User talk:PedanticallySpeaking
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Today is Monday, June 9, 2008. It is now 22:19 (UTC). Wikipedia currently has 2,406,372 articles. You are currently looking at User talk:PedanticallySpeaking on Wikipedia
This is my current talk page. Old messages are, those before February 1, 2006, are at User talk:PedanticallySpeaking/Old1.
Please post new comments at the bottom, unless you are replying to a message I sent you. In that case, would you please post it with the original below? Thanks. PedanticallySpeaking 17:48, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Would like to know who you are: please e-mail me ar admin@natenoy.com, I may need you to testify at the OEC.
[edit] At the Bottom, Please
Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.
[edit] James John Parker Protection
Posted on User talk:Marudubshinki:
Why did you remove the semiprotection I posted on the page almost immediately after I protected it? Unregistered users keep trying to rewrite the article as a campaign statement and I was trying to prevent that. I see it happened again after you unprotected it. PedanticallySpeaking 17:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Reply of Marudubshinki
I removed it after a request on Helpdesk and because I did not think the vandalism and POV serious enough to warrant semi-protection. In other words, I think you were trigger happy with the protection. --maru (talk) contribs 17:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
My reply
I was not "trigger happy." It is the first time I've ever protected anything since I became an administrator over a year ago. I posted a query about this on the administrator's noticeboard and someone suggested semi-protection might be advisable. The changes, which are lifted from the candidate's web-site (which links to the Wikipedia entry from the tagline "Who is Jim Parker?"), appear connected to the campaign. The changes have been made numerous times (see the page [history]). I gave notice of my reasoning on Wikipedia:Protected pages. I have consulted Wikipedia:Help desk and am unsure what question you refer to. Would you point me to it? PedanticallySpeaking 17:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Reply of Maru
Dude, the vast majority of helpdesk requests are made, and handled on, the mailing list. Let me put it this way- just today we had ~90 emails. What you see on that page is a tiny fraction of the true amount.
As for semiprotection, I standby what I said; it shouldn't be used until the vandalism is uncontrollable, multi-layered and complex. --maru (talk) contribs 17:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
My reply
Thank you for your reply. Would you be able to send me a copy of the item from the mailing list? Or is it posted online someplace? PedanticallySpeaking 17:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
His reply
-
-
-
-
- http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/helpdesk-l/. Link seems to be down now. I will paste the original request here:
- "From: Jim Parker <parker309@msn.com> Mailed-By: wikimedia.org
- http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/helpdesk-l/. Link seems to be down now. I will paste the original request here:
-
-
-
To: helpdesk-l@wikimedia.org"
-
-
-
-
-
- "I would like to have this page unlocked so that I can perform one final edit. Then we can lock it again. Somebody keeps changing it. Thanks."
-
-
-
-
My reply
Thanks. This is the man the article is about. And we aren't supposed to edit articles about ourselves. I am grateful. PedanticallySpeaking 18:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Splash
May I ask why you removed the "semi-protection" from this article? The person who it is about has repeatedly been modifying the article to promote his candidacy for Congress. This has been done from a series of IP addresses and this was my effort to prevent this. PedanticallySpeaking 16:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't. I removed the tag because the article was not (and currently is not) semiprotected. -Splashtalk 16:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
- Okay. Another removed the protection and I thought I restored it. Apparently I only did the alert tag on the page. Thanks for your swift reply. PedanticallySpeaking 16:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Katie Holmes
Posted on User talk:Rossrs:
Greetings, Rossrs! Hope you are well. I've completely redone the article on the actress Katie Holmes and put it on WP:PR. If you have the time, I'd be grateful if you could add your comments to Wikipedia:Peer review/Katie Holmes/archive1. I hope to get it to WP:FAC soon. Thanks for your help. PedanticallySpeaking 16:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there, PS! Great article I must say! I think the text is of a very high standard. I have replied at the PR page but to summarize my comments for you : my only concern is the images - some of them are unsourced and there is currently a bot going through Wikipedia deleting unsource images as possible copyright violation, so they need to be made right fairly quickly. I see that most of them were uploaded by User:AriGold so have left a message on Ari's talk page asking for information to be added to the image description pages. Hopefully we can get this all sorted out before it goes onto FA. I'm sure that this will be easy enough to fix - none of the images need to be deleted (except maybe the "Gap" advertisement) - they're fine, but just need the finishing touches to make them "legal" (or whatever the correct term would be....) cheers Rossrs 01:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Greetings, Rossrs! Thanks for your comments on the peer review. I've tried to address the points you've made. I keep rereading and, alas, it seems like I find no end of errors. Let me know if you see anything else that needs attention. PedanticallySpeaking 21:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- Hi PS. I've tried again to trim the article in order to better suit it to becoming an FA. Instead of just reverting because it removed some of 'your' article, please could you actually review the edits. If there are some elements that you do not agree with, then by all means, repair them. Please try not to just revert the whole thing. The article, as it stands, needs a lot of editing and trimming to reach FA. Proto||type 11:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] James Aubrey
Top-notch work! This article is one of the best in all of Wikipedia. Well-researched, cogent, and a pleasure to read. Eleemosynary 01:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks very much for your praise. And great user name, by the way. PedanticallySpeaking 15:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 |
Congratulations!!! To PedanticallySpeaking for 370 edits on James T. Aubrey Jr. Tvaughn05e (Talk)(Contribs) 15:43, 19 February 2006 (UTC) |
