User talk:Atanamir/Archive3

^_^v

CA/SR

Actually, what I said was "Please don't move these pages without consensus." If there is no consensus for a change, the status quo wins out and the pages should remain as they were until and unless the situation changes. I truly am not nearly as concerned with which naming standard "wins out" as I am with ensuring that SPUI doesn't simply get to steamroll over everyone else with his blinkered ideas about what is "correct." Perhaps you'd be interested in explaining just what it is about the two of you that makes you so incredibly special that no one else's input matters? --phh (^t/_c) 00:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious here we're using disambiguation wrong; the official names for state routes in California are State Route Number X or State Route X, not the proper noun California State Route X. Hence, the the word "California" is the disambiguation mechanism much like how "Lugo" is the disambiguation mechanism for Río Grande (Lugo) or Hondo River (Belize). If the article was at Lugo Río Grande, which is an obvious violation of the disambiguation policy, and several people wanted to keep it at Lugo Río Grande "just because that's how it's always been," that would only contribute to disorder. If you want road examples, Autoroute (Quebec), not Quebec Autoroute. Furthermore, the current 'status quo' system was also devised by spui a few years ago (all the article names were all over the place when CA/SR first started, and spui had moved all of them to create a uniform system). He realises that it's wrong now and is trying to fix it. atanamir 00:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that your interpretation is the best way to meet the requirements of WP:NC(CN), which says at the very top: "When choosing a name for a page ask yourself: What word would the average user of the Wikipedia put into the search engine?" The page itself gives a dozen examples of articles where the common name used for the article title is at odds with a more "correct" name. My belief is that an average user, knowing that Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia, when looking for information on this highway would be most likely to search on a variation of "california state route 87" or "california state highway 87". I can't imagine that someone in, say, Amsterdam or Singapore would ever think that "state route 87", disambiguated or not, would be the best search term to use when looking for information on a highway in California specifically. I may be wrong. But I may not be wrong.

Look, you seem like a reasonable person, and this is an issue on which reasonable people can disagree. I truly believe this is an impasse that can be resolved. I honestly do not care that much which standard ultimately prevails, so long as it's arrived at in a reasonable and civil manner. It's just wrong for one person to unilaterally decide that he knows best and that no one else's input matters. My contributions are as valid as the next person's, and so are yours, and SPUI's contributions are no more valid than anyone else's. If you're interested in resolving this peacefully through discussion, then I'm with you all the way. --phh (^t/_c) 16:16, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been wanting discussion, but now everyone on eiher side has turned so stubborn that it's practically impossible to resolve anything with a objective view now; everyone is caught up with what spui does that no one is discussing the acutal thing that matters anymore -- the naming convention. So with a lack of anything better to do i've been sort of inclined to join the move wars... but as of late i've been moving to editing other sorts of articles besdies highways now since it's going nowhere.

Anyways, I agree with what you're saying -- no one would search "State Route 76 (California)". This is also the point Rschen has been making a lot. However, I don't think many of the disambiguated pages WILL be the common search term. If I didn't do wikipedia, i'd prboably never use parenthesis in search things like "Courier (typeface)" -- I'd type "Courier font". I'd search "X-files movie", not "The X Files (film)" and like the example I gave above, I'd search "California Rio Hondo River", not "Rio Hondo (California)". Hence, I think all the disambiguation with parens IS at odds with the common anmes policy; nevertheless, it's the way things are disambiguated now (with the eception of City, State) atanamir 20:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right. Personally I'm beginning to think that there's enough inconsistency among the way people talk about highways, with state route X over here and state highway Y over there and "Illinois Z" messing things up, to make it difficult or impossible to guess how users are likely to search for highways anyway. (One last thing though: why is Governor of California an article, while Governor (California) isn't even a redirect?)

