User talk:Scottandrewhutchins: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 17:33, 2 January 2008

WikiProject Indiana Alerts have been posted:

Popular page listing

Articles for deletion

28 May 2024 – Purdy Hill, Indiana (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Mangoe (t · c); see discussion (3 participants)
28 May 2024 – Shady Lane, Indiana (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Mangoe (t · c); see discussion (3 participants)
27 May 2024 – Old Hill, Indiana (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Mangoe (t · c); see discussion (3 participants)
25 May 2024 – Chicago / Midwest Emmy Awards (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Boleyn (t · c); see discussion (2 participants)
19 May 2024 – List of stamp clubs and philatelic societies in the United States (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Cocobb8 (t · c); see discussion (8 participants; relisted)
14 May 2024 – Brad Chambers (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by BottleOfChocolateMilk (t · c); see discussion (8 participants; relisted)
29 Apr 2024 – Wilson, Indiana (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Mangoe (t · c); see discussion (5 participants; relisted)
23 May 2024 – Six Points, Clay County, Indiana (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Mangoe (t · c) was closed as delete by Liz (t · c) on 30 May 2024; see discussion (4 participants)
23 May 2024 – WZDS-LD (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Mvcg66b3r (t · c) was closed as redirect by Liz (t · c) on 30 May 2024; see discussion (3 participants)
22 May 2024 – Roadman Corner, Indiana (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Mangoe (t · c) was closed as delete by Liz (t · c) on 29 May 2024; see discussion (3 participants)

(4 more...)

Good article nominees

16 May 2024 – Richmond, Indiana, facility fire (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Tails Wx (t · c); start discussion
06 Feb 2024 – R. Ames Montgomery (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by PCN02WPS (t · c); start discussion

Articles for creation

30 Apr 2024 – Draft:Fort Wayne Free Press (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by 168.91.2.31 (t · c)
23 Feb 2024 – Draft:Monon Athletic Conference (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Smoothraccoon123 (t · c)
undated – Draft:Northern Indiana Railway (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Scottandrewhutchins! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {&#123helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- Kukini 03:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting Help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Edit Summary Request

I have noted that you often edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! -- Kukini 03:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Orobas.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Orobas.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Michael Patrick Hearn

Hi SAW: edited your article on MPH, for point of view, but added a verify tag because your article lacks sources. Cheers. V. Joe 00:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Homeric Question

Please stop characterizing my edits as vandalism. You're free to disagree with my edits, but they are not done in bad faith. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signatures on articles

Template:Nosig --Gnewf 01:23, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Orobas.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Orobas.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BrownCow  (how now?) 18:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Nyman

Hello. I have been working on the Opera Project, which includes The opera corpus, a list of important opera composers and their major works. Discovering that all Wikipedia references to Nyman's "Man Who..." opera pointed to the page for Sachs's book, where the opera is mentioned briefly but not described in any way, I decided that the opera deserves a page of its own, as do all the operas in the Corpus, and as has been done for lots of operas based on books, plays, poems, etc. You will see that there are currently a lot of red-linked operas in the Corpus. Some of us are working our way through these, creating stubs and/or articles. In preparation for a "Man Who... (opera)" article, I have relinked all WP links to the book that ought to have been linked to the opera, and made other concomitant changes. I hope this explanation will help you to see why I am not very happy with your reversion of my amendment to the Nyman article. --GuillaumeTell 16:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timon / Alcibiades' reconciliation

Hello! Nice to see your edits on Timon of Athens. However, I hope you will consider leaving in the phrase about Alciabiades' reconciliation with Athens. It explains what the bit about the glove is about; otherwise the article is just cryptic. Also, the contrast between Alcibiades' reconciliation, when he was far more wronged than Timon ever was, and Timon's rather nutty bitterness, is instructive ... and perhaps the point of this rather odd play. rewinn 04:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya! The box labels are the easy part. In my user page (or that of anyone you want to copy from) just edit the page, then copy the stuff between {{Boxboxtop|Info}} and {{Boxboxbottom}} and delete the stuff you don't want. Then add to your collection any individual boxes you like; they're normally something like {User Kleptobox}} . There's an official way to make more ub's but you can create your own on the fly with this formula: {{userbox|#AABBAA|#DDEEDD|[[Image:MagrittePipe.jpg|42px]]|Ceci n'est pas une [[WP:UBX | User Box]].}} It's good silly fun! Some user boxes of the official sort will add stuff to your watchlist. Enjoy! rewinn 04:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the glove and reconciliation: when the Senators fail to get Timon to come back to Athens to help deal with Alciabiades (he offers them his last tree with which to hang themselves) they are reduced to haggling with A: " All have not offended: For those that were, it is not square to take On those that are, Revenge ... With those that haue offended, like a Shepheard, Approach the Fold, and cull th' infected forth, But kill not altogether"

With these words, they are asking him for a sign that he will wreak revenge only on those who did him wrong -- suggesting his glove as a sign (I don't know why).

Alcibiades does offer his glove as a sign of (relative) peace; his revenge is not on Athens but on a few individuals who the Senators shall choose themselves (!):

"Then there's my Glove, Defend and open your uncharged Ports, Those Enemies of Timons, and mine owne Whom you your selves shall set out for reproofe, Fall and no more"

.... and pledges that his army will obey Athens' laws (although I don't see whether this includes the objects of his revenge):

"and to attone your feares With my more Noble meaning, not a man Shall passe his quarter, or offend the streame Of Regular Justice in your Citties bounds, But shall be remedied to your publique Lawes At heaviest answer."

This text leads me to think that the bit with the glove is not throwing down the gauntlet, as we think of it, as a sign of challenge, but somehow a sign of accepting the terms of reconciliation. At the end of the play, as in history, Alcibiades returns from Sparta to Athens (...although he later must flee after more shenanigans, but this isn't really an history.) rewinn 04:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mildred Harris

Mildred Harris indeed played Dorothy Gale in 1914's The Patchwork Girl of Oz. ExRat 20:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scottandrewhutchins, Thanks for taking the time to write to me about Harris' Oz connection to the Dorothy Gale character. I am rather confused about the whole thing however - I have not seen The Patchwork Girl of Oz, but when researching the article I created for Harris, I did look at a variety of reputable sites that list Harris as making a brief cameo in the film as Dorothy. Most prominently are The New York Times movie section [1], which states:

"Mildred Harris, later the wife of Charlie Chaplin, appears briefly as Dorothy, while future comedy star Harold Lloyd can be briefly spotted as an extra."

Also, the AFI Silent Film Catalog [2] lists Harris as playing the role of Dorothy.

Although, I did then find this - Scott Hutchins' Oz Filmography [3] (is this you?) which states that Harris didn't appear in the film, neither did the character of Dorothy Gale.

