Talk:William Gazecki

Emmy for Waco?

Sorry, I cannot find an independent reference for Waco Emmy award. Can somebody else help? Emmy website is not much use for 1998 awards. Verne Equinox 01:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The only reference I can find is: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/09/09/entertainment/main11363.shtml About half-way down the page listing the winners is this: "Investigative journalism (programs): Nightline for "Crime and Punishment, Parts 1 & 2," ABC; HBO America Undercover for "Teen Killers: A Second Chance?" HBO; HBO Signature Double Exposure for "Waco: The Rules of Engagement," HBO". Wgazecki (talk) 16:28, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Apparently it won a News and Documentary Emmy (http://www.imdb.com/event/ev0000493/1999), which to me is different from an Emmy Emmy. So there's that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.199.241.89 (talk) 22:55, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

A News and Documentary Emmy IS an "Emmy Emmy". In the Emmy culture, the greatest distinction is between "National Emmys" and "Local Emmys". It's the National ones that are "Emmy Emmys". The Local ones do not carry the clout that the National ones do. The News and Documentary Emmy is a National Emmy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.238.210.129 (talk) 04:59, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Conforming this article to Wiki standards

I would like to see this article conform to Wiki standards of verifiable references and non-advertising attitude. I don't know how to do that and still maintain historic accuracy and comprehensive information. Wgazecki (talk) 16:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

re: hang on

As stated above, I would like to conform this article ro Wiki standards. Please edit or suggest edits that would create neutrality. It seems to me that what is written is descriptive but not promotional. The events and accomplishments and other references to relationships are factual. How to maintain this factuality and remove the impression of promotion is the question. Wgazecki (talk) 16:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The page hasn't been nominated for speedy deletion, the topic is likely notable but there are many, many worries with how the text is written, along with the lack of sourcing. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:49, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I recently received an email indicating there is a potential current Conflict of Interest with respect to the editing of the William Gazecki article. The reference provided was: 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 This has become quite a mess. I am William Gazecki, and I stopped editing the William Gazecki article last year after Wiki Editor http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User:VQuakr deleted almost the entire page. Which apparently he had the legitimate option to do, EXCEPT that he/she did it in such a manner that there was NO WAY TO UNDO what was done. Which I consider an egregious over-stepping of editorial authority. Such actions demonstrate one-sided control which as I understand it is NOT what Wikipedia is meant to foster. That said, in that interaction with VQuakr, I began to learn the policies regarding living persons, etc. I have stayed away from all of this ever since. As I said at the time, I would like nothing more than any account of my life and career to be accurate and unbiased, and to fall WITHIN Wikipedia guidelines. A Wikipedia Editor named Mediatech1 recently (and autonomously) initiated a series of edits on the William Gazecki page, in an attempt to restore it to a version previous to the actions of VQuakr last year that decimated the page. After some inquiry, I finally heard from Mediatech1. This IS an individual I have known. I've not seen them in many years. He's a retired Hollywood Studio technician who recently decided to learn about Wikipedia with the intention of placing some new articles (for example, the Apollo 17 mission is one of his fields of study). It has been implied that Mediatech1 is/was possibly being employed or in some manner compensated for his work on the William Gazecki article. I had no idea what was going on until I received an email notifying me of this Conflict of Interest problem. There will be no further editing by Mediatech1 on the William Gazecki article.

Also, in trying to get a comprehensive assessment of all this, by following the various links and entries, I have read a number of completely inappropriate comments about how the page was "sprawling", and nothing more than a "promotional CV". These comment are completely inappropriate and do not demonstrate the proper level of respect for William Gazecki, a notable individual in his profession, whose life story includes many notable and historically worthy events and associations. Which is what Wikipedia is for, yes? The entertainment industry as a whole is a highly specialized field, involving many aspects of art, higher education, technology and political and social history. It is an area of expertise and information that those outside of it often do not understand, and the William Gazecki article- as it was developed over a multi-year period of careful entries- offered many examples of relevant and unique historical points. And once I learned I was not supposed to be editing it, I STOPPED!

For anyone who reads this and is interested, THIS is an existing article that serves as an idea model and example of how the William Gazecki article should be formatted and articulated: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Lucy_Walker_(director) This is a documentary film Director like myself, and she and William Gazecki share very similar life stories. EXCEPT that William Gazecki- besides his accomplishments as a filmmaker, whose work represents many authentic and valuable social contributions, has also been witness to or a literal part of several most notable events and/or processes which deserve notation in Wikipedia. These include the first public dissemination of information on Remote Viewing; and the first film on Jacque Fresco, a renowned futurist who viewpoints on social development has been studied by millions of young people. Thee are other examples, some in the field of analogue sound and video technology. Suffice to say that a lot of work that was well-intended and earnestly entered into the Article is now lost. Hopefully there is a way to honor William Gazecki, again with this page as an ideal model: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Lucy_Walker_(director) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wgazecki (talk • contribs) 00:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

And just TO BE CLEAR, for all you conscientious Wiki, I forgot to properly sign the above entry. My mistake. William Gazecki 00:12, 31 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wgazecki (talk • contribs)