User talk:Peacockpeacock

Welcome!

Hello, Peacockpeacock, 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:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Yunshui 雲‍水 15:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peacockpeacock,

My apologies for not adding the Welcome template above to your talkpage earlier; I should have done it the first time I left you a message. I hope you haven't been too put off by the sudden influx of policy pointers and blocks on this page; if I'd given you the above links earlier perhaps it could all have been avoided.

The Fashion in Film Festival page is now well-sourced and looks to be an excellent addition to the encyclopedia (despite my earlier misgivings!), and the discussion at Articles for deletion suggests that the content of Fashion in Film may well be merged to the Festival article soon. The result will be a nice, good-looking, well-referenced addition to Wikipedia, and it couldn't have been done without you! Yunshui 雲‍水 15:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple accounts

Hello Peacockpeacock and welcome to Wikipedia. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections.

Proposed deletion of Fashion in Film Festival

The article Fashion in Film Festival has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable festival. Only sources found are press releases (eg. [1]), blog entries (eg. [2]) or the organiser's own website ([3]). No independent sources to confirm notability per the guidelines.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Potential conflict of interest

Hello Peacockpeacock. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Fashion in Film, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

Just as an aside, if you are related to the organization or the original editor in any way it's best if you are honest about it. While I personally don't recommend it (too easy to get caught up in editing and see notability where it may or may not be), it isn't against the rules to create or edit an article about something you are personally involved in. Hiding your involvement can look very bad, however, especially if someone else finds out, so I just wanted to drop this note about everything. If you're not, then that's good too- just that there's been some questions about whether or not you're affiliated with Fashion in Film or the other editor that created the article.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 11:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Reliable sources

Just another note! I wanted to let you know what can and cannot be used as a reliable source to show notability. Unfortunately none of the links that are on the page can be used as a reliable source that shows notability. The reasons behind this is that the first link just goes to a staff page for Marketa Uhlirova and since it's put out by the college that hosts and puts on the festival, it's seen as a primary source. Primary sources cannot be used as reliable sources unless there's multiple secondary sources that can back up these claims. Secondary sources would be something along the lines of a reliable paper, news station, or notable person doing an in-depth article on the festival.

This brings me to the problems with the other links. Two of them merely state dates that the festival takes place on, which cannot be used as a reliable source. Brief mentions and announcement of meetings or dates do not show notability and cannot be used. The interview link (this one here [4]) is not what Wikipedia considers to be a reliable source, and at most could only be used as a trivial source, meaning that it cannot show notability. The reason behind this is that the site just isn't considered to be notable or reliable enough, and seems to be more of a blog than anything else.

I recommend utilizing Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to see if any other sources you find are usable for reliable sources since you appear to be new to Wikipedia. It's an invaluable resource. I also recommend looking into getting assistance from Wikipedia:WikiProject Fashion or potentially joining its forces, as they might be able to help find sources that can be used. (No guarantees, but they'll know places to look.)Tokyogirl79 (talk) 11:47, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Tokyogirl79[reply]

Another thing I forgot to mention!! Blogs cannot be used as sources unless they're by someone who is considered to be an absolute expert on the subject matter, meaning that they have to be considered someone notable and reliable as a source. The vast majority of blogs do not meet this criteria, which is why I'm removing the blog post as a source.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 11:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Hiya!

It's no biggie that you're the same user- I just wanted to make sure. I don't really think that you're doing this for advertising purposes, I just wanted to warn you that it can get kind of rough if people think there's a conflict of interest.

In any case, I've found a few sources and added them to the article, including one that the nominator found themselves. I did remove a lot of sources, mostly because they were either listings that only displayed the meeting times or because they could be considered primary sources. It can get pretty frustrating at times, trying to figure out what can be considered a reliable source, so absolutely feel free to ask if you have any questions. It took me a long time to figure out what can or can't be used, so I remember what it was like trying to add things, only for people to remove them later. Hopefully this will be able to get kept.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 12:08, 12 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Hm... I think I'd just put it on your user page. You don't have to give your real name, but just say something like "I'm a huge fan of fashion and I'm a contributor to the Fashion in Film Festival by way of (whatever your contribution to the actual festival is, such as coordination, etc) and previously User:FashioninFilm." Then you could state what you want to accomplish here on Wikipedia (expanding the FIF article, improving fashion articles in general, etc) and stuff you generally like. This way it's visible but you don't have to make a huge statement about any of it on the talk pages.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 14:40, 12 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

January 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Fashion in Film has been reverted.
Your edit here to Fashion in Film was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://twitter.com/fashionfilmfest/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:24, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Fashion in Film Festival 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here to Fashion in Film Festival was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (http://www.anothermag.com/current/view/655/Fashion_in_Film) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures?

Hey, I was just wondering- do you know if anyone has any pictures that we can use for the article? They'd have to be something that's fair use, but they'd look great with the article!Tokyogirl79 (talk) 14:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

This user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Peacockpeacock (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

195.195.81.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Fashioninfilm". The reason given for Fashioninfilm's block is: " Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. Please read the following carefully. Why can't I edit Wikipedia? Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, celebrity or other well-known individual, or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy. Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username? Probably not. See WP:FAQ/Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead. What can I do now? You are still welcome to write about something other than your company, organization, or clients. If you do intend to make useful contributions on some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following: Add the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} on your user talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must: Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked. Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked. If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ".

Blocking administrator: Jimfbleak (talk • blocks)

Accept reason: Cleared autoblock per below. — Daniel Case (talk) 19:17, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Peacockpeacock (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am new to Wikipedia and originally began the Fashion in Film and Fashion in Film Festival pages under the fashioninfilm username as I thought that was how it worked. When it said that you were not allowed to write about pages from within an organisation I began my own username, peacockpeacock to write/ edit under my own name, and I have been blocked. Though I began with these pages, I had also intended to contribute to other pages. I work as a professional researcher and have often fed information to colleagues with Wikipedia accounts for updating purposes. In writing about Fashion in Film I do not intend to use the site for promotional or publicity purposes, I was writing only about past activity as a reference and documentation. I am happy not to edit the Fashion in Film or Fashion in Film Festival pages any further and would delete the fashioninfilm username if possible? I would like to be able to edit other pages if I can?

Decline reason:

You haven't been blocked directly. Yes, this username is acceptable and I am willing to accept that you understand our policies, so I will soften the autoblock. — Daniel Case (talk) 19:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.