User talk:Yvonnefitz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the "Comic Strip Live" article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! Yanksox 00:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy tags, if you wish to protest it place a {{hangon}} tag. Thanks! Yanksox 00:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's really a tricky issue, but I recommend rewritting the article in your own words and using sources. Heck, I'll look at the site, and if it looks notable enough to meet guidelines, I'll write the article. If you need anything, feel free to contact! Yanksox 01:16, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to "Comic Strip Live"[edit]

Your recent edit to "Comic Strip Live" (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 01:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I put a Speedy deletion notice on the page, it will be wiped out and we can start this all over again. I am more than happy to help with this page. Also...

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! Yanksox 01:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki[edit]

Don't worry, I'm just tired and not making much sense. :P Yanksox 01:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NN[edit]

WP:NN means "Not Notable". This is an encyclopedia, and so we cannot accept articles on unencyclopedic subjects - i.e. every subject of every article must have a claim to fame. If your article was tagged as NN, it's probably because it did not assert why the subject is significant enough to mention in an encyclopedia.

See, it's sad when people die, and I'm sorry, but putting their names into an encyclopedia isn't the right way to honor them. (|-- UlTiMuS ( U | T | C [] M | E ) 21:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Marcel Fitzner is a bit better, but it reads like an obituary rather than an encyclopedia article. Prepare for a long explanation for why I think so.
For example, look at the article: Paul McCartney. The article immediately states "Recognised as an icon of the 20th century, McCartney is listed in The Guinness Book Of Records as the most successful composer in popular music history." The article clearly states why he is important, and it elaborates on that topic. Your article, however, starts with "Marcel Fitzner was born in Bussum, Holland on October 31, 1944. He immigrated to New York City with his parents and older sister on August 4, 1947. Marcel attended P.S. 87, Jr. High School 44 -- both on Manhattan's Upper West Side -- and graduated from the High School of Art and Design in June 1962......"
It doesn't say why he is worth mentioning at all up until the very end, and even then it's only one sentence. This is not how encyclopedia articles are written. An encyclopedia is to provide useful and important information to people all over the world. And unfortunately, very few will care about Fitzner's life history unless his life history is important to his fame.
Take this as another example: I could say that Joe is 21 years old, that he owns a Ford Explorer, that his dog's name is Rover, that he has a college degree in buissiness... but obviously this is completely unimportant, especially when his "claim to fame" for being included in Wikipedia is that he has the world's biggest ears. That's exactly how I see your article. It has some useful information, but it's buried in huge a pile of useless info as well.
Usually I would readd the deletion request and warn the user to not delete the tag without addressing the raised concerns, but I know you're new here and you really mean to create a great article. However, I still think that Marcel Fitzner needs significant changes in order to stay. I hope we can reach a compromise here. (|-- UlTiMuS ( U | T | C [] M | E ) 00:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is much better. It clearly states who the subject is, and why they're important. I don't have any concerns with it anymore, but please ensure that any further content you add/readd to the article is worth mentioning and important to him being an inventor/entrepeneur. For example, is it really all that important that "He was also captain of the school's rifle team."?
Good job though. It's nice to see a change from all of the nonsense people submit every day. With some people around here, I sometimes wonder if they ever sat through an English class at all. (|-- UlTiMuS ( U | T | C [] M | E ) 03:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In an unrelated matter, it would be helpful to others if you typed ~~~~ after your comments on talk pages to sign yourself (like I do). It makes it a lot easier to keep track of discussions and respond to comments. Cheers. (|-- UlTiMuS ( U | T | C [] M | E ) 03:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

High School of Art and Design[edit]

While there are some articles that order alumni by data, the overwhelming majority order by name. Most readers don't know what year someone graduated, making it harder to find an entry if anyone is looking, and most editors don't know the exact year of graduation making the order that much harder to maintain. Furthermore, the reordered list did not specify the sort order, nor were any graduation dates included. The lack of any comments in the edits made yesterday evening also made it near impossible to figure out what was changed and what was added. Adding additional details as to what was changed only makes it easier for other editors to collaborate on the article. Alansohn (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You can always reply here, by editing this page. I will keep an eye out for updates to your talk page. You can reply to this or any other message on my talk page, click on (Talk) next to my username at the end of this note. Edit that page and add your reply to the bottom, using the four tildes as a signature. Alansohn (talk) 20:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Reply from Yvonne:

