User talk:Dcoetzee/Archive 2011 3 10

Yes, already

Hi. There's a question at MCQ that I'm worried is going to archive without answer. Can you help or point me to somebody who might? Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Okay use or derivative work? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:48, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Done, hope it helps. :-) Dcoetzee 07:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! And here I am again, cluttering your clean page. It looks like WP:CCI may go live soon. I've got a question about the ContributionSurveyor program at its talk page. Your input, I expect, would be invaluable. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, could you point me to the specific question? I didn't spot it. Maybe you linked to the wrong section? Thanks. :-) Dcoetzee 06:15, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron invitation

I loved your article Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Overturned speedy deletions and mentioned it here: Wikipedia talk:Article_Rescue Squadron#Speedy deletion open request for comment and pages How did you gather that information from the deletion log? What tools did you use? Please give me as much details as possible, because I would love to mimic your study.

You maybe interested in a project I am a member of.

WikiProject Article Rescue Squadron Hello, Dcoetzee. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. Ikip (talk) 06:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Ikip (talk) 06:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your response on Wikipedia talk:Article Rescue Squadron, I was afaid you would say "manually" Ikip (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problems?

Hi. Interceptor pattern is tagged as a copyvio of [1], apparently based on the tables. I'm not able to assess the creativity of that material, hence its usability. Can you take a look? On a related note, there is an outstanding section on whether "instruction sets" are copyrightable at WT:CP. Um, ? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey. :-) It looks like a clear copyvio to me. Compare page 8 of the slides with the intro paragraph. To a lesser extent page 16 resembles the second paragraph. The example is also clearly lifted directly from the slides - compare pages 23-28 to the code in example section, they're identical. I'll comment on CP. :-) Dcoetzee 06:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Commons deletion debate?

Hi. Has this one been archived without closure, do you think? It's been sitting there for an awfully long time. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Nope. Commons always has a really long deletion backlog. See Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/2009/08/13. I should probably help clean it up sometime. :-) Dcoetzee 18:25, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:CANVASS addition

Hi there. Regarding your addition to WP:CANVASS here, I agree with this addition. Good thinking, and good phrasing. Tan | 39 02:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! It was just a thought that crossed my mind while reading it and it seemed uncontroversial. Hopefully it'll prove to be so. Dcoetzee 11:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Derivative work?

File:SCPA Historical Marker.PNG? (being all pithy :)) If so, what to do? PUF? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey. :-) That's almost certainly unfree. It's created by the state government of Ohio, which does not typically release its work into the public domain. It's in the US, where there is no freedom of panorama, so we're violating the copyright of the designer of the sign. Additionally, the text on the sign is legible and extensive, so we're violating the copyright of the writer (and this would probably apply even in a typical nation with FoP). I'd take it to PUF just because it's sufficiently complicated, but it seems like a sure delete to me. Dcoetzee 01:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll talk to the image uploader first, about potentially G7ing it. We're in communication about some pretty extensive text issues at the moment. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:41, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, another question

I'm trying to figure out PD status of some images that were published in a 1932 book. The initial conversation is at my talk page.

Brief story:

• The book is an autobiography of Dane Christian Klengenberg, who died in 1931. It was published in London and Toronto in 1932 by Canadian editor Tom MacInnes, who died in 1951. It was also published in the US--unknown if it was within 30 days of original publication. Copyright was never renewed in the US. User:Jayvdb thinks there may be a good case for Canada as place of first publication, given the editor's nationality.

• The book contains photographs of the subject. No photographer is identified for them.

• As I understand it, if the book was first published in London and the photographer is unknown, it would be PD in the UK "70 years from end of year taken, or made available to the public if within 70 years of creation", according to [2], which would miss the 1996 cut off and (I believe) keep the photographs copyrighted in the US under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. If the book was first published in Canada, I think, given that the photographer is unknown they would be PD either 50 years following publication or 75 years after the photograph was taken, whichever comes first (according to Commons), either of which would make them PD by January 1996.

Would photographs from an unknown photographer published in this book be accepted on Commons? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:41, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

May not need your input anymore. :) User:Physchim62 weighs in at my talk page with the rebuttable presumption of copyright in the author and also suggests simultaneous publication in UK and Canada, as well as copyright concerns with the Danes. Unless you disagree that the images are unusable, this one may be over. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey - this is a somewhat difficult case. The relevant tags at Commons would be commons:Template:PD-UK-unknown, commons:Template:PD-Canada, and commons:Template:PD-US-not renewed. I think you can make a good case that all three of these apply in this case, but as you say, the URAA restored copyright in the US. The state of the URAA is an unsettled matter on Commons, see commons:Commons:Licensing#Uruguay_Round_Agreements_Act. I'd say you could upload this (and tag with commons:Template:Not-PD-US-URAA) but I wouldn't recommend it unless you have some really compelling reason to. Dcoetzee 06:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I will pass that on. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Dcoetzee! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 317 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. John Adams (Ohio politician) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Richard Adams (Ohio politician) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Commons image question