- Thanks very much for your praise of my article. PedanticallySpeaking 15:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Katie Holmes
Hey, I am so sorry but as I added them nearly a year ago, I have no idea where I got all of them from. The first picture, from Batman Begins, was from imdb.com (I think). The others, I honestly have no idea where I found them. AriGold 16:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- Okay, I understand. It's hard to know just where things came from. I myself had to go back and check my notes when I put in footnotes on this article. It's just that when I've submitted a FAC in the past, usually the first thing I get for responses is "oppose" votes because the photos aren't satisfactory to some voters. Rossrs put in a note about the Oprah clip, I do know. Again, thanks for your support on this article. PedanticallySpeaking 16:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Aubrey vandalism
Posted on User talk:Curps:
Thanks for your vandalism patrolwork on this article. I was surprised at the many, many edits made but in comparing versions, I see almost nothing I needed to fix. I wasn't able to get online this weekend to monitor it during its day in the sun on the front page. If I can help with your articles, please let me know. Again, thanks for watching over Mr. Aubrey. PedanticallySpeaking 16:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for the opportunity to participate in the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Katie Holmes good luck with bringing it to Featured article status. I know you worked hard on that one and I keep it on my watchlist. Keep up the good work.--Dakota ~ ° 19:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hopkins School
Hopkins School is up for peer review, and anything you could note as a member of WP:Schools would be appreciated! Thanks! Staxringold 11:55, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Posted on his talk page
Greetings, Stax!
I've looked at the Hopkins School article and posted comments on the peer review page. I probably come off sounding very harsh there, but I don't mean to be. I've gotten a number of my articles through this process (e.g. Katie Holmes, Tom Brinkman, Helen Gandy) so I'd like to think I'm familiar with the usual objections there. You have a very solid foundation for a FA, its just not there yet. Let me know if I can help again. PedanticallySpeaking 17:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for the detailed commentary! You didn't come off harsh, I know what you mean (to a lesser degree, I'll admit) about the FA process. Check out my push for Cheers. :) I've tried to address what I can, though your rewrites were gold. A second set of eyes over the rest of the article would be greatly appreciated! Staxringold 20:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Page deletion
Revolution within the form is up for deletion. I ask for a vote to transwiki. Thanks. WHEELER 00:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bruce Johnson
Hi, I just noticed the 4th sentence in the 1st paragraph, a politics maybe reword it just a little? I would do it but not without discussion. Thanks.--Dakota ~ ° 07:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bob McEwen
Hi Pedantically! I'm not fully versed in IPA, but maybe you are. I know you've recently worked on making Bob McEwen into an FA (congrats, BTW), and I just realized you may want to edit his name pronunciation in the lead to IPA per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (pronunciation). Staxringold 00:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bruce Johnson
Posted on User talk:Raul654:
I am trying once more to make this article featured (Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Bruce_Johnson). By my count the vote is 6 to 2 in favor of the nomination. Is this a sufficient ratio for it to be approved? PedanticallySpeaking 16:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jim Petro article
Having a great deal of respect for you writing, and your citations, could I ask you to take on the Jim Petro article? I stumbled onto it this morning while doing some article upkeep and while I played with it, it is in need of a total overhaul. Since you excel at these types of articles, yours was the first name that popped into my head. Stude62 15:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Stude62:
Greetings, Stude62!
Thanks very much for your praise. Glad to see someone's noticing my labors here.
I see what you mean about this article. It looks like a rehash of an official biography. It does need work. However, to research it to the level I'd like is a big undertaking because Petro has been in public life for so long and the number of articles the databases will turn up will be staggering. I can't promise anything, but I will try to do something with it--at the very least rewrite this.
However, my main project right at the moment is my revision of my Bricker Amendment article, which I am completely rewriting in the hopes of sending it to FAC. Did you see my article on the incumbent lieutenant governor, Bruce Johnson, is now a featured article? PedanticallySpeaking 16:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC) (P.S. How, when your main interest is apparently cars, did you come to this particular article?)
[edit] watergate figures category pages
I am a newbie so forgive me if I am asking something stupid. On the watergate figures category page that you seem to have been involved with early on there is this odd link User:Trey Stone/Henry Kissinger sandbox 2 under "K" which seems totally out of place. Should it be there? I'm guessing not! --Slp 21:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Trey Stone:
Greetings, Trey!
I saw your revision of the Henry Kissinger article you are working on. Good to see you taking on such a task. I did want to point out that articles in progress on user pages should not be placed in categories. What you can do so you'll know where to put it when the article is moved into the main namespace is either remove the wikilinks or put a colon after the opening brackets (like this Category:Living people). Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 16:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Slp:
Greetings, Slp!
Glad to have you aboard. I looked at the Henry Kissinger page you cited and I've written User:Trey Stone about it. We aren't supposed to put works in progress like this article into categories. Only main name space articles should be in main name space categories such as this. See my message to him at User_talk:PedanticallySpeaking#watergate_figures_category_pages. Let me know if I can help again. PedanticallySpeaking 16:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Glad To Have You With Us!
Posted on User talk:SlimVirgin
Greetings, SlimVirgin!
