To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
Where exactly is the site of the Hall-Mills murder? If I wanted to find it today, how would I get to it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.149.237.77 (talk) 08:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Albert Fish
In regards to your claims of 'hearsay' and other facts of mine that you have erroneously deleted, I have numerous sources to back them up. I shall put these facts back on the page and back them up accordingly.
Regards,
--Naylor182 13:02, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to re-arrange the article into chrono-order I won't object :0 Wjhonson 18:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Greenwood near Scranton
Greenwood is located in Moosic borough just south of the Minooka section of Scranton. It encompasses the portion of Moosic borough between the Moosic exit off I-81 north to the border with Scranton, from the Lackawanna River to the Moosic (East) mountain (Springbrook Twp). I don't know the organizational history but today's Railroad Av and portions of Cedar AV (near the K-Mart Shopping Center) were formerly Main Street. Greenwood AV is perpendicular to Main ST / Railroad AV and runs about 6 blocks (with a break for a steep hill between Washington and Cotter STs).
Large portions of Greenwood were undeveloped until recently - the most notable recent developments are the Montage Mountain ski area, Lackawanna County Stadium and the Glenmaura residential neighborhood (all of which are in the Greenwood section of Moosic but straddle the line with the City of Scranton). It is very likely that the original settlers were Polish immigrants since St. Mary of Czestochowa Parish is one of the older religious communities and, in the first part of the 20th century, the area around the Church and nearby Main Street were predominantly Polish. It is also likely that the original Greenwood was limited to the neighborhood close to St. Mary Church. JJV 11:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
In response to your question on the Scranton Talk Page, I am not aware of a Greenwood near Scranton, PA. There is a Clark's Green. Googling about, there seems to be a Greenwood over in Crawford. Kail Ceannai 07:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Digging around I found a bit of information that might give you a lead.| Greenwood Fire Deparment (of Lackawana County) History . Based on a bit of rummaging Greenwood Village is, or was, near Moosic (in the SW area of Scranton). There definitely is a Greenwood Ave. in Moosic. Good luck with your research. Kail Ceannai 08:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Norton - Just a quick note to thank you for your contribution
to my Dad's biography. I already have copies of the New York Times
articles documenting his contributions to the advancement of the
musical arts in the USA. Thank you for your interest and your
assistance to the development of his biography. pjs012915. 11:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi...just so you know, the Category:New Brunswick that you applied to this article pertains to the Canadian province, not the city in New Jersey. Bearcat 20:49, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay...I wasn't sure if there was already a category for that or not. Glad we got it straightened out :-) Bearcat 20:53, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
After a bit of inactivity, Medicine has been selected as the new medicine collaboration of the week. I am taking the unusual step of informing all participants, not just those who voted for it, since I feel that it is important that this highest-level topic for our collaboration be extremely well-written. In addition, it is a core topic for Wikipedia 1.0 and serves as the introduction to our other articles. Yet general articles are the ones that are most difficult for individuals to write, which is why I have invited all participants. I hope it isn't an intrusion; I don't make plan to make a habit of sending out these messages. — Knowledge Seekerদ 02:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Richard, thanks for the info in your message about the italics. Will try remembering it from now on. Cheers. Anagnorisis 08:09, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
autoblock
I have replied on my talk page. As I mention there, this is something that requires followup from the developers; in the meantime, a workaround would be to turn off Google Web Accelerator. -- Curps 16:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:"What links here" and Templates giving useless information
I have a suggestion in Wikipedia policy and programming. If you go to a page that has a template on it and click "what links here", all the links in the Template now appear in the "What links here" query. I want to see links that appear on the template to be excluded for the "What links here" query. Try a search yourself. If there is no template on a page you get useful results. If there is a template with dozens of other links the useful information is obscured. If I go to Raritan Landing, New Jersey and hit "What links here" I now see the dozens of other towns from the template, and I miss the usefull information of what pages actually have an embedded link in the text of "Raritan Landing". If you have a suggestion of a better forum to discuss this change, please tell me who I should talk to.--Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 19:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be interested in joining a group on wikipedia which counters the heavy handed tactics of the copyright police. We can't fight them on our own. User talk:Ed g2s has began deleting fair use image on every person's user page and on several other pages, inspired by WP:FUC which was written by another paternal copyright policeman with absolutly no legal training and little understanding of copyright law. User:Ta bu shi da yu created the WP:FUC page and was responsible for deleting hundreds of Time magazine covers and refused to stop even after Time magazine sent an e-mail allowing wikipedia to use the images.
Please tell others about this project. The paternal copyright police are well organized and are intoxicated with their own trival power here on wikipedia. Like most authoritarian personalities, these misguided copyright fanatics have finally have overstepped the bounds of good sense and restraint, when they began deleting tens of thousands images from wikiusers' pages. Only a large number of wikipedians will stop this abuse. Travb 13:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Flickr
I have no idea what to do for free photo archiving; I pay for a Flickr "pro" account because I like the Flickr community and the Flickr user interface. --rbrwr± 21:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Alfred Naess
Watch the wrong year in the image text. Mahlum 07:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the licensing tag that is on Image:New Jersey state seal.png. Observe the section for seals. On this image there is no verification that the copyright has expired. Given that absence of such, it must be presumed that the image is used under a fair use license here on Wikipedia. You may wish to see User_talk:Durin#U.S._state_seal_images_copyright_status where a similar issue was discussed. In that case, Nebraska became a state in 1867, and presumably it's seal was created around the same time. Nevertheless, the state still actively protects it's copyright on the image. Failing presentation of evidence that the seal of the state of New Jersey has been released in the public domain or proof is provided that the copyright has expired and the state of New Jersey recognizes this, the image is used here on Wikipedia under terms of Wikipedia:Fair use criteria. I am reverting your re-insertion of the image into Template:New Jersey Prep. Please do not re-insert the image without contacting the state government of New Jersey regarding copyright clearance. Thank you, --Durin 22:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if I might suggest, you could use Image:Flag of New Jersey.svg instead of the seal. The flag does not carry the same copyright encumbrances. --Durin 22:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I did a bit of investigation and found that the New Jersey state seal was redesigned in 1928. Thus, claims that it is in the public domain because of age may not be valid. --Durin 22:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Elmwood Cemetery
Hi. I noticed you moved the page Elmwood Cemetery (New Brunswick, New Jersey) to Elmwood Cemetery, New Brunswick, New Jersey and was curious why you did so. Naming conventions for locations that are not communities is generally Placename ([Location, ]State or Province) for USA and Canada locations. Is there a reason this article doesn't meet that criteria? My initial move was prompted by trying to be consistent with other listings in Elmwood Cemetery, as well as naming conventions. In your move, you didn't provide an edit summary, so I'm not certain why you moved it.
I just wanted to mention that I've started a discussion about setting a guideline for naming cemeteries. Since you've contributed to a number of cemetery articles, you may want to add your thoughts to the discussion. Thanks. Mindmatrix 14:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Richard, Thanks for adding the Wiki link to D.C. Heath and Company to my article about Walter Tenney Carleton. I'm curious how you put Walter Tenney Carleton together with D.C. Heath and Company, other than my text? Thanks again, Rbcwa 23:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your question on José L. Duomarco article
Thank you Richard for your help.
Some of my quotes are indented once and others indented twice; that was intentional: I indented once the original quote (generally in spanish), and twice, the english translation. Perhaps that's not the good-style-way to do it, but I cannot find it in the Manual.Thanks again, Rosana. --Rtierno 14:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Email
How do I activate my e-mail? — Rickyrab | Talk 15:28, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very cool! Given the brevity of the text, I'd go with the small framed version — and simply comment-out the larger ones until such time, if ever, that as the article gets expanded. But honestly, either way is good. It's nice to collaborate with you! With thanks, --Tenebrae 17:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Biography July Newsletter
The July 2006 issue of the Biography 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. plange 08:36, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
E-MAIL
I needed to confirm my e-mail, so I did. — Rickyrab | Talk 16:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I will be away for much of August, but should be back as of September. — Rickyrab | Talk 16:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Biography Newsletter August 2006
The August 2006 issue of the Biography 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. plange 01:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Since there are so many other epics, why does King Gesar in particular need a see-also reference under Iliad? Would a see-also to Epic poetry be better? Andrew Dalby 20:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remarks about Wikipedia
Hello Richard,
Thank you for your welcoming note to me as a Wiki contributor. I 'll just quickly state my thoughts on Wiki.
