User talk:Maggiedane

Welcome!

Hello, Maggiedane, 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! Firsfron of Ronchester 13:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:Robertames.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Robertames.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to the page Pier Angeli do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 11:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Scotty Beckett has been reverted, as it introduced unsourced or poorly sourced negative or controversial biographical material. Please do not continue to add such information. Thank you. Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 11:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Silent film wiki

My removal of links to articles on that site have nothing to do with what came first. However, just as an observation, in comparing each site's article on Miriam Cooper by the time stamps, that you essentially expanded the article on Wikipedia [1] and transferred it to silent film wiki [2]. That isn't the issue with the site link here. By policy, WP:LNTA, links to that website are among the links to be avoided because it does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article. In fact, it doesn't provide anything of notable content that you didn't already put into it, which is the primary and salient reason such links aren't included.

Having already looked at the contributors to the Miriam Cooper article, it raises awareness of another issue. It appears that User:Thegingerone, under whose name the article was created on silent film wiki and your account are the same person. You should be aware that policy also doesn't support your maintaining two separate usernames on this site. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: the two account names, a checkuser request would either confirm or deny the connection. Meanwhile, the fact remains that, at least for the Miriam Cooper article, the time stamps on each page confirm that the article was expanded by you here before, and within a minute or two, it was added to Silent film wiki. That, as I said, is not the essential issue. The issue is that the link to the Silent film wiki does not provide a unique resource per WP:LNTA. The original source was from a book. If you believe that it should be credited to Silent film wiki, then there is a different issue. Wikis are not considered reliable sources since they are aren't independently verified, vetted third party sources. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your note

I removed your post as you asked. My email is enabled on Wikipedia, so you can disable your email block and send me anything you'd like to tell me and disable it again. Meanwhile, I'm quite serious that you can't keep returning the link to your website unless the determination at the noticeboards is that your website is a reliable and verifiable source, and it is not considered original research or a conflict of interest to add it. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will send an email to the address so you can write back. I'm just not usually prone to giving out my email either, that's why email enabling on here works so well. No one is given your email address when the mail is delivered.

Look, I'm not in anyway disputing that you have some very good knowledge about these persons. I'd personally be happy to go to the library and get source material, except I can't drive and only can get library materials once a month from the outreach program when they bring it to me. But yes, you do have a good wealth of knowledge. My issue is, and always has been, adhering to policy and bringing up issues with it when it has been breached. I have been aware of work you've done here and there with your account, wondered, but had no issue with what I'd seen. You're capable of writing good content, my only beef with it sometimes is how some adjectives are used - they sometimes lend POV or beg for citations. I'm telling you honestly about what the lead is supposed to do, I'm not jerking you around about it. And I don't think you're a jerk spammer. I think you have a website that is interesting, my issues are with how it adheres to policies governing sourcing and links. I think you have a perfect right to ask at the noticeboards, my comment was and is that I know what the answer will be - I've seen it over and over. I'll send the mail. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Miriamcooper.jpg

File:Miriamcooper.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Miriamcooper.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Miriamcooper.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sadiethompsonlobbycard.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Sadiethompsonlobbycard.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marvel1.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Marvel Rea.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bettyb.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Bettyb.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Maggiedane

Maggiedane, I've just been getting a load of the Talk page on the Mabel Normand site and going back and forth with Gwen Gale and Wildhartive about the Filmography. Amazing. I noticed that you're beginning a book on Normand. I first saw her on film at the Museum of Modern Art several years ago in Griffith's Her Awakening and was electrified, galvanized, and blown to pieces by her performance. Shot before behavior was homogenized with the endless taming echo chamber of movies and television, she is a revelation of vivacious charisma in that film who left me stunned; I never saw her do anything quite like it again. It's my favorite screen performance by an actress--my favorite by an actor is Chaney in The Unknown. Since then I've also enjoyed the privilege of seeing many of her films in an ultra-comprehensive Arbuckle retrospective, which MoMA ran twice in a row two or three years ago. Anyway, I just wanted to say hello and to tell you not to let yourself get too frustrated or irritated. It's probably just a bad idea to ever write anything at all for Wikipedia and to focus our writing on something that isn't a palimpsest and target for bullies using counter-intuitive or anti-commonsensical rules devised by shut-ins and thirteen-year-olds. Skymasterson (talk) 03:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And of course there was nothing remotely wrong with your introductory paragraph about Normand. She was irrefutably all those things and more, as you noted in your responses in the Talk page. It's especially intriguing to think of her co-writing and co-directing films with Chaplin, not to mention writing and directing others featuring him. By the way, I recently bumped across an episode of "This Is Your Life" with Mack Sennett on youtube that's rather interesting if you haven't seen it yet. Skymasterson (talk) 15:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rudolph Valentino.

For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 14:45, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

ArbCom Clerk notice

It is a requirement in any request for Arbitration that you notify all parties of your case request. You did not do so for the case request Silent_Films_and_Wildhartlivie. As a result this notification has been done by a clerk. Please attempt to adhere to proper procedure in future. Manning (talk) 12:18, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Valeska Suratt

Thanks so much,Maggie, I appreciate your concern and help. Koplimek (talk) 17:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

Please do not attack other editors, as you did here at User talk:Koplimek. Comments such as "Livie can suck it, its a bully and I want nothing to do with such bullies and Wikipedia", "some half assed admin said I 'copied IMDB'", and "bite me Livie" are inappropriate, do you no favors, will end up getting you banned and will never be helpful in changing the official Wikipedia view that your personal website is not a reliable source. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. LaVidaLoca (talk) 08:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]