I'd heard that you'd left us but I see you've made edits today. Glad to know you're still here. PedanticallySpeaking 17:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How Ya Been?
Posted on User talk:Bishonen:
Greetings, Bishonen!
We haven't talked in a long-time. I hope you are doing well. I saw your comment on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Carnildo 2 and wanted to say I agree completely with your assessment. When I first encountered Carnildo on the WP:FAC pages I looked him up and was surprised to see he was an administrator. How did that happen, I wondered? Then when I saw that he was trying to get back almost immediately after being desyopped (and desyopped for very good reason), I of course voted no. Anyhow, what have you been working on lately? I've just got Katie Holmes and Bruce Johnson to featured status. By my count, thirteen articles I've written have made it to "featured." (See Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations.) Ave!PedanticallySpeaking 17:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for your comments
Posted on User talk:Giano
Greetings, Giano!
I saw your replies to Carnildo's comments on my vote on his new RFA and wanted to thank you for them. Notice that nothing he says actually addresses the points I raised, merely questions my motives for the vote. There's no point in my commenting on the page, one, because the vote is closed, and two, because he does not reply to people except to snipe as in this instance. If you need another admin's support in actions against this user, please let me know. PedanticallySpeaking 15:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Reply of Giano
Thanks. I though t you and Encaphlon spoke very well. I do not anticipate being troubled by this user again as I plan to put a great distance between us. The odd thing is I don't think I have ever had any contact with him before or since the famous episode - I certainly can't remember it if I did. I just wish he would teach that bloody orhanbot thing to read, then even that could stay away from me. Shame poor old Gmaxwell is still in the doldrums over it all, but there you are, can't make an omlette without breaking a few good eggs I suppose. Thanks for the message. Giano | talk 15:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
My reply
I too have never seen this user except in regards to his negative votes on FAC pages. Never. (And I've been here 18 months, have 10,000+ edits, and have edited thousands of pages.) The only thing I see him doing is running OrphanBot, which drives many up the wall. (Just look at the comments on its and Carnildo's talk pages.) I really don't see anything he does except enforce his notions on images and snipe at anyone who questions him. If I can help you on your articles, let me know; my ambit lately has been pop culture (e.g. Katie Holmes) and Ohio politicians (e.g. Bruce Johnson) but I've helped out all over the place. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 16:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Giano and copied here by PS
"If you need another admin's support in actions against this user, please let me know"? Dear god, could he be a little more circumspect in his eagerness to carry on a vendetta? How crass. OK, ok, I shall AGF and read it to mean "if you find yourself unfairly harassed by Carnildo and need some assistance, call on me." —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Reply posted on Giano and Bunchofgrapes's talk pages
The assumption I have a "vendetta" is precisely why people throw their hands up in disgust and walk away from Wikipedia. Your second reading is the correct one intended. PedanticallySpeaking 16:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Bunchofgrapes
Then I got it right :-) All is well. If I offended, I apologize. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Giano
I think your phrasing was a little unfortunate, but I take you at your word, and I'm sorry if my phrasing ("vendetta") went too far. Really. I made a mistake. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Bunchofgrapes
Apology accepted. It's just that so many users shoot first and ask questions later and tend to assume the worst in people. Precisely the offense that got Carnildo deadmin'd. What sort of articles are you working on? PedanticallySpeaking 16:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Orphanbot and its master
Hello again PedanticallySpeaking! Firstly, I could not agree more with your comments above as well as those from said Rfa. Orphanbot raises some very serious concerns about the proper use of AI scripts to make what are, effectively legal and editorial decisions. The arguement that it is somehow "only enforcing policy", glosses over the fact it is not. It is enforcing ITS CREATOR'S INTERPRETATION of policy. I attempted to explain this to the Carnildo formally known as admin, and you can see how sucessful I was in the endevor. That so many come to his defense, perplexes and disturbs me. It's almost as if they feel "someone has to be the bad cop here" and he is best suited for the role. For me, this gives every reason to oppose and none to support. Here is another reason [1] . I also noticed the bot had been sniffing around some of your pics of Ohio pols[2]. But at least it does appear to have Gained a posse. Standing up to him and the other Copyright Vogons and bullies in Rfa, FAC and the talkpages is a good start. But if we are to be truly effective against them, we will have to mobilize and orgainize into some form of association- A Fellowship for Free and Fairuse maybe? Here we will be able to pool our resources, support one another, and help with such problems as finding the right tags for images, which the CV Vogons are usually unwilling or unable to do. Only a very small number of images pose a serious threat of lawsuits. The overreactionry behavior by Carnildo and the Copyright Vogons is well out of proportion and unjustified by the actual danger. Their Nuremberg Defense no longer holds up, assuming it ever did to begin with. We need our own defense. Thank you for your time, inspiring words and taking a stand.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:12, 31 March 2006 (UTC) PS Or Simply "Ghost" to his friends;>
Posted on RDH talk page
Greetings, R.D.H.!
Thanks for your message re the recent RFA vote on Carnildo. I have read your discussion with him regarding OrphanBot's deletions and could not agree more with your position. My objection is he seems to feel that any image that lacks an explicit message from the copyright proprietor saying "I give Wikipedia consent to use this image" must be deleted. He's ignoring decades of fair use precedents, a rigid form of "copyright paranoia" as you have justly labeled it. This is the view of big corporate powers. Many people are ignorant that copyright exists not to make them rich but to supply Americans with things to read, watch, listen to, etc. Other than a few images from Playboy, I can't say I've seen images that aren't fair use here.
