article for deletion, but this was not an attempt at anonymity, just a screw-up. Alison Chaiken 06:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jory, do you have a copy of the current state of the page before it got deleted--otherwise I can ask for one--I can think of other places to put the stuff. (It is also possible to appeal a decision, but I do not think this is likely to work. DGG 01:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DGG, yes, I do have the contents of the page from prior to deletion. In fact, I've setup a database online with the contents. I also have scanned the paper titles for 1922-1971 now and am currently typing them up to add to the database. I also placed a link on the BSTJ article. Thanks for your support and interest. - Jory 08:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Super Tree.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Super Tree.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. Iain 00:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Super Tree.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Super Tree.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 04:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Chuck Day.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Chuck Day.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Oregon invitation

You are invited to join WikiProject Oregon, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to the U.S. state of Oregon. You received this invitation because of your history editing Oregon articles or discussion of Oregon topics. The Oregon WikiProject group discussion is here.
If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants. New members may read about existing members and introduce themselves here.

Katr67 (talk) 22:53, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jory Prum

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jory Prum, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GamerPro64 04:28, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thanks for message. I don't see the logic of your message; if I restore promotional text, who do expect to rewrite it for you. The fact that he may be notable doesn't mean that you can write non-neutral text.

I note in that context that you did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that you meet the notability guidelines. It is now Wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references, or they will be deleted. You had no references, and even if we count external links, two were to affiliated sites and one was self-editable (IMDB).

Note also that your user page is to tell us a bit about yourself, not to provide spamlinks to your sites

If you wish, I can restore the deleted text to a user sub page for you to improve, let me know Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

text now here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:57, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

there are plenty of references, mostly of reasonable quality, the text is neutral in tone and there is a claim of notability. I would restrict the external links to just your own website; IMDB is pointless, because it's self-editable, and the games link looks spammy. When you are ready, you should use the "move" button to move your text to article space. Don't cut and paste or you will loose the history and get shouted at Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:46, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Please do not write or add to an article about yourself, as you apparently did at User:Jory/sandbox. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(moved here from my talk)Thank you for your feedback on the revision work I'm doing on the article about me. I'm aware of the WP policy desiring that I not to work on my own article, however, the article was deleted in November because it contained no citations and was declared to be advertising. I am rewriting it in order to get it reinstated and am working together with another editor on this already. I am awaiting his feedback as to whether the article is properly cited and passes muster for neutrality. I welcome your feedback on the content itself and whether the article is well-cited and neutral at this point. Thanks! Jory (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please take to heart the advice on the template above: creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged. If you've not already done so, please read Wikipedia:Autobiography. Forgive me for being blunt: you are here to promote yourself, ergo anything you write about yourself will perforce be unambiguously promotional, and subject to speedy deletion as such if moved into mainspace. You are of course not the first person to be given this advice. The follow-up advice is usually something like "Wait until someone unconnected with you finds you interesting and important enough to merit an article here". Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:35, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for your insistence. I'm not here to merely promote myself, as you assert. If you read the information in the article and look at the citations, you see that there is nothing written that is not cited and (as far as I can see it) neither positive nor negative; just factual. Of course, it is up to someone else to determine whether that constitutes "neutral", since I can obviously not be a judge of neutrality in this case. There is, of course, a reason this is in the sandbox, right? That's so the article can be worked and fixed on without being on the mainspace.

I have read the guidelines about autobiography thoroughly. And as I said, I'm already working with another editor on correcting the problems with this article. I would like to get my hands off it and let others do the work on it from here on out.

Thank you again for your help in keeping WP a good and useful place. Jory (talk) 01:48, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jimfbleak has reviewed the content and given me the go-ahead (and instructions) for moving this article back to mainspace. He felt the tone was neutral and the references mostly of quality. I have made a couple modifications he suggested and am now waiting on moving the article back to mainspace because I would like to have the two of you (Jimfbleak and Justlettersandnumbers) confer on the content together, as I would like to ensure that the article is neutral, non-promotional, and will not be nominated for speedy deletion simply due to my involvement. I would prefer that one of you perform the move, since I would like to stop being involved with this page entirely to ensure its future neutrality. Please advise. Jory (talk) 09:48, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Justlettersandnumbers, a very experienced editor, is correct to state that autobiographies are strongly discouraged, for obvious reasons, but they are not actually forbidden (and difficult to stop since editors can hide behind a user name that isn't their own). The article can't be deleted simply for being an autobiography, but, like any other page, must meet our criteria regarding notability and advertising. I felt that the article met these criteria, but others are entitled to disagree.

Justlettersandnumbers cannot delete the page, but could tag it for speedy deletion, although personally I don't think it's blatant enough for that. Alternatively, it could be tagged for a deletion discussion on one or both of the possible grounds, and you would be able to participate in that discussion. You really need input from that editor to see what, if any, actionable steps are required to avoid nomination for deletion Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:02, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Jimfbleak, for your quick reply. I certainly am able to appreciate Justlettersandnumbers' experience, which is why I wanted to ensure that a further discussion took place. I would like to point out that I have been quite careful to never hide myself behind anonymity or another user account, because I think it important to be honest and candid. I will wait for a response from Justlettersandnumbers before proceeding. Jory (talk) 10:16, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more than happy to defer to the judgement of Jimfbleak here as elsewhere. As he says, autobiographies are not actually forbidden, just strongly discouraged, and we don't really have any guidance on what to do if an editor refuses to be discouraged. One possible way of getting wider input on this would be to move the page to Draft space and submit it through the Articles for creation process. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your feedback and time. I appreciate you making an effort to work with me on this and provide assistance and guidance. I feel that based on Jimfbleak's feedback, it would be acceptable to move the article into mainspace and wait for further discussion. Thank you again for making Wikipedia a great resource!Jory (talk) 11:08, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's your call. I think that Justlettersandnumbers is suggesting the more sheltered environment of a draft to enable other editors to comment on and improve the article before it's thrown to the wolves. However, it's your decision, and it just means that editors who want to nominate the article for deletion (if any) can do so sooner. Also bear in mind that any editor can modify the article as long as their actions are good faith and verifiable. You probably realise that this can't be a personal page, but just underlining that.

