User talk:Esprit15d/Archive 2

This is an archive of inactive discussion. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

EUDLF

Thanks for cleaning up my article about El Ultimo de la Fila, I was going to go through it myself but I see the little elves did it already ;) I will be adding more to the article very soon. --RiseRover 13:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Wikipedia loves it little elves – please feed them!--Esprit15d 13:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the Speedy Delete tag

Hey, I was just going through some new pages you're tagged with just the {{d}} template. It's better to use {{db|(reason)}}, especially including giving a shorthand WP:CSD reason. Admins are less likely to delete articles that are tagged with no reason. Thanks for helping out with New Page patrol! RasputinAXP _talk _contribs 20:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty. I thought they might be obvious enough. But if the protocol is to use reasons – I can do that!--Esprit15d 20:12, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Desk Metal / Morbid Abortion

Damn – beat me to it! I've added subst to your afd tags to relieve server load :) IainP (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Yeah, that one is something of a no brainer.--Esprit15d 21:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

You seem to be putting the {{subst:afd2}} stuff onto the afd entry talk page rather than where it should be. I've fixed up Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esteemed Colleagues. Thanks/wangi 22:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Homicide: Life on the Streets episodes Season1

Hello, you created a redirect for this page, and the tittle you have chosen isn't not correct: List of Homicide: Life on the Streets (Season 1).

This page is a List of Homicide: Life on the Street (a TV series) episodes for Season 1.

You would better write List of Homicide: Life on the Street episodes (Season 1) (please note that I removed a "s" at the end of "Street").

Thus can you delete both page, I will add content only by tomrrow with a correct name (there is a incorrect "s" at Street).Thanks. Lvr 16:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After I did it, I realized it was wrong. I'll fix it.--Esprit15d 16:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Lvr 21:08, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

X Prize Foundation

If you look at the bottom of page http://www.base.science24.org/art/X_PRIZE_Foundation you'll notice it says "licensed under GNU Free Documentation License". So it's not a copyright violation for Wikipedia to copy the whole thing word-for-word.

We should still give proper credit to whoever wrote it originally.

I'm glad you are checking for copyvios. Even if, once in a long while, some edit you make doesn't quite reach the shining perfection of your other edits :-). --DavidCary 16:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I take it all back. You were correct in tagging it as a copyvio. I think that the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=X_PRIZE_Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=31267109 edit inserted a copyvio of http://www.xprizefoundation.com/about_us/history.asp . --DavidCary 16:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for taking the time to research the matter and for your understanding attitude. It's been a pleasure doing business with you ;).--Esprit15d 16:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

useless redirect

This message is regarding the page escape from the everyday. Please be more careful when redirecting pages to ensure that the article's content is not lost in a redirect. Coolgamer 22:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No information was lost in the redirects, to my knowledge. It got very complicated fast because I mispelled the "From", but after some administrator (you?), deleted the mispelled redirect, I looked to see that the information from the original miscapitalized article had been literally copied and pasted to the correct redirect. So then I just did what I intended to do in the first place, which is redirect the miscapitalized article to the correct title.--Esprit15d 01:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The information was lost in the original redirect to lead to a blank page. I then reverted the old page, then you corrected your mistake. Coolgamer 18:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep that in mind for the next time.--Esprit15d 18:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

THX 4 RDIRECT FX

MeltBanana 21:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome!--Esprit15d 21:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luas smartcard

I notice that you changed my article to a redirect; I have changed it back to merge in the information from the Luas article. I did this because I feel it would cause confusion for someone looking for information on the Luas smartcard to have to go down most of the page to read the information after being redirected, and also the Category:Contactless smartcards seems to establish that there is a consensus to list such smartcards apart from their main article.

I hope that this comment helps to explain my actions. Stifle 15:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wkipedia's motto is be bold, so your changes are defendable and I see your rationale. Unfortunately, it is not in keeping with wikipedia policy. The article you wrote on the Luas smartcard was not as thorough, referenced, wikified or researched as the original article. Plus, it is very unfair to the persons who wrote the original article for their information to be moved to a brand new article without their names being listed at the new article. Because of that unfairness, that is only done on rare occasions where a subheading has gotten very, very large (which is not the case here).