My last encounter with Carnildo was on the Bruce Johnson [candidacy]. All the disputed pictures were publicity photos on official Ohio web-sites. No state document or report I have ever seen--I'm an Ohioan--has ever claimed copyright. I contacted Bruce Johnson's press office and they told me they claimed no copyright in the pictures. But even that wasn't good enough. It's very frustrating because I have no idea how to satisfy him and Johnleemk. If either of them had a copyright law background--not even as attorneys, but dealing with rights--I'd be more inclined to accept their views. I really don't understand either user.
Anyhow, best wishes to you. Let me know if I can help fight "copyright paranoia". PedanticallySpeaking 19:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
That is amazing ...everything u said it was just awsome
[edit] Thank you
Thank you for your vote of confidence in my recent request for bureaucratship. Even though it didn't pass, I greatly appreciate your support and hope I will continue to have your respect. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] James Aubrey photo
Posted on User talk:Raul654
Greetings, Raul!
Hope this message finds you well. I observed today that the photo of Aubrey, a featured article, had been removed from his article and that the image (Image:JamesTAubrey.jpg) was missing (deleted?). Would you be able to tell me anything about what happened to this image since clicking on its title is a dead-end. PedanticallySpeaking 16:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Here's the page history for the deleted image page:
- 19:06, March 10, 2006 Howcheng deleted "Image:JamesTAubrey.jpg" (orphaned fair use image tagged more than 7 days (I5))
- 18:01, March 2, 2006 . . PedanticallySpeaking (remove orphan)
- 03:12, March 1, 2006 . . Roomba (WARNING: This fair use image has been tagged as orphaned because it is not used inline. If it is not used in the article namespace within 7 days, it will be speedy deleted.)
- Direct complaints to user talk:Howcheng Raul654 21:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Katie Holmes on the Main Page
I read what was said at Talk:Katie Holmes, and I just want to say that you shouldn't listen to that, because it is an excellent article that deserves to be read by many people. Also, I consider the subject of the article to be interesting, and I'm sure many other people do too. Not only is it a great article as it stands, but a lot of other editors will be influenced by it when contributing to other articles on similar topics. Extraordinary Machine 23:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Posted on User talk:Extraordinary Machine
Dear Extraordinary,
Thanks for your kind words on my talk page about the Katie Holmes article. Yes, this is a most unserious subject, but she's an interesting person and much in the news lately so is certainly "feature-worthy." I've seen articles on far more important topics that haven't been researched as thoroughly as I did this one. I am gratified by your comments on my hard work. They made my day.
Do let me know if you have an article you're working on that you need another pair of eyes to examine. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 15:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bob McEwen on the front page
Posted on User talk:Raul654:
Greetings, Raul!
Hope this message finds you well. I've put a notice on the talk page for Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article asking that my suggestion Bob McEwen not be featured until I can update it. I have been working on other things since it achieved featured status and there is material from the campaign that should be included. In addition, next Tuesday is the primary election and I'd like to include that as well. I will let you know when I add this additional material. PedanticallySpeaking 15:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bricker Amendment
Posted on User talk:Kaisershatner:
Greetings, Kaiser!
Some months ago you were helping out on the Bricker Amendment article. I unfortunately got sidetracked on other issues, e.g. making Katie Holmes a FA and getting her on the front page, but I've been working on a complete revision to the article. My work-in-progress is at User:PedanticallySpeaking/In Progress2. I still have quite a bit re the congressional consideration to add but I wonder if you have anything to add about what I have so far. Thanks for your help. PedanticallySpeaking 16:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] David R. Smith
This article has been VfD'd and the deletion upheld by consensus at DRV. Your recreation is inappropriate, please don't do it again. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Recreation of data which has had consensus to be deleted is considered vandalism, and repeated recreation is grounds for blocking. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
I only speak that way to people who continue to flout consensus and policy. User:Zoe|(talk) 17:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Greetings, Zoe!
I don't understand your reply at all. Your first move is to bludgeon someone with the threat of expulsion?" That's hardly a civil way to act and I thought we had a policy about that. What of our "assume good faith" doctrine? It is hardly likely to secure cooperation when you avoid making peaceful overtures to secure compliance and enter making threats. I think of "flies with honey". I gather this is your usual practice—to judge from the first comment on this talk page—and I do not think your approach is necessary of justified. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 15:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bricker
Hi, thanks for the note. That $^!&^ Caro book is on my desk, glaring at me. I've been reading it intermittently for two months and I'm still learning about the type of desks they have in the Senate room. But seriously, it's great that you've inserted all of that stuff. I think it could be synthesized into the article pretty easily - why don't you take a run at it. I'd be happy to contribute/copyedit/proofread/whatever. Then maybe we can take another run at WP:PR and potentially WP:FAC.
[edit] Merger of Webster's Third New International Dictionary
I'd like to know why you merged this with Webster's Dictionary, despite clear consensus against the move at Talk:Webster's Dictionary. Please respond on that talk page. Gene Nygaard 05:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Welcom Teratornis
Posted on User talk:Teratornis
Greetings, Teratornis!
