User talk:Renrenren

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist and topic subscriptions to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Timmins, Ontario

- - June-06-2009***

In the Notable athletes from Timmins section you have Kathy Kreiner listed twice. I made the edit and removed the less titled one - and you hit your undo button. I think you may want to hit redo or provide an explanation for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.84.101 (talk) 03:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you had left an edit summary, I would have understood your edit and not posted a vandalism notice on your ANON IP page.--Renrenren (talk) 00:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I`ve been editing the Timmins, Ontario page. On the talk page, I've asked about all the rumours which are being quoted on the page. Some I`ve removed and others I`ve left. I`m wondering if that sort of thing belongs on a City page.

Also, there is a list on the Timmins, Ontario page of notable people. A lot of these people I`ve never heard of, they don`t have wikipedia entries for their name. I`m wondering, if I should simply purge them. If you visit the Timmins, Ontario talk page, you`ll see that I posted this type of comment there. I`m just wondering if I should clear these things up a bit. I`m new to wikipedia and have done some simple editing, but I want to try to be more involved as a wikipedian. Renrenren 18:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your approach seems the right thing. Always be open to references, but if they do not appear after you have requested them, and the information is not verifiable (eg check on Google) then by all means remove it - placing it on the talk page if you think that is appropriate. You might need to Use common sense, but also remember to be bold. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention - if an entry has an article, always check it and its talk page. The first example I checked (Myron Scholes, which you labelled 'suspect') listed his autobiography [1]. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I was planning on using google and wikipedia for search. However, in the case of *Kylah Eide, actor, writer, comedian, she has a wikipedia article written which I suspect was simply put together by herself. I suspect it to be a farce more than anything else. So it makes it difficult to weed out what is true from what is not. Renrenren 22:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

heh. Welcome to the world of Wikipedia! You can probably understand now why we have the policy on verifiability. It can be great to rely on, as long as it's mixed in with some common sense. The article you mentioned - I would be inclined to propose it for deletion. 11 Google hits? Drama student? No reliable third party sources? Nothing on amazon.com? Methinks though the claim about being born in Timmins may be true, the rest is a little exaggerated. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block

My work IP has been blocked.

I work for a school board and i suspect some students have vandalised pages on wikipedia.

Is there a way to be unblocked so I can continue to edit pages from work should the need arise.

Ren

The IP was blocked for 1 month, as of 13 September; looks like it expired before I was able to respond to your request. If this happens in the future, I may be able to convert the block to "anon-only," which will block anonymous editors, but will still allow logged-in editors to use the IP. Sorry for the trouble, and thanks for your time! Luna Santin 19:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

As requested, I have renamed you as User:Renrenren. You should now move this page to your new username. Warofdreams talk 00:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub

I have just created a new page for the Shania Twain Centre which is a tourist attraction in my hometown. This is just the beginning of an article and will require more information that I will be adding over the course of the next few weeks.

Should I be indicating this article as a stub? I went to the Wikipedia Stub page but could not figure out if this was appropriate for my page or not. I doubt that many other wikipedians will have the knowledge to edit this page on the short term.

Any help, advice or guidance you can provide would be much appreciated. Renrenren 17:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged it as a generic stub, but take a look at WP:STUB which may help find something more specific. As to other wikipedians having the knowledge, as it says at the bottom of every edit box "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable", that manes you need to cite reliable sources, which in themselves would enable other wikipedians to find out more. If you don't provide those you may well find the article gets deleted. --pgk 19:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image

I just uploaded the following image I have permission from the author to use this image in any way I like. How do I go about identifying it in such a way. I`m guessing there is some type of tag I can use that represents this. Being fairly new to wikipedia, I`m still trying to get the hang of this stuff.Renrenren 21:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of permission do you have? Do you have permission to license those permissions on, i.e. To allow anyone else to freely distribute it and/or make derivatives including commercial entities? Wikipedia:Boilerplate_request_for_permission contains some boilerplates for the type of permission required and details on where to send it to, so we can keep record of that permission. --pgk 22:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sock Puppet, etc

I removed John Monaghan from the Timmins, Ontario page as he is a non-notable person. I also marked John Monaghan for deletion as it is an autobiographical page and in my opinion does not belong on wikipedia. I left a message on his original talk page user : Monogram informing him about the nomination for deletion. He re-registered under another name (sock puppet) Gilliespearl and added his name back to the Timmins, Ontario under notable people which I removed as well. What can be done now? Can you help me with the next step?