I apologize for my lack of knowledge on the film and Harris' role (or lack of) in the cast. I guess it's probable that Harris' involvement has simply become "Hollywood lore". Thanks for the clarification. ExRat 18:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emmet Fox

Your comment about Emment Fox's death is not supported by a citation. Please provide a credible source for your assertion that Fox was murdered and the nature of his assailant, and I will not revert your posting again. Until then, I have set it back to eliminate your unsupported allegation. David Traver 21:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC). Often rumors come from people in positions of authority. I suspect it should be possible to find a printed biography of Fox that would answer the question for you and provide a basis for reliably expanding the article. David Traver 13:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Land of Oz

Is there a Wikipedia article for the Land of Oz theme park in the North Carolina mountains? If not, why not make one? Isn't it defunct now? Badagnani 05:13, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I first became aware of the park via the Alan Lomax documentary film about Appalachian music and culture, which features elderly locals complaining about all the pristine land the park was ruining. I guess they got the last laugh in a way, but the land still isn't the way it used to be. Badagnani 17:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Political Compass Userbox

How do yo make it display anything but complete neutrality? Scottandrewhutchins 18:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Scottandrewhutchins[reply]

It's fixed. If you go to User:Disavian/Userboxes or User:Disavian/Userboxes/Political, you'll see the examples there with the listing. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 06:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bot Complaint

You just made the following statement: I don't appreciate having my userboxes altered. That is vandalism. Scottandrewhutchins 18:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)Scottandrewhutchins[reply]

It's not vandalism. There was nothing malicious or deceptive in my changes. I userfied your boxes to comply with WP:GUS. Basically, it kept you from having your userboxes deleted. If you revert my changes, you'll find that the userbox has either been replaced or deleted. WP:GUS, coincidentally, is the solution by Jimbo Wales, the founder and director of wikipedia. Please respond on my talk page. αChimp ^laudare 19:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signing stuff

I'm not sure what happened, but some signatures of yours look all weird. Do you sign AFD and HD comments with four tildes? - Mgm|^(talk) 23:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's it. The four tildes already add your username, so you don't have to write it behind the tildes again. - Mgm|^(talk) 05:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worm Quartet

I saw that you've done some work on the Dr. Demento article. I thought you may be a better authority than I to speak on the Worm Quartet AfD. PT ^(s-s-s-s) 21:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Message copied from the Opera Project

Thank you and welcome to the Opera Project - the most dynamic arts project on WP!

I see you have added Winnie Böwe and Hilary Summers to the 'Can you help?' section. I wonder why you think these two merit articles and listing alongside some very famous artists? - Kleinzach 12:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. We encourage people to write about little-known singers if they think they are notable or becoming notable, but the 'Can you helps?' section is really for major artists who for some reason or other still don't have articles, so if you don't mind I think we should delete these two names and leave the articles to you. Is that OK? - Kleinzach 13:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:EvaGreenNudeTheDreamers.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:EvaGreenNudeTheDreamers.jpg. 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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oz project

hey there! it seems you've been contributing a lot to the Oz project and that most people who used to contribute are either taking breaks from it or lost interest. Just wanted to say hi and let you know i've joined the project to work on the literary accuracy in plot summaries and character descriptions and to also hlp with some of the horrible navigation were stuck with right now. you seem to have the filmography side covered, so maybe it would be a good idea for you to categorize us appropriately within those wikiprojects as well, ttyl! Zappernapper 22:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit in the Charun article

On 3 June 2006, you add this to Charun: "Similar to Charon, he is the Estruscan equivalent, at least in terms of function, and was superceded by him when the Trojans came to Italy."

Specify source. Charun is merely a Greek loan. Trojans never came to Italy; the "Tyrrhenoi" did (aka "Etruscans", not Trojans). (See Herodotus, Histories I.94 for the direct source.) Different peoples with different names. Are you confused? --Glengordon01 09:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The details may be more inspired by the Aeneid than by history, but Charon is a Greek loan, while Charun is a substantially different figure of similar function that was replaced with the Gree Charon subsequent to Greek influence. The description and vehavior of Charun seem to me different enough to warrant a separate entry, even if my historical facts are wrong. Scottandrewhutchins

Yes, I understand, but where in the Aeneid? Quote? If you can't justify your claim with a source, give up. --Glengordon01 05:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say Charun was mentioned in the Aeneid. I meant the Aeneid says that the Roman figures come to Italy via the Trojans. I don't have access to the source of the claims about horses or the bashing of souls with a hammer, but I believed they are derived from one of two books by Jeff Rovin, either The Fantasy Encyclopedia or The Encyclopedia of Monsters. Please see Wikipedia definitions of vandalism before you accuse me of it again. Scottandrewhutchins 15:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fantasy Encyclopedia and The Encyclopedia of Monsters?? This proves you have low reading standards. If you can't separate "proven fact" from "fantasy" or "science" from "science fiction", you have no business editing. I suggest you follow the link on Wiki vandalism and actually *read* what it says instead of daydreaming about monsters:

There are four generally acknowledged types of vandalism: deletion of legitimate information, insertion of nonsense or irrelevant content, addition of unwanted commercial links (spam), and policy violations specific to that wiki.

Yours would be vandalism because of insertion of nonsense. Charun bonking the deceased with a hammer is a clear example of nonsense. Grow up and read labrys if you're truly interested in facts about Charun's "hammer". --Glengordon01 15:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not insertion of nonsense. It is derived from a published book. You can disagree if you so choose, but it is not correct to classify it as vanadalism. Scottandrewhutchins 18:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have one undocumented claim that Charun wielded a labrys rather than a hammer. I'm so impressed. Rovin said that Charun carries either a hammer or an axe depending on the source. Scottandrewhutchins 18:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hardly care whether you're impressed. Stating that the hammer is a labrys or labrys derivative is based on historical facts. Hardly outlandish. Claiming that Charun clubs people with a religious symbol based on the word of a sci-fi writer however proves you're a lunatic and a vandal. "Sourced" doesn't mean "based on just any cockamamey book". --Glengordon01 18:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and as for a source. Take a hard lookey at something from Robert S. P. Beekes The Origin of the Etruscans, my neophyte friend:

The double axe. On a smaller issue Versnel concludes (p. 299): ‘When this bipennis [‘double axe’], property of ‘Zeus Bakchos’, carried as symbol of sacred power by Lydian kings, is encountered again as the symbol of the royal authority of the Etruscan kings, particularly of the supreme king of the federation of cities, this may be considered an important indication of the Asia Minor origin of the entire underlying ideology, and of the ceremony of investiture in which the bipennis played a part.’

These conclusions are of primary importance, as they concern a deeprooted complex of religious views that cannot have been taken over from elsewhere. (p.31-32)

Note he's quoting Versnel who says the same damn thing that I'm trying to get through to you. You could have googled that yourself if you weren't so lazy and prone to fantasy books. And in case you're wondering, Beekes is an important scholar particularly of Indo-European linguistics, not a sci-fi writer. So crawl back to the hole you came from, buddy, or learn how to research for yourself. --Glengordon01 19:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The quote says nothing about Charun, and you're resorting to personal attacks, which is another violation of Wikipedia policy. Scottandrewhutchins 22:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read this book? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0838750613/sr=8-1/qid=1155422077/ref=sr_1_1/102-3030524-8738536?ie=UTF8 Scottandrewhutchins 22:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you understand what "academic source" means? Nobody knows who Ronnie H. Terpeling is. Is he a recognized scholar? Never heard of him. Robert S. P. Beekes on the other is a famous linguist and that article that you refuse to read is expounding upon the labrys symbolism, identical to that in the Charun imagery. Can't understand? Too bad. Them's facts.

Claiming that "Charun smashes people's souls with a hammer" is as lunatic as saying "Jesus smashes people's souls with his cross in heaven". If you find that insulting, I equally find your twisted understanding of ancient religions insulting. End of discussion. Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye. Please, get lost. --Glengordon01 23:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VANDALISM. CONSTANT VANDALISM. Stop editing in your narrow POV into Charun. Your sources are science fiction. Stop it! --Glengordon01 20:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved a comment you left on a userpage

Hi, Scottandrewhutchins - I just wanted to let you know that I moved a comment you left on Glengordon01's userpage to his talk page. He's more likely to see it there (since he'll get a notification of a new message), and it's more in line with wikietiquette. Thanks! - Tapir Terrific 18:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your message: No problem! It's an easy mistake to make. Also, I noticed you put some of my userboxes on your page - cool! Do you want them to say "this tapir," though, or "this user"? It's easy to change, and I'd be happy to give you a hand. - Tapir Terrific 18:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your other message: Yeah, that's what always happens to me when I go to the zoo - most people think they're anteaters (and one baby who was just learning to talk thought they were ducks). Anyway, I'll create some userboxes for you that say "user" instead of "tapir." - Tapir Terrific 18:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've got new and improved userboxes now. - Tapir Terrific 18:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Calamari

You are pompous to characterize my contribution as vandalism and nonsense. More than half of Wikipedia could be considered nonsense by someone! If slang terms like Muffin Tops, Whale Tales and others care included in Wikipedia, what makes this onoe Nonsense. Your deletion of my contribution is more akin to vandalism and suppression of liberty!