Hi, and Happy New Year. :) There's a question about an image on Commons at my userpage that you may be better able to address than I. Can you take a look at it and weigh in or take any action that seems necessary? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, that one resolved swiftly already. :D So as not to have wasted your time in reading this altogether, might I ask you to take a look at File:Roundel of the Slovenian Air Force.png and File:Roundel of the Slovenian Air Force.svg and determine what if anything should be done with them? The uploader is certainly not the copyright holder, but I do not know Commons' stance on images of that kind. If they need to be retagged or other handled, can you help out? The contributor's other images are listed at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Slovenian military-patriot. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the slow response! I'll take a look at this now. :-) Dcoetzee 12:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The image File:Roundel of the Slovenian Air Force.png is definitely a difficult case. It's unlikely of course that the uploader is the copyright holder (most likely the Slovenian Air Force itself is) but the image may be so simple as to fall under commons:Template:PD-ineligible. Alternatively, works of the Slovenian government may be public domain (I doubt it, but I can't find any information on Slovenian copyright law). There's no harm in nominating it, but it would likely be kept, if only on the PD-ineligible theory. Hope this helps, and hope you're well. :-) Dcoetzee 12:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm doing fine, and glad to see you. :) I hope you're well also. I did not nominate it with the others because I thought it might be ineligible for copyright protection, but since images are not my main area thought to check with you. Given your response, I'll just leave it be. I've got plenty of others to work on. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

CCI image outstanding issue

Hi. Mer-C requests review of a couple of images at Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations#Requests (the ones for Blackknight12). Can you take a look and weigh in there? I believe most if not all of them should be clear, but because of my previous interactions with the contributor would prefer somebody else evaluate them. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. :-) You're right, I think they are all okay. Hope this helps. Dcoetzee 00:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

William Burton and Hollar

I've figured this one out, but it is tricky: see Talk:William Burton. I have just created William Burton (antiquary) but that is the one who the portrait is not of. I can create the correct other antiquary William Burton (antiquary d.1657) any time I see that it is not going to be an orphan. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Great, thanks for helping sort this out! I certainly never would have guessed there were two antiquaries named William Burton who were contemporaries. Dcoetzee 02:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

NPG

So, what happened to that legal issue? Did they give up? Pcap ping 05:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

No new news as far as I know - WMF may have received direct correspondence from NPG, however. Dcoetzee 05:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Region-based memory allocation

Hi, regarding Special:WhatLinksHere/Region-based_memory_allocation, can you please not create multiple redirects to an article that doesn't exist? Thanks. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Er, I was in the process of writing that article at the time, which was a taxing process involving a lot of research, so it took a while. Maybe I should have created the redirects afterwards to avoid confusing anyone. Dcoetzee 13:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Oops, look like I accidentally slightly changed the name of the final article and forgot to update the redirects. Sorry about that! Dcoetzee 13:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm aware that people like to create redirects to articles they haven't written yet, so I usually leave those for a couple of days, especially if there's more than one. So yeah. I've forgotten what my point was. Bye. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:45, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing this, I might have forgotten about checking those redirects otherwise. Dcoetzee 14:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

wp:quote talk

Seems like you support the idea. Feel free to move your comment so it is more readable.174.3.107.176 (talk) 05:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

No, I'd rather not. Dcoetzee 23:33, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Math stuff

Hi. :) There's a math article at CP today, Mesor. I don't have the math background to assess the creativity there. Can you take a look? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:35, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Cleaned it. :-) This is really more of a medical analysis thing, but the copyvio was pretty obvious (I'm particularly annoyed at the idea of copying references without reading them from a website that isn't even primarily about the topic of the article...). Dcoetzee 22:45, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Updates to copyright instructions

Hi. Based on some feedback I've received, I've updated the instructions at WP:SCV and WP:CP. I've left a more indepth explanation at Wikipedia talk:Suspected copyright violations#Header update along with a request for feedback. As we try to get more people involved in this work, we want to be sure instructions are clear. Given your work, your input there would be very much appreciated. :) Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying this. :-) It certainly was helpful to me to read. Hopefully it'll help others too. Dcoetzee 04:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Connected Components

Hi Derrick. The definition of a connected component on the following page is incorrect: Connected_component_(graph_theory). It states: "In graph theory, a connected component of an undirected graph is a subgraph in which any two vertices are connected to each other by paths, and to which no more vertices or edges can be added while preserving its connectivity." However, "or edges" part of that sentence needs to be removed, as it is not true. Edges can be added to a connected component, while preserving its connectivity. See the NIST definition that you referred to: [3] which says: "such that no vertex of D can be added to S and it still be strongly connected". It does not say that edges cannot be added. Connected components of an undirected graph are not necessarily complete subgraphs; therefore edges can be added between nodes of the graph without threatening its status as a connected component. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.15.64.187 (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

You are both correct and also missing the point. Edges can be added to a graph which enlarge the edge set of some connected component. However, a connected component must partition the set of edges in the underlying graph - there cannot be any edge in the full graph which does not belong to a connected component of that graph. This is precisely what is implied by the statement that "no more edges can be added while preserving its connectivity." To consider a hypothetical example, a cycle graph may be divided into two "components" each containing half the cycle, and these two "components" together contain all vertices. They are not valid connected components because there are two edges in the underlying graph which are in neither component (in fact this graph has only one connected component).