Either way, the wars have been going on far too long over something that's so ridiculous I feel foolish bringing it up anywhere. There's more blocking going on here and here and we both know it's not going to make any difference. What's really needed here is for a group of people on both "sides" to agree to start from scratch, listen to each others' arguments in good faith, come to a decision that's grounded in policy, and agree to abide by whatever decision comes out of the process. My hand is out, if you'd like to shake it. --phh (^t/_c) 20:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point with Governors; I initially thought it was just another misimplementation of disambiguation, but: they all refer to the same governmental position / job, only in different states -- whereas the ( ) disamibuation refers to different objects of the same name... I dunno. That's the best explanation I can offer.

We should create a highway naming tribunal somewhere and get afew poeple from either side. To be honest, I don't think Rschen would make a good addition because we've offered him a lot of arguments but he steadfastly repeats his own arguments over and over again... but otherwise i'm all up for it. atanamir 20:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't be too hard on Rschen; he and I were working on a proposal very much like this one last month, and then SPUI preemptively shot it down. He may have gotten a little too invested in the struggle, but I believe he's sincerely interested in working out a consensus solution. In fact, I believe there's only one person on either side who isn't interested in working out a consensus solution... no points for guessing who it is. I'm hopeful that the dialogue on WT:CASH will result in progress, but SPUI's already rejected anything binding, so I'm not optimistic. --phh (^t/_c) 21:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VA Route Shields

They look good, sorry for the delay, I've been swamped with work. But I suppose the border could be thicker, but not too much. I mean, if you look at some of those shield pictures, that's what they look like. Maybe enough so a 75+px image looks normal? I tried to play around with Illustrator, but it didn't work too well. Either way, it's up to you. --MPD01605 02:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fonts

Hi there! I see you have tagged a number of fonts which were PNG format, and subsequently moved to Commons in SVG. Have you talked to User:DynaBlast about the changes? I'd feel more comfortable going through with the deletions if you could point me to some discussion on the matter. Thanks! --HappyCamper 02:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Alright, I'll go through with the deletions then. Thanks for moving them over to Commons. Will help out with the other WikiProjects too. --HappyCamper 02:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, no problem :-) I think your reasoning is rock solid. Actually, it was after seeing that message which made me hesitate about the deletions. --HappyCamper 02:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Font samples in SVG format

A few weeks back I wanted to upload some font sample images, and I was wondering what format I should use for font samples. After looking around and asking in a few places, I finally got a reply here: Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 48#SVG image help. As you can see, SVG is probably not the best solution because you'd be in essence uploading chunks of the copyrighted font into wikipedia. I had settled for high resolution PNG, but hadn't moved forward on that. I noticed all of your recent additions had been in SVG, and was wondering what your thoughts were on this? Thanks.--Andrew c 23:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly do not know enough about the copyright stuff to comment, which is why I linked to what I was told. The person who informed me could be wrong. Also, I brought up the idea of having a type sample format that is uniform across the board here. I hope you'll put forth your imput.--Andrew c 00:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's more than alright. I, myself, have been fairly busy (I've wanted to contribute to this task, but have yet to find the time... maybe monday). Anyway, take your time and thanks for all your efforts thus far.--Andrew c 03:17, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image:Latin alphabet Gg.svg

I have deleted the image from Wikipedia, but for some reason the replacement image at Commons doesn't display in the article (it looks empty). What happened to it? A few hours ago the at least Commons image looked okay. - Mike Rosoft 10:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine now. Thanks! - Mike Rosoft 22:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Converting png to svg files

Is there a way that you could convert png files that I create into svg files? I am going to be working on creating some Virginia Highway shields but can only save them in the png format. If you would be able to convert them that would be nice. If not then that is not a problem and I will use them the way they are. Thanks. --No1lakersfan 13:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:TheOffice-CasinoNight.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheOffice-CasinoNight.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. 13:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SVG font samples