I didn't know I could write something here. I don't think anyone ever told me, and as you can see there were a few editors who discussed some pages I began during the summer of 2006. (Editing Art & Design's page was done in June 2006 -- when I discovered a student had left a negative comment and only 3 grads were on a Notable Alumni list, if I recall.) It evolved from there, and then I tried adding some pages of my own -- one for the Comic Strip Live, a comedy club in Manhattan (with their input). Alas, two other editors deleted two of my pages -- one for the dumbest reason, saying he felt the "Margin" didn't exist and was a hoax. Well, if he had only run it through Google, he would have found it does indeed exist, and did, and also received a U.S. Patent. And on March 21, 1976, it was one of many inventions featured in the New York Times Magazine (article titled "Pot Luck"). That editor also quit. I found out about the unfortunate deletion -- and his leaving -- long after it happened.

The only editor I ever recall communicating with was by email. Or maybe also Yanksox, if he left the message on his own page, but you didn't. I hate throw my age around but I turned 65 in October and am not a techie. I did try and learn as much as I could during the last few years, including some simple HTML. (I set up our myspace.com page in August 2006, and run it.) I learn by observation. I checked HS La Guardia Arts' page and saw how they added the photo (clicking on "edit this page" and reading the codes) and then added the photo to ours. That's the best I can do.

But back to the Art & Design page. I find alphabetical by last name confusing, unless the last name is listed first, like:

Adams, Neal

Bakshi, Ralph

Bennett, Tony

Carr, Eric

I generally prefer alphabetical by first name:

Eric Carr

Neal Adams

Ralph Bakshi

Tony Bennett

But because we prefer to stress the school's rich history, we would like to do it chronologically. If I thus need to add the years in, so be it. I will get those years together within the week and give it a try. Perhaps you can suggest the way to make them look best -- bold, or parens, etc. At least the one good thing about having had the list the way I had it, without the years showing, was that I always caught those who added their names on, because they always added them at the bottom. I don't mind someone adding their name -- if they are indeed notable (and I do check them out). I've kept perhaps 5 of those additions during the last year. But being involved in hip-hop alone does not make someone notable, unless they are well-known. And Juliana Duque had better stop adding herself in. I don't believe she has ever contacted the school, and certainly has not contacted the Art and Design Alumni Association. Check out our website (I designed the logo -- in 1984, though the "square" was orginally a warm gray, not blue). Yvonnefitz (talk) 01:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 16th: Thanks for removing the non-notable alumnus who added himself. On another edit, I noticed you changed the cap A in Notable Alumni to lower case. If so, shouldn't the same go for Notable Faculty? Yvonnefitz (talk) 04:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I will do my best to ensure that non-notables are removed and will try to continue to find sources for genuine notables. Titles of sections should be in "Sentence case" (with only the first letter and proper nouns capitalized), not "Title Case". This would mean that it should be "Notable faculty". See WP:MOS for more details. Alansohn (talk) 05:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, understood, which is why I asked why you did not change Notable Faculty to Notable faculty. (I work by logic -- if you change one then I assume you will change the other). For me it was a headline, so I had made them both initial caps. I was not aware there were style rules to follow, and will have a look at what you suggested. And as far as notables go, your effort is most appreciated. Thank you again. Yvonnefitz (talk) 15:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 18th: Several names were added tonight. Also created a page for Sam Scali, and redirected it to the extisting Scali, McCabe, Sloves -- for now. Hope to have some of these people get someone to create pages for them. You didn't respond to my above commnets (re. Notable Faculty). Yvonnefitz (talk) 04:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 10th: I trust you read the comments I left on your Talk page tonight. Please see my above question from January 16th. Shouldn't Notable Faculty have been changed to Notable faculty?

PS: How come tonight's date and "User talk" information didn't get logged in?

July 26, 2008: It's been so long, I forgot how to do this [Talk stuff]. Whoever reads this: alumni need to stop adding themselves, and if I catch them doing it more than once -- like Diego da Silva -- they will be permanently banned from this page. Wiki Editors need to read my comments on the page's history. I removed him before, and said so. (If someone is legitimately notable that's another story.) Thanks, Yvonne Yvonnefitz (talk) 22:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

August 17, 2008: OOPS! forgot to log in when I made that Lisa Jane Persky correction. I still wish people would stop adding themselves on, especially since they don't even support the school or the Alumni Assocation with a membership contribution. Yvonnefitz (talk) 19:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 8, 2008: This is why people need to stop adding their own names onto the Notable Alumni list -- and wiki editors need to pay more attention!!! I found several notable alumni names missing, between Calvin Klein and Pat Cleveland. (Go check the recent page versions.) I couldn't understand who removed them or how it happened -- this removal was not showing in the page's edit history. And, making things more confusing, when I did a copy and paste of a previous version, to put all the names back in, they were still missing! Know why?