Part of the confusion here may stem from the fact that the definition is not describing a partitioning of a graph into connected components, but rather defining a single connected component. In any case I've attempted to clarify the article. Dcoetzee 19:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Image question at my talk page

Hi, Derrick. There's an image question at my talk page dealing with possibly copyright expired UK images and the impact on them of the URAA and CTEA. There seems to be some divergence between policy and practice (well, guideline, but I couldn't resist the alliteration) here, and I wanted to check with you to see if you can help answer the question. It's here. I'd be most grateful. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Pestering you, as always

Hi. :D We're trying to figure out how non-admins can note that a CCI is ready to close. Can you determine if the last suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Contributor copyright investigations#How to flag an investigation complete is plausible? It's been sitting since the 7th, but nobody who knows 'bout such things has happened by. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Could I also draw your attention to Wikipedia talk:Contributor copyright investigations#Listing generation question, which seems to have your name on it. Thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank You

		The Human Sexuality Barnstar
		Thank you for your heroic efforts fixing the damage done to articles by image deletion, Simon Speed (talk) 23:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm glad to help. :-) I hope going forward we'll see no more deletions of images that are in use for an educational purpose like these. Dcoetzee 00:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

lady, snow keep

You don't get to close afds early. Snow keep is not a policy, and AFD is not a vote. DRV coming your way.- Wolfkeeper 03:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Suit yourself. Dcoetzee 16:10, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I would not have phrased it as adversarially as Wolfkeeper, but I agree that WP:SNOW was not applicable in this case. Would you consider reopening the AfD so that we don't have to go through DRV? Powers ^T 13:21, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

It already went through DRV, where the closure was endorsed: [4]. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Funnel sort

I've started a draft at User:Gwern/Funnel sort. --Gwern (contribs) 18:26 17 June 2010 (GMT)

[automatically accepted]

I want to ask a question about the “latest accepted revision” of pages on English Wikipedia. Does this option prevent me from seeing the latest version by default that was not marked as an accepted revision? --Mahmudmasri (talk) 05:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

There is a preference to always see the latest version by default. See Pending changes in your preferences. 06:27, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll see it. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 07:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Commons image?

Hi, Derrick. It's been forever since I've run into you. I keep an eye out, but evidently my timing has been bad. :) In any event, when I got a question about a Commons image on my talk page, it seemed a perfect excuse to drop by and say hi in context of asking your feedback. :D Could you take a look at User talk:Moonriddengirl#Help with an image? The uploader of File:6 commando adour raid 1942.jpg is now concerned that he may have inadvertently licensed it incorrectly, and he is most anxious to do the right thing. Hi! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:51, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

And since I'm already bothering you, um, what? (No, I mean, what? Really, what?) Does any of that make sense? </puzzled> --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey, good to hear from you. :-) All of those edits have been reverted. In the first edit, they claimed that they solved a long-standing open problems in computer science and that the source code they're pasting is the solution (in actuality it's not even remotely relevant). In the second edit they pasted a bunch of... what appear to be menu specifications into the general article on codes (which is completely unrelated). In the third they posted the same code as in the first one to a different article - it's still meaningless and irrelevant. They appear to be some crazy troll. :-) Dcoetzee

Thank you. :) When I saw that similar edits had been permitted to stand for a day, I wasn't sure if it was because they weren't noticed or because there was something to them. It didn't look constructive to me, but.... Well, what do I know? :) If it says its related to computers, that is. And thanks for your feedback at my talk page question, too. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 10:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Things get a bit sprawly sometimes. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:38, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Glad to help. :-) Dcoetzee 21:38, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hi, Derrick. I know you're a busy fellow, but I'm wondering if you would mind watchlisting User:Pohick2. He is currently indefinitely blocked for copyright infringements (see ANI thread). He has yet to indicate even a desire to be unblocked, but since he may (he has certainly been a dedicated contributor) it would be good to have an experienced copyright admin who can work with him. There have been several conversations with him in the past, but the most extensive I've had is at User talk:Pohick2/Archive/#Copyright concerns and subsequent, in case you're wondering what ground has already been covered. I think that having a fresh person to talk to might be beneficial should he decide to consider resuming his account. Our last conversation, I'm afraid, didn't end well. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Done :-) Dcoetzee 07:45, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Context

Hello. Please look at this edit. I don't think the phrase "In real analysis,..." has the effect of telling the lay reader that mathematics is what the article is about. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Dcoetzee 05:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Image origin

Hi. A recently blocked contributor, User:Wiki id2, acknowledged that all of the images he had uploaded under claim of his own authorship were not actually his, except one. Since that one (File:Taha Hussain.PNG) was a clear crop, I suggested he upload the complete picture to help prove that he was the photographer. He has now uploaded File:Taha Hussain.jpg, and requests that we delete it once we are satisfied. Since images are way more your thing, would you mind taking a look? Should that alleviate my concerns about that image? It doesn't have metadata, but looks plausible. Your input would be appreciated. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey :-) Based on contributions, I have every reason to suspect that Wiki id2 is a Pakistani person in the same age range as Taha Hussain, so may very well have been in a position to take a photograph of him (he's also himself responsible for the article). The resolution is unusual (it's probably a downscale of the original using some kind of standard photo editing tool, as no real camera would produce an image with this resolution), but it seems legit to me. Dcoetzee 20:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. :) I will not pursue this one further, then, but will regard it as plausible based on this and based on his coming clean, eventually, about the other content. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Happy Dcoetzee's Day!