Saw your page because of your work on my Middletown and Cincinnati Railroad page. I also did the Cincinnati, Lebanon, and Northern Railroad article. I've written a number of southwest Ohio articles and am glad to see another contributor. Let me know if I can help you out. Good work on the Lebanon Countryside Trail article, by the way. PedanticallySpeaking 15:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed event policy for Wikicalendar
I recently posted some ideas about developing criteria for what should and should not be listed on Wikicalendar events at the Wikicalendar's talk page. Since you're actively involved in this project, I thought I'd let you know so that you can comment or add more suggestions. Thanks :). Fabricationary 00:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases
I have recently begun reviving the Supreme Court case project since the founder is inactive. You're welcome to drop on by and help us out if you are still interested. There's also a discussion going at the project's talk page. Enjoy your Memorial Day! btw, read your user page. I hope you'll stay with wikipedia. We need more dedicated wikipedians like yourself. and i'd never heard of "dord" before! --Kchase02 (T) 06:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RfA Notification
Hello! I noticed that you have interacted with user:Staxringold who is currently undergoing an RfA and thought that you might be interested in participating at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Staxringold 2. You have received this message without the endorsement of the candidate involved, and this is not a solicitation of support, it is only an effort to make RfA discussions better (for more information see user:ShortJason/Publicity). Thank you in advance for your participation. ShortJason 19:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] TFA
Nice one! Congrats. Kaisershatner 02:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- Congratulations on today's Featured article. I am envious because several of the Featured articles on which I have worked were editted to death and subsequently lost their status. I have no doubt this one will survive as a Featured article as long as you and the other contributors watch over it. Although I am completely uninterested in politics, this article appears to have an appeal to the general reader because there is a story arc in it. Good one. --Ancheta Wis 15:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Loveland, Ohio
Hi, it looks like you claimed a long time ago that Loveland, Ohio was the only Ohio city that existed in three counties. [3] It looks like Dublin, Ohio also has this distinction, being in Delaware, Franklin, and Union counties. I've removed that part from the article and two of its translations; if you can find anything to back up this claim, feel free to add it back in. In any event, thanks for contributing to my hometown's article. :^) – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 03:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Hey, You're Back
Yup - I've been back for a few months, though I really haven't been able to dedicate the kind of time that I've really been wanting to dedicate. You know, real life and all. I've been generally well overall, but I've been locked in my lab for months (which wouldn't be so bad if I had some windows). How about you? – ClockworkSoul 22:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
It's good to hear that you're back; I've been back from my extended break for a while now, everything's been going pretty well. --Merovingian {T C @} 02:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hello again
Hi, Ped. I've just been to Normandy for a few days (that's the one in France). Got my first view of Mont St Michel - fantastic! Deb 11:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'm so envious. I visited Mont St Michel a few years ago. Amazing place! And at night it is spectacular... I'll have to try to find a good night photo to add to the article. I would love to go there again. Anyway I didn't come here to join a conversation uninvited :-) But I did want to say hello PS. Hope everything's going well for you. With me, nothing special to report but everything is good. Welcome back !! Rossrs 13:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Didn't go through the tunnel this time. We took the ferry from Portsmouth to Caen, which saved an awful lot of driving. (From here to Kent would have taken about five hours in the car.) As the crow flies, I suppose it's only about 300 miles - that's a wild guess. Deb 16:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: I'm Back--How Are You?
I'm fine, thanks! I finished all of my exams earlier this month, which is good. Thanks for the comments about my RFA; it's nice to have support from somebody as experienced as yourself. I should note that I haven't been patrolling the Holmes article and so I didn't notice that you had left, but it's great to have you back anyway. How are you? Extraordinary Machine 17:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- I am doing Media Studies, Film Studies, Psychology and Maths. I also did Critical Thinking this year but that's only a one-year course, so I won't be continuing it. I like what you've done with the Bricker Amendment article in your progress page; it's very comprehensive and well-written, and I found the background sections particularly informative. I did notice a few errors, and the "State precedents" and "Aftermath" could be expanded, but otherwise it's really good. And thanks for the congrats...now I'm just worried about accidentally deleting something :). Extraordinary Machine 21:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thanks! Yeah, I was a bit surprised by the number of the support votes, though I wouldn't say that everybody liked me (though I don't really mind if they don't). On an unrelated note, I was wondering if you could take a look at the article Number 1's (Mariah Carey album) and leave a comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Number 1's (Mariah Carey album)/archive1? It would be much appreciated, particularly because I'm worried that I'm not seeing basic mistakes. Extraordinary Machine 22:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposal on Notability
Because you're a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, I'm notifying you that the inclusionist proposa Wikipedia:Non-notabilityl is in progress to define the role of notability in articles. Please help us make this successful! Also note the proposal Wikipedia:Importance is a deletionist proposla that seeks to officially introduce notabiltiy for the first time. Make sure this is defeated! --Ephilei 22:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nixon etc.
I kind of caught the Nixon bug after our Watergate collaboration. My latest biggie with him is a master list of Nixon political opponents.
Speaking of, would you be interested in weighing in on these AfDs?:
- Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Edward_Nixon
- Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Arthur_Nixon
- Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Harold_Nixon
I'd like to see separate articles. Vote your conscience, though!