Someone (John C Mula?) added himself in and messed up the HTML codes (one of these: < ) -- that affected a whole list of alumni, till the next one of these: >

Guys, would someone please pay more attention? I'm 65 years old and not a techie. Why did I have to figure it out, by giving things a closer look?

Here is the proof (the past and now replaced version)

The one that he messed up (see where John Mula added himself, and where he messed up Calvin Klein's reference code):

  • 1960 Calvin Klein, fashion designer Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page).
  • 1969 Pat Cleveland, fashion model

I think I have said all I am going to say on this, for today! Yvonnefitz (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      • The only way you're doing to see what I am talking about, even in my above example, is by going to see the "Edit this page" tab. Yvonnefitz (talk) 18:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of File:ADbldg60.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:ADbldg60.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Site has all rights reserved. No apparent public domain license for this image http://www.artalumni.com/

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on [[Talk:File:ADbldg60.jpg|the article's talk page]] explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. BanyanTree 12:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yvonne, the image went unnoticed because you had asserted that the image was in the public domain when you uploaded it. For reasons I won't get into, I was checking a bunch of images and noticed that the link provided from the article went to a website that claimed "all rights reserved." As there was no evidence that the claim for public domain was valid and that the image wasn't actually a violation of the copyright held by High School of Art and Design, I tagged it for speedy deletion. Such erroneous licensing is hard to spot unless someone is investigating backlinks, which is probably why nobody noticed until now.
I'm afraid I don't know what you are referring to regarding the Al Scaduto article, as its history shows no recent bot edits. A "bot" is a computer program that runs on Wikipedia to carry out repetitive tasks that humans tend to find boring. See Wikipedia:Bots for a fuller explanation.
I am now watching this page so feel free to respond here, if you wish. - BanyanTree 05:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 4, 2009: Thanks for getting back to me. Firstly, I don't know how the designation about public domain came about, and how it applies. I uploaded the photo myself and recall some question about copyright. Perhaps I thought the question was asking if it belonged to someone else (and that we couldn't use it if it did). Indirectly, it belongs to the Alumni Association website (www.artalumni.com). My former classmate Bob Schumacher founded the site, he colorized the photo from our yearbook and we posted it. We also posted a photo of the older building of the school. Both photos were from our yearbook but have been colorized, making each a new piece of art, in a way. So are they considered public domain or not?

The photo that got removed (http://www.artalumni.com/media/ADbldg60.jpg) was of the current school building before they re-clad the outside (circa 1995). It is now gray with green trim. I had no idea where the other editor got the present photo, and whom it belongs to (so we are even afraid to copy it and use it on our site). But he left the old, smaller one in. Kind of odd to have 2 photos, one on top of the other. But it quite a shock for me to see the older one missing, last night, with some scary message about immediate removal [of the article] from wikipedia.

There was something mentioned about a "bot" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ImageRemovalBot) and read "This user account is a bot operated by Carnildo (talk)." Carnildo sounded pretty nasty. I was totally confused about what I had done wrong and if the entire page was being deleted -- after all the [2+ years] work I had put into it.

Anyway, it is a little much to have two photos on the page. But perhaps I should create an Early history section and include both older photos of the building there. In 2012 the school is due to get yet another building -- up the block!

As far as the Al Scaduto page went, there was nothing wrong with that page. It just happened as soon as I logged on, to read his (to get some info before I added him to our list), a huge message was pasted over it, for me, about a bot and removal. I was totally confused until I went to the High School of Art and Design page -- and saw the photo was gone.