Could you possibly create a font sample for the typeface Transport Heavy, like the ones you currently have on Commons (Image:Aldus sample.svg for example). I've created a simple version (in PNG format) for now, but it would be nice to have a standard format. There is a sample at http://www.cbrd.co.uk/media/fonts/; you can download the font, but it doesn't have every symbol. Thanks! Smurrayinchester 15:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright tag

Hi there. I've recently been going through the images at Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Images and checking their copyright status. I came across an image that I think you created and uploaded: Image:Numenor-Armenelos.png. Unfortunately the copyright tag is outdated. Would you be able to update it? I note that someone has also uploaded the image to Commons. The Wikipedia image page is here, the Commons page is here. There is also a discussion about this map here. Thanks. Carcharoth 13:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating the tags. Do you have any plans to do any similar maps in the near future? Carcharoth 19:28, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is a large collection of maps that has been created and uploaded recently at Commons:Category:Middle_Earth_maps. You could talk to the guy who's done those maps: User:Astrokey44 and see what can be done. I haven't talked to Astrokey about maps yet, but I hope to sometime soon. Most of his are Third Age maps - I noticed yours because it was of Numenor, which is not often redrawn. Carcharoth 21:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At commons

Hello! Do you know whether Image:Georgia sample.svg is at commons or not? --HappyCamper 05:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFAr

I have no idea if they've done any - you might want to ask one of them. --SPUI (T - C) 20:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow!

I didn't think you'd get back to me! Thanks so much! :-) --HappyCamper 00:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:ExpressionWebDesigner.png

Thanks for uploading Image:ExpressionWebDesigner.png. 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. 13:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with SVG

Okay, I'm won over to the idea that the font samples should be SVG, not PNG. So I'd like to go and upload new SVG samples to replace all the PNGs I previously created... but I'll be damned if I can figure out how to do it. I've got AI 12, but whenever I save a sample as SVG, it doesn't embed the fonts (even though I tell it to). When I look at the SVG source it looks nothing like yours. I'm stumped. Can you give me some tips, or point me to a walkthrough? I'm very frustrated with this. (If you don't have time, I totally understand and no hard feelings.) —Chowbok 19:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

I noticed you uploaded a few font samples onto the FHWA Series fonts page, but you did typos in them! You wrote "Jackdaws love by big sphinx of quartz". I thought I'd just let you know :) — JeremyTalk 04:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom

The proposed decision is the one to watch. --SPUI (T - C) 04:04, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Atlas of middle earth

You wrote: Great idea with that map at Numenor. I have the same book -- do you think its a good idea to put similar maps of the battles and other locations like Ered Gorgoroth, etc.? I can help with scanning as well. atanamir 19:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I consider it a good idea. The maps contain detail not included in other, more grafic maps. -- Jason Palpatine 21:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC) (speak your mind | contributions)[reply]

Image:Consolas sample.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Consolas sample.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Angr 20:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Marshall Islands Map.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Marshall Islands Map.svg. 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. 22:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming

I understand... I've done that sort of thing before... in fact, the text just after your addition I added to help us over at WP:SFD... basically if SPUI's view is the consensus generated I would fully back it and support it. However... put it this way. Basically back in the early days, when only WP:CASH was around, no WP:USRD, etc. it was probably okay to mass-move since you were the only editors. In a sense, unspoken consensus. However, that is no longer the case. I discovered how many people are now involved with highways as I had to notify each and every one of them, a process which took a few hours over DSL. Basically... the highway department at Wikipedia has changed, and you can't just start polices anymore--you have to get approval. Even last year you could get away with mass moves--as I did with West Virginia. However, we can't do that anymore.