Hi, have a look at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes, if this doesn't help you can always try to post a little notice on WP:ANI. Bjelleklang - talk 19:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I'd sugust that you stop removing the link. That can wait until the article is deleted. If you want to recommend the article for deletion, I'd suggest the article for delete page. I took a look at the John Monaghan page and I'm sure it wouldn't survive AFD. Once it's deleted, then remove his name from the list. ---J.S ^(T/C) 19:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shania Twain Centre

No problem, nice to see another Shania Twain fan adding to Wikipedia... :) --Thankyoubaby 05:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eilleen Regina Lang

Shania is also known as Eilleen Regina Lange, as you can see here: ASCAP.

Visitors might want to know about it. Israell 23:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timmins infobox

Apparently there's actually something wrong at the server level with the 250px thumbnail of the map image (the size that the infobox template actually looks for.) Other sizes seem to work fine, but the 250px size just brings up an error message. I'm doing what I can to resolve it, but since it's a technical issue I'm not sure exactly when it'll be fixed. We'll definitely get it resolved somehow; I just need input from the technical team to know what the appropriate solution is. Bearcat 01:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*laugh* Thanks for letting me know. I still wasn't seeing it and was in the process of trying to figure out what else to do, but it turned out I just needed to purge my cache. Duh. Bearcat 03:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

monobook.js

{{help me}} I used to have a link in my toolbox on the left which would allow me to check spelling edits and anonymous IP edits. I often used to go in there and watch for vandals and restore pages and such. Those links have disappeared. I was using the Admin-like RC Patrol tools. Could someone see if perhaps I've made some change to my monobook.js file which has caused these links to disappear or if perhaps the tool I was using has simply been discontinued as I don't remember where on wikipedia I had found it. --Renrenren 02:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you mean Lupin's Anti Vandal Tool. Try adding the following to the bottom of your monobook, then clearing your cache (see WP:CACHE):

importScript("User:Lupin/recent2.js");

— D e on555^talk_desk^{sign here!} 02:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to have done the trick. Thanks for the help. Renrenren 03:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:206.108.254.2

User http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:206.108.254.2 is the IP address for the school board I belong to. Is there a template we can add indicating that this IP belongs to an educational institution? Perhaps one that would encourage users to register and edit pages without doing so anonymously? --Renrenren 16:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can place {{subst:schoolip}} at the top of the Talk page; I think that's the template you're looking for. Hope that helps. --ais523 17:05, 18 January 2007 (U T C)

blanking own talk page

User User:Jonathannew7 has been constantly blanking his own talk page in an effort to remove the many warnings he has received. Further, he has taken to blanking discussions at Kylie Minogue page and has been warned repeatedly. Is there a guideline about what can be removed from one's own talk page? I just restored his talk page once again. Should a user that does this be reported for a possible short-term ban?--Renrenren 21:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Wikipedians have enough of a mindset that people can do whatever they wish on their talk page that blanking it is highly unlikely to result in more than a handslap. Blanking article discussion pages, though, is grounds for reporting to WP:AIV if done enough. -Amark moo! 21:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Renrenren. You might want to look at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Removing warnings and its talk page. I must admit I often restore old warnings when I add new ones, but warning people for removing them carries little weight. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Insert {{subst:Blank|Talk:Kylie Minogue}} after the first blank on the person's talk page, {{subst:Blank2|Talk:Kylie Minogue}} the second time, and so on. After the fourth time, you'll have a solid case at WP:AIV. Xiner (talk, email) 21:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I and User:Rossrs have been keeping an eye on said user's behaviour, and it seemed he/she/it finally got the message. At least, the blanking of the KM talk page discussion has stopped. If it resumes, I will list the user on WP:AIV. Thanks for your concern. --Plek 23:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all of you for your advice. I`ll keep an eye on it and see what else comes of it. --Renrenren 01:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing?

I edited a school page for fun the first time and got a warning. So I went to make things right, and tried to post good information. I got warned a second time for writing good information. Whats the problem with it? Teamcritical 01:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I`ve responded on your talk page. --Renrenren 13:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allan Stanley and Allen Stanley

While perusing Wikipedia, I noticed that there are 2 pages talking about the same person. Allan Stanley and Allen Stanley are both about the same hockey player from Timmins, Ontario. I don`t know what to do this or where to report this. Perhaps another editor could take care of posting this for me in the proper section. --Renrenren 02:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is taken care of. I have applied the correct templates to both articles so that Allen Stanley will be merged into Allan Stanley which according to the NY Rangers website is the correct spelling. Thanks for the heads up. You may also want to ready WP:Merge so you can do this on your own if you happen to see this again. Thanks— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 02:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with list

