User talk:Mikiesmonkey

License tagging for Image:Lynn Anderson Press Photo 07.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lynn Anderson Press Photo 07.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on Lynn Anderson. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. I have sent you an e-mail regarding your attack on User:Dottiewest1fan. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 22:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I told you in the past, I NEVER EVER EVER wrote about Anderson slapping a child, ever!!! I'm only scared of you because you keep sending me messages and you do think you own her article. I only wrote about a factual arrest that occured that suppositly she might have struck a police officer while being led to a partol car, whatever that means. I'm not trying to make her a bad person or anything like that. And what does that mean you will be filing a report, excuse me, I never said anything about slapping a child, what child, she has children, I think one, but I don't know, I know nothing about that she had a child or slapped one, what the heck?!!! Dottiewest1fan (talk) 01:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lynn Anderson

You are writing in a TONE that is not allowed in Wikipedia. I suggest you go to these following pages:

Wikipedia:Citing sources, which clearly tells you how to reference material here.
Wikipedia:Manual of style, which tells you how to write without writing like a fansite. Look at the usage section.

I don't think you ever read through these. I understand that some things you write might be factual, I agree, don't get me wrong, but unereferenced material will lead some people to believe that your information is unfactual. Proof is always needed. For example, you said that Billboard magazine said that Lynn Anderson is currently ranked among the Top 10 most successful artists for female country singers, or something like that. Without a reference this doesn't seem factual. I honestly don't believe the statement because of this, when did they say this, 1974? Honestly, there has been people ahead of her who have contriubted and become much more successful on Billboard, and it might be a little more than possible that she is off that list, as of 2008, not 1974. There has been other successful singers, Reba McEntire, Faith Hill, Carrie Underwood. I suggest you check you sources that might well-over dated. I get the Cashbox 8 #1 records, ok, but I only went by Billboard, and that it what most country articles go by, not the outdated Cashbox. Honestly the "career decline" section seems to be misinterpreted by you. I'm not saying she's never did music-like thigs, I'm just saying her popularity declined, in terms of chart success. She still tours and stuff, there's nothing wrong with that. She hasn't had a hit record in over 20 years though, and a single that charted since 1989, which is the reason why her career declined, as well as the fact she rarely released a new studio effort. I can't just say like you that her records are still selling, without a reference, wow. Also she indeed did have a minor role on Starsky & Hutch. She only appeared in 2 episodes as a character, but only 2 episodes, that doesn't make her an important character in the show's run on the air. You make her seem like sha had re-occuring role over 10 episodes or something like that.

I honestly have no idea why my personal life is in here. I am actually not on the computer until late afternoon, excuse me, but I have a life. I act, sing, and dance at a performing arts studio, extra-curricular activites, have friends, work, wow, this is none of your business, and you can't say I have too much time on my hands. I was just at the movies with friends, what the heck! You need to let people edit her article, you should still edit her article, I have no objections to that, but you must follow the rules. User TenPoundHammer can agree with its tone before. I'm not trying to sound tough with him helping me, he is a trusted user, who knows more about the laws of this place than I do, that's all. I also don't like how you used Wikipedia as your rough draft for Lynn's official site. The biography looks exactly as it looked on Wikipedia, and this kind of stuff is not allowed. When an encylopedia is written like a fansite, then precautions are taken.

And that slapping a child thing, I told you months before I never WROTE IT. I know nothing about her children, I highly doubt she was arrested for that because then her kids would be taken away. I didn't even know she had kids until you brought it up months ago. I'm not trying to get you in so much trouble you're trying to file a report about me, whatever that means. I don't want you to leave the site, just learn how to write well here. If I said anthing misleading, well then I'm sorry for that. I can't e-mail right now, there's trouble with my e-mail address. Dottiewest1fan (talk) 02:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Lynn Anderson

DottieFan - I'm not going to belabor the issue with you by continuing to go back and forth. I do have a busy life outside of the Wikipedia World. I will say, as an affilate of Lynn Anderson's, with all due respect, the more you write, the more concerned I am with your contributions to Lynn Anderson's article. The grammatical and spelling errors are actually embarrassing when they appear in her article.