User:Dcoetzee has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Dcoetzee's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Dcoetzee! Peace, Rlevse 01:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Rlevse. :-) Dcoetzee 01:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Verifiability

• Universal data compression (AfD discussion)

Because you changed the article so that it no longer matched the sources cited, deletion is being called for yet again, here. Please fix this, citing the source that you had for your different definition, to quash this argument. Uncle G (talk) 03:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

If I recall correctly my rewording was based on the references already listed in the article. I just put it in my own words, as we are required to do. If the fact that this is a rewording is unclear, perhaps the explanation is inadequate. If I recall incorrectly, then I can't remember where I found the sources I used, nor how I found them. Dcoetzee 04:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Chime in

Could you chime in here and maybe update the article: User_talk:Jesse_Viviano#IPsec? Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing?

Hi, Derrick. :) There's a question at my talk page about the paraphrasing in Len Lawson. We could use another set of eyes. More information is available at its talk page and at mine, here, if you have time. It would, as always, be much appreciated. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Math!

Yes, me again. :) There's a question at my talk page about whether an article that was once deleted for copyright concerns is now copyright-problem free. For background, see Wikipedia:AN#Deletion of Copyrighted Material. The question at my talk page is here; the rewrite is here and the source is here. Can you take a look and give feedback at my talk page or at User talk:Fly by Night? I'd be ever so grateful. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Replied, sorry for the delay. :-) Dcoetzee 06:10, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Dcoetzee! I appreciate you taking the time to help. The use of $\scriptstyle \frown$ in place of $\scriptstyle \cap$ was two-fold. Firstly I think $\scriptstyle \frown$ looks nicer, and secondly the cap product article uses $\scriptstyle \frown$ insead of $\scriptstyle \cap$. — Fly by Night (talk) 19:07, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Derrick! You remain a prince among men. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:28, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

She's a charmer, isn't she? ☺ — Fly by Night (talk) 21:59, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Always :-) Glad to help. Dcoetzee 02:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

about Willy On Wheels

Hello,

I'm french and i tried to read your essay about vandal called "willy on wheels"… but i do not understand everything. new comer on wikipédia, I cant find the way to find a translator of your essay for the french wikipedia. could you please help me ?

thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.15.245.176 (talk) 11:48, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Does this help? Since my French is very poor, I do not know if their translation is very good. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, c'est moi

User:Fly by Night has found another copyvio in a math related article. It's the last listing at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 August 21. Can I possibly drop this on your lap? The rest of the day (including SCV) is done. I'd appreciate it. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:01, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, taking a look now. :-) Dcoetzee 15:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

See my note there. Could unfortunately not resolve this without access to the source. Dcoetzee 15:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I may have downloaded the pdf at home. I'll take a look tonight and see if I still have it. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That would be great, Verno. :) I had the same issue with accessing the source, but I wasn't quite sure if it would be something that might be more obvious to you than to me. I appreciate your looking, Derrick. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I do have the source, and noticed that it's a revised version of the paper located at http://at.yorku.ca/i/d/e/a/35.htm. If none of those formats work for you I can get you the pdf version somehow. VernoWhitney (talk) 01:17, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I really should've been able to find that as it was cited. The proof was quite long and copied character for character, which is not okay. The definition, like many mathematical definitions, is quite difficult to put in any other words, and that's okay - I rephrased it a bit just to be careful. All clean. Dcoetzee 07:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:57, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

DNB WikiProject

I don't know how interesting this is for you: but Wikipedia:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography has just been set up formally. This could be a good place to marry up historical images with articles on their subjects, at least. Charles Matthews (talk) 18:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2

Because you participated in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Some Person/The Real Secret Page and Secret Barnstar, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2. Cunard (talk) 06:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing explanation?

Hi, Derrick. I am trying to explain close paraphrasing at User talk:Trackinfo#Copyright violation, but it's late in my part of the world. Knowing your familiarity with the issue (not to mention the essay :D), could you drop by and clarify? I'm sure you can explain it more succinctly than I. I'd be grateful. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I should note, his latest version is much better than his first, but, in my opinion, still follows too closely: [5]. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:47, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Done. :-) Dcoetzee 00:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

You need a separate talk page just for my requests

Hi, Derrick.

There's a Commons image copyright question at my talk page, and I am in need of somebody familiar with the ins-and-outs of Commons copyright to help out. If you have an oppportunity, could you weigh in at this thread? If you don't have the opportunity, let me know, and I'll pester somebody else. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:31, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Adopt-a-user reminder

Hello, I have completed a general cleanup of the adopter information page for the adopt-a-user project, located here. During my cleanup, I have removed several inactive and retired users. In order to provide interested adoptees with an easy location to find adopters, it is essential that the page be up-to-date with the latest information possible. Thus:

• If you are no longer interested in being an adopter, please remove yourself from the list.
• If you are still interested, please check the list to see if any information needs to be updated or added - especially your availability. Thank you.