I saw you had a couple of FAs lately! Congrats! Jokestress 16:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Ohio Maps
You are very welcome - glad to help. Do you think a blank series of Ohio county outline maps would be useful? They could be filled in to make locator maps (see Allen Township, Hancock County, Ohio for an example). Ruhrfisch 17:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Salutations!
Greetings PedanticallySpeaking!
You left me a nice message on my talk page which I was not around to immediately respond, so now I'm returning the favor. The answer to your quearry can be found HERE. In the meantime have a great break:) Sapere aude, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] bricker
Thanks for the note; I've also been away away from WP, sorry to have missed the PR and stuff. I'll try to put some work in when I get a moment. NB I'm on page 230 of the Caro biography; finally getting quite interesting... Best, Kaisershatner 15:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kent-Meridian High School
Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent-Meridian High School, I just thought you'd like to know that the consensus for deleting High School articles now appears to be swinging back in favor of deletion. So this may indicate the beginning of another campaign to remove most High School articles. Your opinion on the AfD article would be appreciated. It might be helpful if a notability standard for High Schools could be agreed upon. Thank you. — RJH (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Ohio school districts)
You created this proposal more than a year ago. It received little discussion, and it seems to very particularly apply to Ohio school districts. Do you think it should be deleted? —Centrx→talk • 06:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- No, I do not think it should be deleted. I have tried my best to get people to comment on it, posting notices on many Ohio pages. I had also hoped that it might serve as an example for naming articles on other state's school districts. PedanticallySpeaking 16:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] back for Bricker
you pulled me out of temporary retirement; see full copyedit and note some comments in my edit summaries as you have access to the primary sources, also see comments at WP:FAC. Good job, now back to RL for me! Kaisershatner 01:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lip reading/Speach reading
I am profoundly deaf. I went through 6 month of Walter Reed Army Hospital's Deaf/Lip reading prograam. What a joke. Ok, that's enough of that.
Mu point is that actress Diane Lane is the most perfect for "speech reading" I've seen. I always have to have CC, but even so I need more. It would be great if someone would suggest to Julia Stiles to get every Diane Lane movie, cut out the Lane segments and see how she does what she does. Stiles could not possibly mimic Lane becasue their faces are made different. Stiles has an almost China Doll face and until she is older she will have to work with that, but that doesn't mean that with effort and practice she can't make her face express as Lane does with a difference of course. And it's not just the face. Sometimes (often) Lane will react to an actor and then turn and react again. I have a favorate insance, but I'll cut this down and quit.
Col. Charles Souleyret, USAF Ret mickeys4@sbcglobal.net
[edit] Returning the favor?
I was quite pleased to see that Bricker Amendment has successfully passed all of the trials and been granted FA status. :) I was wondering whether, of you have time, you would mind taking a look at my peer review request for caffeine? Cheers! – ClockworkSoul 20:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Katie Holmes
I removed the link to katieholmespictures.com from the article on Katie Holmes. Generally, picture galleries aren't considered appropriate (see WP:EL). I'm rather surprised that you added this link so if you think there's an extenuating circumstance for that link, please feel free to bring it up in the discussion page. --Yamla 17:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- That's that we have a policy against picture gallery links. But could you tell me where that is? PedanticallySpeaking 17:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- WP:EL doesn't specifically forbid it but picture galleries tend to fall into the list of sites not to add. It's easy enough to find pictures of Holmes just by doing a google image search (which returns about 66,300, though many are duplicates). So the site doesn't add anything of value (and hence, WP:EL says it probably shouldn't be added). Additionally, picture galleries in general tend to play fast and loose with copyright and so we try to avoid such sites so we can't be blamed for contributionary copyright infringement or whatever it is called. It's not absolutely clear, mind you, which is why I mentioned to you that I was removing the link rather than just rolling it back as vandalism or something (note: your addition of the link clearly was not vandalism). --Yamla 17:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Congrats
Greetings, Ral315!
Congratulations on being made the new editor of Signpost. I've not been very active recently, so I've been catching up by reading the signpost and just now saw the story on Michael Snow's departure. I'd be interested in writing for you--if my other obligations permit. So a preliminary question: How do you handle stories? Do you assign them or do people come and propose topics to you? PedanticallySpeaking 17:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
- Generally users just pick a story, posting that they're going to write about it here to avoid duplication. Technically the deadline's passed for this week; if you have something to write about for this week, make sure to get it in by about 22:00 UTC. I try to have stories done earlier so I can publish with a reasonable time frame, but I'm battling IT at my school right now, so it might be a little late. Ral315 (talk) 17:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost article
Hi - I am new writing for signpost, but just list the topic, and a page where you are prepareing the article (if it exists - or where you want it to be) and sign your name under Special Stories in the newsroom. Good luck and thanks for helping. --Trödel 16:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I didn't see your note. Yes, feel free to write about the patent office. Ral315 (talk) 19:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Armenia
Please visit the Talk: Armenia and Talk: Armenians pages http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Armenia&action=edit§ion=3 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Armenians&action=edit§ion=36 please voice your view on the current discussion, there is a small minority that are promoting and point of view that Armenia is geographically in Europe and Armenians are a European people. It is best to serve the factual truth and your support is desperately needed.