No, I'm not going by a "Billboard Top Female Country Artists" list from 1974. As of 2006 - Lynn Anderson ranked number NINE (9). Secondly, nobody ever said Lynn Anderson was a regular star of "Starsky & Hutch". I believe the original wording was, "she appeared in AN episode of Starsky & Hutch" ("an" - meaning ONE). She had a guest starring role in ONE episode (not two, as you stated). I tell ya, those "facts" are funny things ... they always get in the way. In this ONE episode, she had a MAJOR starring role - as the entire episode revolved around her character. Thirdly, her BIO on her website was absolutely written the same as the Wikipedia article. Know why? Because it's entirely FACTUAL! And, since you're SUPPOSEDLY (not "suppositly") an authoritarian on all female country singers from the '70s, I thought you would certainly know that Cashbox AND Billboard were the TWO MAJOR music publications/charts for many years, especially in the '60s and '70s. One was no less important than the other. We're not talking about some obscure publication. A #1 spot on Cashbox was just as important as one on Billboard. Again, Cashbox was a MAJOR publication. Record World was also a very prestigious publication, although probably less than the other two.

I'm really not sure why you have an axe to grind with Miss Anderson, perhaps because she proved far more successful than your favorite .... again, I'm really not sure. However, when you put out untruths and/or misinformation, you're doing her a huge disservice. You say you didn't write the "child slapping entry", but it was mixed in with a section of other negatives that you so readily made available ... leading one to believe it came from the same source. At any rate, we have copies of the article as it appeared when that statement was included. I have no problem with the negative entries, as long as they're factual.

As for your being "scared of me". That's utterly ridiculous. Once again, you're making misstatements by saying I keep sending you messages. I've never sent you a message that wasn't within a public forum on Wikipedia. How could I, when your email address is not made public? Gotta be careful ... there go those "facts" creeping up again. They'll get you every time.

I had not been on Wikipedia in weeks (as I stated, I have a very busy life). I'd have never known Lynn's article had been changed so drastically until we got inundated with emails from folks asking what happened to Lynn's article on Wikipedia. It wasn't until then that I discovered your major overhaul of Lynn's article AND your confrontational message in my "user box" .... starting this line of communication we're now having. I completely understand that no ONE person has ownership of any article on Wikipedia (believe it or not, I actually knew this prior to your telling me), but I simply do not understand your obsession with Lynn's article. For the past two years, you've been rearranging things on her page on, what seems like, an almost weekly basis. Strange!

I'm delighted that you and "Tenpoundhammer" have bonded and become a team. I think that's great! I also appreciate the permission you've granted for my continuing to make contributions to Lynn Anderson's page. That's very thoughtful of you ... especially since I know more about Lynn Anderson and her career than either of you. Without your express permission, I probably would have never made further contributions.

I don't have time to deal with it right now but, suffice it to say, I'll be making those contributions relatively soon. As I previously stated, please feel free to contact the administrators at Wikipedia should you deem it necessary. All I ask is that you keep your facts in check. As I also stated, we will be making contacts of our own.

End of discussion on MY part (for now, anyway) - Peace! Mikiesmonkey (talk) 04:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments re Lynn Anderson article

Hi there. I'm looking at this with regards to a report on the admin noticeboard, and have to say that I would agree your version of the article was written in a less than encyclopedic tone, as well as with far fewer references than the current version. Wikipedia articles need to be backed up with good reliable sources for verifiability, and should be written like an encyclopedia article, rather than as a biography that one might find on a fan or official website. I suggest that if you have information to add, you make use of the article talk page to present that information, and discuss with other editors of the article as to how it should be included. There are several experienced editors who will be watching that page and guiding the discussion, and if the information you feel should be included is backed by good reliable sources, I'm sure there will be a way to include it into the article. Thanks. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should also note that some of your comments to other involved editors have been incivil; please ensure that you avoid personal attacks and comment on the content, not the contributors. Thanks. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in response to your message. If you comment on my talk page, that would be fine, or you can do so as a response here on your page; I have it watchlisted. Tony Fox (arf!) 01:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Lynn anderson nashville october 2012.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Lynn anderson nashville october 2012.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

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. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:48, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lynn profile 73.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lynn profile 73.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 05:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Orange Mike | Talk 19:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing that Lynn Anderson is dead, not sure how it's considered a conflict of interest - as in promoting an artist. Secondly, I'm also a virtual LA encyclopedia and, while I fully understand the rule of no "fluff," etc., I think it's important to mention the FACTS which were either sourced OR can easily be sourced. NOTHING I've contributed has been UNfactual, nor promo-fluff. Are we just selective or biased on whose page gets the facts in full - i.e. Crystal Gayle (whom I adore) article is laden with things one could easily consider promotional if you're using the same rules you're applying to LA's page. Just asking for consistency with the rules. Thanks. - Mike

As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to go undetected, even for years. We can only address what we know about. Feel free to go to the talk page of any article that you see inappropriate content on to discuss it. As for conflict of interest, if you were her agent, that counts as a conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Mikiesmonkey. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Lynn Anderson, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 11:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administration notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ChrisTofu11961 (talk) 03:29, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]