On the article Conseil scolaire catholique de district des Grandes-Rivièves, I am trying to get the list of schools to show up properly. I have started each school name with a * but that was not working. I was then forced to put a line break at the end of each line. I shouldn`t have to go about it this way.... Am I missing something? I`ve done this before and never really had much of an issue with it. i consulted Wikipedia:Cheatsheet on how to make a bulleted list and it`s still not working. Any help would be much appreciated. --Renrenren 19:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see little boxes in front of each line that look like this: ? If you don't mean for them to be there, I previewed it and taking them out will make the bullet points work just fine. If you don't see them, but don't want them to be there, I can do it for you. Let me know. -- Natalya 20:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response Natalya. In front of each line, I see an asterix. I thought those would be changed to boxes and create a bulleted list of schools. However, on the article page the * looks like a *... there is no box like there should be in the bulleted list. This is what I'm trying to figure out. --Renrenren 21:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There appeared to be some strange, non-printed characters instead of standard newlines. If you cut-and-pasted this from a terminal or an old version of Word, that might be the cause. Anyway, whatever the cause, I have fixed it. --Selket ^Talk 21:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cut and pasted from a Quattro pro document I had. i did not see these non-printed characters. Thank you for fixing.--Renrenren 22:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Zancai

Hey, no problem. Thanks for your suggestions. I'm not too sure what to do about the taxobox; right now it's an "actor" taxobox. I think we can get away with it for now, as it merely presents information and does not assert that he is an actor - which, as we've already discussed, is a hazy description of him. Anyway, cheers. BFD1 20:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC) Ha, you have definitely got that one right. I haven't even noticed that reference. Tear 'er down, if you will! :D Thanks. BFD1 21:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response.

You're welcome. Acalamari 21:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's cool man...

I tried to revert it... but my Internet gave out... and I don't know what happened. Ahmad Husseini 21:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Board 56

If it has an official name, you should probably find it and include it before deleting the existing information. Lexicon (talk) 16:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, my bad. Lexicon (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWoo

Okay, he's blocked. Keep informing me as new socks show up. Lexicon (talk) 23:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, dude

It's nice to see anyone trying to revert crap like that. I wonder who he actually is—maybe someone I upset elsewhere? Or just someone making random stupid edits? It doesn't appear to be WikiWoo's style. Guess we'll never know. Lexicon (talk) 14:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now pretty sure it was Helponly9669, someone I warned about vandalism a little earlier, so I've blocked that user as well. You can identify some of these throwaway accounts by the way they're named: "Helponly" is obviously a reiteration of one of the security words you have to retype when creating a new account, and Yrevpleh is a reverse of one (helpvery). I guess the numbers are supposed to add something to making them seem "real".

Apparently some users have even been creating "open password accounts" this way for the purposes of sharing them around to anyone who wants to evade bans and such, by taking the word it shows and making it the username, and then reversing the two words to create the password. Then when anyone who's familiar with the idea sees a posting by one of these two-word nonsense usernames, they can just log in with it and play around. Several of these were exposed a while ago.

I've always thought that registering should be required to edit on Wikipedia, and now I'd go further and say that a valid e-mail address should also be required—it will make those who think about doing stupid shit have to go through the extra steps of creating a Hotmail or Yahoo account and following the link in the resulting e-mail before being able to post, which may prevent some of them from bothering. Of course, the downside is that it is also likely to discourage legitimate contributors who just want to fix a spelling mistake or whatever, which can be the spark that starts the burning fire of "wiki-addiction" that turns that one-time editor into a great contributor. Ah well, what can ya do? Lexicon (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What can be done?

{{helpme}}. For the past few days, I've been spending my time patrolling the articles Douglas Kinsella and Shit from Hell. These articles are under attack from anonymous IP but judging by each edit, one person seems to have been involved. He has now left a message on my talk page and also vandalised User:Victoriagirl. What can be done to avoid this. Semi protect is probably a bit much, but at least if some other users added these pages to their watchlist, we might be able to more easily control the attacks. --Renrenren 19:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think this will help. This is not the usual vandal, who just wants to create his "fun" message and hopes it will not be found. Writing on your talkpage shows, he wants to create annoyance. If he can get reactions, he will go on. More reactions will cause more vandalizm. That´s the price, wikipedia has to pay to be open for everyone. The best thing you can do, is to ask for semi protection for some time. The guy will search for another target. The other possibility is not to react at all for some weeks. This will have the same effect, but then this nonsense would stay there for weeks. --Thw1309 20:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas Kinsella