The pages on Peoples Temple and Jonestown Guyana have been very disturbing to me. Nothing revolts me worse that cheap sensationalism and extremely sloppy historical writing. The entry has a section that lists all the punk bands and comedians who have goofed on the PT members and their dead relatives, but it's preposterously truncated and inaccurate about what happened at JTown. I made remarks on the talk pages. As a researcher who was part of a film project on the tragedy, I would love to write a full article, but would this be "original research?" All I seem to be able to do is rant from the peanut gallery. There are contless ways by which the thing can be improved. It's nothing personal. The film I was involved in will probably be a piece of crap if they ever finish it. Last I knew, they were filming in South Africa. There's no money in straight facts sometimes.
Also, the page on Chuck Munson is rather annoying and belongs in the garbage can. Worse still is that he's a Wiki editor. It means that one of these things is not like the other, as they used to say on Sesame Street. If you believe that CM is a significant anarchist or that he is a Wiki editor with no personal agenda, you are absolutely mistaken.
You'll see me contributing material on anarchist history. I have to go slow because most of my research is entirely original, and there are scores of old anarchists that only I know anything about.
You have a background in pharmaceutical research? I'm Guinea Pig Zero. Happy to meet you.
Also, I live very near the Paul Robeson house on Walnut Steet in Philadelphia. His mural on Chestnut, btw, is lately getting blocked by stray trees that are getting tall in front of it, blocking the view of passing drivers. Maybe I'll walk over there with a saw some time. That mural is peculiar even though very impressive. It has him as a bibliophile and humanitarian (and other things that he was), but there's no mention of socialism or the union movement. Robeson would laugh his head off.
The Philadelphia City Archives, where I found Oscar Neebe's marriage record, is a techno-primitive place. I also have City Directory entries that have Oscar living here with several other Neebes, but I have to find them in my scrapbooks before tossing them into Wiki.
I hope that this note finds you well.
Robert Helms
Henrietta Lacks
Hello Richard. I wanted to apologise for removing the biography template from the Henrietta Lacks article. Somehow, in my haste, i managed to mistake it for a biography of living persons template, which was why i removed it. You can understand, i'm sure, why one might consider Lacks as a living person, but that it is probably not appropriate catagorisation per WP:BLP. Anyway, you are correct to include the template which is appropriate. Again, i'm sorry, and will be more careful in future. Rockpocket 18:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Hahnen.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Hahnen.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigDT 11:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I have struck your tag on this image and replaced it with {{PD-US}}. Under Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., "exact photographic copies of public domain images could not be protected by copyright because the copies lack originality." Thus, a scan or photocopy from an old (pre-1923 or copyright otherwise expired) newspaper article is itself public domain. BigDT 12:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go
Also please remember to sign on my talk page in the future.
O'Connor and Goldberg was a shoe store in Chicago. The economist Milton Friedman worked at the store in 1932. "O'Connor and Goldberg" is also used to describe any mixed Irish Jewish neighborhood.
References
Milton Friedman and Rose D. Friedman; Two Lucky People: Memoirs
Hi, I'm Wslack, your advocate. Just letting you know that I'm beginning my look into the case. I write more here when I have questions. --\/\/slack (talk) 02:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, after reading all the way down the AfD, I find that the Nom has been withdrawn. I anticipate a keep especially considering how the article has grown. Is there anything else I can assist you with? Right now, I'm closing the case, but it can be reopened if you still want help. I'm always available. --\/\/slack (talk) 02:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
New Jersey seal to map replacement
I did all of the counties. I figured if I did one, why not do them all? It seems to work well. Noodles the Clown 17:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if the pages are getting too cluttered, but the boxes provide a good and quick cross reference. Noodles the Clown 18:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have now categorized all the templates. Noodles the Clown 18:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We are about to merge MoS:ALL CAPS into MoS:CAPS, but before we do, we (or rather I - I can only speak for myself of course) would like to hear your opinion on the subject at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (ALL CAPS). Thanks, Shinobu 23:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Biography Newsletter September 2006
The September 2006 issue of the Biography 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. plange 00:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rescue from obscurity
I need help rescueing Ludwik Silberstein from obscurity. The article posted has only rudimentary information from Who's Who in Science, 1968. Your subscriptions may provide a proper obituary or other article exploring his life.Rgdboer 04:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Italics and Emphasis
Bleh, revert-warring on a MoS page is pretty bad; waiting for some other people to comment would be by far the better option here. Kirill Lokshin 23:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Spies-August 01.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Spies-August 01.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Wwagner 06:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the nice cleanup and headings you provided for this article. I'd been meaning to get around to expanding it for months after watching the film of M.Butterfly. I felt that the real story was ever so much more interesting. I was very susprised to find out that Kang Sheng was the fellow who strong-armed Boursicot into handing over the documents. It makes sense now, of course, given the time during which the affair began. I don't know how to upload photos, sadly. I found one of Shi in a newspaper article that was posted and would like to include it. Can you help?Lisapollison 14:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Norton's Atlas?
Are you by any chance connected to the Norton of Norton's Atlas?--Runcorn 21:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good job on aviation pioneers!
Don't think that all of the work you have been puting in on the Wright Brothers and other aviation pioneers hasn't been noticed. I hereby award you with the wikiwings from WikiProject Aircraft. Thanks! --rogerd 02:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think I just answered my own question. I see that WFS was in Alabama and WSA was in Ohio. So I presume that these are two separate subjects, right? --rogerd 14:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rutgers/Busch/Waksman stuff
Good job on starting the Busch Campus and Waksman Institute articles...you beat me to the punch on those. —ExplorerCDT 22:04, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject query
Hi there, I am doing some clean up on the list of proposed WikiProjects. I noticed that WikiProject Cemeteries of the United States has been listed for more than 60 days. Unless you object, I would like to remove it from the list since it is unlikely to receive further feedback. Thanks! --Aguerriero (talk) 18:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I do like the idea, after having visited several very old cemeteries in Boston. Well, old by American standards. :) Let me know if you ever decide to create the project. --Aguerriero (talk) 18:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
re: 6 mile run
The official sites all refer to it as D&R canal state park; I assume some sites have the name wrong, I haven't seen it cited that way in any official sources. The map links all point to princeton, near D&R park HQ, but that's pretty far south of 6 mile run. I guess the coordinates in the article are wrong, although I'm not sure what the correct ones are. -Steve Sanbeg 23:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that makes more sense. I guess navtech was a bit liberal with their naming; maybe they thought "park" was just simpler than "reservoir site". It's not on the NJ list of parks, http://www.state.nj.us/dep/parksandforests/parks/parkindex.html. It is strange that it shows up that way on the map. -Steve Sanbeg 14:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lorenz Hutschenreuther
I see you have spend some time editing and illustrating the Hutschenreuther page - fine information! But I have a question: the marks illustrated read "LHS", but the text offers a differennt reading. Would you help me along? --RPD 20:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Theodorus Jacobus Frelinghuysen
Some of the stuff I rearranged in the article, makes it flow better. Wikipedia is not a genealogical database...so we don't need to know who his grandkids are, etc. If they're notable, cat them under Frelinghuysen family and if the kids are notable write articles about his kids. Only one or two of them are notable, most aren't. Romeyn, was a minor minister in Northern Jersey in the 1740s...big deal. So what if he preached to my ancestors...extraneous genealogical information doesn't belong here. I listed his kids, that's about all that is important. (Thinking my edits to the Joyce Kilmer article were the model for my cuts on this). I also took the three sections of various periods of his life and consolidated them into one section entitled "biography". Timeline information, if important, should be converted into text, there. The Timeline b.s. is completely amateurish and potentially redundant. —ExplorerCDT 03:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why label an header in Wikipedia "biography"? Thats redundant.
Not really. Logical title. Bio, Quotes (belongs in Wikiquote), References, External links. If he was an author (unfortunately not) then I'd add a section named "Works." If I renamed "Biography" to "His Life" it would be amateurish. It makes more sense than having titles like "Birth, marriage and children," "Education and emigration" and "Death and burial" when they screw up the timeline and perhaps segregate three sentences worth of information.—ExplorerCDT 03:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, what's sparks your interest in the Frelinghuysens, Peter Ballantine, etc.? Because if you're descended from them, you're related to me and that scares the living fuck out of me. —ExplorerCDT 14:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image:8638926109296632553.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:8638926109296632553.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. Peter O. (Talk) 11:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I posted the above article for speedy deletion under db-repost, but I'm not sure now of exactly what should be done with it. To check, I'll notify Cyde, the admin that deleted it originally, and have asked my admin coach for some advice. Cheers, Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 05:13, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, the page was deleted unilaterally by Cyde, rather than through a deletion discussion. If you could leave a note on the article's talk page to explain why it should not be deleted, I will do the same (to explain my confusion over the matter). --Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 05:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Thanks for the heads up on the Forbes 400 article. I contacted editorial staff at Forbes and they refered me to their Legal departmnet. I emailed one of their Lawyers and he said that we are not allowed to list the Whole List :-(]
I tried !!