I believe that out of style the "California State Route" should be kept, but I will support the convention that comes out of the debate, whatever it is. Basically, SPUI's mass moves angered a lot of people at California and Washington, and even when people requested that he stop, his not doing so was a bad move. In reality, none of us are in control of the Highways area anymore, regardless of seniority, and we have to get consensus before making massive changes. I guess it's a drawback of having lots of expertise and local knowledge now... --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delaware

Try U.S. Route 13 Alternate (Delaware), with a city name before Delaware if necessary to disambiguate. --SPUI (T - C) 04:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

You can add the proposal, just add a Principle 3. I would disagree with the disambiguation in parentheses, though, as ... well with United States Postal Service. USPS could be anything... so they expanded the abbreviation. They didn't do USPS (postal service). To look at it this way... Mercury for example. they don't call it Planet Mercury or Mercury Planet so they used the parentheses. But with State Route 1 for example... many call it California State Route 1 so it is okay to not use parentheses here. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 20:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This really isn't an in-between proposal-- it looks like SPUI's. Also, if you want to clarify that it really is "State Route 25" that's what the boldface text is there for. For example, it's at the common name Jimmy Carter not James Earl Carter Jr. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 21:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then why were you changing the boldface text to "California State Route X"? --SPUI (T - C) 07:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input

Thanks for your input at Talk:List of numbered highways in Ohio. It is greatly appreciated and your naming convention is quite acceptable, given that it is broad enough that it could include numbered/unnumbered highways (e.g. Morse Road in Columbus, although that is a bad example) and highways that are state and are not state maintained (e.g. Ohio Turnpike).

If possible, could you provide insight on state route table implementation (no changes should occur until there is a consensus) for List of Routes in Vermont? Seicer (talk) (contribs) 07:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't implemented the checkered theme, however, I did a test of two rows. I would have thought it would be a bit busy, but since SPUI is complaining about it being "too big" and/or "busy" as is right now, I don't see how it could "hurt" the page. And I do agree with the VT -> Route naming - I just carried it over IIRC from the old page. There is also no correlation between 2A and 8A. I think they are signed as such and not as ALT 2 or ALT 8 (as they are in Kentucky). Seicer (talk) (contribs) 07:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would take some time but still leave the image as being unclickable. If you click the image, however, there is a listing at the bottom of where the image is used at. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 07:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would softening the table by lightening the gray color reduce the "busy" nature of the gray-white mix? I'll play around with it more tommorrow if I get a chance at work. I gotta scoot to bed! Thanks for the help! Seicer (talk) (contribs) 07:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

#F6F6F6 actually looks quite nice. I was almost inclined to say #AAAAAA was good, but after blowing that up across my screen, it looked amazingly busy. F6F6F6 didn't. Also, make sure that the page does not get reverted. I'm going out of town Sunday and don't want to come back and see all of my pages reverted (I did work on other state routes). I'll have others watch for those changes as well... I put way too much work into it :P Seicer (talk) (contribs) 13:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am almost fond of this design. See the talk page of the Vermont state routes for a description why. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 14:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to OH Route List at Seicer

That would probably be best. It's getting confusing enough as-is. What should it be updated to? There are several proposals out there. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 17:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds fair to me. I won't be around to do a lot of work for the next few days, however. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 18:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your vote at Talk:List of numbered highways in Ohio

That's fine, I don't mind at all. "List of highways in Ohio" sounds good too - it's mainly the "numbered" that I don't like. Cheers, --james^(talk) 02:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SVG format

Yes, I've tried saving them in SVG, but it seems ArcMaps SVG export blows. Everyone I export locks up both IE and Firefox, and I dunno if it's a ~~big~~ bug in ArcMaps export or IE/Firefox's SVG implementation. But, when it gets worked out I plan on converting them over. Stratosphere ^{(U T)} 02:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to SR List for Ohio

No problem. Just do a batch rename so you won't have to do too much work :) Thanks for the compliments, they are much appreciated! Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do like the navi box concept and something that could be used on other pages that I have suvdivided, such as Kentucky's. Great concept and execution! It's best sometimes to just "go ahead and do it". Seicer (talk) (contribs) 13:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NC 24

