User talk:Seanydelight

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Seanydelight, 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! Gurt Posh (talk) 07:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Becoming a Wikipedian is a calculated decision after years of reliance! =] Hope my contributions are enjoyed. Seanydelight (talk) 09:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

God's Seat

File:God's Seat.jpg Thanks for the article and the pic. However the site probably doesn't qualify for a standalone article. Would it make sense to move the material into Santa Monica Mountains or Backbone Trail? Also, I'm concerned about the lack of published sources. Has a local paper written about it, perhaps?   Will Beback  talk  08:19, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Very much appreciated, and agreed. Those of us who live near it know that it is by far the single most visited outlook aside from The Mulholland Lookout. It would not make sense to move it to the Backbone Trail article because no one knows what that is. Even people that live right off it. Different interests. Hardcore hikers know about the backbone trail; photographers and smokers love God's Seat. If you lived in Ventura or Los Angeles County you'd know that this does qualify for a standalone article. I'm concerned about sources, too. The Local papers are too busy writing about people breaking into cars on Friday nights. Although I'm sure I could find something. Facebook ought really count as a source (with enough likes). This was my first stab at making an article; more to come and thank you for the compliment.

You're a good writer. But in the future I suggest that you start with the sources first. We're not supposed to write articles based on personal knowledge. Read WP:verifiability and WP:no original research, or least read the nutshells and intros.

Also, do you really want to publicize the place? I like to keep my favorite spots a secret. ;)   Will Beback  talk  08:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Haha, let me put it this way: I've already obtained a lifesworth of joy from God's Seat, I don't mind if others discover it. Plus, the more people go up there, the less jerks get drunk and break bottles. It's win win for me. =] Seanydelight (talk) 08:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

As long as they don't set fires.   Will Beback  talk  08:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

My first reference will pertain to the "popularity" of God's Seat. It may be hard to prove but is impossible to disprove.

"It may be hard to prove but is impossible to disprove." Perhaps, but on Wikipedia the person adding the material has the burden of proof. We can't even say that the Beatles were popular unless there's a source for it. That's one reason why photography can be a comparatively satisfying way of contributing to the project - it's the only area where one's own original contribution is allowed. Also, photos can tell stories that we can't say in words. Photographing 12 bikers is allowed, but saying there were 12 bikers is not.   Will Beback  talk  10:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

gotcha Seanydelight (talk) 11:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

File:Mulholland Corridor.jpg

The gnomes are going to complain about that one. Obviously, you're not really the copyright holder. OTOH, the NPS probably is and US federal government work product is not copyrighted. So the file can probably stay, but it'll need a difference 'license'. I'll see if I can fix it.   Will Beback  talk  08:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I took it. Its a photo of a map, behind plexiglass at a turnout at the end of Mulholland. I can't imagine them, or anyone for that matter, minding. My bigger concern is people saying The Hells Angels didn't actual use God's Seat as a hangout. You still see them up there actually, but speaking face to face with them is the only way to learn of their accurate history. And so forth. You're a good ally to have here Will, and I thank you again. As you can see my contributions are well-intentioned. Seanydelight (talk) 08:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

If we take pictures of pictures, then the person who made the original picture still holds the copyright. They might not care, but the admins on Wikimedia will. I've changed the license, which might make it OK.

As for the Hells Angels and other assertions, anyone can delete those if they don't have a source. Our own personal knowledge, however extensive, is worthless here. Footnotes are the coin of the realm.   Will Beback  talk  08:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

can't anyone delete anything, even if it has a source? Seanydelight (talk) 08:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

Deleting properly sourced material without a good reason is borderline vandalism. Such deletions are generally undone without a second thought. While it's legal to delete unsourced material wherever and whenever found, it's considered rude and disruptive to do so without making at least an effort ask for sources and allow a reasonable period for them to be provided. Did I mention that we need to find sources for God's Seat? ;)   Will Beback  talk  09:12, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Good info. So it seems I have some gnome-proofing to do... Regardless, my strong points are article-writing and photo-uploading, so I'm finding. I'm young, nimble, immune to poison oak, so even if I get "vandalized" along the way, I'm sure to improve the hell out of some Malibu and Mulholland-related articles. If Facebook can't be a source, I'll get The Acorn to do a story on it, or find some scholastic journal mentioning it in some way. I have access to Cal State's library, and a few friends who are professors who could maybe pull a favor.

