User talk:BFD1

Welcome!

Hello, BFD1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! OsgoodeLawyer 14:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prhizzm

Hey BFD1, thanks for your contributions on the Prhizzm page. I'd love to get more done with it, so any good information you have, don't hesitate to add it. OsgoodeLawyer 14:04, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, Osgoodelawyer. Thanks for your help. BFD1 01:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)BFD1[reply]

Okay, with all your knowledge of Jon Dellandrea and your username including Brendan Dellandrea's initials, I have to ask: are you him? -- OsgoodeLawyer 13:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I lose points for originality with my username, don't I? Yes, I am... I hope that won't cause too much trouble. BFD1 22:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would cause any trouble. You should probably be added to Wikipedians with articles, though, to make users aware of the possibility of non-NPOV statements in your own article (but right now there's little likelihood of anyone thinking that). -- OsgoodeLawyer 17:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Hood Controversy [ed]

You editing of John Hood has, however, been commented on off-Wikipedia. I have toned down the reference a little. Jonathan A Jones 10:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jonathan. Interesting to note that the author of this article took my comments above completely out of context. My comment, "I hope that won't cause too much trouble" was made in reference to my own edits to my own entry on wikipedia, not the entry for John Hood. The time and date stamp of my comments makes it clear -- these comments were made by me weeks before I even became aware of the John Hood article. I regret that the author of the news article did not contact me through my talk page for comment and give me due opportunity to respond to the allegations prior to taking my remarks entirely out of context. BFD1 19:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that's student journalism for you. For the record, I believe that your personal involvement in this affair has been positive, and that you left the page considerably better than you found it. Jonathan A Jones 08:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cherwell has now published your letter in this week's printed edition; I can't find a copy on the web. Jonathan A Jones 14:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was good of them. Pity it's not on their website. Can you tell me whether they offered any editorial comment in return? Thanks. BFD1 15:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, just printed as a letter. Jonathan A Jones 10:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University of Toronto

I found the answer at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English. Ardenn 19:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which makes it clear who said what, and when. Thank you. Ardenn 19:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder. ;) BFD1 19:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The U of T is probably the 5th oldest university in Canada. Laval (1663), UNB (1785), University of King's College (1789) Dalhouse (1818), McGill (1821). Paulelastic 19:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I kinda think that since it's 5th oldest, it doesn't really need to be mentioned. In my mind, age doesn't necessarily confer value to an institution, so saying a school is "one of the oldest" seems unnecessary to me. For instance, Waterloo is fairly young, but its reputation exceeds that of much older schools. But this is just my opinion... you are free to make changes to the U of T article if you want, as long as it is fairly NPOV. The reason I removed the original statement in the first place was because it was ambiguous (e.g. I could claim that York was one of the oldest universities in the country and it would not be untrue, strictly speaking, because the phrase "one of the oldest" is ambiguous). My aim is to ensure that university articles on Wikipedia read like articles and not like subtle (or often, unsubtle) rodomontades. That's all. Thanks. Paulelastic 03:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kuhn

I'm a recent alumnus of U of T and now a graduate student at York. If you're an "avid fan of Kuhn," as it indeed seems from your response to my note at the Kuhn page, then we should definitely talk. --JTBurman 21:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a "monster"

Hey, thanks. I'm glad you like it here. Oz Lawyer 17:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Derringer

Thanks for the info on what's being done with inserting John Derringer's birthday. I don't have any hard evidence, unless you can get copies of his morning show broadcasts. But I listen to him every morning, and I know that they were celebrating his birthday on September 21, and that he mentioned several days ago that he was 43 years old. That's what I based the information on. Jakebelder 16:27, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Typo on quote

Thanks for picking that up; obviously you are right, if the misspelling was present in the original. --Spellmaster 00:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zanta Article