Thanks again Trade2tradewell 15:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Max and Nash
Please read the message I left on User:MadMax's talk page. This is a bothersome mess, and I regret that it is happening, but it is necessary. DS 16:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a secret tribunal. It was an emergency decision based on a matter of intellectual property, and on a nasty surprise. As a consequence of that surprise, Nash is not currently an acceptable reference for WP articles. If the nature of that surprise is not already a matter of public record, then our making it so could be actionable: I was told that a lawyer had already become involved. (That's why I'm going to the library this afternoon, by the way - to check whether the information is already in print). For now, any material whose sole source is Nash must be expunged. DS 16:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Found it
We've got a page about [our problems with Nash] - consider, for instance, the part about how Nash "repeatedly said that his books are seeded with misinformation, including incorrect facts and nonexistent people, so as to catch those who "steal" from his work".
Any Nash-based data must be expunged. He cannot be considered a reliable sourceq, point blank. DS 17:13, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
pdfs
I have some OCR software somewhere, so I would be interested if you are able to send me the pdfs. RichFarmbrough, 18:49 6 November2006 (GMT).
Nope, I've not been to the Maryland Festival... yet! I grew up near Rhinebeck, though, so it was a frequent attendance for me growing up, and now that I've gotten more seriously into knitting, crochet, and even a bit of spinning, it was a real treat to get back up there.
Thanks for the note, and for initiating that article! --Ninly 15:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lawn weeds and weed control
Hi Richard,
I noticed that you are the creator of Category:Lawn weeds, and was wondering if you'd be interested in helping to create some material on wikibooks about controlling lawn weeds. If you look at the pages in b:Category:Weed profiles, you can see some examples of where I'm trying to go.
Just a note: I'm an organic horticulturist, so I'm not as familiar with how lawn chemicals (specifically herbicides) are used, but I would like to see their use included on the weed profiles in that book. Does your chemical expertise extend to horticultural chemicals? --SB_Johnny|talk|books 12:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Actually, even if you were a chemical maximalist, that'd be good with me... the book just needs someone who understands that side of things better than I do. If there's any chemicals in particular that you can add some practical know-how about, you can just copy-paste the wikipedia article over and work on it, but make sure to request an import so we can have the wp contributors' history. You can request imports on my talk or at b:WB:RFI... import brings all versions of the article over.
I'm not sure how much you know about biochem (i.e., what exactly it is that a chemical does to inhibit and/or kill a weed, pest, or disease-causing organism), but I think having as much good info about that as possible -- in the simplest language possible -- will really be a big help in making the book a good resource for gardeners. If you need any help on the wikibooks side (administrative or otherwise), please consider me to be at your service. --SB_Johnny|talk|books 21:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Upcoming NYC Meetup
You might want to know when the next meetup was being organized in New York City. Plan for Saturday, 9 December 2006. While you're at it. Come help us decide on a restaurant. See: Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC. Spread the word. Thanks. —ExplorerCDT 03:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mason Gross
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Without implying in any fashion a sense of ownership, please stop fucking up article I've worked on by adding things that don't belong (timeline, bad form in creating two-sentence sections, etc.). I've told you before, and in this case the information you segregated as "timeline" is already in the article, and if it isn't figure a way to incorporate it in the text. How many times do I have to tell you to stop such unjustified changes. STOP renaming articles in violation of the guidelines regarding naming (common names, for one), sectioning off short one, two or three sentence sections, adding puerile or redundant "timelines" and other "fluff" that I've brought up to you before. Further reversions or edits in this regard will be reported as vandalism. —ExplorerCDT 23:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Answering to your AMA request
Hi! I'm your AMA advocate in your issue with ExplorerCDT. I understand you want a third party to come in to give his opinion on this matter. You could list your dispute in Third opinion; or maybe, you might want to list a Request for Comment, but this is more "serious". Take a look around them and see what would you like better. --Neigel von Teighen 17:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, first let's get the diffs so we can begin to prepare the first step (almost surely a Request for Comment). If we enter a RfC, the idea is that both parties present their evidence and then other users give their support to whomever they think is right... It's the first step on Wikipedia's Dispute Resolution system (see here). At least for now, I would not recommend you an informal mediation unless he starts it. Anyway, you shouldn't scare because of those warnings; Cristopher is not an administrator, so he can't block anyone. --Neigel von Teighen 17:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Robert Wood Johnson III
I added a Corporate Chairman subsection to the Johnson & Johnson page. You can see RWJIII never lead the company. I am not sure how accurate the succession box on his page is because he may have only been a president of a subsidiary. I do not know the company very well. TonyTheTiger 20:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have alot of stuff of mine deleted. I've been banned twice. I don't understand the copyright tags. I always put down the website I get it from and the tag I think is right, but it turns out to be wrong at times and User:RadioKirk always bans me. I also work for http://www.findagrave.com/ and I have never had an image deleted their I got from another site. I really don't get it. I just want to contribute. -User:The Mystery Man
US Army Signal Corps page
I don't know who you think you are or what the Manual of Style has to do with the etiquette for the mission statement on the site's page. Please do not try to edit or change the format already in place.
Whats the rule for military rank capitalization? Is its always capitalized as a person's title, then uncapitalized when used elsewhere?
Such as: "He worked with Captain John Doe, and several lieutenants" --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 00:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are various rules. The modern United States Army, I am told, insists on capitalizing them in all instances. Since I write about the American Civil War, the interests of the current U.S. Army do not apply. Therefore, I use common formal English usage, which is endorsed by WP:MOSCL#Titles and other entities, such as the Chicago Manual of Style. I have those rules described in User:Hlj/CWediting#Military ranks and you are welcome to apply them to your writing as well. Hal Jespersen 00:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You should promote your guide to an MoS suggestion. Its well thought out, the existing one doesn't have enough in it. Where in the US are you, did you get hit by the big storm this week? Its in NJ now, wind advisory, its 65 degrees as the warm air is pushed ahead of the storm at 60 miles per hour. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 00:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is actually a discussion underway in WP:ACW to adopt my style guide, but since it is so specific to the Civil War, I would never attempt to enter the maelstrom of the mainstream Wikipedia style arena. I am quite indifferent about the adoption effort because I would rather establish and live by my own rules, rather than trying to convince others to codify them. Since I have written or edited probably over 500 ACW articles, I have established somewhat of a de facto standard without argument. The other really prolific ACW editor, Scott Mingus, also uses my style, so together we have it pretty well covered.
I live in Northern California, where it was in the mid-60s with sunny skies today. I did grow up in New Jersey, however, so I can feel your pain. :-) Do me a favor. If you would like to continue corresponding about this or other issues, e-mail me (there is a link in the yellow box on the top of my user page) because it is easier than this back-and-forth cutting and pasting. Hal Jespersen 00:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I stumbled onto this exchange and noted my name. I indeed follow most of Hal's style guide, as it provides uniformity. Every now and them I slip into my writing style that my publisher prefers, and have to stop and remember to use Wiki MPS. Scott Mingus 12:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationale for Image:KathrynJohnston.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:KathrynJohnston.jpg. The image description 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.