• You are receiving this message because you are listed as an adopter here.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Netalarm (talk) at 03:34, 23 September 2010 (UTC).

Repeated links proposal

This is a proposal to change the Repeated links section of the MOS. Please edit &/or comment on the talk page as you see fit.

Feel free to move the proposal/discussion straight to the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (linking) if you wish. I just thought we might establish some sort of consensus first, out of the heat and fury over there. --Michael C. Price ^talk 10:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

When making changes to scientific articles you have to understand the subject

You rearranged sections in arithmetic coding. Do you understand that first part is not clear for anyone who try to become familiar with the subject. It does not matter if it is right or wrong, it does not explain anything. The explanation that arithmetic coding narrows interval on every step is right or meaningless. People need to understand where compression comes from. Why narrowing down interval leads to shorter message? Why this shorter message is shortest possible? And how to restore message back from final interval? Besides that, first section does not mention that compression occur by choosing shortest fraction from final interval and not from narrowing down the interval itself. I wrote that sections that you moved down. I actually don't care if you remove them or not because I explained everything on my web site, which shown by Google on the first page even before wiki. Did you write your own arithmetic coder ever? I wrote several coders in open source that are used by people. If you want to arithmetic coding via narrowing interval starting from [0,1) that is fine, but explain how to encode, decode, explain why it is numerically stable and converge and what is the limit to which it converges. It takes two pages of printed text to explain this and reader needs to know high school math to understand it but it requires high level on understanding to be able to explain it. C-processor (talk) 08:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

If it is your explanation on the top part of arithmetic coding section I can tell you that even Claude Shannon would not understand it in 1948 if he read it. It may be correct but useless. You know the joke how two guys got lost at see on the boat and met another boat with fisherman. They asked "where are we" and got the answer "you are in the boat". They decided that fisherman was mathematician because the answer was precise but useless, so this is upper part of the article. You can make the whole article useless by removing my section and will have more readers on my site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by C-processor (talk • contribs) 08:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I've written many arithmetic coders, as a matter of fact. I appreciate your contributions and the interesting connections they raise but I feel like the new text assumes a lot of background that readers unfamiliar with the subject would not have - just as with basic arithmetic, it's important to understand the basic algorithm and how it is performed before understanding its theoretical basis. This is the value of the introductory examples. Placing this first also allows the remaining content to discuss the theory without expounding upon detailed examples of its own. Additionally, I feel like the examples are more accessible than the theory, and I prefer to present articles in roughly an order of increasing difficulty. It does depend on what audience you're going for though, and maybe it would be better to intermix the algorithm description with the theory somehow. Dcoetzee 07:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Continuous-repayment mortgage

Hmm - the diagram you minimised in Continuous-repayment_mortgage is fairly important in respect of illustrating the characteristic curve of a CRM. But having the diagram and all relevant text viewable at the same time does enhance readability. And of course readers can always click to enlarge the thumbnail.

Any further comments/suggestions you may have would be appreciated - I am trying to deal with another editor's comment about the article being too technical for most readers. Actually IMHO it is not - it is not beyond the level of first year university Maths and there are far more mathematically challenging articles elsewhere on Wikipedia. All the same I'm sure the article would benefit from a rigorous mathematical critique.

Neil Parker (talk) 16:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

You can feel free to enlarge it by adjusting the size (200px -> 300px or whatever) but the use of frame is discouraged, since it prevents the image from being replaced by a higher-resolution or vector version for print editions. I think the article is okay, but many people who would like to understand this particular topic don't have a first-year university background, so I think it could use a high school level introduction similar to compound interest that discusses in detail how the relevant limit is achieved. Dcoetzee 23:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The CRM balance function can be obtained either by:

1) Using limit theory - see Continuous-repayment_mortgage#Derivation_of_time-continuous_equation.

2) Integration of cash flow elements. Briefly mentioned in the introduction

3) Solution of differential equation

I would have thought the first mentioned does more or less what you suggest above. The only slightly advanced concept (ie possibly beyond high school level) mentioned here is the very same limit that is used in determination of the formula for continuous compounding. Perhaps what is needed is an online reference to a derivation of that limit similar to the one given in "Algebra and Trigonometry" (Munem and Foulis) which I have specifically included as an inline reference. Thanks for the feedback all the same.

Neil Parker (talk) 08:25, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright issue?

Hi. There are two listed copyright issues at CP today that could use somebody familiar with computers: High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection and AACS encryption key controversy. I, of course, don't even know what a cryptographic key is. :) Is this something you can handle, or should I try to dig up assistance at VPP or something? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I responded at WP:CP. The gist of it is that it's not a copyright issue, because cryptographic keys are too short to be eligible for copyright protection (for example, the AACS key is 32 characters of text). Any issues with publishing them would fall under the DMCA, not copyright law. Dcoetzee 00:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

An update from adopt a user

Hi there Dcoetzee! You may be wondering, what have I done to sound the alarm this time? Nothing. I'm messaging you in regards to the adopt-a-user program, which currently has a backlog of users wishing to be adopted. This doesn't make much sense, as we have a considerable list of users offer adoption, so there shouldn't be any backlog. I've begun to eliminate this backlog myself through a matching program, but I need your help to make it work. Of course, adoptees and adopters don't have to go through there, but I believe it helps eliminate the backlog because someone is actively matching pairs.