Image tagging for Image:Despair3a.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Despair3a.jpg. 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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Phoenix Theatre

Your recent edit to Phoenix Theatre (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 23:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Edward Wagenknecht

Edward Wagenknecht didn't write, heavily or otherwise, about Spike Lee. Your edit was a harmless joke but really doesn't help much in building an encyclopedia. Please heed the warnings already posted on your talk page and try to make more constructive edits. Thanks. Casey Abell 15:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly in Wagenknecht's works did he write about Spike Lee? If you can provide citations to books or articles by Wagenknecht where he writes about Lee, I'll gladly apologize and restore your comment. Casey Abell 16:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religion userboxes

You wrote... Since you appear to have taken over the religion user boxes, could you add my Unity Church userbox to your page. Also, the no body mofication one, since the whole beliefs page is gone. I want people t see they exist, since my user page probably isn't seeing much traffic.Scottandrewhutchins 17:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't taken over anything. I'm just helping implement WP:GUS. Feel free to include boxes to any of the directories listed at User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes. Rfrisbie^talk 17:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Charun, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks.

More vandalism on the French wikipedia perchance? Are you the illusive and conveniently anonymous "Discussion Utilisateur:24.168.35.44" by chance? Seems kinda coincidental that an edit war is starting in two languages on the same obscure topic of Charun. On the same dumb issue too. Odder still is how this IP can be traced to a server located in Herndon, VA... an American server, right by you. But far be it from me to connect the dots. --Glengordon01 18:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another IP address: 66.9.70.2... concidentally from the United States. Either there is a rash of generous Americans contributing to the French Wikipedia lately on the topic of Charun, or more likely, a single American with a mediochre understanding of French and an unhealthy obsession for sexy people named Glen :) is trying to bug me personally. Please, if you're going to join the French Wikipedia, do it nicely and with respect for cultures other than your own. --Glengordon01 22:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your characterization of my edits as "vandalism" is an out-and-out lie. --Scottandrewhutchins 22:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use previews

I would like to thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. —Mets501 (talk) 20:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New userboxes

Per the terms of the German userbox solution new userboxes should not be created in template space. Please read up on the current practices. That page has instructions on how to properly create userfied userboxes. --Cyde Weys 20:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vanth vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Vanth, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. Glengordon01 01:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You undermine your image and cause when you introduce sourceless nonsense of your own (the silly stuff is in bold):

She "assisted ill people on their deathbeds^{[citation needed]} and inhaled good demons^{[citation needed]}"

--Glengordon01 01:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your characterization of my edits as "nonsense" is an out-and-out lie. --Scottandrewhutchins 22:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gremlins

I've explained several times in edit summaries why I've removed them, and yet you persist, which is beginning to be disruptive and essentially vandalism. Your source does not back up the Gremlins connection, except for a message board, which does not qualify as a reliable source. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 21:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not add nonsense to wikipedia.
Do not continue to revert (see WP:3RR)
If you've got a reason for your additions, explain it ont he talk page of the article.

If you reinsert again you will be blocked. --Doc 22:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your characterization of my edits as "nonsense" is an out-and-out lie. --Scottandrewhutchins 22:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, maybe they aren't. Sorry, bad choice of words. I don't know, and I don't case about the details. But on wikipedia we discuss such things and we try to convince others - we don't just keep reverting to our prefered version. You were warned. I'm blocking you for 24 hours per WP:3RR. --Doc 22:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

--Doc 22:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Start again

OK, your edits are not vandalism, although it maybe that they aren't good. I'm not getting involved in the content of the article. I'm going to reduce your WP:3RR block from 24 to 2 hours. When it expires, feel free to continuer discussion on the talk page. But do not reinsert the material, unless you can convince other editors of your case. Make your suggestions on the talk page, ask for comments, and wait until some new voices give their views. Abide by the consensus of the discussion. OK. --Doc 23:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I still blocked? 2 hours has proven to be more than 12 thus far. --Scottandrewhutchins 11:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did reduce your account block to 2 hours, however you have tried to edit while blocked, and that has tripped at 24 hour autoblocker on your IP. I have now removed it. Please assume good faith. In reply to your e-mail, he reason I didn't respond to your e-mail sooner was not because I am ' a liar' but because I was asleep during the night. THanks. --Doc 12:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS, if you call anyone else a liar, I will block you again. We assume good faith - consider that those you disagree with miht just be wrong, in error, mistake, or hold a different opinion to you. Thanks. --Doc 12:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Survival of St. Joan

Hi, I noticed your name as the creator of this article and would like your advice: at the featured list Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc this is classified as an opera rather than as popular music. "Rock opera" is a broad term: would you call this closer to Verdi or Elton John? High culture and popular music appear under different sections on the list. Would appreciate your expert opinion. Durova 08:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Preview

I would like to thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. --Geniac 00:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. --Geniac 00:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Glengordon01

I've started a request for comment that you may want to participate in. Regards, Durova 01:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concern

User:Glengordon01 brought this to my attention:[4]. I have already asked you twice at Talk:Charun to interact in a more polite manner and am very disappointed to see that you posted this so recently. This works against the spirit of dispute resolution and if it continues you may find yourself the subject of a user conduct RfC or an administrative block. Durova 23:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you refactor your comment at the talk page on the RFC? I agree there's nothing abnormal about 50 edits in a day when you're preparing an article for GA nomination. This RFC isn't about your behavior so you don't have to respond to his accusations. I responded only because he questioned my qualification for opening the RFC. Your comment that User:Glengordon01 might be mentally unbalanced looks more likely to provoke further hostility than to resolve the problem. Durova 17:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Petty ego-boosting on others' talk pages

I've reverted your ego from my talk page. If I could block you from it, I definitely would in a heartbeat:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Glengordon01&diff=77319911&oldid=77257978

You: Avid interest in children's toys and hollywood films
Me: Avid 15-year interest in comparative linguistics, studying the Etruscan language for a couple of years.

Who knows better about Etruscan civilization? This is not your forté. Your arrogance knows no bounds. A person who is deluded enough to believe that they can string along out-of-context quotes and yet have a grasp of a subject in a matter of weeks is not worth talking to. It fools Wikipedia; it doesn't fool me. So I doubt your capacity to discuss Charun on a higher level, with a level of maturity necessary to treat the subject fairly.

Others have noticed your article is heavily POV [5] and rightly tacked "citations needed" on almost every ludicrous sentence of yours in this article.

But you honestly think that referencing the article to death with sci-fi authors is going to make it any less POV.

Improvements on the page? Oh yes. Here is your wonderful list of references that remain on the article:

Alice K. Turner: Author of the pornographic trash hit Playboy book of science fiction. Good call. Your level of research is impeccable.

Jeff Rovin: Author of 500 Hilarious Jokes for Kids. Quoting authors of children's materials shows a high level of sophistication on your part. We're all proud of you.

But... do you quote real Etruscanologists like Massimo Pallottino or Larissa Bonfante. Nope, because that would smash all of your amateur idées fixes on the subject you plague.

So what still don't you understand? I've been ever so clear, Scotty. --Glengordon01 07:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS, while Wikipedia may not get it, you for one prove that original research can be done by cherrypicking out-of-context quotes from authors. This is precisely what your tactic has been.