Email
When are you going to turn on your email? And Congratulations on you POTD --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Email had worked in the past, not sure when they changed the policy on that. I'd prefer to talk here, but if email is needed, I just authenticated and enabled it. The featured picture of GCT wasn't taken by me, I just put it up for nomination. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 02:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Military deletion
I'm not sure exactly.... but in most cases, I'm trying to get those articles kept. Sharkface217 22:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bias against lists
It appears that the recent wave of AfDs on military event lists was motivated by an anti-list bias. The main arguments used were that the "lists are difficult to maintain and are incomplete". This is ludicrous since lists are easier to maintain than both categories and articles. They're easier than categories because lists are centralized and have built-in tracking while categories are decentralized and have no tracking (i.e., no edit histories). Lists are easier to maintain than articles because updating articles requires more grammar-based editing, while most lists have no grammar. In the case of lists with annotations, the editing is still simpler than for articles because you don't have to deal with paragraph structure - most annotations are a simple phrase or sentence. As for incompleteness, that argument is totally irrelevant as a reason for deletion of any page, as the entire encyclopedia is a work-in-progress, and with the exception of "the stub" being the minimum-sized page start, there is no minimum on how much a user can contribute with each save. The Transhumanist 01:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[reply]
Battle list restructuring effort
I just noticed that the person who nominated the battle lists for deletion is also taking a more direct approach at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#List re-constructing, to what end exactly is unclear at this time. Unfortunately, there's no way to tell from the talk pages of the lists that a discussion is taking place about them. I was lucky to have spotted it. The Transhumanist 02:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[reply]
As of 2006
Since as of 2006 redirects us to 2006, wouldn't it be easier to just skip the redirect? Bgold4 17:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fédération Aéronautique Internationale
Firstly thank you for the contribution to the FAI article. Why out of all the available records, did you choose those three? Are they just ones that interest you. It seems that there is an enormous task if we add all the current records and in any case this would not be the appropriate place. Same message left on the article's talk page. JMcC 08:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that creating tables is a much better way of presenting data, but please do not do it just for the sake of it. Just lobbing in three random records does not bode well for the article's future structure. I think a better approach for the FAI article would be a list of the various types of aircraft, whose records it administers, eg ballooning, gliding, powered aircraft etc. Thereafter articles called Ballooning records, Gliding records etc could be created for the most interesting ones of each type. In this way people with an interest in just ballooning records would have a link from the Ballooning article. In the end, retyping the whole FAI list of records into Wikipedia is unlikely to be rewarding. It would also quickly get out of date, so there will be a natural limit to the records cited. JMcC 10:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Businesspeople
I posted my opinion. Thanks for the notice. I am not sure if you felt I would have an opinion because I am AA or because of the category work I have done on families. The answer would be both, but more so because of the latter. TonyTheTiger 21:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for inviting me. It served as a good notice that I have to add the Category:American businesspeople or a subcategory to many of my articles. You do good work on minor notable historical businesspeople. I need people like you to help me get some of my articles cleaned up. TonyTheTiger 23:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit to Turboencabulator
Thank you very much for finding the quote from Time on the Turboencabulator! I had looked for it, but was unable to find it in their archives. Eliot 16:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help with the posting. You mentioned archive data. I have done several bios that have incomplete birth and death dates and places. Some of these bios are for living people. What kind of resources are you offering? Do you have an article you would like me to take a look at in return? P.S. I am trying to generate traffic here so if you have a chance place a vote for me at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/COTW so that others will perceive it as more lively. Since you also work on minor historical figures you probably understand how difficult it is to get perfect info of this type. Here is my list. I don't know what you can do with it.
Thanks for the help. Watching you work, I realize that I am not using the proper format for birth and death dates. I had been making the locations parenthetical and they should be part of the main body as you make them according to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Dates_of_birth_and_death. The NY Times seems great for deaths. What about births? What resources are there? TonyTheTiger 02:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure send the Busch stuff to the discussion pages for perusal. I have not done formal work on my family history. My mother and I were born in New Orleans, where my parents met. My father (1957 Athlete of the Year for the Republic of Panama) was from the City of Colon in the Province of Colon in the Republic of Panama. I imagine foreign research is a totally different animal. TonyTheTiger 02:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't you just contribute to the bio since there are all sorts of translation gymnastics to get the info to me. I use FF as my browser.TonyTheTiger 05:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see the file. Where is it?
You are so modest. You have done such great research on your other bios. I do not think I would do a better job. If you want me to look at it though I will eventually get around to it. TonyTheTiger 15:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to view the files when I clicked on them to blow them up. I am on holiday schedule. I drove from Chi to Memphis today. I have a free wifi connection for 2.5 hours at the Memphis library before it closes. I will be travelling all day on Fri and Tuesday. My mother and I (both born in New Orleans) will be visiting displaced relatives in Houston for the holidays. TonyTheTiger 00:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you are saying the file is actually loaded as an Image file and called as a Media file? It is nowhere to be found as an image file. Is that correct? TonyTheTiger 04:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Per your email
I do not have email turned on presently because the only email I have would provide my Real Life Name- not an ideal condition. I notice your interest in beer barons. My high school physics teacher said they used to hawk a brand of beer in baseball parks which sounded like "Greasy-dick" What could that have been? Something like "Griesedieck?" Regards. Edison 06:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As for becoming obnoxious in defense of any position on Wikipedia, it is all too easy. Just take a chill pill, walk away for 12 hours or so, and let the other person have the last word. It changes nothing. Let the testosterone and adrenaline disperse. It is better than being goaded into a NPA violation. Edison 06:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My beer-baron hero is August Schell. When the Sioux attacked New Ulm Minnesota in 1862, he somehow induced them to burn down all his competitors' breweries, but spare his, which makes a fine product to this day. "Mach schnell, kauf' Schell!" Edison 06:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See[1]"Sommolier News" where it says the Schell brewery was "untouched" during the attack becaue of the "kindness" of Ms. Schell. Coincidence? I don't THINK so. It is all speculation, because no Schells or Sioux have ever come forward to say the destruction of the others and the sparing of Schell's was a setup. Edison 06:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your apology
Thanks very much for your thoughtful apology. In turn, I apologise for the tone of my reply. We agree that these people's ethnic identity is worthy of Wikipedia categorisation, I think it's just the category intersection that is under discussion. --RobertG ♬ talk 10:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Media files
Those files are killer on my eyes. I don't think I want to spend much time on them. TonyTheTiger 21:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Media Files
How do you post media files? TonyTheTiger 02:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You ROCK!!!
Thank you for your help with my Whip Jones article. As a new user I was really frustrated with the first attempt and the feedback I received. I do not plan to edit the article, as I still don't get what was so offensive when I started.
If you would like to continue adding/fixing it, I WELCOME your edits!!! Please see Talk:Whip Jones for material and quotes.
I love the idea of inclusionist wikipedians, sign me up.
I suggest the bios of people should be in proportion to their importance. The details of their work or other notability, obviously, but also the details of their personal life, unless that is their notability. I am concerned about such things as listing all directorships. or divorces. Just a suggestion.DGG 00:18, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and you got me started trying to clarify for myself what I have in mind. So it got rather long, and I moved my answer, & your qy, & some other stuff to asubpage of its own at User:DGG/bios
Thank you for your help with the bio on James William McGhee – it looks like its going to be deleted anyway.
I am a visually impaired person and I have attempted to upload as much of the supporting evidence as possible through my scanner reading machine, please tell me if the supporting documentation hasn’t arrived. For Paul Ashley Chase I uploaded an obit from Warner Brothers, For Maria Hart I provided three internet sources, a copy of a Los Angeles Times article and reference to Hollywood Reporter and Varity articles. For James W. McGhee I gave you 5 patent numbers and a reference to the Canadian patent office and reference to a LA Times article dated March 17, 1942. I also uploaded the original copies. For George L. McGhee I provided a copy of an e-mail from the 30,000 member professional organization he founded.
I am in a house with several dozen pin-in drapery hooks. I know there all over the world. Sort of like the light bulb. Don’t you think Wikipedia’s notability standards are a little high?
Mjmcghee
Annette Richardson Dinwoodey
With all the work you've done on the Annette Richardson Dinwoodey article, I'm thinking we should put it in your user space if it's voted down! I hope they're paying you something because you really do a helluva great job researching and writing articles... and I'm pretty sure that's not the first time I've said that to you. —Wknight94 (talk) 05:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did just now and that's great food for thought! I think I'd weight things a little differently. Off the top of my head, I would definitely give category 1 quite a bit more priority than category 2. But, like your intro there says, it would also depend on how featured the subject was. I've seen people claim notability just because they gave a single quote in a national news story... I tend to go more by gut feeling which is probably not a great approach. I also claim victory in cases like this where the AFD itself results in drastic improvement in the article. I never go to AFD with that intention but, if the result is keep after drastic improvement then everyone wins. —Wknight94 (talk) 05:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Point system
Hey, I stumbled on User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Point system for notabilityand I think it's a great idea. I have actually mulled over a similar system myself but never got around to writing it up. I've been involved quite a bit in deletions and AfDs, and I've always thought that there needs to be a systematic (if not algorithmic) procedure for determining notability. The only thing I'd add to such a system, off the top of my head, is to somehow differentiate between a topic being the main focus of an article as opposed to simply noted in an article. Great stuff, keep it up!! --- Deville (Talk) 03:32, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
RfA
Have you considered another run at RfA? I looked into it a bit and find your contributions excellent, though I am puzzled by the block log. Let me know your thoughts. - crzcrztalk 23:35, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I live in Jersey. Getting your bags sliced in Russia is a rite of passage, congratulations. As to RfA, let me know, and we'll have another go at it. Those are some interesting block reasons... - crzcrztalk 09:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to cut in here. Richard, FYI, if a redirect titled R has only one line in its history and that line is to redirect it to an article titled A, then A can be moved to R without sysop privileges. The software won't even prompt you about it. It's called a "move over redirect" and you can read about it at WP:MOVE#Moving over a redirect. You can see it in the move logs for a page, e.g. here. OTOH, if R has more than one line in its history or it redirects somewhere besides A, then R would need to be deleted before A can be moved to R, meaning sysop privileges would be needed first. Apparently in the midst of everyone screaming at you last July, no one bothered to explain that to you, which is unfortunate. I'm also curious about your page moves to include middle names. Was it decided somewhere that we should include middle names? —Wknight94 (talk) 14:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - Solveig Fiske
Thanks for improving the article on Solveig Fiske. I see that we have several overlapping interests, and thanks to the debacle over poor bishop Fiske, I am signing up with the inclusionists. Also, you look really familiar to me? Do you live in Maplewood? --Leifern 14:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your Help Needed
Can you assist User:Kevin Murray with his air force bio on Aubrey Hornsby and the related notability issues. He's left me a message looking for citability.