Any suggestions you can make will be appreciated. Thanks Yvonnefitz (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you're thinking about this edit. Note that there was no mention of mention of the article being deleted. For a long time there was a problem that when administrators deleted images, there was an ugly redlink, such as File:ADbldg60.jpg, remaining on all the articles that image has been used on. User:ImageRemovalBot is a program that detects when an image is deleted and goes to all the articles where that image appears and removes it. To be accurate, the bot hides the wikimarkup text of the image. <!-- by putting it within these symbols-->. Carnildo (talk · contribs), is an administrator and the user who runs ImageRemovalBot. I have no idea why you would think he "sounded pretty nasty", but he does get a lot of people insulting him because he is involved with removing a lot of images that people want to keep because they have problematic licensing.
Back to the image. Under US law, an artist owns all rights to a creative work up till 70 years after their death, unless they explicitly release their rights in some way. Any other art done with that work is known as a derivative work, and does not reset or override the copyright clock. For example, if I take a picture and you modify it, then both of us have ownership of the derivative work you produce. However, as I am the original owner and you are creating the derivative work, I have basically absolute authority and can force you to stop using my image, take you to court to get damages if you've used my image to make money or simply to seek payment for emotional distress, or order your work to be destroyed. Wikipedia takes the ownership rights of artists very seriously and there are many community pages set up to help editors trying to identify copyright violations. As for the only image currently on the article, File:Hs-art-design.jpg, the uploader uses a license that states he took the photograph, is the copyright holder and releases it under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (detail). Anyone willing to respect and abide by the copyright holder's license can use the image for further use.
So to sum up, the image you uploaded was deleted. In reaction, a bot hid the now missing image. I can only guess that you were looking at the "diff" of the most recent edit showing the most recent change in the article, which is shown at the top of the page, and thought that it was a notice on the article. It was not and is not. Your article was never put into any deletion process. - BanyanTree 22:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Candida Royalle school citation.[edit]

First, the small item. I'm well aware that porn stars have stage names. So do many mainstream actors. If she doesn't want to release it, then that's fine. I don't care. If she did, we'd need a verifiable and reliable source for the info. (see WP:V and WP:RS)

Second, according to WP:BLP, "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." The emphasis is from the quote and not my own emphasis. So, schools attended or other resume type info is of the "challenged or likely to be challenged" sort. Even articles for, as you suggested, Calvin Klein should be reliably sourced. And in the case of a porn star, then this is also of concern for the school. Many schools might not want to be known as the alma mater of a porn star. So for the school's reputation as well, we need reliable sourcing. For example, take a look at Vanessa Hudgens#Controversies. She was working for Disney and a couple pics got on the net of her in lingerie and nude as well. That was just two pictures and Disney was releasing statements. So, if we're going to say that a porn star attended a school, we better have good sources to back it up. Dismas|(talk) 03:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My reply: May 16, 2010 (approx 2:04pm, NY time)

Could you kindly explain this in plain English? I am the former Alumni President of the High School of Art and Design (served June 1990 - June 2007) and have continued volunteering since. I was the one who totally revamped this wikipedia page in June 2006 and have been adding names to the Notable list (with the exception of a few others who add themselves now and then, or another alum adding a teacher to the list). I am 67 years old.

I know Candida Royalle personally (I met her at the school's 65th birthday gala in October 2001). She is definitely a graduate from the Class of 1968. So, who is supposed to verify or certify that she attended? And who is supposed to get what -- a written statement from the school? Then send this to whom? You may not be aware that the Privacy Act of decades ago prohibits public schools from giving out information -- including same to its own alumni association. Do we have to prove that the late "Jackie Curtis" also attended -- but didn't graduate, btw? Or several others? At best I can go to our alumni website (or maybe you should), make a copy of "Candida's" yearbook photo, and email it to you. But where? Would that be sufficient? All current admins at the school were not admins when "Candida" attended. And I graduated in June 1960. We have even had someone (transvestite?) involved in a murder some years ago -- it was in New York Magazine. I know the school is proud of their graduates and attendees. There is nothing wrong (or negative) about being an actress in the porn industry and "Candida" certainly made great improvements and received accolades for her efforts in making porn more female-friendly. She is also a successful business woman.

So, please make this simpler for me: What is the proof you need, who has to supply it, and where does it get sent? Yvonnefitz (talk) 18:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, poor grammar: The school is proud of its graduates... And here is a link to the A&D Alumni Association website: http://www.artalumni.com

Alumni[edit]

I noticed this artist - Simon Gaon says he went to Art and Design, and isn't on the list...Modernist (talk) 18:28, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I didn't know about him previously. Yvonnefitz (talk) 02:04, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On citation requests[edit]

Hi, Yvonne. First may I see it's nice to see an older person heartily embracing this modern marvel, Wikipedia. I'm no "spring chicken" myself, as it happens!

