User talk:Geoffrey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149
Hi Geoffrey, feel free to change the way I phrased the Iraqi reports. I was just attempting to pull all of the official Iraqi government statements together in one place. -º¡º
RE Meta: Thanks. :) --mav
Hi!
I've just been looking at les Invalides and your excellent four pictures are too wide. What I mean is that they make me scroll my 1024 by 768 screen to see them all and this is irritating to the reader. Three across the screen should be OK but not four. Could you rearrange them please?
Thanks Adrian Pingstone 16:46 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- They're not my pictures, they're Isis's - I just put them in that table. ;-) Strange, though, it worked fine on my 1024×768 screen (WinXP, Mozilla). But I changed them to a 2×2 square arrangement - it definitely wouldn't've worked on 800×600 or less screens. Geoffrey 01:37 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)
-
- Bad news! The right hand two pics (on Internet Explorer 5.5) are half on my 1024 by 768 screen and half off. In other words, there's a lot of white space between the pics. Any other ideas?
- Adrian Pingstone 08:03 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Bad news! The right hand two pics (on Internet Explorer 5.5) are half on my 1024 by 768 screen and half off. In other words, there's a lot of white space between the pics. Any other ideas?
-
-
- Hmm...I see. IE and Mozilla render stuff very differently. I think the problem was the table width="100%" tag. I changed it to width="600" (pixels) - it's now looking the same on IE 6.0 and Mozilla 1.3. Only thing is 640×480 screens will still have to scroll - but they have to scroll to see an entire Wikipedia article anyway. Geoffrey 21:33 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- It's absolutely fine now.Thanks.
- Adrian Pingstone 22:21 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- It's absolutely fine now.Thanks.
-
-
Hi, I think you are going to need to re-insert your comments into User:Jimbo Wales/Pushing To 1.0. The formatting went quite bizarre after your change and Wik reverted it. I just tried to put back in what you wrote but something strange happened and all of a sudden my name was all over it suggesting I had written things there when I hadn't! Good luck trying to re-do it. Angela
Geoffrey,
In answer to your queries:
Isn't the NRSV incompatible with Wikipedia's GFDL?
AFAIK, it appears from my reading of the GNU FDL, the NRSV is incompatible with the GNU FDL.
Where did you get the "permission" listed on your user page?
I copied the notice you seen from the permissions page on the NRSV website ( http://www.ncccusa.org/newbtu/permiss.html ). I put the notice there to inform Wikipedians and others were the quotes came from.
You ought to use King James or something uncopyrighted.
That's a good idea.
As to the Authorized Version, that would be a good idea. However, the AV is under copyright in the UK. The SAERV of 1901 would a better choice. Thank you for pointing out my error.
Mea Culpa.
The AV is copyrighted? Who did that!? :-)
Yes, the AV is copyrighted in the UK. See http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/king_james_copy_pr.htm.
This SAERV (Standard American English Revised Version, maybe?
SAERV stands for Standard American Edition, Revised Version, also known as the American Standard Version.
My ISP won't connect to much except Wikipedia right now)
I've been there many, many times.
may work, because 1901 should mean public domain in US, but...isn't there a Net Bible translation that's open content?
A couple of years ago, I had the ASV/SAERV on my site. Before putting it there, I checked into the C/R status. You are right: 1901 is public domain in the US. In the second part, you are refering to the NET Bible. See http://www.netbible.org. It's copyrighted, and from what I heard, permission is hard to get. There is also the World English Bible. See http://www.worldenglishbible.org. It's PD, but not done yet.