Hi Richard,
I noticed you added the end-date for Thomas Butler King's second stint in Congress. Just wondering if you found another source other than the Congressional Biographies as I have been looking for another source to verify those dates for Congressmen. King's Congressional Bio states he resigned in 1850, which seems to usually mean stepping down before the end of the term (March 3 in those days as you know) based on some of the other Georgia Congressmen I have worked on recently. Just curious, as I'd really like to have a second source to cross-reference on future articles and edits to existing ones. Thanks --Roswell native 05:49, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hornsby
I live east of San Francisco CA.
I am not related to Hornsby; I found this article in the deletion list and decided that it was worth some effort. I have sent an email to Hornsby's grandson to see whether the family has some more information. I suspect that the article was begun by someone with personal knowledge.
Since you are working on the article, you may want to join the discussion on the deletion.
The explanation you seek can be found at Wikipedia:NavFrame. In short, the {{Navigation}} template used to implement {{G8}} uses a CSS class called "NavFrame". Combined with site-wide JavaScript, this provides the collapsing/expanding elements. I believe if there are 3 or more template on a page using "NavFrame", all of them are automatically collapsed. See Wikipedia:NavFrame for the precise template count that triggers this behavior. Mike Dillon 03:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Request Assistance
Need help on article... added picture you put on page into infobox for Annette Richardson Dinwoodey but can't get that writing gone that's above and below picture. Thanks for helping out on this article. I don't know much about how to do this yet. Thanks! Jlrich 03:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Stop restoring bad edits to the Joyce Kilmer article. Your div style will be turned back when this article goes to FAC in the next week or two because it's unacceptable. Second, what's your hang up with "the [[World War I|first World War]]". If that's all of what you insist upon changing, you might as well go search for a shrubbery. —ExplorerCDT 09:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Stop also putting in information about the location (seemingly birthplaces) of Kilmer's parents that could potential confuse the flow and content of the article to readers. It's not relevant to Joyce Kilmer himself, and should not be in his article. Feel free to add that information to articles regarding Frederick and Annie Kilmer should you decide to start them. However, it is not relevant and will continue to be reverted from the Joyce Kilmer article.
Your reference, while appreciated, is overly redundant and against the provision in the MoS regarding over-referencing certain points. We already have three references for this statement, we don't need a fourth. Thanks, but no thanks. —ExplorerCDT 09:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List of films with similar themes and release dates AfD
Hi, you've expressed an opinion in the deletion discussion of this article. I've recently suggested a compromise in hopes of improving the article while keeping both sides happy, and would appreciate if you could revisit the issue. Thanks. --Wafulz 18:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fish
Did I say, that it's a vast improvement? Well, just in case: It's a vast improvement. Good work. RichFarmbrough, 09:56 10 January2007 (GMT).
I had always susupected this was like Otis Toole. Yes, I have the gmail account, "farmbrough", which forwards to my main mail account. I also use gmail as my SMTP server, becasue so many things reject an SMTP server on an ADSL conx. RichFarmbrough, 15:31 10 January2007 (GMT).
Just installed it at work, Looks fine, although replicates AIM, GAIM, SKYPE etc... RichFarmbrough, 16:02 10 January2007 (GMT).
I never (rarely) go into the gmail page, as I get everything on Thunderbird at home. RichFarmbrough, 16:08 10 January2007 (GMT).
Well the idea was that everything got duplicated on gmail and the desktop, but it didn't work out, and I didn't need it to. It is a good way of doing things though, and I trust Goooles backup process more than my own. RichFarmbrough, 16:19 10 January2007 (GMT).
I've put an HTML warning at the top of the article. Probably we should also report the standard story in a section of it's own, in these cases. RichFarmbrough, 19:40 11 January2007 (GMT).
Citations
I am afraid not, at least not automatically, but I am in a discussion with another wikipedia developer to rewrite cite.php to include an ibid. system. I'll share this with him. --Dirk BeetstraTC 22:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 22:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey!
I read your entry at biomembers. If you would like a co-author to help develop a biography on a low level notoriety person to meet Wikipedia notability requirements, please feel free to post a note on my talk page or email me. -- Jreferee 02:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I added a post at the bottom of the Joyce Kilmer talk page that adds Template:Biography#Marriage_and_children to the discussion. Hope this helps! -- Jreferee 18:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC) P.S. If you want to make an argument for including the father, Wikiproject Biography supports Template:Biography which identifies Charles Darwin as an approved Wikiproject Biography comparison article when resolving the issue of which relatives to include in the notable person's article. The other comparison articles on the Joyce Kilmer talk page are not Wikiproject Biography approved and thus offer no Wikipedia support one way or another on the issue. -- Jreferee 18:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image tagging for Image:HaroldLloyd_044.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:HaroldLloyd_044.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:
To get an idea of what description you may need to add when uploading an image, check out the Image:David holt.jpg which I uploaded. -- Jreferee 18:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NRoHP
Funny you should ask right now, as I'm going through some of the NJ ones. What I did was put our project banner on any talk page that had [[Category:Registered Historic Places in statename]] on it's mainpage. Then I'm going thru to assess the articles. I just happened to be looking at the Meadows Foundation, and see that it's an organization that administrates NRHP sites (amongst other things). So technically, no, it's not on the NRHP itself. But since it's involved with the sites, it could fall under the umbrella of the project. I was going to leave the banner, but it can be removed; it's not a big deal either way.
Mind you, I did just remove the Registered Historic Places in New Jersey category from the Van Liew-Suydam House, as I can't find it on the National Register anywhere. It's not even listed as an "Also known as". If that's not the case, apologies; I'm just going by what the available resources say.
I just added the project's infobox, though, to the Van Wickle House, and assessed it as a start for the NJ project and ours. Hope this info helps. --Ebyabe 20:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And yep, it's that field, entered as "| refnum =". Everything you need to know is on the talk page for the template.
I'll respond in a bit about districts, whilst I compose my thoughts. --Ebyabe 21:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that's right, I had that discussion; it's at Talk:Tech Tower. There ya go! --Ebyabe 21:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the refnum field was a relatively recent addition, along with the architecture-related ones. They can be easily added to any article where they may be missing. As far as adding the infobox to Six Miles, I'd say yes. It'd be nice to have every NRHP site have it's own separate article, but that day's quite a ways off. Until then, having it as a sub-section of an existing article is fine. It can always be broken off later when the NRHP place becomes its own article. I'll go ahead and add it. I also changed the link on the NJ Registered Historic Places list to point to it. --Ebyabe 22:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Albert Fish
The appropriate header has been added to the peer review transclusion file. --Allen3talk 17:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose you mean because of my edits to HLH? ;-) It was Primetime though! -Shai-kun 04:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
License tagging for Image:Bela Lugosi 01.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bela Lugosi 01.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. 05:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Patent Medicines
Hi Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (and what a very specific & precise username that is!) ... I have brought a category you created (Category:Patent Medicines to CFD for renaming to Category:Patent medicines per wikipedia alphabetization conventions. Anything can happen in these discussions, including deletion, so you might want to drop by the CFD and give your thoughts. --lquilter 21:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aviators
I've been trying to expand articles on early women aviators and simultaneously reformatting them to WikiProject Biography standards. I've noticed you've done sterling work on several of the American aviators in whom I'm interested, and to whose articles I'll be adding information, and I wondered if you'd be offended if I reformatted the articles at the same time? I could leave them but that probably only means someone else will reformat them later. For examples of my previous reformatting you could see Raymonde de Laroche, Marie Marvingt and Hélène Dutrieu. Random Passer-by 01:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I'll add the reformatting to my To Do list. (I'm not an American. I'm an insomniac European.) Random Passer-by 01:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've been editing female aviators in chronological order of notable actions so British, French, Australian, and Belgian women received my attention before the Americans. Psst... American spellings and dates for American biographies and British/Commonwealth spellings and dates for British, European and Commonwealth biographies so "licence" is correct sometimes. This also means you might want to check my spelling on the American articles when I'm done to make sure it conforms to American standards. :-) Random Passer-by 02:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have a problem with honour/honor. I know the difference but I still spell it wrongly. "It's just one of those things, one of those crazy things...." Random Passer-by 13:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It might be too soon for a GA review since it looks like a peer review is pending. In my view, each sentence should have a footnote (expect those in the lead section). Otherwise, how is a reviewing editor supposed to know where the information came from to be able to verify that information? The copyright material in the article footnotes needs to be delted. The footnotes in the article need to be revised to be proper footnotes. I revised footnote 5 to give you an example of what I mean. Also, if you haven't done so, you may want to go through each of these links looking for material to add to the article. This should give you a start. Once you addressed all the peer review statements, then the article may be ready for GA review. -- Jreferee 16:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From Saffron: "On the other hand, traditional Kashmiri legend states that saffron first arrived sometime during the 11th and 12th centuries AD, when two foreign and itinerant Sufi ascetics, Khwaja Masood Wali and Hazrat Sheikh Shariffudin, wandered into Kashmir. The foreigners, having fallen sick, beseeched a cure for illness from a local tribal chieftain. When the chieftain obliged, the two holy men reputedly gave them a saffron crocus bulb as payment and thanks. To this day, grateful prayers are offered to the two saints during the saffron harvesting season in late autumn. The saints, indeed, have a golden-domed shrine and tomb dedicated to them in the saffron-trading village of Pampore, India. However, the Kashmiri poet and scholar Mohammed Yusuf Teng disputes this. He states that Kashmiris had cultivated saffron for more than two millennia. Indeed, such ancient indigenous cultivation is alluded to in Kashmiri Tantric Hindu epics of that time.[28]" There is only one reference for the whole paragraph.
