User talk:YBorg

AfD nomination of Publius Enigma

An article that you have been involved in editing, Publius Enigma, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Publius Enigma. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Pmedema (talk) 11:54, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, YBorg, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

I went ahead and popped that ref request off of the page. You can remove the cleanup templates yourself if the specified issues have been completely resolved. That said, it wouldn't hurt to have a second set of eyes and/or peer review prior to removing the Wikipedia:Original Research warning on Range of Realization. Also note that duplicate pages are to be avoided, to prevent the headache of having to replicate updates across all effected pages. See Wikipedia:redirects. Likewise, duplicate spellings that are as minor as z/s ou/o international spelling differences do not need to be explained here. See Wikipedia:Spelling. Happy editing, MrZaius^talk 09:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Materiality (architecture)

Feel free to remove the template if you disagree. Some additional context might help non-expert readers understand what the term actually means. The first paragraph talks almost exclusively about material, not materiality. It remains unclear when architects use the term materiality. The MacArthur quote doesn't mention materiality, either. Do buildings have a materiality? Or does architecture? Or should one ask what kind of materiality they have or use, or whether it's good or bad? In what terms is materiality usually described or measured? Rl 12:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Alchemy

in your note to me, you seem to be trying to throw some random terms at me for some reason. perhaps you think it is some sort of shibboleth. how about you try explaining why you think that neurochemistry has anything to do with alchemy instead of playing silly word games? at the moment, i'm not inclined to think that it does, but if you were to try to explain your reasoning, perhaps you might be persuasive. as it stands, your original idea (and i will note that without a legitimate citation, it is not permissable under WP:OR) doesn't seem to have anything to do with the medieval pseudo- or proto-science described in the article. Whateley23 09:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Enigmapuzzle.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Enigmapuzzle.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 16:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Enigmapuzzle.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Enigmapuzzle.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 07:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]