Contents |
[edit] Foster
I don't remember where I got the 1891 date. If there are several sources that say 1881 then that's probably correct. AndyL 06:21, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 39th Canadian Federal Election
- You weren't quite right saying that law requires the election to be held in 2009. Unlike (notably, although by no means exclusively) the United States, Canada (as a Westminster System) does not have fixed election dates. Instead, elections are called by dissolving Parliament. That can be done (technical details aside) by the Prime Minister at will, or by the government losing a vote of non-confidence. Constitutional law sets a time limit on the duration of any Parliament of five years, so at most five years can elapse between elections. The current Canadian government is a minority government, with no stable majority coalitions, so it is particularly vulnerable to non-confidence motions. I edited your change to the intro sentence, but nice job at cleaning the language up. Majromax 02:33, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Kiki designs
Hope you'll visit Wikijunior project Nikki/Kiki character designs to discuss who's design is best. I've found a dozen talented people to create designs. -- user:zanimum
[edit] m:Wikijunior_project_Nikki_character_designs#Least_favourite
The deadline for using our US$10000 grant from the Beck Foundation, for publishing a Wikijunior book is December. Thus, we need to narrow the competition for Kiki artist down to as few contestants as possible. I'm asking you and anyone that's already discussed current designs to list their three least favourite creations, as votes for elimination. -- user:zanimum
[edit] copyvio at Time-sharing
Hi, it's just the opposite. ;-) I have been critizized for having not trapped some copyright violations when editing articles. So I started to mark possible copyright violations with {{copyvio}} which means possible copyright violation. I check with http://www.copyscape.com/ for corresponding websites, there is no automatism at all. Just when I'm rather sure that there is a copyright violation, I tag the page. Moreover, I write "copyvio ?" into the summary. Intentionally I do not remove the content of the page. So just making a comment and removing the tag {{copyvio}} would suffice to recover the page. Sometimes I make a mistake. ;-) However, the dancing page is a special case. Since I am involved in Austrian folk dancing I assumed that someone had copied the page content without thinking about licenses. However, as you can see on their homepage it is explicitely stated that this page is Copyright The Bavarian Schuhplattlers © 1999-2004. I don't like this. People should put their pages under the GPL. ;-) I accept, if they don't think about copyright. However, explicitely claiming copyright for the own work and not respecting other's licenses is not ok. In this case a stricter - means "correct" - practice of dealing with copyright issues is appropriate. As you can see, the user just stated I OWN the copyrights, as I wrote the webpage info. insted of doing what's told in the information text of the copyvio tag. And I fear the user will never put the page under the GPL. This seems as if I had a real problem with this page. No, not really, however, when I saw this page, I made my checks, in fact it does not conform to the GPL, I stopped for a moment ... and said ok, it is a copyright violation. At least it will be a copyright violation when a later user will use the content under the GPL. I fear, but I am not sure. - However, to come back to real life: You are right and I just wanted to explain the backgrounds of my actions. As you can see from my activity log I've drastically reduced my activities. Especially acting appropriate in copyright issues is hard: I do not want to offend god willed but not-being-aware people on the one hand but I want to respect licenses on the other hand. So I simply will leave this issue to the specialists. In my opinion there are too many copyright violations when measuring strictly. It's a bit annoying. I want to thank you again for having been polite and friendly when asking me, maybe I myself would have been more harsh with people like me. ;-) --Roland2 11:05, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] translation....
I've just finished translating Emanuela Orlandi. An interesting little mystery but I don't think here is much subtance behind it. I have thereofre added a request for verification and a stub template. A piece of advide from someone older and much more experienced with matters Italian than you are might be helpful though: Be careful not to beleive all the conspiracy theories that involve the Vatican, the mafia and so on. There are quite literally billions of them!! It is an industry over here to pin the blame for every somehwta peculair incident on "hidden" or "occult" forces working in the shadows; the CIA, SISMI, Vatican, etc..
But it's good that you take an interst in Italy.--Lacatosias 11:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Moloch.jpg
Please let me know when you have moved this image to en.wp (ie, here), and I will delete it from the Commons. Regards, pfctdayelise (translate?) 16:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How do you know people from the LPSB?
Are you a student and/or employee of the school board? How do you know Mr. Blackwell? Several of your comments on the talk page for the school board IP show that you live in this area. --Kyle 16:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] April 2007
Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. jhawkinson 06:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