From Barack Obama: "Fornek, Scott. "If Obama runs, I'll campaign for him, Winfrey says," Chicago Sun-Times, September 28, 2006. There is no parenthesis for periodical listings.
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Nelson-Reese.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Nelson-Reese.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 13:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationale for Image:Gould-Anna 01.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Gould-Anna 01.jpg. The image description 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.
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 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.
In general, you're right about Sr. and Jr. applying during the older person's lifetime. In this case, Jr and II appear to be different people, cousins or something like that. I will try to get more details. --Eastmain 13:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello -- you may recall that in mid-December 2006 you and many others voted to undeleted "Category:Jewish-American businesspeople" which had been unjustly and swiftly deleted by a rogue administrator in early December 2006; proper debate/voting was not done and huge amounts of data was lost when this category was deleted, many of the people in that category losing their Jewish identity entirely because of this. This particular unjust category deletion happened in early December 2006, see: [2].
This unjust category deletion was later rectified when you along with others overwhelmingly voted to overturn the deletion and relist the category, see:
[3]. However, at this time neither admins. nor others bothered to begin re-adding the names that had been lost/merged when the category was originally deleted.
However, the category was not immediately recreated -- it wasn't relisted until many-many days after it had been voted back in to existence, and I had to bug User:RobertG in order to get it relisted, see: [4]. Also, since that category's former data had already been entirely merged in to "Category:American businesspeople" it effectively meant that in order to rebuild the unjustly deleted category the people that had built it up over many months had to start from scratch since a list of the former names in the category were never provided so that users could re-add them. The category nor a list of the names that were formerly in it is no longer available, or this info is only accessible by admins.
Finally, even though the category deletion was properly overturned by you and others, it was renominated for deletion AGAIN on the 10 of January 2007 (only days after it had been recreated) -- it was then deleted 17 January 2007, with NONE of the people that had formerly voted to relist the category voting this time around; see: [5].
I am wondering if there is anything that can be done about this? Are you able to obtain a list of the names that were formerly in the category, or are only admins. able to do that? Can you or someone else try to have the category relisted? Is there a way to undelete the category again, given that it was deleted BOTH TIMES under rather dubious circumstances, with those that voted to undelete it the first time not even knowing to vote the second time or even that it had been renominated for deletion?
Thanks for any info/help that you can provide. --172.161.68.238 15:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"What links here" bug
Hi. You posted a bug report in April of last year at Bug 5691. I developed the same concern as you recently, and discovered Bug 1392 (your bug report was closed as a duplicate of this). Just thought you should know.--Pharos 08:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tighter Requirements
Your comments are much appreciated. I invite you to edit and remove anything you consider does not belong on the list. I was thinking about removing the entire section under mainstream medicine. But I want to leave this to more experienced editors. I welcome any suggestions for the list for improvement. I will leave it up to experienced editors from this point moving forward. This list just needs experienced to improve and focus this list. Thanks, --QuackGuru 04:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A.K. Miller
Nice to see someone else can contribute to this! And nice job finding the NY Times article. I've had trouble getting references, thought I'd exhausted them all. TheQuandry 02:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
GA Nomination
The article Albert Fish you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Albert Fish for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Soldan 17:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed your name on a recent AfD, you may be interested in this: [6] The page you wanted to keep was removed by a well organized group of wikieditors. Travb (talk) 19:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Julian Information
I only take classes in a building named after him -- I don't know enough to contribute to the article without significant research. If you're interested in editing the article, the DPU website has excellent information, and I believe I linked it in the external links, which you can probably access through my contributions. Archaeo 21:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look over the article and review it right now, give me about 15-20 minutes. I'm a stickler for redirects, link repair, and wikilinks so it may need some fixes based on that. Don't fix anything yet until I review it, that way we both don't waste our time. --Nehrams2020 03:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have reviewed it with some suggestions. Please fix them and let me know when you are done so I can pass it. --Nehrams2020 03:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For the redirects, direct the page to the actual article. You don't have to change the wikilink necessarily, but you can do it like this: [[Extremism|religious mania]] or [[Capital punishment|death penalty]]. For the boogeyman link you don't have to change it in the article but again do: [[boogeyman|boogey man]]. Let me know if this doesn't make sense or if you need further clarification. --Nehrams2020 05:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find an official policy, but it does make the article finer-tuned and better for future page moves. If you have a link that redirects to a page and that page is going to be moved, it would be better to already be linked to that page so the editor that moved the page can successfully fix all of the redirects. If you don't want to fix the redirects, that's fine, it just makes it easier to get from page to page. Also, the editor that delisted the article reminded me of the changes he suggested, so make sure all of those are fixed as well. --Nehrams2020 19:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not a professional writer (although someone recently offered me a part-time job based on my Wikipedia edits). I just picked it up by osmosis from my love of reading.
Okay, I verified my email. Now, if I only knew how to use it...
Percy Julian
I was about to promote this, but someone just put two cite needed tags on it, see their edit summary. Since I'm not a chemical expert, need you to look at these issues and address properly. Let me know when you're done.Rlevse 20:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Numbers game
Mr. Norton,
I've been working on the linage of policy operators in New York City and recently linked the eight year gap between Peter H. Matthews and the Harlem numbers racket under Casper Holstein and Stephanie St. Clair to its eventual takeover by Dutch Schultz and the Genovese crime family (as well as extending the series to Reuben Parsons and John Frink). If any of this information is innacurate, please let me know. MadMax 00:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Norton,
I've done some revising of the linage, particularly seperating Coppola and Salerno, however I can't seem to be able to find any information regarding who took over the numbers racket following Salerno's imprisonment in 1986 (someone may have taken over for him however after becoming head of the Genovese family during the 1970s). MadMax 09:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Joyce Kilmer note
I fixed the note you tried so it works now (took me a while - I'd never done one before). The sibling info still needs a ref, which can be added to the note itself. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 21:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Helping out with the Unassessed Wikipedia Biographies
Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of [unassessed articles] tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 21:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Michael Latham Powell
Moved from Michael Powell (director) to Michael Latham Powell. Why?
It used to be at Michael Latham Powell but as the discussion page said back in April last year, he was only called that on official documents. He was, and still is, known as just Michael Powell. That's why we moved it to Michael Powell (director), because of the other people with the same name. I doubt anyone will ever search for him by the name Michael Latham Powell. -- SteveCrook 15:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But now it doesn't fit in with the style of all the other names on the Michael Powell' disambiguation page -- SteveCrook 16:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Glucine
I moved the page to Glulisine; glucine is a mineral, and I couldn't find any hits to glucine = glulisine. Regards, Flyguy649talkcontribs 19:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiproject Biography March 2007 Newsletter
The March 2007 issue of the Biography 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. Mocko13 22:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mr Norton, the article you created on parasitic cancer has been nominated for deletion on the grounds that it's a neologism unused in the literature. I disagree, but do not have the requisite knowledge. Would you care to step in and defend it? DS 03:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Harold Augustin Calahan
How have you been. What does the AFD comment "I only need 3" mean? TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 18:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Question
Just out of curiosity, are you related to Walter O'Malley, as I see you have contributed a great deal to his articles and other O'Malley articles. Thank you for your time. --Josh 15:23, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
License tagging for Image:Lindauer Kershaw 1929 023b.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Lindauer Kershaw 1929 023b.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. 07:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Frederick K. Humphreys
Actually User:Skinwalker had tagged your article on Frederick K. Humphreys for deletion. I found it when I was looking through the articles in the category as part of starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Homeopathy and removed the prod tag because I didn't think it was deserved. I have a question for you; how are you finding images for your articles? They are very well illustrated. Abridgedtalk 22:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. Hey, any interest in helping out with homeopathy articles? There are some 19th century homeopaths like Constantine Hering and some early 20th century ones like Herbert A Roberts and Margaret Lucy Tyler who really need articles. Abridgedtalk 20:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
re: Judith Ann Roberts
I'm interested in your comments on the article I nominated for deletion. As a relative newcomer I have a few questions.