What I see happening is that you're running into two of Wikipedia's core tenets — which actually are core tenets of any encyclopedia. The first is maintaining a neutral tone, and the other is verification. I'm sure if you picked up a volume of the Encyclopedia Brittanica you'd want the article written neutrally and without biases, and you'd want to feel secure that everything in there was independently verifiable.

Which leads us to the adjective "venerable" and other claims: It's not that they can't be used. That's not it at all. It's just that we have to provide reliable-source citations for whatever we put it. This means, for the most part, objective journalistic sites — magazine and newspaper articles, books, authoritative online site. The one thing we can't use is personal knowledge. One other core policy, no original research, says, for very good reason, that people can't just put in what they claim as their own personal knowledge.

Why not, you may ask? First, individuals may misremember things, or be incorrect about things, or have a personal bias or agenda. That's why journalists, for example, get get multiple sources, to get all sides of a story. And secondly, the way Wikipedia is structured, allowing for anonymous contributions, there is no way to confirm that any of us are who we say we are. This has been proven by several well-publicized events in which hoaxters claimed to be people whom they were not. Some of them seemed so obvious and sincere about who they said they were that no reasonable person would have doubted them — and yet, they were not. Surely you can see how an encyclopedia can't just "take somebody's word for it" — even if we could know for certain who they are. Providing verifiable citations — confirming that a fact has been stated in a reliable source publication — is critically important.

Also, assuming you are involved with the alumni association, it's important that remain within the bounds of a Wikipedian who is knowledgeable in a subject, and never step across the line into advocacy or opinion. That would constitute a conflict of interest. What you wrote about your school, with perfectly pardonable pride, tells me that you may not necessarily make additions that are purely objective and neutral.

But that's OK — this is a collaborative enterprise, and we each perform checks and balances on each other. You may state a fact enthusiastically, and I may adjust for a more neutral tone, and so together we've added something neither one of us could have on our own! And I would say that the alumni association website is a perfectly good source for factual information as to who graduated from the school and when, as well as history of the school.

I hope this information, complete with blue links to the relevant policies and guidelines, helps. And, yes, you and I are in lockstep when it comes to keep watch on "notable alumni" lists — here and at many other schools, people add themselves in order to self-promote. Happy editing! -- Tenebrae (talk) 22:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Yvonne. Yes, I added those citation request banners, which I assume you know from that article's edit history. I'm sorry you're having difficulty managing the advice or other information given to you by other editors; I'm not sure who they are or in what way, if at all, they conflict, but my friend and colleague Tenebrae put it best just above, which is why I'm placing this message in the same section. Almost all information (excepting stuff like "the sky is blue" or "Christmas falls on December 25") needs to be supported by reliable sources explicitly cited in the text, usually in the form of an inline citation.
One thing that I can clarify is this: Notability is the test for whether a topic merits its own article. Although sources need to be cited for this, this is distinct from WP:Verifiability. The notables listed under Faculty and Alumni need to be supported by sources in order to adhere to WP:Verifiability, not notability. Just clicking on one at random, Helmut Krone, shows that his article doesn't even mention the High School of Art and Design. Neither does Eva Hesse. Mark Texeira's article mentions it, but it's not sourced in that article either. Even if the other articles have sources that these people attended HSA&D, one article cannot function as a source in another, because that is CIRCULAR. However, if that other article has a citation, you can copy the citation. I just did this now with Chic Stone, whose article cited that fact, so I copied it into the HSA&D article. This applies to all articles, including LaGuardia High School. Just because editors haven't yet spotted an article missing so many sources like LGHS shouldn't be interpreted to mean that that article is exempt from these policies. For what it's worth, I added similar banners to the LaGuardia HS article.
I've just removed Cheryl Green, and every other non-notable whose inclusion in the article was not supported by a source. If anyone gives you grief over this, just explain to them the policies in question, or even better, refer them to Tenebrae and my posts here.
I also removed the note about the list being selected by the school's Alumni Association. I'm not against re-adding it, so long as a reliable source can be found to accompany it. If the school or the Alumni Association publishes materials that contain that list, that would do, but keep in mind that what the Alumni Association considers notable is not the same as what Wikipedia considers notable. At the very least, secondary sources are needed to support someone's inclusion on such a list in a Wikipedia article, if not having an article of their own.
However, I did not change "Notable faculty" to "Faculty". I changed it from "Faculty includes" to "Faculty". "Notable faculty" certainly is more consistent with such sections on WP, so I've changed it just now. Thanks for pointing that out to me.
I commend you for all the hard work you do as a alumni president and editor working on that article; please do not interpret my edits as any type of slight or criticism of you or your work. If it helps, I sympathize; as an alumnus of the School of Visual Arts, I lament the fact that that article is also filled with unsourced material, and contains citation request banners (one of which I just added right now). I also try to add a source myself here and there when I come across it, but my time is limited. It may be a Herculean task, but you know what they say about a journey of a thousand miles, and the article will eventually be the better for it. But if there's anything I can do to help you, or answer any questions you have, don't hesitate to ask. :-) Nightscream (talk) 02:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if you were talking to me or Qwyrxian, but I believe I have been confining my answers to your talk page, with the exception of my disagreement with Qwyrxian.
WP:Verifiability has been around in some form since at least 2003, arguably earlier. It is not "sudden", and it's not our fault if material in an article that violates policy hasn't been found until now. Wikipedia is VAST. The English language version alone is close to 4 million articles, so we all do the best we can. I believe that if the list is supported by a published source, then it would be in keeping with WP:V. I apologize if other editors do not always adhere to these policies. They are indeed supposed to. And btw, I've added some sources to the HSAD article, just to do my part. Nightscream (talk) 03:46, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Qwyrxian" (whoever that is) left comments on your talk page. I can't answer on two different places. I am behind schedule in my apartment now. I have to go. Sorry. The school doesn't pay me to do this and I've spent too many years doing more for them than I did for me. I am now paying the price. Yvonnefitz (talk) 03:54, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know Qwyrxian commented on my talk page. That's what I just said. (Read what I said above.) In other words, I was talking to him, not you, with that last post I left on my tp. I never said or implied you had to answer in two different places. In any event, it was nice talking to you. Take care, and try not to let all this get to you. :-) Nightscream (talk) 04:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday 2/12/12: TY. Will reply in a week or two. I must put time in on my apartment emergency. Yvonnefitz (talk) 18:04, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Founding date and contact methods[edit]