On the list of adopters, I have modified the middle column to say "Interests." It's easier working with other users that have similar interests, so if it's not too much to ask, could you add your interests in the middle column? For example, if I was interested in hurricanes, computers, business, and ... reptiles? I would place those in the middle column. Counter-vandalism and the like can also be included (maintenance should be used as the general term). The more interests, the better, since adoptees can learn more about you and choose the one they feel most comfortable working with. The information about when you're most active and other stuff can go into the "Notes" section to the right.

Finally, I've gone around and asked adoptees (and will in the future) to fill in a short survey so adopters can take the initiative and contact users they feel comfortable working with. We all know that most adoptees just place the adopt me template on their user page and leave it - so it's up to us to approach them and offer adoption. So, please take a look at the survey, adopt those that fit your interests, and maybe watchlist it so you can see the interests of adoptees and adopt one that fits your interests in the future.

Once again, thank you for participating in the adopt-a-user program! If you wish to respond to this post, please message me on my talk page.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Netalarm (talk) at 05:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC).

Pronunciation request

The Pronunciation task force has you listed as a member. Would you be able to make a recording for Albany, New York? upstateNYer 01:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I would, although I should figure out first how to pronounce it properly. :-P I'm not a New York local and not sure if the "al" is as in "Albert" or as in "all". Dcoetzee 22:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

The first syllable is pronounced like the word "all". The pronunciation guide at the beginning of the article should make it clear for you I think. Let me know if you have any further questions and thanks for the help! upstateNYer 20:49, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Any update on this? upstateNYer 04:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, give me a little bit of time, I will take care of it. Dcoetzee 06:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Xanderliptak

I have opened an RfC/U on Xanderliptak. Since you have attempted to deal with the concerns that I raise, I have mentioned you in the RfC. The RfC is not yet certified and may not be; currently I am the sole signatory, and any RfC not accompanied by evidence showing that two users tried and failed to resolve the same dispute will be deleted after 48 hours as "uncertified". But I thought you should be made aware. Any feedback will, of course, be most welcome. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:24, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Question about table copyright

Hi. There's a question at my user talk page with which I could use some assistance. It relates to whether or not some tables created by the user (who asked) would infringe on some figures used in an article. They correspond point per point, but I'm unsure how creative they would be judged to be. Can you take a look at User talk:Moonriddengirl#A question I have been meaning to ask and offer some feedback? I've identified which figure corresponds to which table to hopefully make this less of a chore. :) I'd be gratful. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

File:FIT spotter card.jpg

Hi Derrick, thanks for your comments about this file, I've changed it to being fair use, and the resolution has been lowered, do you think you could take a look at the FUR and let me know if it is ok? Thanks a lot. SmartSE (talk) 12:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks good to me - the only unclear point is that a portion would not suffice (e.g. I could imagine maybe half of it would illustrate the point) but I think it's fine like it is. It doesn't have to be as low res as you made it, only low enough that it's not good for printing - unless you shrunk it for privacy reasons. Dcoetzee 01:22, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Dermatitis.jpg

Hi, Derrick. This file was inadvertently deleted in 2007 as duplicated on Commons, but the original was not attributed. (See Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#File:Dermatitis.jpg) Since the image on Commons does not have any kind of image source box that I recognize, I'm not sure where to log the attribution. Can you give some input or help out? After we've helped violate this guy's license for years, I'd really like to make sure we do it right! I'd appreciate it. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Took care of this by deleting and re-importing the image with CommonsHelper. :-) Dcoetzee 22:41, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Help, o computer person!

Hi. I don't know if you have time or interest in this one, but Responsiveness came up at CP today. It had a few sentences copied from its source. Looking at it, though, I'm thinking that it may be a serious issue of synthesis. I was trying to replace it with sourced comment, but if I do that, I'm just going to wind up with a WP:DICDEF. Can you do something with that? Could anybody? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey, took a look at this. I've heard the term responsiveness and I have heard it applied to both process scheduling (as discussed in Responsiveness vs Performance) and to user interfaces (as discussed in Delays). The article requires improvement e.g. I find it a bit too specific and constrained ("The three steps are", "The other three [criteria] are"), and it does represent a combination of concepts from different subfields, but I think they're closely-related enough that it's an acceptable topic for an article. Dcoetzee 01:09, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay. That's all alien to me, but if the article seems valid to you, I'll trust that it is. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:15, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Contribution team

Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.