Thank you. :) It was the vandalism that drew me there. When I arrived, I noticed that it could use a bit of work. Hopefully the vandals won't come in and start mucking it up when the protection expires! Moonriddengirl 01:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! That's crazy stuff. I've seen a couple of ugly battles on Wikipedia, but I've never seen anything blow up like that. Moonriddengirl 01:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CSCDGR.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:CSCDGR.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWoo

I've started the CheckUser request: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#Outstanding_requests. Specifically, the subpage with the past checkuser requests is located here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/WikiWoo. --Stéphane Charette (talk) 09:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC) {{helpme}}[reply]

I've added two other sock accounts on the first link you have given. I don't know if I did it correctly as it said I should post it to another page as well but I would have needed admin status to do that. I've added a help me template here so that I can know if I did it correctly or not. With wikiwoo's long standing disputes on that page and others here on wikipedia, hopefully an administrator will be able to take a look at the page in question as well as the latest talk page entries and see if another block, perhaps an IP block is in order. --Renrenren (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. The message you saw was for the initial creation of the case - new cases have to be transcluded onto the main checkuser page so that they are noticed by the clerks and checkusers. This was already done. You shouldn't need admin powers in order to file a checkuser request, however - none of those pages are protected, or even semi-protected, from what I can tell. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spam links

{{help me}} User 69.19.14.36 has been posting spam links to many communities in Northern Ontario. Could someone with admin status do a quick revert of all his edits. I knocked off all the ones on my watch page, but there seems to be many dozen others.--Renrenren (talk) 21:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for flagging this. None of his Special:Contributions/69.19.14.36 recent contributions are "top", so I'm guessing they have all been reverted. He hasn't posted since 19:46:21 UTC, 35 minutes ago, shortly after the most recent warnings. I have added a sterner warning to the user page (although usually there's no point in bringing the same thing to a user's attention multiple times). Please raise this again if you see it restarting. Bovlb (talk) 21:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bobvlb.--Renrenren (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Stc1.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Stc1.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? BlueAzure (talk) 22:55, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken warning to 86.139.116.24

I was looking at the recent changes feed and noticed the vandalism warning you gave User:86.139.116.24 for supposed vandalism on the page Timmins. I just wanted to let you know I believe you attributed the vandalism to the wrong person. User:86.139.116.24 simply fixed some typos in some already existing vandalism which, given, isn't the most constructive thing, but could probably be considered a good faith edit. You also immediately jumped to giving him a vandalism warning at level 4 (e.g., a final warning) rather than starting with a level 1 warning and working up to 4 if he or she continues, which is a move I question.

Ironically, the user who actually did the vandalism, User:208.101.65.186 is exactly who's edits you restored when you rolled back User:86.139.116.24's edits. That is, you rolled back to a vandalized version of the page. So now not only do you have vandalism on the page, but you have poorly written vandalism by rolling back User:86.139.116.24's typo fixes.

Hopefully you can correct this all on your own. Thanks for editing Wikipedia! Matt T. (talk) 12:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Garth Turner

I've reverted it, as the whole point of the lead section is to include information that's already found elsewhere in the article. See WP:LEAD (actually, the same is true for much of what's in infoboxes, which makes your rationale a double non-starter). Regards, Sarcasticidealist (talk) 02:04, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Timmins Today

No topic is ever entitled to inclusion on a list of anything in Wikipedia if it isn't notable enough for an actual Wikipedia article — links on a list are required to be internal links to Wikipedia articles only. If Timmins Today is really that worth mentioning, then it's worth at least attempting an article for it. Bearcat (talk) 23:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Timmins Climate Box

Don't worry i plan to put a climate box, I messed up the first one i put on. Cheers--Kyle1278 17:54, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

Hi there! i need some help : i need to stop a user from editing a track listing format that other users agreed with on this article: Memoirs of an Imperfect Angel. At the talk page of the article we agreed with 1 format and this user keeps changing it because he/she beleives that it is not ok, the user will also not comment on the talk page to post a reason why he/she is doing the changes that are not helping the article at all. Thank U! (MariAna Mimi 12:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC))

Sorry, perhaps you can try to contact an admin. I can't help you with this problem. --Renrenren (talk) 22:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Timmins

Regarding this edit, the mine was not "discovered", as there was no mine there to discover. The orebody was discovered and the mine was built (or founded). One does not actually "find" a mine unless it is already there (i.e. built) to begin with. --kelapstick (talk) 15:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