Also, you will find it is a lot less confusing than you think. Many articles have several redirects, becuase almost every topic has subtopics that could be new articles, but are better served by being together. Someone who wants to know about the Luas system probably also wants to know about its ticketing system, and this should all be in one place. You shouldn't have to go through four or five different articles for each aspect of the railway. I am going to revert the articles. If you still disagree with me (which you may), maybe we can come to some sort of resolution throught the mediation cabal here.--Esprit15d 16:08, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert wars are not really justified over what is a rather trivial issue such as this. I disagree, however, with most of what you said. The article I wrote was actually an expansion of the content already there, the history was linked from the new article's talk page to ensure people were credited for their work, and I still maintain that precedent at the category I mentioned and elsewhere suggests that splitting this off was the correct decision. I think it's worth discussing, although bringing in a load of people who know very little about the issue would not help. How about we put it to the Irish Wikipedians' noticeboard? Stifle 18:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, the point of my last message on your talk page I'm recusing myself from the issue, but I felt like it was only fair to let you know that there are ppl that agree with you. Any action you take from here on out, I'm just letting you know that I won't touch it.--Esprit15d 13:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chemmeen.jpg

Hi, thanks a ton for uploading the image. However, it is not a book cover, it is a dvd cover. You would also be able to make out that it is a dvd cover from the following: - The legend below the title Chemmeen reads "First DVD in Malayalam." Top right mentions the words "Surya Movies." Bottom left shows the seal of the President of India in a Golden yellow colour, indicating that the movie has won the President's Gold medal. I have changed the license and description of the image accordingly. You may want to have a look at it. Thanks again for all your help. --Gurubrahma 19:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane season articles

Please do not rename hurricane season articles into incorrect names. The correct name, used by all ~200 season articles on wikipedia, is 1971 Pacific hurricane season. Jdorje 20:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The links are still valid and the articles will not be affected whatsoever. However, according to Wikipedia naming convention for article titles, events recurring at regular intervals should have the specific date come after the main name. This is practiced throughout wikipedia. For more information on the policy, click the link. Of course within the article, they can be named whatever is appropriate for the context.--Esprit15d 20:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the articles are to be renamed, it will take a truly massive amount of work. There are ~200 articles, with ~200 categories, and ~500 articles placed into those categories, and all will have to be moved. Please discuss it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones before making more changes that will get reverted or lead to edit wars because people don't understand what you're doing (note that 2002 Pacific hurricane season has already been "moved back", probably accidentally). Jdorje 20:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Category:Tropical cyclones by season. Jdorje 20:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time Magazine Covers

In response to your question about my naming of Time Covers, the system isn't mine. The files have the same names as they do on the Time Magazine website. However, there is a logic to it, as the date of publication is in the file name. For instance 1101320229 400.jpg was published of February 29, 1932. The 400 has something to do with the size of the image. I haven't figured out where the 1101 came from, but it's on all of the images. Maybe it's a defense against Y2K style problems (a cover from Feb. 29, 2032 could be labeled 1102320229). I kept the names this way because if you know the pattern, you can quickly look up an image and see if it's been uploaded or not. Sorry if that's more of an explanation than you were looking for. --djrobgordon 22:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's exactly the information I was looking for. I was thinking about starting a naming project since WP has so many Time Covers, and they are widely used, I'm sure there are duplicates, or at the very least, they could be accessed in a more systematic way. Also, in the Time "Gallery" they are all jumbled up. I don't know, but I was just wondering – Thank you muchly!--Esprit15d 13:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cartoon character

The article points out that the character appeared in just one cartoon; there are literally thousands of cartoon characters that fit that description. My feeling is still that an article on it is inappropriate (there's precious little mor that could be said than the line or two there already). The qualifier "appeared in just one cartoon" after its entry in Looney Tunes would suffice surely? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:14, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. Looks like the format there doesn't allow notation. But, oh well, you have to pick your battles.--Esprit15d 21:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon Flowers images

Hi. I moticed you added the photographer's name back into the captions, noting that he gave permission for use only if his name were included. Now I know very little about liscencing and use of images, but I wonder, first of all, can he attach stipulations in an open source format such as this, and secondly, should we allow him to? While it's not advertizing as such, it's treading somewhat close to having companies approach us with an attiude of "we'll help you with so and so, but you have to put our logo in there." Just some thoughts. -R. fiend 04:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have some interesting points. I'll snoop around GDFL, wikipedia culture/policy and Kendall's site and get back with you on my impression.--Esprit15d 20:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Rehanaqeel