Hey, thanks for that long comment. It was a good read. =) Well, when I wrote the comment that "this was part of a format that was laid down before I got here", I was referring to the state highway articles that had already been written for the state of North Carolina. I assumed sometime in the past this issue had been argued and they decided to named them "North Carolina State Highway x". I just continued that tradition. When I wrote that commment I was a fairly new member to Wikipedia and had NO idea that there was a huge debate on it, resulting in states picking their own convention. I was the one who started the North Carolina Highways Wikiproject after noticing on the US Roads Wikiproject page that there wasn't one for my state. Then SPUI came along. I think he realized that I was new, so he to get me to go along with a name change from North Carolina State Highway 24 to NC 24. I bacially put his proposition on my WikiProject talk, asking the rest of the members involved what they thought. I personally didn't like the idea of just "NC x" because it was too vague, it was an abbreviation, and it conflicted with Congressional districts of the same name and nautical craft that use that format.

Well, as the debate ensued, I eventually found a link to the old poll on state highway article naming and read what was argued in the past. I even found articles for where members like SPUI and others had been banned for edit warring; I read a lot of the comments, arguments, etc. That's when I realized that our little argument about NC 24 was just a reoccurance of a huge issue that occurred months prior to my joining Wikipedia. Well, when the new state route naming convention came around, I thought about both of the proposals, drew conclusions, and commented about my findings.

My previous comment on NC 24 about "rules laid down before I got here" is no longer valid, because I now know the history behind those rules. Now, I can't really speak for the entire nation on this, but I think "Statename Term x" is MUCH better for North Carolina and a some of other states than the parentheses proposal. The word "state", in my opinion probably shouldn't be a part of the title though. I have listed my reasonings for this over and over why I think Proposal 1 is better and I will attempt to list them here:

The road signs and addresses of residents living on a North Carolina state route read "N.C. Highway x", which is an abbreviation of "North Carolina Highway x"
Wikipedia policies say you should avoid disambiguation with parentheses if it can be avoided. I think it can easily be.
Since "common names" are usually derived from TV and by reading road signs, etc. I think Proposal 1 is the most common way of speaking the "common name" of the route.
Since it is on the road signs and addresses, it is an official name.
No Joe Schmoe would type "Term x (State Name)" in a search bar that is unfamiliar with Wikipedia's organization.
Proposal 1 would prevent confusion and bump up the articles on Google queries
Proposal 1 would not cause confusion where more than one state's routes are dicussed. Example: when describing a state route ends at another state route at the state line.
Nobody I know just says "State Route x" or "State Highway x" here. It's just not done! "NC x" is the most popular abbreviation, yes, but it's just that, an abbreviation.
Nearly every state's routes abbreviation has the state name first. Example: "NC x", "WIS x", "M-x", "K-x", "TX-x". Why can't the article have the state name first? Why do you not want it included?
Redirects can be made for Principle 2, so the pipe trick will still work with Principle 1.

Ok, that's about all I can think of. I can't say that all these apply to all the other states, like your own California, but I know they apply to the Carolinas. Virginia, on the other hand, from what I gather never puts the state name at all. It just uses shields or small white plates to designate routes. All their routes have a shared name... for example "VA 23" would also be "Rich Handerson Highway". However, the state name is present in some legislation. Unless you are from Virginia, you probably wouldn't know this, so I think for the majority of the country's sake, we should still go with Principle 1. Do you understand my reasoning why I now choose Principle 1? I understand why people like Principle 2, but there are so many problems with it and in my opinion; it's just unnatural and conterproductive. Sorry for the long comment. =) --TinMan 20:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it must have taken a while to reply that much. You raise very good points and I agree with most of them, but I think there's a few things I need to say.

(note how this is different from principle I, which state that NC must use NC state highway X!).

Principle 1 does not necessarily make the North Carolina articles "North Carolina State Highway x". The next step of the process will determine what each state chooses to use as a "term". For North Carolina, I plan to vote for "North Carolina Highway x". The word "state" doesn't have to be there, nor really needs to be there. For other states, they could choose not to use a term at all if they wanted, like "Michigan x" or choose some other term like "State Route", "Route", "State Road", etc.