1 Where is the burden of notability? I came across the article as part of the copyedit process, culling through lists of articles needing attention. I'm sure I could have found some sources for it (especially as it reads like a copyvio from a 'true crime' website), but it made no claim to notability, no claim that it led to changes in law or public policy, things like Amber Alert (noted in my nom), involved no famous person, etc. Is every murder victim that is sourcable and verifiable (I can think of few that are not reported in newspapers) thus notable and worthy of inclusion in WP? Rape victim? Armed robbery, assault, etc?
You are thinking notability means worthy of inclusion into a traditional encyclopedia that is limited by space, so that only the most widely circulated information is included. The Wikipedia notability is determined by the press picking up a concept, or the story, and publishing it. The rules are at least two reliable, mainstream sources are needed that are independent of the subject.
2 Is every article, no matter how flawed, worthy of inclusion? And if so, where is the burden on sourcing, etc? With the next person who reads it? Does this include copyright violation? I have nominated several articles for WP:Speedy and WP:AFD because they were copied from web pages. Would you say that I should have instead deleted the copyvio and then researched and written the article myself? Is it 'laziness' that I did not?
If you thought it was a copyright violation, it could have been flagged with the proper tag, and someone would have reviewed it. It seems to be worded as if it was copied from a newspaper article.
3 There was a recent AfD for Arabella Kennedy the stillborn daughter of John and Jackie Kennedy. The result was to delete and merge to a Kennedy article, would you have kept it? A close friend of mine also had a stillborn child, it's death was reported (as an obit) in two major metropolitan newspapers. Worthy of an article?
You are confusing an obituary with a funeral notice, a funeral notice is a paid advertisement, and is not reviewed by the editors of a newspaper, and so is not a published source, any more than an ad is. Also a delete and a merge are different. In a merge the information is kept and the article name is redirected to the larger article where the information is merged. When that is done it isn't about notability, its about keeping information in a single article, nothing is deleted.
Please don't think I am being argumentative, I see inclusionist/deletionist arguments every day and on a spectrum, I would consider myself on the inclusionist side, but surely there has to be some limit. As an analogy, I would include every instance of man bites dog, but not every instance of dog bites man. Thanks for your thoughts on this! --killing sparrows 04:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the points I raised.
I think, in relation to #1, that my point was more in regard to notabilty, than verifiability. Is there a point where we become an archive of minutiae rather than a compendium of information. I know, this begs the question, what is information?, but still perhaps you see what I'm getting at. Are not the sources (newspapers, etc.), increasingly stored digitally, sufficient for much of the commonplace people, events and such? Are you concerned that the trend in journalism as infotainment, and the slant towards the tittilating and lurid (sex sells and if it bleeds, it leads) as opposed to the thoughtful and substantial concern you? I know of many people doing notable, important work in a variety of fields that will never be worthy of a WP entry based on published sources, yet a murderer or the victim of one (surely hundreds of people a day in the US alone!), a porn 'star,' a Pokemon character, bands or elementary schools all are easily sourced, but are they notable. My examples are of course influenced by my own interests, and more so by my disinterests, but again I think you will understand my underlying question.
Regarding #2, this is really just about process, and my reference to copyvio issues is general, not about this specific article. If an article is found that is clearly a copyvio, my impulse is to delete, using of course accepted WP policies and procedures. I have had people imply that having found such a violation I should have rewritten the article myself! In essence that anyone finding a seriously flawed article (I am speaking here to copyvio and totally unsourced material with no claim to notability, not articles that are just poorly written) should either fix it or mind their own business. I have indeed done that on occasion, in several different ways, but isn't the burden more appropriately on the creator than the reader?
On #3 I agree and see the distinction.
My interests in WP are as much about it's substance as it's form, I hope to see it become something significant to our world. Disk space is probably unlimited, but the human commodity of time, necessary to copyedit, source, verify and maintain a quality resource, is not.
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. I'm sure you have a real life, as do I, but if you have any comments on the preceeding, I would enjoy reading them when you have the time. --killing sparrows 04:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:2003-11677.jpg. 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.
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 16:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. |EPO| 16:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
AfD votes
Before you continue voting "Speedy Keep," you might want to review the criteria for speedy keep, and then consider revising your vote. As none of the AfDs you voted on fall under any of the criteria for speedy keep, the closing admin will not count your opinion as it stands. Thanks, Rockstar (T/C) 03:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Categories vs Lists
Hi there,
I noticed your comment on the AfD for List of 3-D films and was wondering if you could give me your thoughts on the cat vs list concept. I read WP:Lists and WP:Cat and frankly can't see the advantage of one over the other. This list does seem useful to me, it seems to very easily meet the criteria for a good list. If I were looking for info about 3-D movies it would be a great place to start. But a category seems to have the same advantages. I'm going to ask the same question of the person stating the cat option is better. Thanks!--killing sparrows 05:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The WikiProject Biography Newsletter: Issue II - April 2007
The April 2007 issue of the WikiProject Biography 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 BetacommandBot 19:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Archiving
Hi, that's a big talk page you have. :) Check out WP:ARCHIVE in case you'd like to make it a bit more manageable. Have a good day! Pax:Vobiscum 09:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has nominated August H. Auer Jr., an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/August H. Auer Jr. and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 18:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When you see a copyright problems tag on an article, DO NOT REMOVE IT. If you do, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Whilst you may have no regard for copyright, Wikipedia does, and we don't let people edit here who abuse it. Yes, as you said in you edit summary [7], you can't copyright facts. But the wording of the text describing the facts is copyrightable, and in this case IS copyright - and your reversion violated it.
Now, it so happens that since you did that, I have managed to confirm that the copyright holder has allowed the text to be used under a compatible licence - but the tagging of the article should have remained in place pending that confirmation. Don't remove these things again without checking with the user or administration who placed them.--Docg 22:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please study copyright, and Wikipedia processes for suspected copyright violation=
From Wikipedia:Copyright "If some of the content of a page really is an infringement, then the infringing content should be removed, and a note to that effect should be made on the talk page, along with the original source. If the author's permission is obtained later, the text can be restored. If all of the content of a page is a suspected copyright infringement, then the page should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and the content of the page replaced by the standard notice which you can find there. If, after a week, the page still appears to be a copyright infringement, then it may be deleted following the procedures on the votes page." (my emphasis added)
You claimed the entire article was a violation, despite several rounds of editing, and you deleted a list of awards. A list of awards received cannot be copyrighted. You can not copyright facts, and nothing is more factual and devoid of potentialy copyrighted commentary than a list of awards. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 01:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The tag says do not remove it, until it is reviewed. You removed it. Replacing copyrighted text. Don't do that. If you can show it isn't copyrighted then discuss it. The list was part of an entire coprwrited article.--Docg 02:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Swedish Geneology
I am flattered that you turned to me with your question, but although i am well informed about Swedish history, i am in no way an expert in the area of geneology, except when it has importence to historicall events. If you have any historicall question about this, feel free to put it on my talk-page, and i will answer it there or here. --Aciram 12:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, you'll need to take matters into your own hands with this article. There's two points of contention here, and I don't think you can get a grip on both of them. First, arriving at definition probably comes down to a pissing match with some vindictive censors. Secondly, most images like the Rolling Stone covers may not be fair use in this instance. I've got my hands full. All bad puns intended. Thanks for your help. For a couple days, this was a decent article. H Bruthzoo 18:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop recreating deleted templates. An image source and an image license are two entirely different things. Jkelly 19:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I read the TfD discussion, and think that this template is useful, and should be re-created, but it needs to be re-worded. The template that was deleted merely cited the source of the material, but what I think is needed is a citation to New York's Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) that provides for access to, and free republication of, New York state public records. This is a state law issue that is orthogonal to any (Federal) copyright law issues. I'll find the proper citation and give it a try. --MCB 06:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you reverting image cleanup tags on this image? It's not being used in an article, you are linking to the image description page as some kind of reference. Wikimedia servers aren't for hosting documents that aren't freely licensed, and convenient referencing is not a Wikipedia:Non-free content exception. Jkelly 20:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What article? The image description page is linked to from Eddie August Schneider, apparantly as some kind of reference, but it is not actually being rendered anywhere, and it is hard to imagine why it should be. Are you clear that we don't want to be republishing media that is not freely licensed, or media that we are unsure about the copyright status of? You're an experienced editor, so I'm unsure why you're publishing questionable media on Wikimedia servers, and why you're reverting to keep it out of the deletion queue. Jkelly 23:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am reverting because you said it was orphaned, and it is not orphaned, its in the article as a media link as the reference to his death date and cause of death. I am simply correcting your error. You deleted the original license also. You don't like "fair use" and you don't like "public domain" which seems to imply that you know more than I do about death certificates. If you don't know of any legal decisions involving death certificates, why don't you just leave "fair use". It meets all the Wikipedia criteria. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 01:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anders Örbom
I'm sorry, but military history is not within my field. However, if you are able to understand Swedish, wich i think you are judging by your question, it would not at all be hard for you to find more information about Anders Örbom if you search within Swedish librarys; you might not find many biographys about him exclusively, but he is no duobt included in the large work made about the Great Nortern war, the campaigns of Charles XII and his military personel. The literature about this subject are enormous. You seem to be well informed about his geneology alredy, and i understand your interest in him. Swedish geneology is not hard to trace from the 17th century and forward because of the carefull registration of births and deaths made by the Curch from this point. No doubt you are alredy familiar with Rootsweb and other ancestor-sites on the net. I wish you luck and wish i could have been of more assistance! --Aciram 10:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