Please don't remove another editor's messages from User Talk pages, especially without discussing it with them. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry. I was editing the page, and then, it's very confusing, but regardless I got a editing at the same time message, I couldn't tell whether I had deleted my own welcome message or someone else's. Sorry, that was not my intention.--Esprit15d 15:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK — these things happen. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lootie original.jpg

Deleted – ap doesnt allow useage of their photos here (unless fair use is claimed, which it wasnt...) --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 16:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankee muchly!--Esprit15d 16:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrey Yurevich Bronitsyn

I removed your speedy tag from this article. There's a clear claim of notability (member of the State Duma of Russia -- i.e., a legislator), so it doesn't qualify. Regards, howch e ng {chat} 19:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I saw the party, but not the Duma.--Esprit15d 19:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:MeettheBeatlesreissuecover.jpg

Hi, I'm not sure what is the problem with this image being deleted? Thanks Arniep 18:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont' really have any problem with it being deleted. Really, I don't have much investment in the decision – it's one of those battles I stumbled upon while doing time in speedy deletion. I just wanted to leave a comment for the admin that made the final decision to chose the better looking picture.--Esprit15d 18:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why does no one mention in the talk page why they remove the got rice song?

At least you mentioned in edit summary. DyslexicEditor 20:54, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if that's praise or not, but I'll say thank you. :) I definitley always leave a note when I take away something that big, but listing lyrics is a pretty much textbook coyright violation, so I thought that edit summary would be sufficient. You'll also noticed I linked to another site that had the lyrics, for the casual readers viewing pleasure.--Esprit15d 20:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I liked your edit. Most edits are like "Popups assisted reversion" where the person never responds why in talk and keeps doing it again and again.

Bersted

Hi Esprit Saw your comment at the talk page. This is just one of all the List of civil parishes in West Sussex: a small one, but part of the make-up of the whole county. I am at present trying to put more meat on the bones of each of them: but it will take some time, since it requires a lot of googling to do it, and I want to get a basic part of each one. Everywhere has something ... and 8000 is quite a large parish, believe me! Peter Shearan 10:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thnaks for the input on the matter. Carry on :) --Esprit15d 13:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drifit-soft

Thanks for letting me know. I'me relatively new to the speedy deletion process, so thatnks for setting me straight. -- gtdp ^[T]/_[C] 19:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and thanks for your cooperative spirit. If you go to the page, you can follow the "articles for deletion" process :)--Esprit15d 19:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. I've been 'patrolling' Newpages for a while, but I've never really realised that there's a whole group of us out there... Thanks again for the help. -- gtdp ^[T]/_[C] 20:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Kennel Club, again

Hi there Esprit. You left a note on my TALK page and changed the redirect re the above. Would you be kind enough to have a look at the history of Spanish Kennel Club and at my comment at Talk:Real Sociedad Canina en España and add your two cents' worth? Thanks. Quill 21:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am slightly confused as to what is going on, but it seems like you've found an article with a name in Spanish, when, you thought, that article titles should be in English. You are right, they generally should be. There are tons of inconsistencies at WP, which are largely due to error, and that's why we spend time trying to correct them. Per Wikipedia naming conventions "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." A sub guideline of that is "Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly used in English than the English form." I will comment on that article in particular on the talk page.--Esprit15d 21:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and please see...

Thank you for the corections on the John Moore. Also, as you seem to have an interest in new(ish) content I was wondering if you could have a look at the new stuff in Salutogenesis – I'm brand spanking new to this + English is a 2nd language. --André SC 21:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from User page

Dear Esprit15d: As far as I understand you have intervened to block my recent entry 'Samokov Knoll' on account of perceived copyright violation; however the publication of material from http://apc.mfa.government.bg/ has been duly sanctioned as you may see in User talk:Apcbg so take due notice please. Apcbg.