So when you quote a professional like Nancy de Grummond who knows the subject better than any of your other has-been sci-fi authors, you quote her only as an afterthought on minor things. Clever ploy but not sensible research. --Glengordon01 07:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's hardly an afterthought when she is the principal source. You're still dmeonstrating that you don't understand Wikipedia policy. You also refuse to acknowledge that I've been studying mythology avidly since I was in elementary shcool. You're also continuing to be uncivil. You're still failing to understand that I CAN'T quote the two you cited unless they are talking about Charun, otherwise I violate WP:NOR. If they say something about Charun, I can get the books out of the library and quite them. --Scottandrewhutchins 16:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can certainly quote Etruscanologists if you do your homework and look for references. I've told you about Larissa Bonfante whose view I share despite your own violations of WP:Civility. Thankfully, you finally added them. "[...]I've been studying mythology avidly since I was in elementary shcool"... It's spelled "school". --Glengordon01 01:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am well aware of the spelling of "school", but I'm not a professional typist and sometimes letters get transposed due to manual, but never mental, errors. --Scottandrewhutchins 10:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notability fights

Finally! Someone who supports me. I am not familiar enough with how these "requirements" are made even though Wikipedia finds them "contestable". How do we go about changing these requirements?

There's all this going on, but it seems like just a bunch of people shouting at each other and not actally a constructive way to get things done. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability In Defense of the Artist 21:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I was going to say...I saw your addition to The Frogs, but the production team links aren't correct: the playwright has no bio, the composer's bio is about to be deleted, and the director's link goes to a disambig page that doesn't mention her. In Defense of the Artist 06:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Charun.

For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 12:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC).

Your edit to Barry Lyndon

Hello Scottandrewhutchins. I am sorry to bother you but I was wondering if you have a source for your edit about Mr Rosenman and the music for Kubrick's film, Barry Lyndon, that you recently amde. I have had to add the citation needed tag for now. You don't need to respond to me but if you have the source for this info you can either create a footnote, start a reference section just above the external links part of the page, or cite your source on the discussion page for the film. If, before you click on SAVE PAGE, you cite the source in the edit summary line that works too, but it is too late to do that for this edit. I appreciate your edit but if a source isn't cited any wikipedian can come along and remove the entry so please help if you can. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to George W. Bush

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as those in George W. Bush, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thanks for your efforts, and happy editing! —dto (talkcontribs) 05:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probe Ministries

I read your question on the WP:WEASEL talk page, and I would encourage you to read my response here:[[6]]Cbuhl79 15:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on Leonard Kastle

You've done an amazing job. I was a student of his and sang in performances of excerpts from two of his operas. I have always een amazed that he is not more widely known and praised. Lisapollison 07:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments to me on my Talkpage. Leonard is in fact a Gay man as you may have gathered and he is VERY open about it. It nearly cost him his job at SUNYA in the 1980s when he was forced to file a very high profile palimony suit against his ex-lover of over 20 years (name escapes me, I recall he was a producer of William F. Buckely's PBS show and produced The Honeymoon Killers). As I recall, the suit was necessary to disentangle the rights to some of his musical works including a sublime musical called The Birdwatchers. If you were to search the Albany Times Union Newspaper on his name and the word Palimony, the cites would come up. I personally led a "Sing-In" in the music building to try and save his job. we had about 300 students show up which wasn't ad considering the AIDS hysteria of the times. He was let go briefly but rehired with new administration of his dept. Perhpas not let go so much as simply not scheduled for any classes, I forget. All that matters is, he was welcomed back with enthusiasm. The scuttlebutt was that he was despised y the former admins because of his enormous popularity with students and the fact that he held no Phd. Leonard's talent and gentle nature have always won out in the end and seen to it that he is appreciated within his own community. The City of Albany funded some of his later works and he's now firmly established at SUNYA. I have his address but sadly, haven't spoken to him in a decade. I should call him. He calls me Leeza for some reason! I would very much like for you to get a copy of the performance recordings of Mother Ann, The excerpts from the Pariahs and the main songs from the Birdwatchers. I believe based on your observations in the article that you would enjoy them immensely and appreciate their lasting beauty. Perhaps I can help get copies to you.Lisapollison 10:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VI - November 2006

The November 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Twyla Tharp

Bienvenidos, Scottandrewhutchins ~ I am dropping by to let you know that I slightly expanded and completely formatted the article on our beloved Twyla Tharp, which I noticed you made considerable additions to. I also added a photograph, and placed all the information in a chronological order that will hopefull help readers with understanding it. If you'd like to take a look, I would more than appreciate it. Thank you! Sincerely, Emmegan 01:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

For the second time, your attempt to add jingoism to the George W. Bush article has been reverted. Please keep in mind Wikipedia's policies of neutral point of view, no original research and verifiability. Your edit violates all three. We appreciate your other contributions; however, this one could be considered vandalism. -- AuburnPilot ^talk 01:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I read the article back when you first added it to the George W. Bush article. It is not a matter of whether you or I believe it fits (which incidentally I don't), it's a matter of verifiability pertaining to a WP:BIO. Our interpretation of Bush's actions constitute original research and cannot be included. I apologize if my wording was blunt, but to insert jingoism into the article is really stretching things. I suggest you take the suggestion to the Talk:George W. Bush page before reinserting. Discussion is always beneficial when making controversial edits. -- AuburnPilot ^talk 01:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

The Tuna Helpers

This was deleted because it did not assert notability. See Wikipedia:Notability (music) for guidelines for musicians/bands. Just because something is redlinked does not mean it has to have an article. Thank you, Fang Aili ^talk 17:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your question, see the link above. --Fang Aili ^talk 18:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Pocket Characters

You were right. My error was done in both ignorance and good faith. You have my most sincere apologies. NielsenGW 20:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wizard of Oz

Hi there, I have recently revisited my childhood and have DL'd all of the Oz books in their entirity to re-read. I've always been a huge fan of these books. :]

I noticed on the project page that you mentioned you're a part of some newsletters and groups who I presume, discuss the books? I would love some information on these groups and their web pages if possible!

Thanks very much in advance, Shaybear♥.

Eva Green - Composer?

Hello, sorry to bother you. If I interpreted the discussion page of the Eva Green article correctly, you included in the article a reference to her being a composer. The article also says that she composed the score to the film The Dreamers. I find this information very interesting and would like to find out more on the subject, but I have not been able to locate another source that mentions it. I am sure that you were correct in including these facts in the article, I am simply at a loss for further information. Therefore, since I would imagine you know where the information came from, it would be a great help if you could tell me where I might find out more about it. It would also be very helpful if you could reply on my talk page so that I know when you have replied. I also have much less entries on my talk page, so your reply will be easier to locate if you put it there. Thank you very much, and I apologize for any bother this may cause you.

Europus 05:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Okay, thanks anyway. I guess I'll just have to search harder to find out more. Thank you for your time, and have nice day.

Europus 00:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILMS Newsletter

The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timon of ___

Thanks for the kind words! ;) I agree that the Timon thing is far from settled, and I would not be surprised if Shakespeare's dabblings in the classics led to a conflation. Jokestress 23:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Documentary film mistake

Why did you insert words like "poop" on the page? That doesn't seem like you. --Scottandrewhutchins 19:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woops. I reverted some edits back to the wrong version. --Jeremy Butler 16:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oz Template

Hello. I'd like to ask you two questions about Template:Oz. One: do you think the 1933 cartoon, The Wizard of Oz, is worth including there? Two: about that heading, "the feature film adaptations" - I thought a feature film ran 40 minutes or four reels. Clearly, some of the 1910s adaptations don't fit that bill, so might another heading not be more appropriate? Biruitorul 04:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've made the changes. Biruitorul 05:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Boxes Format Hint

Hi Scottandrewhutchins (also from Indy),

I stole a technique from someone else which allows you to format User Boxes into perfect columns:

== User Boxes ==

This user is a recent changes patroller.

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof.

A, B and C

This user prefers not to use the serial comma.

US

This user uses American English.

(View source to see "code.")

This might not be important to you, but it reduced the length of my page to be manageable. If you put three vertical bar between the hyphens, then you get three columns. See User:lmcelhiney for an example.

