User talk:Thiudareiks

Welcome!

Hello, Thiudareiks, 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Adambiswanger1 02:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

Please put the reason for an edit in the edit summary. —WikiLen 01:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion at talk pages

I noted you deleted some of my comments at the talk page section on "David Schirmer" at the "The Secret (2006 film), this edit. I suspect this was unintentional — I've restored it. With some exceptions, "editing others' comments is not allowed." — See Wikipedia Talk page guidelines: Others' comments. I didn't really mind, but I did want what I wrote to remain. —WikiLen 06:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schirmer concerns

I intend to edit your comments at The Secret talk page to take out all details about Schirmer allegations but leave in that we are looking for reliable sources that have published on this. I invite you to do so first. If we don't do this, I think we are in violation of this policy:

Editors must take particular care when writing biographical material about living persons, for legal reasons and in order to be fair. Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material immediately if it's about a living person, and do not move it to the talk page.

I have no experience in this and may take advantage of one the Wikipedia's support processes to get help on this — researching it. I worry we are not taking the care that the above quote calls for. The details that worry me are not that allegations have been made (Schirmer's video establishes this is the case), but rather the substance of the allegations. Should you be able to find a published reliable source for the substance of the allegations, my worries would be gone. —WikiLen 07:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at the two anti-Schirmer videos posted by user dariafiles of youTube. I don't think Wikipedia needs to worry about being sued over the content you put in at the talk page. Personally, I think you should clean it up. Technically, it is in violation of policy, but I will leave it alone. Unfortunately, these videos are not videos published by the news show "A Current Affair" or under permission of that show—clear copyright violations—so Wikipedia cannot use them. However, not-to-worry: this is a story that is definitely not going to go away. We only need sit back and wait for the stories to show up. Also, the show connects it to the film—who wouldn't—so issues of only being indirectly related to the film do not apply. —WikiLen 14:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like you are not doing your homework. Here are two links I just found to Schirmer videos at the "A Current Affair" site: (WikiLen 16:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I find no copyright notices on them so it seems they are in the public domain, so the YouTube version are good too as you previously concluded. All you had to do was provide these links or equivalent in the original bit you wrote and untold grief over this would have been avoided, not to mention the many hours I spent on this — I'm upset! What happened here? The links don't work on a Mac (which is why I did not find the links until now) and probably needs a high speed connection so perhaps that is why, but if so, you could at least have asked others to the help you get the links. I can't really blame you for this — your new at this — but it sure is annoying. If you choose to put the Schirmer stuff in Wikipedia I will clean it up if it does not meet Wikipedia standards. The trick is to not editorialize, just quote or paraphrase others (reliable others), with citations — keeping NPOV (neutral point of view, not blog-point-of-view). Heads up: the detailed Schirmer stuff will go at the David Schirmer article and the implications for The Secret film will go at the Film's article. You owe me on this — do a good job. —WikiLen 16:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't have time to do it well enough to keep it from getting deleted, just make a section at the talk page describing what needs to be done—I can help you with that too—and someone else will do it. I suggest waiting a bit. Stuff is going to come out that will provide much more interesting quotes, etc. —WikiLen 16:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this that I added at WikiNews. Your text seems to work perfectly for the WikiNews context. —WikiLen 16:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]