Evolution of knowledge

Looks like copyvio, yeah...but I think that's much more of a secondary problem. The main issue with it is that it looks to be primarily original research, citing and setting out to prove a unique thesis, rather than an encyclopedia article. As such, it's an AFD candidate more than anything. Bearcat 23:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I didn't think it looked encyclopedic either.--Esprit15d 13:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Freddie_mills_3.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Freddie mills 3.JPG. 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 on Wikipedia 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}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 07:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I cleaned it up and reposted it without checking it's status. Feel free to delete.--Esprit15d 13:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NQcontent Enterprise

I removed the copyvio notice from this page. The original submitter claims ownership, which I've confirmed via email and logged with the Wikimedia PR department. Thanks. howch e ng {chat} 17:14, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

subst

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

Thanks! howch e ng {chat} 18:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

N2Deep

I removed your speedy deletion tag from this article. It claims that the group was signed to Profile Records, which is a notable label and therefore they meet the criteria under WP:MUSIC. Regards, howch e ng {chat} 19:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave me alone

I can blank my own talk page, duh.

Just leave it alone, nobody cares about it anyway.

Flameviper12 20:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS. If you were talking about deletionism, I am an eventualist and an inclusionist, obviously someone could have wikified it.

And I didn't vandalize it, I created it.

Pah.

Image Tagging File:Magic Rub.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Magic Rub.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Matt 06:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sub-pages bad?

Anti-vaccinationists Thanks for looking at the monster. Was that a policy decision? I had a hierarchy in mind. Midgley 15:34, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Midgley 17:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Killed

Don't want to muck up your talk page, but I want to thank you for your kind comment. Cheers, --The Grza 09:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CODA reply.

Not sure what you're asking from me with regards to the CODA article, by that I mean, what exactly to contribute to it (I'll admit I'm not really on top of things with regards to article editing). Though, I'll try and help through discussions, if anyone wishes to ask me for anything regarding the deaf community etc including you feel free to do so. Although I presume that area may be covered already =) Still, I'm around if needed and if I know what to actually contribute I'll jump into editing. Cheers. --RBlowes 05:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please join the discussion at User talk:Ntennis/Deaf WikiProject proposal and if you would like, add your name to the Deaf WikiProject. I hope you can contribute to the project! --Lux 01:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Homme.jpg

A note about this image: the licensing terms are cc-by-nc-sa [1]. Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't accept non-commercial images, so I have re-tagged it appropriately. It will shortly be deleted, unless you think that a fair use claim can be made. If you think it can be, please add {{fair use in|Joshua Homme}} along with a detailed fair use rationale. It would be better if you could find a free image instead. Thanks. -Splash^talk 02:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, no. I see that he allows uploading Wikipedia seperately from the CC license. I'm going to remove the cc-by-sa license tag altogether and replace it with a message instead, since we shouldn't indicate one license when those are not the terms we take the image under. Apologies for any inconvenience. -Splash^talk 02:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carlo Boccazzi

Hello. I have been trying to clean up the Dead End Pages. While sorting through the list of articles there I ran across the article Carlo Boccazzi. My usual mode of operation is to leave a message on the original author's talk page. When I went to Carlobv's talk page I noted a message from you regarding a copyright violation for the article Carlo boccazzi varotto. The link that you referenced in your message is in Italian, however. Since the two article's have similar names I suspect that the new article could be a copyvio as well. Since you originally left the message I am assuming you have some experience in Italian. (???) Do you think you can review this article and determine if it is also a copyvio? Thanks! James084 03:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LUEspace

Can we have the article "LUEspace"? It's already in development but let's have an article and I can edit the changes as it develops.

---Alright. Thanks for the heads up. Caffolote 24:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brad Pitt People

Thanks for uploading File:Cover of People - 11 July 2005.jpg. However, you have not yet provided a detailed fair use justification for its use on Brad Pitt. --Yamla 15:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:No source

Greetings. You asked if I would add <div class="NavFrame" style="padding:0;border-style:none;"> to the {{No source}} template. I'm very willing to, but I don't understand where. Could you elaborate? (By the way, remember to sign your comments with ~~~~ since it makes it easier to tell who left the comment.) All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 13:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Walmarting

This has been recommended for deletion. You might want to take a look-see. I tried to add more examples in the external sites list, but am working on other articles right now.--Beth Wellington 01:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look at the vote. Since the last four comments were keeps, I went ahead and rewrote the article and preserved the original on its discussion page. See what you think. Thanks.--Beth Wellington 18:23, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great template work

Thank you for the templates for WP:PNT – I haven't used them yet, but they look great, and it all seems to work. I have been thinking about adding a direct link to the page's entry on WP:PNT before, but didn't get around to it. The copy-and-paste thing to make reporting easier will (I hope) be a great help in making people actually list the articles they tag with {{notenglish}} and there won't be so many lonely entries in CAT:PNT anymore. Thanks again, Kusma (討論) 00:03, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bradfordville School