There's always room for good pictures on Wikimedia. If you know any professors who've published material on local history then they might get special consideration as experts, in which case an article on the topic on their faculty pages, etc, could be used as a source. And the local paper might find it interesting to write about the place too. But it'd be an uphill battle. A small mention (and photo) in the SM Mtns article is probably as far as this can be stretched without a source.

If you're interested in local history and places then there are many existing articles which could use improvements and photos. Point Mugu State Park, Leo Carrillo State Park, Arroyo Sequit, etc. How about an article on Neptune's Net?[1][2][3] That place is famous and many articles have been written about it in newspapers. I bet some Hells Angels (or wannabes) hang out there too.   Will Beback  talk  10:15, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the mission. As you could probably guess I'm in that area constantly, and love Neptune's Net. It could be done by tomorrow.

June 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User_talk:Calabe1992. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Calabe1992 (talk) 15:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

will do, thank you and apologies. late night wiki-ing can get intense! =] Seanydelight (talk) 17:27, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Talk:God's Seat. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. The templates placed on your article are not vandalism. See WP:CONFLICT. Calabe1992 (talk) 18:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

sigh, ok. Seanydelight (talk) 18:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

Image license, some tips

Hey Seanydelight, I see you created Sherwood Dam and added another image, located here. I had to change the summary and licensing for the image. You had cited it as your own work and licensed it CC-BY-SA 3.0. The good news is that the image is in the public domain because it was published before 1923. If you look at the image, you can see the changes I made. The source is missing though, please add where you got it from in that field. It is always important to properly license and provide information about images on Wikipedia. Otherwise, they can be deleted as copyright violations.

I noticed you are new and wanted to offer some friendly advice to make your experience and editing better in the future. One of the most important aspects of Wikipedia is verification. Everything you cite in a Wikipedia article should be in that source and the source should be reliable. This is most important for claims in an article that may be challenged. I commented more about this in regards to Sherwood Dam on that article's talk. Also, when editing, be sure to use edit summaries. They are helpful not only to yourself down the line but to other editors as well. They help describe what happened during that particular edit. Anyway, I thought I'd drop by and tell you the above. It's good to have you 'aboard' and Sherwood Dam is looking more and more better. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.--NortyNort (Holla) 03:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

August 2011

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:California State Route 23. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Rschen7754 07:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

please forgive me im trying my best, im sorry... Seanydelight (talk) 07:37, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

Just some helpful advice from an editor who has been here for quite a few years, yet was new once... you're definitely not starting off on the right foot. People are willing to extend some grace to a new editor who is at least respectful and willing to learn. But, you're attacking other editors instead. This will get you indefinitely blocked pretty quickly. My advice to you is to change your attitude, pretty quickly. --Rschen7754 07:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

again... im sorry, what did i do? Seanydelight (talk) 07:37, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

I've read a lot of the messages that were left to you above. It seems that people are trying to help you. I am trying to help you. But, if you respond to constructive criticism with stuff like this you will find that other editors will lose patience with you very quickly, and they'll move from trying to help you to trying to get you blocked. At Wikipedia, there are various standards to make sure the encyclopedia looks professional. If you respond to someone's explaining the standards to you with, in essence "screw you and the standards", that doesn't make friends either. Having expertise and knowledge is one thing, but to edit Wikipedia you've gotta learn how to get along with other people. --Rschen7754 07:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm here to make articles; not friends. Seanydelight (talk) 16:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Seanydelight

Proposed deletion of Myosotis malibu

The article Myosotis malibu has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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./ Plutonium27 (talk) 12:58, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Do not create, add, or restore hoaxes to Wikipedia. Hoaxes are caught and marked for deletion shortly after they are created. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia – and then to correct them if possible. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia to learn more about this project and how you can contribute constructively. Thank you.

Nomination of 1978 Agoura-Malibu Firestorm for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1978 Agoura-Malibu Firestorm 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/1978 Agoura-Malibu Firestorm 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 09:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

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) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)