Hi BFD1, Thanks for following up on the Zanta article deletion. While Zanta's published notoriety outside of Toronto is somewhat lower than, say, the Naked Cowboy in New York, the esential relevance of his existence is not. I am new to this community and have only ever attempted to edit one article, but I'd like to provide some support for you in the debate about whether the article is relevant to a global audience. Let me know if you are looking for support in any particular place: negotiating where to log my complaint, even, is really difficult to figure out! Xtormenta 18:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with xtormenta - thanks for taking the lead on this! If there can be countless pages on Pokémon, Zanta deserves a page too! --Xfireworksx 04:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Please provide me with your email address. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 20:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! you've got mail. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 21:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Mitchell

with respect,what other reliable source are you looking for.joanne and kim were talking about this live on the air.i dont think there is a more reliable source then that.do not delete again unless you can come up with a better reason then the weak lame excuse you used last time.

myfro—Preceding unsigned comment added by Myfro (talk • contribs)

i have removed the following section based on your arguement that it is unsourced and we only have the writers word that this was indeed said by kim on the radio."In December of 2005, Mitchell had proposed to the Q107 listeners that they write a Christmas song together. The resulting song is entitled "A Christmas Smile". At the end of the song, Mitchell advises his fans not to drink and drive, but to "go for a soda" instead."If you would like the opinion of other editors besides myself, we can create a request for comment.If you wish to take the matter up further please do so on Talk:Kim Mitchell.

Myfro 12:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hello,would an email/edit from joanne wilder or kim himself count as reliable.if you would like i can ask either to clarify? Myfro 22:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude didn't your parents ever tell you about people who live in glass houses.First about being not neutral,you are guilty yourself of this by deleting my unsourced claim stated by kim on the radio but leaving posted the unsourced claim by kim which i deleted.It seems to me you left the one because it was to your liking but deleted mine because you "personally" did not approve of it.Tell me why you left the one but deleted the other? Second i will withdraw my line but will,as per your "rule" delete any edits attributed to anything supposedly said by kim on the radio.In my opinion,by your bias against my edit, you have just made this page weaker.Another old saying i can recall is an old chinese curse."Be careful what you wish for.... Myfro 23:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC) hey dude,i know they were not your edits,my question was why did you not delete them with my line? the both were right in front of your screen.Myfro 23:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Zancai

Good catch on the word actor in the first section. I had missed that one and only removed the category marker. --Renrenren 20:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While we're on the topic, reffering to him as a Christmas character is a bit of a stretch as well. I don`t think he fits in with the Jack Frost's and Mrs Claus's of the world. Perhaps that one should come down as well. --Renrenren 20:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I noticed you just added a new item to the contributions, which got me to wondering—do you have an image of yourself that could be used in the article (and perhaps some biographical data including birth date and place—with the information preferably posted elsewhere first to preclude claims of original research—perhaps on a sub-page of prhizzm.com) that I could use in the article (an infobox on the side would be nice). Maybe an image of you by yourself (I think I saw a B&W one in one of the articles once, maybe the Eye Weekly one?—do you own the rights to that image?) for the infobox, and another one of you performing (for inclusion later in the article). What do you say? Lexicon (talk) 15:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, BTW, I'm Osgoodelawyer; I'm not sure if the last time we spoke I had already changed my name. Lexicon (talk) 15:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Benbecula Leaf.jpg

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Benbecula Leaf.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 16:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ochre

Dear BFD1. You undid Ochre article edit as well as removed interwiki link to existing Russian page about this musician. Since Chris removed forum from his web-site I can't give a reference link to prove my edit, but hopefully there is a cached page on MSN Search. You can see Chris' reply to my question there. Kowarisuki 03:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Sorry about the over-edit; the interwiki was a mistake. I still have reservations about the addition since forums and self-published material do not generally meet the guideline of WP:RS. There's a secondary question as to the notability of the addition as well. BFD1 14:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Wiki's rules ain't perfect because it's quite clear that some _reliable_ source like BBC won't publish quotes of musician who is widely popular in narrow circle. ^^ So forum/interviews are the only sources of info. Anyway I left it in Russian version, I think it might be of interest to somebody. Cheers. Kowarisuki 04:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:DMZ logoBlack-01.png

Thanks for uploading File:DMZ logoBlack-01.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, BFD1. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]