It seems you edited while I was editing. I copied and pasted material (what you removed) and saved it temporarily for reference while I was removing large sections, rearranging, and rewriting the page but never got to a finished point before it vanished. :-( oh well Noles1984 18:46, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You made an honest mistake. Maybe you can start the article in a word processor, and then copy/paste it when it's ready. Also, selectively removing messages from your talk page is considered bad faith. Most editors keep the good with the bad, and it will strengthen your respectability when its your turn to make an argument.--Esprit15d 19:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Never had a problem with "editing on the fly" but will use Windows notepad to construct text prior to saving on Wikipedia. I was unaware of the rules for editing of my own talk page. 207.156.48.123 14:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roivas replies about Kit Smith

Please see my talk page regarding your recent deletion.

Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Roivas (talk • contribs)

Paul Boghossian

I have removed your deletion-template from the article Paul Boghossian. The article was created today, and will be improved later on, as part of the Philosophy project. Please do not interfere with the ongoing work of the philosophy project. --Thorsen 16:15, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs

Hello,

Thank you for your stub submission. You may wish to note that it is preferable to use a stub template from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types instead of using simply {{stub}}, if you can.

Thanks! Ryanjunk 16:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder. However, using specific stubs usually is my practice, but the article literally gave no indication of what it was at all. It could be a road, team or building for all the article stated (which it said founded, so figured it wasnt living). I considered nominating it for deletion, but tried to give it a chance.--Esprit15d 16:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True enough, I had to Google it to figure out it was a town. Just my standard reminder anyway. Happy editing! Ryanjunk 16:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious copyvios

New articles which are obvious copyvios can be tagged with db-copyvio, saving everyone some time. Hpuppet 16:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes the master becomes the student. You're right. Hpuppet 16:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Bernhardt Copyvios response

Please see my response about Talk:Robert Bernhardt and the included biography and advise if a re-write is truly necessary.

--Mkamensek 19:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Sometimes

Thank you for the help on splitting up the Charlotte Sometimes article. Not to criticize, but next time, it would be nice to wait a day or so, until the person who started the spliting process is done, as there were four or five times while I was working on it that I got the "Another user has edited this page" message, and had to redo my edit. I hope this doesn't sound like I'm complaning., it's just difficult when two people are trying to edit simultaneously. Nekura 19:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Features new to Windows Vista

Just wondering what was your point in putting "Migwiz" ([2]) into the Features new to Windows Vista article. — Alex ^(T|C|E) 22:13, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because I thought migwiz was a hoax, then googled it and found out it was a feature of Windows Vista, so I moved it there (since it didn't deserve it's own article) and figured that someone who knew something about it, or had the article on their watch page would clean it up (since I know nothing about it).--Esprit15d 18:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page styling

Might I ask, how were you able to get your user boxes to behave? Mine won't align to the right even though I stole the original format from someone whose boxes DID work. Can you offer any help? - CobaltBlueTony 21:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for File:Heydude.gif

Thanks for uploading File:Heydude.gif. 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 User talk:Carnildo/images. 16:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Billie Jean

I dont know how to contact you, so here is the proof of billie jean as a current single http://uk.launch.yahoo.com/c/uk/single_charts.html - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.102.12.22 (talk • contribs)

Australian Senate

In two years time when the next half senate election is held, the list will be fully populated and there will be two distict times when terms end. Xtra 01:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:FalloutBoyppja.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:FalloutBoyppja.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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:Image legality questions. 15:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't upload the file, just resaved it. I put the comment on the talk page about it not being a cover. It should be deleted.--Esprit15d 15:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Notenglish

I have reverted this to the last version with non-hidden instructions, due to the large amount of unlisted pages I found today (have a look at WP:PNT, it is bad). Maybe we should discuss this at Template talk:Notenglish. Kusma (討論) 22:07, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The other template was really nice, and I liked to use it myself, so it was rather sad to revert it. Maybe the optimal geek solution would be to use your pretty template plus a bot that (semi-)automatically reports orphaned pages, like it is done on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Kusma (討論) 22:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we also don't have that much traffic at WP:PNT so it probably isn't really necessary to run a bot (the category is small enough to be human-checked every couple of days) – but it would be cool. I'll be happy to hear any other ideas you might have about how the process can be improved (and which templates should be used). Kusma (討論) 22:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

discussion about the Template:CurrentAlbums and the Category:Current albums

I'm not sure what's the point about them. I thought that you might be interested in this discussion. Jogers (talk) 11:49, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Williams Deletion page

Here you go, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Williams (pastor) (2nd nomination) you said delete last time hopefully this time we can make it stick.