Take care,

Larry

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The January 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Your edit to Kate Musker

Your recent edit to Kate Musker (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 00:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted using admin delete - I hope that helps -- Tawker 01:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation style

Thank you for your work on Davy Jones. Unfortunately, disambiguation pages do not follow the same stylistic rules as normal pages. In particular,

there should be only one live link per entry.

Please see the disambiguation style guide for more information. If you have any questions not answered there, drop me a note or try the help desk. By the way, I have already brought Davy Jones into line with the guidelines.

Orphaned fair use image (Image:DavidLee.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:DavidLee.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 09:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:AlisonPillSusan,jpg.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:AlisonPillSusan,jpg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Vlcsnap-107838.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vlcsnap-107838.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Novels newsletter : Issue IX - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 17:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Vagina tented.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Vagina tented.jpg. 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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial Limbs

Hello, I just recently wrote my first complete article on Wikipedia artificial limbs and saw that you had done a large amount of work in other medical areas. Could you take a look at my article and give me some pointers about improving the article and make any changes yourself? Thanks: Nfk17 02:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Category for Discussion

A category created by you or to which you have significantly contributed is being considered for deletion, rename, move or merge in accordance with Wikipedia's Categories for Discussion policies . This does not mean that any of the userpages in the category will be deleted. They may, however, be recategorized.
Please share your thoughts on the matter at this category's entry on the User categories for discussion page.
VegaDark 10:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Earl Zea

I'm alerting you to the fact that I've nominated the article on Earl Zea for speedy deletion. I can see nothing that makes him notable enough to have an article in the encyclopedia. There are directions on the speedy delete template for you to contest this. AniMate 04:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry the article was deleted before you had a chance to edit it. However, you can go to WP:DRV (deletion review) and list the article for review. If you think the article is worth keeping and is actual encyclopedic content, that's the best way to get it undeleted. Personally, I don't know why you would, as I'm pretty sure he's not notable and the page pretty much existed for the purpose of putting an unbelievable sad and embarrassing incident in his life out there for ridicule. Best of luck. AniMate 22:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Earl Zea story is quite notable and deserving of an entry. I was 14 when it happened about 10 blocks from my house, and there was quite a panic induced as the initial report claimed that a burglar had removed his penis.

Etruscan mythology - Your attempts to start wars, interfere with debate and violate WP:LIBEL

Evidence: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Etruscan_mythology&diff=111843351&oldid=111797626

Any personal attacks against me clearly have no bearing on Etruscan mythology. Therefore it does not belong on that page. Using these irrelevancies for your own personal interests is vandalism and violates WP:LIBEL which reads:

"It is Wikipedia policy to delete libellous material when it has been identified."

Do not start wars and interfere with the deletion. As a self-described "unproduced playwright", your sense of priorities in life is telling. --Glengordon01 18:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oz

You should join the Oz wiki at [7] Tremewanbill 04:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Hidan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hidan.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:Media copyright questions. 08:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elbow Witch

Hi. I see you began the article on Elbow Witch, and the only decent online reference I could find was a Google cache of your mypages site. It looks like your info came from one of William Jone's collected texts? Do you happen to know which one or have a citation for it? Thanks --Miskwito 08:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Christianity

Please don't add groups which don't have demonstrable importance when considered in the light of the global history of Christianity over the last 2,000 years (not just the English speaking world over the last 200 years) -- that's how the last big argument on the Template_talk:Christianity page started. I propose the "Nestorian test" -- if they're not more important than Nestorians in the overall global history of Christianity, they probably shouldn't be included.... AnonMoos 21:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, considering that the number of Christians in the world is now about 2 billion, having 2 million adherents doesn't necessarily make a group important enough over the scope of the global Christianity of the last 2,000 years to have a separate link on the Christianity template, when less than 20 individual faith traditions or groups are mentioned there. The relatively small number of current adherents wouldn't necessarily be a stumbling block to inclusion if the group had an unbroken continuous tradition of many centuries' standing, or a broad significant influence on many other Chrsitian groups, or a worldwide presence in a large number of countries in the world, but I'm scanning down the Unity Church article and not seeing that.

The real test is, is the Unity Church more important than the Nestorian churches in the global history of Christianity over the last 2,000 years (not just the English speaking world over the last 200 years)? AnonMoos 22:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't and can't be any simple numerical cut-off point, but the total number of current adherents is one factor among many which should taken into account -- including a presence in many regions and countries of the world, significant public prominence, general theological influence on other Christian denominations/churches, a continuous tradition dating back many centuries, and/or broad historical significance in the overall history of Christianity over 2,000 years. On the first three measures, the Unity Church seems to fall significantly short of the JWs, and on the last two it seems to fall significantly short of the Nestorians -- who were the only meaningful Christian presence over large swaths of Asia for many centuries.

I'm sure there are many fine upstanding pious individuals among the members of the Unity Church, but when you raise the issue of including it on the Christianity template, you're thereby putting it in direct competition for template space with all Christian groups which have existed over the last 2,000 years, and the main criterion is the group's importance in the global history of Christianity over the last 2,000 years (NOT just the English speaking world over the last 200 years). AnonMoos 21:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I'm sorry, but there isn't any such "right" to be on the Christianity template -- because if there were, then that would open the template up to including hundreds of groups. And the fact that you haven't addressed any of the specific concerns I raised above (other than repeating the 2 million statistic, which isn't enough by itself) doesn't impress me. AnonMoos 03:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't make false accusations

Please don't make false accusations of vandalism, as you did in your edit notes at List of Monster in My Pocket characters. Spylab 18:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scott also makes false accusations at Charun in edit notes (see here). Violation of WP:Assume_good_faith, of course. This is becoming a pattern with him. --Glengordon01 04:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glengordon01 is a hypocrite. He accused me of vandalism before I ever accused him of vandalism. --Scottandrewhutchins 17:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See? Angry, spiteful and always accusatory. Sufficed to say, the IP he accuses me of is in the States closer to himself, but I'm in Canada. Obviously then his accusations are false, vicious and out of control but he never apologizes for his anti-productive behaviour. He needs time-out. Scott's contribs show that he's editing a gazillion articles per day but is intent on interfering with other people's contributions for god-king pleasure rather admitting when he knows less than someone else. Please take time to go to the bathroom, Scott, and find groups offline to balance out your life. There is such a thing as internet addiction and you're a prime candidate. --Glengordon01 21:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - April 2007

The April 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by Grafikbot 11:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Monster articles

I honestly have no clue who is supposed to be named what, but you've made an edit history mess of nightmarish proportions with your warring. If you want a page moved, you use the move button up top. You do not create a new page and copy the contents. That destroys the edit history and makes a terrible mess for others to come along and fix. Stop doing it. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 04:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gravitron

If the Gravitron was invented in 1983, how was it featured in a 1959 film? I've never seen the movie, but are you sure it wasn't some other carousel-type thing? Kafziel ^Talk 20:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost hole

Whether or not Ghost hole has been deleted is irrelevant - if the article doesn't exist, it doesn't belong under a "See also" list. And please don't call the admin who deleted it an idiot - I suggest that you be more civil to the Wikipedia community or you risk getting blocked. Thank you. 86.152.203.212 11:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - May 2007

The May 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 16:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser procedure

You recently compiled and listed a case at requests for checkuser. A checkuser or clerk has requested you supply one or more diffs to justify the use of the checkuser procedure in the case, in accordance with the procedures listed in the table at the top of the requests for checkuser page. For an outcome to be achieved, we require that you provide these diffs as soon as possible. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation. -- lucasbfr ^talk 00:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC), checkuser clerk.[reply]

Man-Thing

Hi, and thanks for asking. Hang in there, and I'll explain everything.

