User talk:JMLofficier

Welcome!

Hello, JMLofficier, 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
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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!  Jpeob 05:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. I nearly blocked your username for violating our policy on "no names of celebrities" - and then it turns out you actually are Jean-Marc Lofficier.

Welcome to the project, sir. DS 17:39, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, well done on re-writing it. That's a solid effort! Sure, I'm willing to help. The "article is longer than preferable" tag though is purely a guide. Splitting the article into another superfluous article perhaps would not be beneficial. Keep up the good work! Jpeob 02:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, though, you could further improve the page by Citing sources. This would allow your edits to follow the Verification policy of the project and be even more valuable. Cheers, Jpeob 03:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded on your talk page because I wasn't sure this was the right place.

--User:JMLofficier

No worries. We're all here to help each other! Responding to my talk page is fine - perhaps edit at the bottom of the page so the talk page is in chronological order - but that's just me being pedantic...

It's great you're updating stuff you know about. Wikipedia has a policy of No original research which basically means you aren't meant to add material to Wikipedia that has not been previously published by a reliable source. As your information is coming from a published book - which is a reliable source - that is fine.

Try to source a claim like this:

Substantiated claim.<ref name=Perry>Perry's Handbook, Sixth Edition, McGraw-Hill Co., 1984.</ref>

Which looks like this in the article: Substantiated claim.^[1] ''Then put a references section at the bottom of the page (I've already done this on the [[Fantastique]] article) like this'': <references/>

In that section will come up the actual reference like this:

^[1]

I hope that helps. If that seems too complicated, perouse these help pages: Citations quick reference, Footnotes and Citing sources.

Hope that helps. Cheers, Jpeob 13:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, try to sign your pages with the four tildes: ~~~~

Thanks, Jpeob 05:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed a split into the three parts of the trilogy as there is easily enough infomration to provide 3 solid entries. See the talk page for further discussion. Also I note you mention that there is a proposed 4th part - do you have a source for that? You wouldn't know if the whole trilogy is going to be reprinted possibly in a collected volume? If we do split it would be good to have an image from each one. I know you have them on your site - would you have large quality versions we can use? I notice one seems to have been removed and if you like I can sort them out and make sure the right tags get used for them to be kept. (Emperor 18:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I've responded in more detail on the Superman's Metropolis page but I have no objection to what you propose. As far as I know there's no plan for a collected edition. I wish. What do you mean by "one seems to have been removed?" What? From where? JMLofficier 13:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. By "one seems to have been removed" I was refering to the fact that there were image tags pointing to what seemed like the Metropolis cover but it wasn't there (which usually means copyright issues hadn't been clarified to Wikipedia's complete satisfaction and it had been removed - it can be a tad tricky). As I say I can either add the images in (you can email them to me (the_emperor AT mail2emperor.com - where the " AT " is really @ of course) and I'll take a swing at it or you can upload them yourself and drop a note in here or the relevant entry and I'll spot them and sort it out. As you are fine with the splitting I'll sort that out in a bit. (Emperor 14:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Not being accusatory here, but I just wanted to point out the Wikipedia conflict of interest policy. Just a quick heads-up, in case you get questions later. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I personally happen to disagree with the policy. 1) as a frequent wiki user (in areas like comics, sci-fi, bibliographies, etc.) I want the information to be up to date and correct; if it posted by people who know best, as long as it doesn't contain any opinions, just facts, so much the better; 2) as a long-time wiki contributor in fairly narrow, specialized areas (French fantastique, literature, etc.), I don't like to see well-researched, professionally written entries bastardized by well-meaning amateurs. I agree that there is a line between compiling factual information (about books, films, comics, etc.) and self-promotion, and object to the latter just as you would; on the other hand, as long as the information is correct and opinion-free, I would rather have it than not, or rely on a third-party rather than a source. Lesser of two evils, etc. JMLofficier (talk) 15:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course (oh, there's also an autobiography policy). I'm not accusing you so don't feel the need to defend yourself... nor am I intending to start an argument on the policy, I'm just pointing it out so you know! :) --Midnightdreary (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; I try to be careful when updating articles not just about me but people I know (and who don't have time to do what I do :-)); basically, I stick to bibliographical information, ie: adding new book titles/dates, updating links, etc. merely in order to keep the records up to date. JMLofficier (talk) 06:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few things arising from recent edits:

• I added an infobox - it'd be handy if there was a picture to round it out. Information can be found at WP:UPLOAD, it is a "busy" page but the top option (Creative Commons) is the better one as it'll make it available across the various wikis.