If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 22:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

By the way, this is a human edit (not a bot). I'm specifically contacting you as you expressed interest in the Campus Ambassador position, and the Wikipedia Contributions Team has a lot of commonality in working along with the Campus Ambassadors. You can reach me on my talk page, or by email at drosenthal@wikimedia.org with questions; I can't guarantee that I'll be checking back on your talk page often enough to hold a sustained conversation there. Regards, ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 22:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation, but I'm afraid I'm unlikely to be able to commit time to this effort. I nevertheless wish you good luck. Dcoetzee 23:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco

Hello, Dcoetzee. I'd like to know if you could help me out. I have nominated yet another article as a FAC at the English-written Wikipedia. It is about José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco (Link: [6]), a 19th century Brazilian statesman. I'd like to ask you to take a look at the article's pictures and write in the nomination page if they are OK or not. I also made the same invitation to Kaldari and I wanted to see both of you giving your opinion there, since you are both administrators there and at here, at Commons. Here is the link to the nomination page: [7]. Thank you very much for your time. I'd be very thankful if you could review it. Cheers, --Lecen (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. Dcoetzee 01:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

More Info

I found more info on Willy on Wheels! He's Amerykan, speaks Amerykan English and Spanish, and is an Uncyclopedian! Bonelayer12864 (talk) 14:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your source is or if it's reliable (many people pretend to be Willy), but feel free to edit the essay if you like. Dcoetzee 19:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco

Dcoetzee, José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco was promoted to Featured article. I'm here to let you know that I really appreciated what you did, by taking your time to review the article's pictures. Thank you very much and kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 14:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Glad to help! Congratulations! Dcoetzee 19:38, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Contribution Surveyor

Hi! When you have time could you stop by Wikipedia talk:Contributor copyright investigations#Tweak Contribution Surveyor? and weigh in (since we're conspiring about your tool and all)? VernoWhitney (talk) 21:15, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

CP question

Hi. :) We've got a listing at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 December 9 on which we could use feedback, as we currently have a 2/1 admin split on whether the content is okay. It's not remotely a heated discussion, since none of us are likely to be personally invested. It's not really much of a discussion, actually, so much as it is a few comments. I would really like to get feedback from somebody else, particularly as it involves several pages. The one to look at is Talk:1953 Iranian coup d'état/Communism sources. Would you mind taking a look and seeing if you have an opinion? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:55, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Duluth Fall Festival.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Duluth Fall Festival.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

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:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:10, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

This was uploaded 6 years ago before copyright verification was quite so formal. The copyright holder gave a verbal release, but I am seeking a new release by e-mail, just to be safe. Dcoetzee 02:52, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Root key copyright?

Hi. :) There's a question at CP that could use your attention, if you have time: Is a "Root key" protected by copyright?. I seem to recall having discussed this before, but a scan of "root key" + copyright in Wikipedia and user talk space was not helpful. :/ Could you please weigh in there? TYIA. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Mekia Cox

I have responded to your concerns.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Template:SloanesRef merge with Template:OEIS ?

See Template:SloanesRef. HenningThielemann (talk) 16:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Such a merge is not appropriate in this case. {{OEIS}} is intended for links to sequences in the body of an article, while {{SloanesRef}} is for use in the references section. Dcoetzee 22:52, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I would still prefer a consistent naming. Since there are certainly more things to cite Mr. Sloane for, I think say OEISRef is more appropriate than SloanesRef. HenningThielemann (talk) 21:24, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Flags, copyright, Commons, fair use?

Hi. :) There's a question at my talk page from a previously blocked infringer who is trying to remain within policy. He has uploaded some national flags to Commons, and these have been marked for deletion. I'm unsure if there are special provisions for flags and, if so, to which project they apply, but I thought you might know. Any chance you could weigh in at User_talk:Moonriddengirl#Help_Please? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Mekia Cox/1

Be advised of Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Mekia Cox/1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:43, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Planarity Virus

Have you done anything to verify that planarity (as hosted by planarity.net) does not contain a virus? I tested it on 3 computers at my school's library all of which after a short time had a fake anti-spyware program pop up along with a bunch of additional weirdness. There are other possibilities as to what the source of the virus could be, but in light of the testing I have done, are you sure you feel confident about reverting that article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.0.154 (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm very confident. I've used the app on multiple machines, talked to people who have used it, and verified the identity of its creator as a legitimate developer. Some virus scanners falsely identify programs as viruses which are not based on signatures. Dcoetzee 00:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Simple cycle graph.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Simple cycle graph.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Kelly ^hi! 05:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Interested in mentoring your class

I just wanted to let you know that as a mentor, I am particularly interested in taking on students covering the topics of Environmental Law/Policy. Feel free to direct some of them to me. – VisionHolder « talk » 03:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks VisionHolder, I'll keep you in mind if any are looking for assistance, or if we need staffing in the IRC room. Dcoetzee 00:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 28 January 2011

The newsletter of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program – Volume 1, 28 January 2011 This is the first issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program newsletter. Please read it! It has important information about the the current wave of classes, instructions and advice, and other news about the ambassador program. Classes get active, students requesting mentors First mentor responsibilities Other news Things you can do

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

:)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For going the extra mile (or seven) to help with my computer issues, thanks so much! sonia♫ 04:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Glad to help a friend. :-) Hopefully it'll help you in your contributions! Dcoetzee 09:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Photo clearance issues