I'm actually a bit confused since the reverted version has a whole paragraph about DeMatteis' run, but no matter. I reverted because the previous versions had so many stylistic, edit-guideline and other errors, too many to fix individually. Material belonging under PH was placed in FCB, opinions were introduced ("The final issue justified its end..."), non-notable and subjective trivia was introduced ("in an issue of What If, one of the characters looked something like Man-Thing"), etc. There is a standard introduction that WikiComics Project editors have agreed upon through consensus. Subheads per Wiki guidelines are not capitalized by titles. That last thing in particular is extremely basic. Until an editor reads up more on Wiki guidelines in general and WikiProject Comics guidelines in particular, it's far better generally better to make a series of small editors rather than a whole bunch in a single bulk edit. Editors seeing a whole mess o' stylistic and formatting errors are apt to revert.

I know this is criticism, but it's specific and technical and not personal, and I hope you take this in the collaborative spirit in which it's given. If your fellow editors, such as myself, weren't committed to working together, we wouldn't take the time to be so detailed. I can send you links to some of the policies if you'd like; just ask -- believe me, it' easier than wading through and looking for some of them! Thanks, and I look forward to seeing your properly styled/formatted edits. --Tenebrae 21:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little context in Alien Terror

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Alien Terror, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Alien Terror is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Alien Terror, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 05:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD notification

TfD nomination of Template:Steve Gerber

Template:Steve Gerber has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — ThuranX 01:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Merrick

I've "citation tagged" your recent addition to Joseph Merrick. If you could provide a reference for this interesting addition, that would be great. Cheers, Doctormatt 01:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:54549490462.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:54549490462.gif. 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 04:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:54549490462.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:54549490462.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 04:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Gerber template

The TfD has been closed as keep. However, several editors expressed concerns that the template should be more limited in use. Since you identified yourself as the main creator of the template in the TfD, I thought it would be best to inform you of the results. Cheers, RyanGerbil10(Don't ask 'bout Camden) 03:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Buoy single cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Buoy single cover.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.

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.BetacommandBot 16:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:CW POSTER.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:CW POSTER.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.

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.BetacommandBot 03:52, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Give Up Your Guns Buoys.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Give Up Your Guns Buoys.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.BetacommandBot 04:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Hos88.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hos88.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.BetacommandBot 04:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:TimothyGoldenClassics.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:TimothyGoldenClassics.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.BetacommandBot 08:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:STAR07720.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:STAR07720.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.BetacommandBot 09:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIII - June 2007

The June 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 15:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

=Matango video game

Where do you get this info?Invisible Noise 03:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Dworkin

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Keith Dworkin, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. B. Wolterding 08:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Pit and the Pendulum (1961 film)

I strongly disagree with your moving/renaming the article to "Pit and the Pendulum" without first discussing the issue on the article's talk page. While I can probably guess that your reasoning is the fact the IMDB, All Movie Guide, and MRQE list the movie without the first "The", the vast majority of all reviews/sources/online movie sites/reference materials that I've seen refer to the film as "The Pit and the Pendulum". In all interviews that I've read, Roger Corman, Richard Matheson, and Vincent Price referred to the film as "The Pit and the Pendulum". It is always advertised in that manner. I believe English language Wikipedia articles should utilize a film's most commonly known English-language title. Perhaps adding (AKA Pit and the Pendulum) after the bolded title at the beginning of the article would have been more appropriate. If your argument is that the onscreen title should have precedent over all other sources, I believe you are incorrect. "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein"'s onscreen title is "Meet Frankenstein", yet almost nobody refers to the film in that manner. "Witchfinder General"'s onscreen title is "Matthew Hopkins - Witchfinder General", but only a fraction of reliable sources use that particular title. I am considering reverting your edit but I would like to be made aware of what your reasons for making the change in the first place were.-Hal Raglan 18:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you direct me to the guidelines where it says onscreen titles have precedence over more commonly documented titles for a film? I can't find this. Guidelines do state (admittedly about foreign language films, but I think this still applies): "Names of articles should be the most commonly used title for the following reasons: We want to maximize the likelihood of being listed in external search engines, thereby attracting more people to Wikipedia." I've just checked all of my Roger Corman books and none of them refer to the title as "Pit and the Pendulum". Not sure why you claim "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" is not a good example. The actual credits read Bud Abbott and Lou Costello Meet Frankenstein. By your logic, that should be the film's "verifiable and consistent" title. The same with "Matthew Hopkins - Witchfinder General" -- the film's onscreen credit. I understand what you are saying about all the links working, but I still believe you should have discussed the move/retitling instead of just making the move. Also, why did you retain (1961 film) to the title? As far as I can tell, no other film has ever been titled "Pit and the Pendulum". The (1961 film) qualifier is not needed.-Hal Raglan 22:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Show me the "and" on the title screen of Abbott and and Costello Meet Frankenstein. Before, you claimed that the onscreen title was simply Meet Frankenstein, so you are still not being consistent. --Scottandrewhutchins 14:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, I've never referred to the film as Abbott and and Costello Meet Frankenstein. Second, I am unsure of why you are so confused by such a simple matter. In many opening film credits, actors routinely have their names "above the title". In the case of the Abbott and Costello film, Bud Abbot and Lou Costello (the stars) have their name "above the title", which in this case is "Meet Frankenstein" (the onscreen title below the names of the actors). By your logic, the title of the movie is "Meet Frankenstein". Writer Stephen Jones agrees with you and lists the film as such in one of his horror film guides. My other example was "Witchfinder General". The onscreen title is "Matthew Hopkins - Witchfinder General". In his book, Nightmare Movies, Kim Newman refers to the movie as "Matthew Hopkins - Witchfinder General". Yet only these two writers and a few others refer to these movies by their onscreen titles. Most reference publications refer to Roger Corman's film as "The Pit and the Pendulum". Yes, some do drop the first "The" but the film's most common title is "The Pit and the Pendulum". I see no inconsistency in my examples or my reasoning. I've opened the subject up for debate on the talk page of the article. Please do not make another drastic change w/out discussing the issue and waiting for consensus. Thank you.-Hal Raglan 21:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you deliberately ignoring my point? Stephen Jones claims that the name of the movie is Meet Frankenstein when no other writer (to my knowledge) refers to the film in that way. Kim Newman (and a few others) refer to "Witchfinder General" as "Matthew Hopkins - Witchfinder General". Simply because they argue that those are the onscreen titles does not magically make those the actual titles of the films. The same is true of Corman's film...the most common title is "The Pit and the Pendulum". Just because some people, including you, argue otherwise does not make it so. Why are you having such difficulty with this?-Hal Raglan 21:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the wikipedia film guidelines: "Names of articles should be the most commonly used title for the following reasons: We want to maximize the likelihood of being listed in external search engines, thereby attracting more people to Wikipedia."-Hal Raglan 18:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

need your help in editing the article about The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (anime)

Hei.. I saw that you have recently helped fix this article (The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (anime)) a bit.. I would really appriciate help fixing up my latest changes to the article.. Have a great day Acidburn24m 20:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Zdiscg 046 nyman.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Zdiscg 046 nyman.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 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 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 non-free media 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.BetacommandBot 11:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:MIMP_promo.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:MIMP_promo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image 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 the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 16:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV - July 2007

The July 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 17:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citrusville

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Citrusville, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Rambutan (talk) 16:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

William-Adolphe Bouguereau gallery

You removed the AfD notice from this article. That's not permitted and doesn't do any good, as it doesn't affect the AfD at all. You may like to join in the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William-Adolphe Bouguereau gallery (3rd nomination). Tyrenius 18:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unity Church

Malcolm Gets in not a member of Unity he has perform at Unity New York and other New Thought Churchs -Religious Science. Oprah does not endorse any faith and attends many different Churchs and Temples. That's a big jump in the article.JGG59 12:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to your "asshole" comment

First, I will respond to your unjustified personal attack on my talk page (in which you called me an asshole) with the following template: Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at User talk:Spylab, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you. . Second, All I did to Characters of Monster in My Pocket was change the title on March 29, 2007 ("move" means change the title). A Wikipedia administrator later deleted the page at some point (I have no idea when), and that has nothing to do with me. So, who's the asshole now? Spylab 16:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Carole Seuling

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Carole Seuling, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. B. Wolterding 09:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XV - August 2007

The August 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spring Heeled Jack

Before re-adding more pointless trivia, please read and follow WP:TRIVIA and WP:ENC. Do so and you will see the edit you made here was against the way things are done here. DreamGuy 16:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NYC Meetup

Hello Scott

I enjoyed meeting you as well. It was nice to be reminded of L. Frank Baum, graphic novels, and how these works refuse to be pigeon-holed in one category or another, as if, being a children's book, a Baum work cannot also be fantastic literature or the basis of a comic book. Take care — Gosgood 13:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unity

By definition Christians believe that Jesus is your lord and savior. Unity believes Jesus is a Master Teacher, Jesus the Christ. If you define Christianity as a way of being (life style) then yes we are Christian. Other wise no.