• I started a bibliography section as the text in the main body of the article was getting too "listy" (and... and... and...) and a bibliography section means the biography doesn't have to be so comprehensive (it makes it easier to hit the key points and keep the text flowing). Just letting you know there is a plan behind it. I'll see if I can streamline the text as time allows.

• I am curious about the "American" categories as the text doesn't seem to justify them - you've edited the article since they were added so I assume they reflect the situation as best they can. I have placed the main body of the article under a bibliography heading so that might be the best place to clarify matters.

Cheers (Emperor (talk) 04:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

To help the ball rolling, I inserted all the raw bibliographical data for our books, comics (as writers) and comics (as translators); it's not quite up to date, and totally unformatted, but it's a start. Obviously, then, the biography could then be trimmed drastically, to just moving from journalism into books and comics, a bit of TV, relocating to France in 2004. I could try to draft something that would profile our life/career in half-a-dozen shorter paragraphs, if you want. JMLofficier (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds just the ticket. I can sort out the formatting of the bibliography and once it takes the pressure off the biography it should be possible to create a more focused bibliography. (Emperor (talk) 03:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I've created a basic draft, along the lines you described. Feel free to rewrite and polish, fix the notes, external stuff, anything not in conformity with Wiki's current formats. Also if you see any glaring omissions, or have questions, let me know. JMLofficier (talk) 10:27, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note - that is a good start. What I'll do is give another editor a nudge and we'll take a run at it and rework and expand it (as we've done on a few other articles, like Michael Bair and Antony Johnston) and then see if there are any gaps that need filling. If you have any links to interviews and news coverage then drop them in. I'll start collecting them together and mining them for content. (Emperor (talk) 02:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Excellent. Re: the interviews, look at our website www.lofficier.com - there's a section called interviews on the front page which links to various interviews; nothing very recent however. Let me know if you need anything else. JMLofficier (talk) 16:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two picture questions: 1) Do you mind there being a picture of you both to illustrate the article (and if not, do you have one handy to upload, please?!)? 2) [Aimed at Emperor as much as anyone] Where does policy currently stand on the "gratuitousness" or otherwise of having a couple of most-salient bookcovers adorning bibliographies..? ntnon (talk) 22:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re the photo. I don't mind at all. You can use the one on this page: http://www.lofficier.com/resume.htm I'm embarrassed to admit I do not know how to upload images on Wiki. Re book covers. My personal site has small scans. All books published by Black Coat Press or Riviere Blanche are OK since we control the rights of the images. Ditto for any Hexagon Comics. (If I knew how to do it I'd upload the covers on the pages Wampus, Zembla, etc. Only the Kabur page has an image uploaded by someone else.) For Marvel, DC, comics etc. I don't know what the policy is. Thanks, guys! JMLofficier (talk) 13:25, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technically we can't upload your picture as it has to be made available under a license you have to grant. It isn't difficult though - see WP:UPLOAD, which walks you through the process (go with the upper section and upload it to Wikimedia Commons).

Fair use for images on the main article is tricky - the guidelines are at WP:FAIRUSE#Images. They'd need to be used as part of a critical discussion (so can be justified for the specific articles) but not as decoration. (Emperor (talk) 00:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from André Caroff. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. MLauba (talk) 14:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you muchly for the precision. Initially I removed the template for two reasons: (1) because there is no such templates on numerous other short biographical entries of other french science fiction writers, which are very substantially similar to Andre Caroff's page. Meaning, either they should all have templates, or none of them should. There is illogism at work. (2) There is a French wiki entry on Caroff, but virtually nothing else in English; therefore it is not possible to link to outside sources. As the primary contributor to the French Fantastique and French science fiction entries, I figures that referring through hyperlinks to these pages was enough. If you think my reasons are valid, please remove the template. JMLofficier (talk) 12:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Jules Lermina, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.blackcoatpress.com/lermina.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a copyright problem and has been tagged as such. MER-C 07:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		Research Participation Barnstar
		For your participation in the survey for Anonymity and conformity on the internet. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 12:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jaydee (comics) 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/Jaydee (comics) 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 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. Fram (talk) 12:24, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JMLofficier. 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]

Hello, JMLofficier. 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]

The article Transilvane has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:13, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Transilvane 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/Transilvane 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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Louis Geoffroy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Unsourced, and searches have failed to find any substantial coverage.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Josephine Balsamo 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/Josephine Balsamo 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 until the discussion has finished.

Boleyn (talk) 12:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Superman's Metropolis 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/Superman's Metropolis 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 until the discussion has finished.

Di (they-them) (talk) 17:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]