Everyone calls them cars, but its correct name is automobile, and that should be where its article should be.'

And that's where you have to decide between what is more important: common name or official name or uniform name. A balance between the three would be nice, but I know that's not always possible. Besides, a major reason "car" is not used is because there are many different types of cars: train cars, road cars (automobiles), etc. "Automobile" works best because it avoids disambiguation. Otherwise you'd have "Car (road)" or "Car (automobile)", etc. I think the same type of 'avoiding' should be used here, but like you said, whether disambig is needed or not in this case is opinion.

Why should we settle for the article being at the incorrect (although could be) common name and having a redirect from its official name?

What makes a name an official name? What the state DOT says? If the correct official name is "State Route xx", then I think adding "California", which is also a proper noun to the front is fine. I think "California Route xx" is common saying for someone outside of California, and I would think at least someone in Cali would say the same. I don't think that is incorrect. Maybe living in a state where that is correct is misguiding my judgement though. Yet, U.S. Routes are titled "U.S. Route xx" (or at least around here "U.S. Highway xx"). Do you know of a place where the "U.S." prefix is not used (that's not too informal)?

It'd be hard to have one state with routes at both "California Highway 55" and "California The 55" -- hopefully even you'd agree that'd be ugly!

Yes, that would be ugly, but I think "The 55" is far too informal; it may be very common, but you wouldn't see road signs reading "The 55" I wouldn't think.

I would like to say more, but I got to go. --TinMan 12:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

edits by sockpuppets

Hi there. I have reviewed the edits you mentioned on my talk page. I have restored some of information on the Husky Energy page, as it is indeed correct. As for the Cranbourne article, I don't know if it is valid or not. With both of the sockpuppeteers in question, they do occasionally have reasonable edits. When I am in doubt, I remove the information added by a sock of a banned user. -- JamesTeterenko 23:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Programming languages rename poll

Following on your suggestion, I have created a poll to get input from multiple PL article editors. Please help by linking discussion, as discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Programming languages#Poll procedure. LotLE×talk 22:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

email address

I've just confirmed my email address. It should work now. --Polaron | Talk 00:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Sorry about that. All fixed now. --Polaron | Talk 00:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not invited to the poll?

My apologies. I invited whoever I found listed as a participant at WP:USRD and subprojects. I think you removed your name from them a while back, and that's why you weren't invited :( Sorry about that. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fonts samples

Hello, when you do the font samples, could you please include a line for each script the font supports? Maybe something like a stripped down Version of http://linuxlibertine.sourceforge.net/#samples? A line of oblique wouldn't hurt either because the oblique version of the font is most of the time more distinct than the regular one. TIA, Helge--Hhielscher 10:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned California State Highway Shields

I noticed that several California State Highway Shields you uploaded in 2005 are no longer being used in any articles (as they have been replaced with images from Commons), and was wondering if you would mind if I nominate them for deletion? --Fritz S. (Talk) 12:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bodoni info box

Hi Atanamir. I restored its removal by James Arboghast earlier today. The new specimen and expanded article is mostly by NGAGAS, a typography student at The Art Institute of Boston, her new specimen is clearer, and shows all alpha characters considerably bigger than the info box format. All biographical abd historical data is in the article, along with a clearer description of classification, and a discussion of physical characteristics. Best, Jim CApitol3

Hi Atanamir. My student NGAGAS originaly deleted the info box, believing her speciment to be beter. It appeared to have been deleted and I attempted to restore it. By broken image do you mean it does not display? Thanks. Jim CApitol3 12:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Atanamir. Is the image "250px-Bodonibodoni.jpg" rendering on your screen? I've checked the Bodoni article on a few different machines and that pic still seems to be broken.

Best regards, j a m e s t a l k 12:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Colorado 11.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Colorado 11.svg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 00:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Colorado 22.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Colorado 22.svg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 00:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]