August 2007

Fair use rationale for Image:Homforsale.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Homforsale.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 non-free media 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 20:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Sedition Act of 1918

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Sedition Act of 1918. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Groupthink 00:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unity Page

Hi just leting you know I did add a ref and a link, I am within the guidelines to add informatiom to the page. Being a student of Unity and New thought I do know about the history of Unity and roots in the movement. I did add the link JGG59 August 2007

Unity

I am just curious and would love to discuss New Thought and Christianity. You know and I know that traditional Christians believe "Jesus as lord and savior". If you describe it in the broadest sense of the word it is a life style. I have been a student of Unity and Religious Science for years. I know the Minister will determine what text will be used Buttterworth rarely used the Bible. I have attended for years Unity NY and Rev Paul can not use the Bible at all but a Broadway Show to make a point. I have attended Unity where the Minister will bring in a Taoist Text. I belief when we restrict New Thought we limit ourselfs. That true spirituality is open at the top hence the whole point of the New Thought movement.I love Jesus but I relate to him in the Unity, New Thought concepts not traditional Christian concepts. Knowing Unity, Religious Science and Divine Science are a new movement independent of Christianity or even a extention or expansion of Christian concepts to what I believe Jesus was here to tell us. JGG59

Unity

I guess the point is in the context of the artical is Unitys beginnings which is firmly established in The New Thought movement. Which has taken The Bible away from literalist. The Fillmores started with the Christian Scientist moved in line with Emma Curtis Hopkins Mother of New Thought. You and I know if we were to sit down with traditional Christians we would be talking a foreign language. Religious Science, Divine Science or any of the independent New Thought churchs speak the same and pray the same and have thier origins in The New Thought Movement. In the context of the artical I wanted the origins to be clear. JGG59

Unity

Thanks that sounds more in line with what I wanted to convey. Thank you. JGG59 —Preceding unsigned comment added by JGG59 (talk • contribs) 20:37, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Unity

I contacted unity customer service what is unity offical name of Unity, Unity Church or Unity School of Christianity. They Stated The offical title is Unity or Unity Church. Also known as Unity School of Christianity would not be a correct lead in. Just letting you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JGG59 (talk • contribs) 05:13, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Related Creatures in Swamp Thing

While I admire the scholarship in the recent expansion of that section, I feel it's bordering into the trivial. It's not always clear if we're talking of influences on or from Swamp Thing. It it's all influences from then that's too many. If it's just a list of related creatures, then it's trivia. The monster from the swamp is a common trope in fiction anyway. The only relevant mentions are: The Heap, Sturgeon's It, and possibly Man-Thing for the coincidence.

The bulk of this information should appear either under Heap or It rather than under Swamp Thing. --Leocomix 14:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Template: Universal Horror

The reason I have removed some of the films is that Universal Horror seems to refer to the main Monsters (Frankenstein, Dracula, The Wolf Man etc.) NOT every horror film made by Universal from the twenties to the fifties. --Indie.Bones 12:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)Indie.Bones[reply]

License tagging for Image:Jinnicky.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jinnicky.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Facebook claim.

You claim that a Facebook customer representative ("Theodore") emailed you on August 31st, 2007, which led you to state that "Facebook is so concerned about the misuse of the site for data mining that adding too many friends too quickly can result in a permanently disabled account even if done by a real person". You can make claims all you want, but unless you have evidence/proof, there is no good reason for posting such erroneous claims on such a site as Wikipedia. Please cite sources, have witnesses, proof, SOMETHING...in the future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.232.201.101 (talk) 06:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well Mr. Anonymous, I did the best I could to cite the e-mail, with coding and all, so I think that should qualify. --Scottandrewhutchins 11:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coney Island and amusement parks

Scott, I saw that you added info to the Coney Island article about the amusement parks. Do you have a source for that information (like a newspaper article or something?)? Also, you might be interested in contributing to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks, a WikiProject which aims to improve the quality of all amusement park related articles on Wikipedia. Thanks --Tinned Elk 17:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WNYC! Thanks. I was referring to the info about the places closing. --Tinned Elk 19:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:MonsterInMyPocket Doc.pdf

Thanks for uploading Image:MonsterInMyPocket Doc.pdf. 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 02:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI - September 2007

The September 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 09:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howard the Duck

You added the part that says the real Howard appeared in Image and Vertigo titles. Which Vertigo title? There is none listed in the lists of appearances. --Leocomix 13:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Leonard as being the real Howard. I referred to this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Howard_the_Duck&diff=142725206&oldid=142069503 From what you say the answer is Nevada. That must be a cameo appearance as I don't remember it noticing it. Do you remember which issue? --Leocomix 13:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:116 4 352.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:116 4 352.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. Phil Sandifer 02:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beasties (1989 film)

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Beasties (1989 film), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Fram 12:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of progressive rock artists

That page was a redirect to List of progressive rock bands and musicians, which was was deleted after this discussion CitiCat^♫ 17:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shakespeare plays

Shakespeare Project consensus has long been that we bold only the common titles of the plays. The "full titles" aren't really even the real titles, they're just what the printer gave them in one of the early editions of the play, and every edition gives it a different title. If you disagree with that consensus, please bring it up at the Shakespeare Wikiproject page, rather than changing every single play one at a time and getting reverted again and again. Thanks, Wrad 18:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Trot Griffiths.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Crowoz010.jpg. The copy called Image:Crowoz010.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 18:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XVII - October 2007

The October 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 09:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New York City Meetup

The agenda for the next meetup includes the formation of a Wikimedia New York City local chapter. Hope to see you there!--Pharos 20:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Medved

Please do not remove legitimate "citation needed" tags. To state that someone is "conservative" is a point of view, and either needs a citation or should be removed. It does not matter what is in the bibliography section. It needs a citation per Wikipedia policy. Thank you. Ward3001 15:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most overrated film of all time

You know better than to vandalize liike this. [8]. The Parsnip! 18:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a small discussion going on about this and I've been asked to invite you over. Maybe you'd like to add your comments? [9] The Parsnip! 20:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Earl Zea

A tag has been placed on Earl Zea, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD G10.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. B1atv 06:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talkpage comment

Hi, I deleted the comment you left at Talk:Jamie Babbit following the talkpage guidelines. The comment didn't have any relevance to improving the article. --Beloved Freak 11:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unity

Please do not threaten me and call me a vandal. This an Encyclopedia fair and balanced view points which can include a criticism. I saw the editors comments and he concluded it was about content not vandalism. Unity is not the only source for the article a third party would be valid. You are more like a born again then New Thought. Peace and love.151.202.182.100 03:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forwarded message