Hi. :) There is a conversation at my talk page concerning multiple images on Wikipdia and Commons where the uploaders asserts that he purchased the images and their rights from an estate, but no verification is provided. When I believed this was a single-image issue, I simply tagged the image for {{npd}} and notified the contributor of the need to verify this, but the contributor is not often active, and it has expanded. I wanted to get some feedback from you about how you felt this could best be approached. If you don't mind, would you weigh in at my talk page about it? If you're busy or have no opinion, please just let me know here and I'll bug somebody else. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dcoetzee. You have new messages at Guerillero's talk page.
Message added 04:16, 8 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your name appearing in a French newspaper ;)

Actually, it's only their online version, but nice achievement ;). And amazing work too :) -- Luk ^talk 09:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the link :-) I fear my work was not nearly so laborious as they would believe, but it's nice to know they appreciate the high-resolution works being more easily available. Dcoetzee 10:35, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Editing Fridays article for 11 February 2011

--Guerillero | My Talk 02:00, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 13 February 2011

The newsletter of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program – Volume 1, 28 January 2011 This is the second issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed. Userboxes and profiles - Add an ambassador userbox to your page, and make sure you've added your mentor profile! Be a coordinating ambassador - Pick and class and make sure no students fall through the cracks. New screencasts - Short videos on watchlists and a number of other topics may be useful to students. Updates from Campus Ambassadors - Ambassadors are starting to report on classroom experiences, both on-wiki and on the Google Group. Other news - There's a new on-wiki application for being an Online Ambassador, and Editing Friday #2 is today! Things you can do - This is just a sample; if you're eager for something to do, there's plenty more.

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:21, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Me again; essay in progress. Feedback?

Hi, Derrick. :) Although I really don't have time, I'm drawing together an essay about copyright in lists: User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright in lists. Before publishing it, I'd really like to get some feedback on it, and, as you know, I highly value yours. :) If you have time and inclination, would you mind reading through? I'm hoping to provide some clear and useful guidance on a subject that is often discussed, but not widely understood. You are welcome to edit it directly or to leave comments at the talk page. I think it particularly could use some work at the last section ("What copyrighted selection/arrangement mean for Wikipedia"), but I'm at a bit of a loss as to what to say or how to approach it.

And I'm not dumping this only on you, so if you don't have time or inclination, you should not feel bad. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:06, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi :-) I'm afraid it'll take me a little time to get to this due to some rl grading obligations, but I will come back to it when I can, it looks like a good idea. :-) Dcoetzee 00:49, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Club at Berkeley

Hi Derrick, Thanks for letting me know, I've signed up and look forward to hearing more through the list. Kaushik Iyer (talk) 02:27, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Google Art Project, extracting images

Hello Derrick, let me introduce myself, I am David, a student of Art History in Portugal. We (at my university) are planning to create a project that would store high-quality images of paintings, books and other works of art in digital format. The goal would not only be to store human art/culture for preservation, but also to make it available online. That "digital library" would then be available to anyone, in particular students, to facilitate analysis of the works. This is where we would like to request your help, you see, at first we plan to collect material already in digital form, and we are planning to use Google Art Project as one of the initial sources, the problem is that we can't really get decent pictures from there... I noticed you uploaded some paintings from there into wikipedia, so I was wondering if you could provide us with the tools or knowledge you used, if you are OK to share that... Hope you can help. Cheers, David Salvador. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.80.234.247 (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi David, all public domain works from the Google Art Project are available on Wikimedia Commons at commons:Category:Google Art Project at full resolution, except the gigapixel images which are at reduced resolution (I plan on making those available at full resolution at another site, since they require special tools to process). It is a simple matter to download all images from a Commons category automatically using the Mediawiki API (let me know if you need help with this). I cannot of course redistribute the non-free copyrighted images (nor could your site do so without a license). Commons is also home to many other high-quality images of public domain artwork, perhaps hundreds of thousands, and will be a good source in general for your project - commons:Category:PD Art is a good starting point to explore. Dcoetzee 01:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiClub

Welcome to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Club at Berkeley Maximilianklein (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Contribution surveyor down?

I just tried your wonderful tool to see if a full CCI would be needed to handle some contributions and it's telling me "The MySQL server is running with the --read-only option so it cannot execute this statement". Any chance you know what's up with that? VernoWhitney (talk) 15:02, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Verno, that particular error message indicates a schema update in progress. I checked and the problem has resolved itself. Dcoetzee 03:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hrmm, I can't say I've ever seen that error before except for when I forgot I had started the server with that option. Oh well, thanks for the feedback. It still seems to be finnicky for me right now but I tried it a few times and it came through. Cheers! VernoWhitney (talk) 14:19, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Quicksort partition example image

Hi! I've recently made an edit simplifying the inplace version of the quicksort algorithm. It basically always uses the last element as the partitioning pivot. I think that's clearer and also more consistent with standard implementations in textbooks. The problems is that the image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Partition_example.svg) no longer matches. I even tried to make a new one on Gimp, but I'm not sure how to upload it. Could you make a new image (eliminating the first step) and fix this? Thiagohirai (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC).

n.b. I just reverted that edit - this is worth talking about on the talk page but the literature is pretty clear on the topic. bou·le·var·dier (talk) 07:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)