Image copyright problem with File:John Mayer Trio.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:John Mayer Trio.jpg. 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}}.

Please signify the copyright information 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 Image legality questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 12:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Country subdivisions

...IMO splitting the cats into a group of "Administatrive divisions of some countries" and "Political divisions of some other countries" is not useful.

could you maybe change your vote on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 April 4#Category:Subdivisions by country to Category:Political divisions by country

and let's discuss this on the project page

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Subnational entities/Naming#Umbrella terms

first? It is really is mass rename, since it not only involves the cats and subcates but also lots of articles. As Lorenz pointed out the most important seems to be that we find clear definitions of what the terms mean. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 07:35, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer Administrative divisions. In much more common use than "political divisions" (per Google search), by more authoritative sources (Bartleby, the CIA and Guiness Book), and used more often in the context in which we are using it here, geographical sub-regions of a sovereign state. "Subdivision" is the incorrect term entirely.--Esprit15d 17:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- comment statistical regions are not administrative regions. but that is what is sometimes is included in the cats. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Science fiction fans

Hi Esprit. Regarding renaming, the CfD discussion didn't really move that way for some reason, and it's too late in the week to steer it there now. The cat will likely be kept w/o consensus. Renaming can be considered in the future to match whatever criteria is decided-upon. Hopefully it will be relatively straightforward. ×Meegs 15:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CODA Article

Hi! Umm...you left a note on my userpage about the CODA article and about input on it. Don't be mistaken, I am interested in helping out with the article, but I am not a CODA, so I might not be the best person to ask about it. I am taking the American Sign Language course at my high school, and am in my last year of the course, which is ASL 5-6. If there is anyhting that I can help out with, like regarding questions about the classes or coursework, I can answer those, but CODA questions, I cannot. Thanks, though! --Aeris of Iniquity 00:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

White Stripes reference

Thank you for your note re. the reference. However you have reinserted an incorrect reference to "glonomarriage". The material does not come from that source. It comes from an NME article. The article can be found on http://www.nme.com/news/billy-childish-and-the-headcoats/22394. The reference needs to refer to that.

I have studied footnotes (and used them dozens of times) and the coding is correct. It doesn't have a name for the reference in the initial <ref> tag as a name is only necessary if the reference is going to be used again elsewhere in the article. What is "incorrect", if you like, is that it doesn't have the other information, such as author, title of article and access date, because I didn't have these in front of me at the time, but I realise they should ideally be put in. I was changing the format from the initial reference coding which was simply a link to the article (without author and title info etc), to make it compatible with the footnotes coding.

The reason I did this is that it is not a good idea to mix the two different methods of referencing, e.g. footnotes and direct URL link, as you suggest doing, as then two concurrent sets of numbering are generated in the article, which can be confusing for the reader, when the same number appears again but is to a different reference.

I have reinstated the correct link, with the extra information.

I felt the comment on me in the edit summary was unnecessary (and not true), and is likely to put off other editors from trying to use the footnote system in case they too get a negative notice. However, I accept your statement that you were not acting out of malicious intent. I certainly agree that using footnotes can be a bit tricky and it's easy to make an error.

Tyrenius 05:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subdivision category debate

The original debate for renameing the country subdivision categories was closed and a new debate on the subject has now been listed. The results of the old debate are shown, but will not be counted when the current debate is closed. You are being notified because you were involved in the previous debate. If you still have an interest in the outcome, please come and participate in the new debate. - TexasAndroid 20:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC Woggly

I have opened a Request for Comment on User:Woggly due to harassment which is clearly evidenced by her in a harassment campaign that she has organized on her talk page User:Woggly 4 On this page one can witness how accusations of using sockpuppets were never confirmed before she accused me of these actions and others. Need your advice. Thanks, IsraelBeach 01:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Kobe Bryant