Obviously, this person is confused...but here you go. This is from my talk page. --71.42.142.238 15:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Scottandrewhutchins for what its worth ( I wll try not to mispell anything for you) you win. Allowing others- a third party view is part of the process. It is not either or, but both. To realize and honor Unity's roots in both is my objective. Not to diminish but to enhance the belief systems. New Thought Unity , Religious Science. Divine Science are meant to added on to, (New Thoughts) to continue to grow and expand just like our Minds. Thanks.JGG59 15:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not Scottandrewhutchins. Suggest you refer your communications to his talk page. --71.42.142.238 15:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Vlcsnap-37679.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Vlcsnap-37679.png. 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 23:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your HIV/AIDS/CIRCUMCISION additions

Please stop adding misinformation to the aforementioned articles. The source you are citing is a webposting of an AP report of an oral report of a preliminary study that reached no statistically significant results, and which will probably never be printed in a refereed peer-reviewed journal. In short, it is an unreliable source. Furthermore, from your summation of that source, you either do not understand its findings, or are intentionally misrepresenting them. Readdition will merely result in their removal; and if you repeatedly revert, you will be blocked. If you wish to discuss any changes to the articles, do so on their talk page. - Nunh-huh 14:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging and running

Placing a POV template on an article is not meant as a replacement for discussion. Placing a tag without discussion on the article's talk page will simply result in the removal of the tag. - Nunh-huh 15:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You seem to have reverted to your preferred version of HIV for the third time within 24 hours. You may also have done so on other articles. Please read WP:3RR. A fourth revert within 24 hours will almost certainly result in you being blocked from editing. This is the second time you've been informed of this. Should you have actual points to make about the page's contents, the talk page is the appropriate place for it. Once you have found out that the change you want to make is contested - which you are quite clearly, now, as your change has been removed by more than one user - you should achieve consensus on the talk page before trying to reinsert it. - Nunh-huh 15:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say you had, I said a repetition would. You don't have to revert to identical versions to fall afoul of the 3RR (and in fact, you could be blocked for less than 3 reverts should any given administrator see it that way. You would be well advised to discuss matters on that talk page and cease playing with the articles. - Nunh-huh 16:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also note that you haven't stopped your misrepresentations (calling a single oral report "studies" is one of the more obvious ones. One thing is not plural.) - Nunh-huh 16:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XVIII - November 2007

The November 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 15:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vlcsnap-107838.png

I have tagged Image:Vlcsnap-107838.png as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Nauseef 01:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hidan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hidan.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 06:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of User:Scottandrewhutchins/Userboxes/user Body Modification No

A tag has been placed on User:Scottandrewhutchins/Userboxes/user Body Modification No requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a template that is divisive and inflammatory.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[Talk:User:Scottandrewhutchins/Userboxes/user Body Modification No|the article's talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 01:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Viktor Frankenstein

Actually, the sentence is not mine but I did move it. I removed it from an article on 'Frankenstein's Creature' as they didn't fit there; it was used to justify calling the creature 'Frankenstein'...it doesn't. I didn't have the heart to destroy it as it is somewhat true (probably well researched), however, it shouldn't be in an article about 'Frankenstein's Creature' but 'Viktor Frankenstein', where I moved it. I will leave other members to find citations (hopefully the member who wrote it). King Óðinn The Aesir 12:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 13:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 13:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 13:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 13:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 13:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Godzilla Template

~~Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.~~

Also, please respond on the talk page. There are a certain amount of films that are not connected and related to the Godzilla franchise in any way. — Enter Movie (talk) 00:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Defintion of a vandal

Have a look at Wikipedia:Vandalism - the first line is as follows:

"Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia."

Conversely a good faith editor, who believes that removing content would be an improvement isn't a vandal. Addhoc (talk) 19:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second Warning

~~Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.~~

First of all, you are breaking two of the three main content policies: the verifiability and original research ones. You're adding original research that you can't verify.

"Verifiable" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source.

If the films are really connected in terms of continuity or crossovers, you should be able to cite a reliable source.

Second of all, all the films you added are irrelevant to the topic of the template. The only connection with the Godzilla films and the other Toho films, like I've said before, is that (1) they're made by Toho and (2) some of those films are made by the same team as the original Godzilla. This does not mean they're still part of the Godzilla franchise.

Finally, your accusations of vandalism to me are absurd. Removing relevant material is vandalism, but deleting irrelevant material is definitely not. What makes Tomei Ningen, Half Human, ESPY, Prophecies of Nostradamus, etc. relevant to the Godzilla franchise anyways?

Thank you, and good night. — Enter Movie (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AMNH tour

We need to get a preliminary head-count for the AMNH tour happening before the meet-up. If you think you would like to go, please sign up at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC#AMHN tour sign-up. Thanks! ScienceApologist (talk) 03:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third and Final Warning

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.

Please stop vandalizing the Godzilla template. If you can prove that Tomei Ningen, Half Human, The H-Man, The Secret of the Telegian, The Human Vapor, The Last War, Matango, Dogora, Latitude Zero, Fancy Paradise, Nihon Chinbotsu, Prophecies of Nostradamus, ESPY, Visitor to the Pupil's Center, Blue Christmas, Deathquake, School in the Crosshairs, Daijōbu, My Friend, Sayonara Jupiter, Portrait in Prussian Blue, Nineteen, Tokyo Blackout, Princess from the Moon, Zeiram, Mikadroid: Robokill Beneath Discoclub Layla, Supergirl Reiko, Nostradamus: The Prophecy, GUNHEAD, and Nihon Chinbotsu are connected to the Godzilla franchise in any way (with the exception of that they're made by Toho and that some of the films are made by the same team as the original Godzilla), please explain so in the template talk page. But if you continue to edit and add those films onto the template without verification that "one is incomplete without the other," you will be blocked from editing. Thank you. — Enter Movie (talk) 03:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By what right have you to consider me a vandal by preventing you from removing relevant films? This is a content dispute, not a vandalism, and on what authority do you have to block me any more than I have to block you? -Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 05:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhhhh. . . . 'cause you have no proof that those films are relevant to the Godzilla franchise. Oh, and I have no authority to block you; that's the administrator's job. — Enter Movie (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the one who deleted relevant material from the template, you are the only vandal. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, I don't have much opinion on who is right in the content dispute here (altho, if Enter Movie is correct about the lack of connection to the franchise, that sounds pretty convincing to me.) But, please don't toss around accusations of vandalism simply because someone makes an edit you disagree with. See Wikipedia:Vandalism for more info. Friday (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Friday.

"As the one who deleted relevant material from the template, you are the only vandal." Again, you have yet to prove that they're relevant. Please read Wikipedia:No original research. — Enter Movie (talk) 18:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is a vandal using his own terms, since he is the first one to accuse me of vandalism. therefore, if anything I have done is vandalism, what he has done must also be considered as such. By Wikipedia standards, neither of us is a vandal, by the standards with which he is judging me, he is the pot calling the kettle black. As I've said, Toho has a catalog listing all of these science fiction films together on a flowchart, and Dogora, Matango, Gohtne, and numerous others have appeared in Godzilla video games and other sorts of memorabilia. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 18:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? You're right. Do whatever you want to the template. Neither of us are vandalizing because this is a dispute over an article's content. I'm gonna withdraw the vandalizing warnings. But you're gonna have to discuss the current situation in the talk page to reach a resolution. — Enter Movie (talk) 19:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probe Ministries & notability

I notice you reverted my redirection of this article. Please see further discussion at Talk:Probe Ministries#Redirection, merge or ultimately deletion?. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 03:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:DESTINY.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:DESTINY.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 (talk) 05:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FacingGoya.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:FacingGoya.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 (talk) 05:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mimpvideo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mimpvideo.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 (talk) 17:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1,096: / Line 1,096: @@
 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 [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 05:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
+==Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mimpvideo.jpg==
+Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:Mimpvideo.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 [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/media|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:No fair -->[[User:BetacommandBot|BetacommandBot]] ([[User talk:BetacommandBot|talk]]) 17:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)