[edit] Township maps: updated copyright tag
Hi. Noticed that the {{pd}} tags on your township maps were showing up as obsolete, so I updated them to the {{PD-USGov}} tag. --KeithB 13:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kings Island
Thank you for reverting the location of Kings Island to Mason. I was about to revert it but you got to it before me. It is easy to confuse since Kings Mills is nearby but, as you stated, Mason annexed the park in 1997. Thanks again. Dblevins2 23:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Heads up
Here is the advanced notification you requested -- Bricker ammendment will be the featured article on October 28. See Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 28, 2006 Raul654 02:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, I tried emailing you, but your email is disabled. Raul654 02:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bob McEwen
Heyo. Just thought you might like to know the image I uploaded for this article is having it's fair use status disputed, so if you can either find a free replacement for it or expand the fair use rationale that might be useful. Staxringold talkcontribs 20:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Quick note - the image has been redeleted (under CSD G4, recreation of correctly deleted content). Proto::► 09:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:CharlesWSanders.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CharlesWSanders.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think I fixed their 'unsourced' problem. We love bots, don't we. --Matthew K 17:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:HolmesBat.jpg
You restored the deleted image, Image:HolmesBat.jpg. This image is in violation of WP:FUC and was deleted according to policy. Can you please explain why you restored it and then removed the tag indicating that it is in violation of WP:FUC? --Yamla 17:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
- The photograph is clearly a fair use as it is a promotional photograph distributed by the studio to promote its product. PedanticallySpeaking 18:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but fails Wikipedia's first fair-use criteria outlined at WP:FUC. "No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information. [...] However, if the subject of the photograph still exists, a freely-licensed photograph could be taken." The subject of the photograph, Katie Holmes, still exists (she's a living person), therefore a free equivalent could be created. Thus, the image fails WP:FUC which is why it was tagged as such, and the deletion was according to process. We are not permitted to use fair-use images solely to depict living people, as is the case with this image. --Yamla 18:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikiwiki1950
Add your name to the ist of wikipedians who are against wikkipedias position of the Akron wiki article (they want to delete it)
[edit] Julia Stiles
Julia Stiles is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy (Talk) 21:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Random House Dictionary article
You wrote the original article on the Random House Dictionary, and I later expanded it. In June, 69.0.49.44 removed statements made by you and ones made by me. I want to check with you about your statement:
"Following the controversy over Webster's Third New International Dictionary, published in 1961, Random House decided to expand the American College Dictionary into a full-fledged competitor to the Webster's Third."
69.0.49.44 changed it to:
"In the late 1950s, it was decided to publish an expansion of the American College Dictionary, which had been kept up to date with each reprinting since its publication."
I tend to think 69.0.49.44 is unreliable because I have copies of the ACD and it was scarcely altered over the years.
Do you know where you got the info in your version? I don't know when the RH decision was made, but I am inclined to your version, so I will fix the article if you can offer a basis for it. Abstrator 19:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:LtGovBruceJohnson.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:LtGovBruceJohnson.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
- On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 07:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More replaceable fair use images
- Image:ArthurStanleyKatz.jpg
- Image:CommissionerPatDeWine.jpg
—Chowbok ☠ 00:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WGA screenwriting credit system FAR
WGA screenwriting credit system has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Gzkn 07:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:ThomasABemmesforCongress.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:ThomasABemmesforCongress.JPG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add
{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 06:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Possibly unfree Image:LtGovBruceJohnson.jpg
Oden 06:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Better Source Request for Image:DanaGioiaNEAchairman.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:DanaGioiaNEAchairman.jpg. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talkpage. Thank you. MECU≈talk 01:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add
{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ytny (talk) 02:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] An AfD you might want to see
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ohio second congressional district election, 2005/Minor candidates youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 00:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Are you interested in a city wiki for Cincinnati?
Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. You mention being wikibonked. You mention being fed up with the combative nature of Wikipedia. Who wouldn't be? Nobody wants to spend hours slaving over articles only to serve them as fodder to deletionists. Lately I have become increasingly aware that many article disputes might become less arousing if people chose the right wiki to begin with. I recently helped solve an editing dispute by suggesting another wiki suitable for the non-encyclopedic portions of an article; in that case, everybody won.
I'm toying with the idea of starting a City wiki for Cincinnati (perhaps calling it Cincypedia if the name is available), to run on MediaWiki for easy editing by Wikipedia veterans. Since you have contributed to a vast number of Wikipedia articles about Cincinnati, and your wiki editing powers are great, you would be among the first Wikipedians I would want to recruit, and likely promote to administratorship in relatively short order. I'd imagine emulating established city wikis in terms of operating model and policies, such as:
- Davis wiki
- Akron Wiki - Akron's own w:City Wiki (released July 2006)
- city-wiki-center, city-wikis have homepages on it
- A guide to running a City Wiki by Mark Krenz from Bloomingpedia
Since the wiki would likely have few editors initially, a relative handful of dedicated editors would have substantially more editorial freedom than is possible on Wikipedia, and fewer problems with content warring and deletionism.