As Justlettersandnumbers, says, we have no absolute block on people writing about themselves or their companies. They are always scrutinised very closely, for obvious reasons, but sometimes they jump through enough hoops to survive.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I fully expect others will edit the page and also expect that things I may not have chosen to publicize can be added, too. (Fortunately, I don't tend to do the stupid things celebrities often do! So I'm not all too worried.) I looked at the submission process suggested by Justlettersandnumbers and read through a number of articles there, many of which were pretty clearly rejected for obvious advertising or lack of neutrality. I believe I have succeeded at remaining purely factual on the article and felt like the process might just be a lot of time spent shepherding. Instead, I did move the article (as you no doubt saw) and have left the COI tag in place. I also made note of its appropriateness in the article's Talk page and asked that others please participate. Again, my thanks with your assistance and advice.Jory (talk) 11:42, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jory Prum for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jory Prum is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jory Prum until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I rather feel that the proliferation of "Keep" votes at AFD from Wikipedia:Single-purpose accounts with few or no edits elsewhere is not helping your case, especially when at least one has launched a personal attack with accusations of bias against Justlettersandnumbers. I'm not suggesting that you have any involvement, but their votes will be disregarded, and it tends to create the wrong impression amongst good faith contributors to the debate Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:30, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. I did not create any of those posts and I definitely agree about the CrisCros1836 post, which is simply not necessary, not helpful, and most likely harmful to the discussion. I actually commented to Sergecross73 about it, since there was a discussion between him and another editor about sock puppets being used. They definitely weren't me and I haven't told people what to say or how to behave. I'm assuming there's nothing to do regarding SPAs or personal attacks apart from disregard them? I think the issue is that some people — most likely people I have worked with or met at some point — have an opinion about the page, but are not experienced with WP process and behavior. Jory (talk) 15:59, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jory, I have just closed this as keep. Let me stress, though, and I think User:Jimfbleak will agree, that you should probably stay away from the article. Also, I read a bunch of the articles linked in the AfD: that's real interesting stuff. Best, Drmies (talk) 03:04, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Drmies, for your decision; I appreciate you taking the time to look through the lively AfD discussion and reaching a decision. Also, glad you found the articles interesting; feel free to ask me about anything related to sound for games anytime. :-) I agree with you and Jimfbleak and will be refraining from editing the article further. It was always my intention to leave it alone once it was in decent enough of a state. I would assume that the appropriate (and properly distanced) way for me to contribute new items or offer corrections would be through the article's Talk page, yes? I intend to make sue of that and hope my comments will help keep the article's quality high.
Yeah, leave a note on the talk page, ping an active editor, something like that. My interest in sound isn't so much in games, but that story on the drive was fascinating, and I wonder how much information we're going to lose because mediums that are supposed to last forever are simply out of fashion very quickly. CDs wear out quicker than we thought, and what if a famous writer used a ZIP drive for their last epic novel? Who's got one of those still? Or, who's got the cable to connect it to something, and the drivers to read it? (The driver may be one a 5 1/4 floppy, and while there are such drives around, few people will have easy access to them.) See, I'm good, cause I got everything on Laserdisc... Take care, Drmies (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I was thinking of this story; I read about this guy in Vintage Guitar or Guitar Player, restoring old technology. He goes back a bit further than you do, of course--but he also has a RADAR... Drmies (talk) 16:58, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Haha...LaserDisc is the future! :-) Seriously, though, archiving projects is a major issue in the digital age. Even if you have all the best practices and all the equipment to get the older tech up and running again, there's a huge challenge in connecting the old tech to the new tech. In the case of the Grim restoration work, I was fortunate that the machine I had recovered the 60 GB of GF data to had FireWire capabilities, as the original machines the work was performed on certainly did not. But none of my modern FireWire drives can easily connect to that old machine, since Apple dropped the old Mac OS 9-era drivers when they switched to GPT formatting, and all my old drives were too small to contain the entire set; I had to move everything in small batches. So even the act of moving the restored data from the old machine to the new machine was a significant challenge! And after that, we were fortunate that Pro Tools in the current era still works with Pro Tools session formats from 17 years ago. Whew! Thanks again for all your help! Jory (talk) 17:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sure thing--thanks for the anecdote. I'm about to shift from ProCite to [EndNote]]--same problem, different field. If that doesn't work, if it doesn't probably import my old database, I'm up shit creek. OK, if anything's up with the article, just ping me and I'll see if I can help. Drmies (talk) 17:32, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EndNote is great, since it uses MySQL-format DB files. Ultra portable, that! Jory (talk) 20:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]