== Timmins ==

Discovering a mine is not the same as founding a mine. You discover or you find an orebody. The Hollinger Mine was discovered after Sandy MacIntyre slipped on moss and discovered gold dripped over the rocks like candle wax. Benny Hollinger later that year explored north of that site and discovered the Hollinger. I don`t think Sandy McIntyre or Benny Hollinger went around saying they founded a mine... they discovered gold. Just for fun type into google "mine discovered" and "mine founded" to see the various hits pertaining to these two words assemble together. You`ll notice many more hits to the first one. Perhaps the use of the word founded can be applied to when the mine becomes a business and goes into production. It certainly wouldn`t be applied by my prospector friends who search the bush of Northern Ontario all summer. I think they all have hopes of FOUNDING a mine after first DISCOVERING the ore body. It`s all semantics. I think I`ve made a convincing enough point. Up to you to see if you want to change it or not. --Renrenren (talk) 20:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want to use the word "founded" that is a separate issue, however "discovered" is not correct, unless the context is changed from discovering the mine to discovering the orebody that the mine would be built to exploit. Maybe the wording should be discussed at WikiProject Mining.--kelapstick (talk) 20:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To be perfectly honest, I don't have the time, nor the interest to bring this up at Wiki Project Mining. I watch and edit only a handful of pages. I still think the word is wrong, perhaps it should say when the Hollinger Mine ore body was discovered. I think the google hits I brought up more than prove my point, but I don't care enough to make a huge case out of the issue. --Renrenren (talk) 11:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it from the mine being "founded" to "opened". The timeline is right with the Hollinger mine opening in 1910 and Timmins being founded in 1912. Thoughts? I think it works and that way we don't have to get into "discovered the orebody that the Hollinger Mine would be built to exploit" (or something similar).--kelapstick (talk) 15:22, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the more I read that paragraph, the more it bugs me. The City wasn't founded simply because of discovery of gold at the Hollinger. There were also huge finds at the Dome and the MacIntyre. Then the paragraph turns into a discussion of Noah Timmins's offspring who are well known today. Needs a cleanup. I`ll have a look at it this weekend and post a possible alternate wording here. --Renrenren (talk) 16:04, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, and the only member of Cowboy Junkies that has a page is Margo Timmins, the rest just redirect to the band's page. --kelapstick (talk) 16:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does this sound. I think I would keep it simple... your thoughts? I got rid of the cowboy junkies thing because it`s irrelevant to the topic

The Town of Timmins was founded by Noah Timmins in 1912 following gold discoveries in the Porcupine Camp. By 1912 the Hollinger, MacIntyre and Big Dome Mines were founded. The new town had already grown larger than the original mining camps to the east on Porcupine Lake. --Renrenren (talk) 18:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That looks good to me, and I agree about the Cowboy Junkies removal. I thought I had redirected most of the band members pages (one or two lines) to the band, but I guess I was wrong. I had done that with another band though. --kelapstick (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Timmins, Ontario

Hi there, in response to the message you left me about removing "notable people" from the Timmins, Ontario article. Yes, none have an article, but that's not the reason I removed the names. I removed the names because not only were there no articles for any of them, there were also no sources provided for any of them to back them up as being notable, meaning that notability hadn't been established in the article. In case you didn't notice, red-linked names get added to articles all the time as being notable, but in many cases, turn out to be not notable, often times just editors adding jokes, which is why establishing notability is essential, that way we know for sure if the person is notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia. If I offended anyone with the removals, I appologize as that wasn't my intent. My intent was to clean up the article by removing the unsourced names. It's obvious now that the names may very well be notable but had sources been included when the names were added, notability would have been established and I never would have removed the names as unsourced. Once again, I appologize for removing unsourced information from this article. Cmr08 (talk) 01:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not hard to add references, at the end of sentence where you want to add a reference, insert the url between two ref tags. There are templates that can also help, but as long as the url is there, it should be ok. What you should do, is goto the help page and read over the section concerning links and references, as everything you need to know is explained there. I would also suggest reading over "notability" guidelines before adding names, just to make sure the person meets notability requirements. Lots of people are mentioned on websites, but that alone doesn't mean they should be considered notable enough to be added to an encyclopedia. If you need any help with any of this, don't be afraid to ask me. Since there is still so much I don't know about editing on wikipedia, I can't say for sure that I could help, but I will try. Cmr08 (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Shania Twain Centre

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Shania Twain Centre, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.shaniatwaincentre.com/history-of-the-shania-twain-centre/, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Shania Twain Centre and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Shania Twain Centre, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Shania Twain Centre with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Shania Twain Centre. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Shania Twain Centre saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Drm310 (talk) 06:19, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and do what needs to be done. I could take the time to rewrite the section but will not have time till the summer. The section previous to Aug 5 2003 is from the website. The rest I wrote myself from my experiences as a volunteer at the Centre. Renrenren (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Renrenren. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]