Please let me know if you would have any interest in a city wiki for Cincinnati. As far as I could determine, nobody else has started one yet. --Teratornis 20:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me
[edit] Featured article review of Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Dawsoncreeklogo.jpg
Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Dawsoncreeklogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:PedanticallySpeaking/Articles. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:James Doohan 1980s.jpg
Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:James Doohan 1980s.jpg) was found at the following location: User:PedanticallySpeaking/July 20. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 09:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Naming of schools
Have you see the debate on the wikischools pages ... Victuallers 18:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] nb
[edit] Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add
{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Docg 14:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg
 |
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Dawsonscreek2ndseasondvdcover.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreek2ndseasondvdcover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Jean Schmidt FAR
Jean Schmidt has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--SallyForth123 01:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dawsonscreek1stseasondvdcover.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreek1stseasondvdcover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] JohnWGriffin.jpg
I have tagged Image:JohnWGriffin.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Calliopejen1 22:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 14:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Florida Atlantic University
I saw that you did a nice peer review for Hopkins School and was wondering if you would mind taking a look at the above article. It is currently undergoing peer review here. If things turn out well I plan on taking it to WP:FAC next.
Thanks, KnightLago 20:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Featured List of the Day Experiment
There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 21:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] LOTD experiment
My userpage List of the Day experiment is getting under way at WP:LOTD. One of your lists has been nominated. I invite you to come by and represent it. If you would like to represent your list article please reformat your username in the table so it is normal sized. Among the things you may want to do to represent your list are:
- Change the image selection
- Add talk page projects to the list and then add them on the summary table
- Write a summary of the article in less than 500 characters. I will begin doing this later today for those who don't do it themselves.
- Participate in the feed back process when it starts on December 1.
- Participate in the voting when it starts on December 11.
You are free to remain uninvolved. Your list was chosen for being among the first [[WP:FL]s ever created.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 19:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] FA Review
James T. Aubrey, Jr. has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
[edit] Questioning minor 1st paragraph edits?
Re: John Roberts, John Paul Stevens, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Samuel Alito, Sandra Day O'Connor
This is a small matter. I don't understand the reasons for Sjrplscjnky's recent minor edits of articles about each of the Justices of the Supreme Court. After some time, there has been no response to inquiries posted on this editor's talk page nor has there been feedback from similar postings on the talk pages of each of the nine articles about a sitting Justice and the one about retired Justice O'Connor. Rather than simply reverting this "improvement," I thought it best to solicit comment from others who might be interested. I found your name amongst others at Talk:Supreme Court of the United States.
I'm persuaded that Sjrplscjnky's strategy of introducing academic honors in the first paragraph is unhelpful in this narrow set of articles -- that is, in Wikipedia articles about Justices of the Supreme Court. I think my reasoning might well extend as well to others on the Federal bench. In each instance, I would question adding this information only in the first paragraph -- not elsewhere in the article.
In support of my view that this edit should be reverted, please consider re-visiting articles written about the following pairs of jurists.
-
- A1. Benjamin Cardozo
- A2. Learned Hand
The question becomes: Would the current version of the Wikipedia article about any one of them -- or either pair -- be improved by academic credentials in the introductory paragraph? I think not.
Perhaps it helps to repeat a wry argument Kathleen Sullivan of Stanford Law makes when she suggests that some on the Harvard Law faculty do wonder how Antonin Scalia avoided learning what others have managed to grasp about the processes of judging? I would hope this anecdote gently illustrates the point.
Less humorous, but an even stronger argument is the one Clarence Thomas makes when he mentions wanting to return his law degree to Yale.
As you can see, I'm questioning relatively trivial edit; but I hope you agree that this otherwise plausible "improvement" should be removed from introductory paragraphs of ten articles. If not, why not?
Would you care to offer a comment or observation? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 20:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] User:Vaoverland
Hadn't heard from you in a while. I see you noted I was dormant for a while in summer of 2005 (this was do to relocating). Since later that summer, I have pretty active and busy with WP again, although a lot of time went to Jamestown 2007-related WP articles. Hope you are well. Yours, Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia (talk) 05:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Shortcut WP:NAC
I see you have the shortcut WP:NAC linked in your user space. This currently links to the community portal. Would you be opposed to eliminating this shortcut redirect to the portal in order to reuse it for Wikipedia:non-admin closure? You are one of two people currently using the shortcut, according to it's "waht links here" special page. Thanks, JERRY talk contribs 16:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have gone forward with usurping this redirect shortcut. Please elt me know if you see this a s a problem. JERRY talk contribs 20:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Aubrey
Hi PedanticallySpeaking, we've never met and I'm not sure if you ever even read this page anymore. I see from your contribs that it's been awhile since you were active. I recently did some work adding the inline citation method to James T. Aubrey, Jr. I know some editors don't like inline citations, so I hope this doesn't look like I took a hatchet to all your hard work. I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed learning about Aubrey from your research. I hope that you feel un-bonked some day, but if not I hope you know that your work was appreciated. --JayHenry (talk) 19:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Jean_Schmidt_Clermont_Sun.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Jean_Schmidt_Clermont_Sun.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 17:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] List of Ohio county name etymologies
You have made many edits at List of Ohio county name etymologies which is under discussion at WP:FLRC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Calendar
Which places still use the Julian Calendar? There is Mount Athos, and "a village in England" - but is there anywhere else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackiespeel (talk • contribs) 18:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Tom Brinkman
Tom Brinkman has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 13:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bruce Edward Johnson
Bruce Edward Johnson has been nominated at WP:FAR.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
![[1]](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Mojo%28Simpsons%29.jpg&diff=44762717&oldid=44761170){kind=link}