One time i delete one thing because it is not current and you are on me, why don't you go block the suns lovers and nash lovers who are consistently deleting all the facts on that page. I do it once and you cry. Hganesan 18:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)hganesan 18:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)hganesan[reply]

1996 Kisei

I hope what I smell isn't a bit of sarcasm ;) The article has a long ways to go, along with all the others of it's kind. Can 20:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks a bunch then :) Can 20:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of albums containing a hidden track

Nice work with the reformatting, I didn't know it could be done that way but it looks much much nicer now. (And hopefully I'll finish redoing the end of the article this week, I got to S then my life got busy, but now I have an enforced break thanks to tonsilitus!) Good work :) Satan's Rubber Duck 20:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hey, thanks for reverting! Sorry to be a bit of an ass about this :/ Please see Wikipedia talk:Footnotes and vote! :) – FrancisTyers · 20:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tikal's references

Hi! I wanted to say thanks for helping me with Tikal's references! However, you said that two of the notes were dead. I fixed the links now. So would you mind putting the references in the right place for me (where they were originally)? I don't know how to do it – I only know how to do it the old-fashioned way! I'm sorry to bother you! --71.118.79.162 05:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unlawful combatant

Please check and fix all the citations you broke on the 12 June when you converted the citations from WP:Footnote3 to WP:Footnotes. It seems the tool User:Cyde/Ref converter can not handle citations which contain containing bullet points, but perhapse it was something else. What ever it was, please fix the now broken ones, and if it was a bug in the Ref converter please report it to user:Cyde--Philip Baird Shearer 22:29, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: copyvio

Be aware that "articles" copied from other websites and posted less than 48 hours before tagging can be speedy deleted as per WP:CSD#A8 (unless the source content is believed to be public domain, GFDL, etc., which it ususally is not). — Jun. 22, '06 [13:52] <freak|talk>

The speedy deletion coyvio tag only applies to commercial sites, which the site for Association for Financial Professionals is not. That is why I nominated it in the normal fashion.--Esprit15d 13:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Citing to the Bible

As a recent participant in the TfD dicussion on whether {{Bibleverse}} and {{Bibleref}} should be deleted, I wanted to make sure you were aware of the new discussion at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible. The goal of these discussion is to resolve the concerns raised re GFDL, use of an external cite, etc. Additionally, this page should serve as a location for recording research about the different websites that provide online Bible information. Please edit the summary and join the discussion – thx Trödel 15:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with Bible Template

Hey, you mentioned an issue with the template when used in conjunction with certain books, could you elaborate a bit so that I can fix it? Thanks.--SomeStranger^(t) 23:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For books with more than 1 volume you are supposed to use {{bibleverse}} instead of {{bibleref}}. I could change the entire thing to make it all run under one template (removing the {{bibleverse-nb}} and {{bibleref}}), but that would require changing a ton of pages. I will go ahead and whip up something in my sandbox, when I am done, you can decide amongst the community who uses these templates if you want to replace the three current ones.--SomeStranger^(t) 20:23, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Context, context, context

"1m" should not be replaced by "1 m" everywhere it appears: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Antimatter&curid=1317&diff=60202806&oldid=60072262 —Keenan Pepper 17:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Convert refs

Hi, there. I noticed that you ran a bot to convert the refs on Hugo Chávez a while back. I don't know how to do this: would you be able to do the same to Bolivarian Missions? Would really appreciate it, as I want to begin working on that article, but can't handle that ref style, nor copy refs from other articles. Sandy 12:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much !! Sandy 21:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your ref converting

Your ref-conerting of World War II casualties broke everything and left the article in a mess. I guess there are some articles that aren't easily converted automatically, so I urge you to check the articles you convert to make sure everything went fine. Thanks! Shanes 22:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charlies

Hello, to be friendly I have come here first before reverting your changes to my edits on Madchester, the Charlatans were/are not a Madchester band. They began in the late 80's in Birmingham well before the press hype of the music scene in Manchester, I can assure you that any Madchester compilation or NME write up from that time will lead to one report (which I will try and find) of Tim Burgess slagging of Madchester and distancing the band from a scene made up by a desperate media, IMO Madchester bollocks detracts from the more seriuosly talented bands from that town like New Order, Smiths and Roses. Thanks. Nick Boulevard 00:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no clue what you're talking about. The only edits I made to that page were to cleanup the references section. You will have to take your case up with another editor.--Esprit15d 12:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]