Talk:Anton Goosen

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

South Africa

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Major Review

I am busy implementing a major review of this Wikipedia Page and whilst this is in progress (25 March 2013 to 2 April 2013) some content may appear incomplete. I am in the process of citing all material but this may well take some time and will be subject to access to original source materials in the DOMUS archive at the Stellenbosch University. Please bear with me whilst this is in progress.

JohanPienaar (talk) 14:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As user Jac16888 took it upon himself to vandalise the page a lot of work the process was lost. It will now take another week or two to cite sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohanPienaar (talk • contribs) 14:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The content you are adding is overly promotional and entirely unsourced, I suggest you work on it before adding anymore - as it stands it is not acceptable content--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you are an expert on Anton Goosen then. No need to suggest that I work on it. As I have stated above that is allready happening. I will suggest however that before you act like a bull in a china shop again, you read the Talk page. Also editors are suppossed to help, not feed their own egos by deleting content as they wish. As was clearly stated all along. It is a work in progress and a significant improvement on the stub. JohanPienaar (talk) 17:38, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to be an expert to know that the content you have added is not suitable in the slightest--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I might have heard more stupid statements, but not recently. A basic knowledge of the topic is required to judge whther it is "fluff". Next time be an editor not a dictator. But then I am not the first person to tell you that am I? JohanPienaar (talk) 18:25, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you re-read what I wrote, since you seem to have misunderstood it. After dealing with promotional crap such as this on Wikipedia for over 5 years I am perfectly capable of telling when somebody is trying to add a magazine style fluff piece as opposed to an actual sourced and useful encyclopedia article - I don't need to be intimately familiar with Mr. Goosen to be able to read what you have wrote and found it promotional--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:33, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The point is irrelevant anyway - since the content is a direct translation of [1] it is therefore a copyright violation, this makes it a legal issue and restoring it would be a very bad idea--Jac16888 ^Talk 00:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You power hungry moron. Clearly you are a slow learner if in five years you have not grasped the basic principles of editing on Wikipedia. Firstly it is not a direct translation as you assert (need some language skills as well?) It is not a copyright violation either as I wrote the original piece in Afrikaans and am now contributing it to Wikipedia. Clearly you have some sort of personal axe to gring from behind a mask and I suggest you take it elsewhere. You should really go and revert the Bob Dylan piece as well by your standards. I will be taking this up through the relevant channels. 196.215.179.30 JohanPienaar (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Insulting me doesn't exactly make your case any stronger: the facts are clear, the content I removed is practically a word for word translation of that website with a few minor changes - not enough to make it sufficiently different, and there is nothing on that website to suggest said content has been legally released to match with Wikipedia's own license, we cannot just take your word for it. So give up your little insults and actually write proper content which meets with Wikipedia guidelines or go else go away and waste somebodies elses time--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The facts are indeed clear. JohanPienaar (talk) 17:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are. To quote from the website: "© 2009 Anton Goosen - Alle regte voorbehou". Unless permission is properly released we cannot use this content, and considering the promotional nature of content from a persons own website why would we want to anyway--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:01, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by User Jac16888

Due to continious malicious vandalism by User Jac16888 more time is now spent on restoring pages than actually editing and improving the page. This will be taken up through the relevant channels. JohanPienaar (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That editor has caused trouble before

For the record, that particular editor was involved in deleting other valuable material from the project. And they continue to make non-constructive comments with my editing.24.0.133.234 (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources needed

To add stuff like this, sources should be easy to find and properly document. That is the only way to get rid of the {{refimprove}} template. This is a schoolbook issue of wp:RS and wp:BLP, not one of copyvio.

Submitted for Speedy Deletion

I have submitted this article for Speedy Deletion. The original author no longer exists and was clearly the music for which the article was written. No sources added since BLP tag in 2013 and all source links bounce back to this same article. Highly promotional. Kobuu (talk) 14:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anton Goosen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where does he come from

Where does he come from 41.150.244.186 (talk) 18:34, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]