Sunday 1/5/14: So, who is now the Wikipedia editor revising our page? Strange things are going on. Someone edited the introductory sentence -- regarding the school's founding -- and got the date wrong! It's 1936, not 1938! And the fact that the date was printed in a DOE pamplet is meaningless -- THEY got it wrong!!! Yvonnefitz (talk) 03:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source for 1936? - Purplewowies (talk) 04:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I made the same request at Talk:High School of Art and Design‎ which is really the place to discuss the article High School of Art and Design‎, but if you know of a source, please post it either here or there. DES (talk) 05:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me but I am confused. Firstly, it seems there are 2 different people responding to me. Secondly, how would I have known there was a post somewhere about the High School of Art and Design? I didn't receive a notification about your request. When one of the editors made himself known in the past, I knew to go to his page, and look up that subject. No one informed me there was a request about the school. And, without information (regarding who is now editing the page) the only place I can go to make a comment is my own talk page. As soon as I find something with the date I'll let you know. The date was in many of our yearbooks, including mine. And I graduated in 1960. The DOE makes mistakes. It was perhaps a typo.

Right now it's beyond my bedtime. Yvonnefitz (talk) 07:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is not one single person who is "editing the page". Most Wikipedia articles are edited by multiple people -- in some case by many people. Indeed our policy on article ownership clearly prohibits any one editor from trying to "own" or exclusively edit any article. Any editor (and anyone can be an editor) may edit any article that he or she chooses at any time. DES (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because many people can edit an article, each article has a discussion or "talk" page associated with it. Editors make comments on the article talk pages on how articles might best be improved. This avoids the fragmentation of discussion that can happen when such matters are discussed on a user talk page, if there are several users involved. It also retains the discussions associated with the article on a long-term basis. In the case at hand the article talk page is Talk:High School of Art and Design‎. I urge you to read it. DES (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible to monitor changes in selected articles and associated pages by using your watchlist. Or you might want to simply check Talk:High School of Art and Design‎ on a regular basis. DES (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When a user makes a signed edit on a talk page that includes a link to your user page (such as User:Yvonnefitz or Yvonnefitz) you should get a notification. This takes the form (in the default setup or "skin") of a red number to the right of your user name at the top of each Wikipedia page you view when logged in. Clicking on this displays details of the events you are being notified of. However, it is possible that your preferences are set to suppress such notifications. In that case a user can notify you by placing {{tb}} templates on your user talk page. I will do so in future. DES (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On the founding date, of course any source can be wrong, and I am not questioning your personal knowledge. However the verifiability policy (a core policy since Wikipedia's founding) and the No original research policy mean that Wikipedia must follow published reliable sources and not personal knowledge. Thus to correct one source that says 1938, we need a different source (or better yet more than one) that says 1936. A yearbook might do, a published news article would be better, or a mention in a published book. I will do some looking for such a reference. DES (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry if you have been confused. Actually at least three editors have now responded to you, Jreferee, Purplewowies, and myself (DESiegel). I have edited High School of Art and Design‎ and Talk:High School of Art and Design‎, both starting from your help desk request. I am a fairly regular responder at the help desk and an admin. Jreferee is also a help desk regular. I hope this response clarifies things a bit. DES (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just edited the High School of Art and Design. The Notable alumni list should be moved to a separate sub-article since it is so long. I don't have time to do it now, but will try to get to it later. An example of how the list may look is at List of Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership recipients (a list I created). -- Jreferee (talk) 15:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

-- Jreferee (talk) 15:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good high school article[edit]

An example of a good high school article is North Community High School and edits to High School of Art and Design should be to move the High School of Art and Design article towards something like North Community High School. -- Jreferee (talk) 15:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the above to Talk:High School of Art and Design to encourage central discussion. DES (talk) 16:24, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So where am I supposed to respond to the three of you -- on the High School of Art and Design talk page? Not here, where your responses were posted? Yvonnefitz (talk) 02:11, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If someone posts here you may chose to respond here, but when it is about the High School of Art and Design, I think it would be best to respond on Talk:High School of Art and Design. But there is no absolute rule about that, you may act as you prefer. But using the article talk page will tend to centralize discussion about the article and I think it would avoid confusion. I have made substantive comments in reply to yours on the article talk page this morning. DES (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Yvonnefitz. You have new messages at Talk:High School of Art and Design.
Message added 16:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Responded to multiple points in your comment DES (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Yvonnefitz. You have new messages at Talk:High School of Art and Design.
Message added 20:24, 7 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DES (talk) 20:24, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Yvonnefitz. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Yvonnefitz. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited High School of Art and Design, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vogue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from Yvonne: Thanks for letting me know about that (I thought I was typing in the name of the publication). So I will remove "Vogue" from the citation info. Please be advised that any comments about edits related to the High School of Art and Design Wikipedia page are posted here (a special "talk" page for the school: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:High_School_of_Art_and_Design Or do I write it this way??? [3] ???

Disambiguation link notification for July 16[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited High School of Art and Design, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christopher Martin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from Yvonne: This is an old entry on our notables list. The citation wasn't added by me. I will have to look into this later. Meanwhile, I would appreciate it if you could post your comments on the High School of Art and Design Talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:High_School_of_Art_and_Design

  • I have a question about how to use a book as a citation. My question was posted there. None of the other editors have yet answered it.

Reply from Yvonne: Sorry I am confused. I thought the disambiguation was referring to this citation, which I did not post: Kastner, Jeffrey. "ART/ARCHITECTURE; An Energetic Imagist Who Dances With Chance", The New York Times, August 19, 2001. Accessed November 19, 2007.

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Yvonnefitz. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Celebritynetworth.com as a source[edit]

Hi Yvonnefitz. I noticed that you used celebritynetworth.com as a source for biographical information in High School of Art and Design [1]. Please note that the general consensus as expressed at WP:RSN is that celebritynetworth.com does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks.--Ronz (talk) 17:37, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. The article comes from the New York Times. In the future please leave comments on the talk page for the school: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:High_School_of_Art_and_Design Thank you. Yvonnefitz (talk) 23:12, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Afd Robert Volpe[edit]

Nomination of Robert Volpe for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Volpe 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/Robert Volpe until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.

What is your message to me? I am confused.[edit]

What is your message to me? I am confused. Yvonnefitz (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yousef Raz: who are you and what is your message to me? I am confused.[edit]

Yousef Raz: who are you and what is your message to me? I am confused. Yvonnefitz (talk) 06:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference NYT2001 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Kastner, Jeffrey. "ART/ARCHITECTURE; An Energetic Imagist Who Dances With Chance", The New York Times, August 19, 2001. Accessed November 19, 2007.
  3. ^ [2]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yvonnefitz&oldid=1141929863"