password hacking
I've put it on the main discussion page but since you've been making recent updates, I wanted to make sure you heard that my password over at Daily Kos got hacked earlier today. It's fixed now but you may want to consider changes yours as well. I think I've picked something better but I'm wondering if you know anyone who could offer better advice? Abby Kelleyite 20:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Eddie Schneider 1930.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Eddie Schneider 1937.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:EddieSchneiderObituary.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Hall-Mills 033.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Hall-Mills Murder. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:HallMills 1926.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Hall-Mills Murder. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:NewarkSchneider14 copy.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:RobertBuck 1930.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Schneider 02.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Schneider-EddieAugust 1911-1940 c1930.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Schneider-Eddie undated.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Eddie August Schneider. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tanzer 030.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Carl Tanzler. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tanzer 031.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Carl Tanzler. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tanzler 049.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Carl Tanzler. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tanzler 056.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Carl Tanzler. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tanzler 075.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Carl Tanzler. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tanzler 083.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Carl Tanzler. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Tanzler 084.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Carl Tanzler. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 22:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Rebekka Gudleifsdóttir, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, 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 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 the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
I see you added the image again. Did you read what I wrote on the talk page? I can't see how it's necessary to use a copyrighted image of a "handbra" when one could easily photograph one first hand. It's not an article about that individual handbra, so any handbra will do. That alone should be enough to disqualify its candidacy for fair use. Can you explain your rationale? You say that a reason was supplied, but I'm not sure what you mean. LeeboT/C 02:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Wolfram 01.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Donald Justin Wolfram. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Richard, I did create the Baker entry and added the initial short paragraph. I don't know that much about the man and being a cocktail geek I was very surprised to see he didn't have an entry in Wiki. I have zero experience working with wikipedia, and it isn't really clear to me how he wouldn't qualify for inclusion, but seems there is already mounting pressure to delete the entry. What are your thoughts?
License tagging for Image:1900 census Baker.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1900 census Baker.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. 07:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Baker article
I agree... the collaboration is terrific. I knew there were better researchers out there who would know how to dig up the obscure details of a minimally documented life. Thanks for your help!
Percy Lavon Julian
Hello, we haven't crossed paths in a while. I have taken over as Director of WP:WPChi. Our assessment department is just getting going. As part of our formation I am reevaluating all articles falling under WP:GA or WP:FA quality class. I have put one FA up for WP:FAR and will be putting at least 2 GAs up for WP:GA/R. I am going alphabetically so that is why I say at least 2. Percy Lavon Julian is well above most standards so I will not nominate it for GA/R. However, its intro is sort of confusing because it refers to things as if they have been mentioned before. In particular both Glidden and Syntex seem to be used in a way that suggest one might be familiar with them. Forgive me if it is just because I am unfamiliar with the topic, but since you seem to be the primary editor and I am familiar with your diligence, I thought I would point this out to you. I understand it may seem odd to me because this is not my field, but I think you should take a look. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for cleaning up the intro. I was looking at the talk page and think some more directly related projects should be involved in this article,IMO. I would propose slapping several banners on the talk page. Most categories come from Talk:Anabolic steroid. What do you think WPs I have added here? TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've nominated Bruce Lefebvre, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Bruce Lefebvre satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce Lefebvre and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Bruce Lefebvre during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —— Eagle101Need help? 08:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Frog and the Peach
Hi there. I see you created this article and I was wondering if you could provide citations for the awards? Ta muchly. Mmoneypenny 21:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Dahmermug.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Dahmermug.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 07:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NYT
Thanks! Very helpful. Chick Bowen 18:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
License tagging for Image:Georgefg.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:Georgefg.jpeg. 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. 21:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Question
You implied here that Wikipedia:List guideline overrules WP:NOT. I'm curious as to why you did this (don't worry, I'm considering a withdrawal, just want to get more justification reasons for it besides apparent bias). --Whsitchy 01:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanx -- thoughtful. From your NYT obit, I made some quick basic changes and will probably do more later. Also found the names for all nine of his children. Handicapper 12:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Renfrew Museum (FYI)
Hello. For lack of a better quick solution, I've redirected Renfrew Museum to Renfrew, Ontario. It seems that a group of vandals (or sockpuppets) have been working on this junk for a couple of weeks now but I'd appreciate it if you could put the redirect on your watchlist so that someone notices if they ever try at it again. Thanks, Pascal.Tesson 05:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain how you feel keeping both articles is beneficial to Wikipedia when: 1) the info was clipped from the main articles for both stations, so the information really belongs there; and 2) creating a separate page is most certainly constitutes as fancruft? Rollosmokes 21:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Images
A bunch of your images tagged with {{smithsonian}} are currently up for speedy deletion because the smithsonian template was deletion. --Wafulz 15:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Kohlman-Lynn.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. 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.
Thanks for uploading Image:1900_census_Zarelda.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}} 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 15:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 15:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:1900_census_Washington.jpg. 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}} 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 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:1900_census_Turpin.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}} 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 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:1900_census_Stowager.jpg. 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}} 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 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:1900_census_Still.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}} 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 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 15:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:SmithBrothers 02.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. 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 05:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image tagging for Image:1900_census_White.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:1900_census_White.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
On February 13th, you added a picture to my grandfather's wikipedia page, Eddie Feigner. The picture that was uploaded was a picture of a former player of his named Jack Knight. Can you please remove that picture and replace it with an accurate one? Thank you.
You mean he was a tomato?
Perhaps tomato entrepreneur would be better?
Baronets.
a Baronet is not a member of the peerage and doesnt get any powers like peers did. Maybe you are mixing a Baronet up with a Baron. regards. --Vintagekits 17:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Dent2.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Herman A. Flurscheim
A tag has been placed on Herman A. Flurscheim, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, 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 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 the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Gavin Collins 11:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Lindauer-Susan.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Lindauer-Susan.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 {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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 any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. J Milburn 11:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I agree with that argument- if you could write up a decent fair use rationale I would be happy to remove my tag. J Milburn 15:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:NYT 24November1953.gif. 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please delete my biography
You copied the Daniel_Brandt bio into a /Brandt subdirectory on your user space on June 14. That article no longer exists, but your copy is now indexed in Google. I consider this a WP:BLP violation. Please delete it. Daniel Brandt 03:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody else has deleted it per this discussion at BLP/N. Please refrain from using userspace to keep copies of deleted content, especially when important BLP issues are at hand. Ƙɽɨɱρᶓȶ 05:49, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
revert on Ethiopia page
1. You removed my input on the Ethiopia talk page. Why?
2. Someone else reverted my edits (sourced material and all) on the Ethiopia page to your version. Why would your version have more precedence than anyone elses? Doesn't that defeat the idea of wikipedia? The freedom to edit? It was not a vandalization
either, it had SOURCES and yet it was deleted. Why?
3. I have noticed I am not the only one with objections towards the biased and not-so-careful "NPOV" work on the Ethiopia page. Given that you are responsible for the page being reverted back to, why have you ignored these voices and chosen to present a wikipedia article on Ethiopia that endorses wholeheartedly the official Ethiopian nationalist dogma?
Raoul Wallenberg
Attila lajos has made major changes to the article. I have already edited the intro, which included a reference to his own doctoral thesis. Now I'm trying to decide whether to just revert the entire Holocaust section. I don't have enough background to judge how accurate the new additions are, but they look and sound decidedly biased, and are unsourced. Your opinion would be appreciated. Clarityfiend 06:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't change spellings
In a recent edit to the page Margita Bangová, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.
In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, just ask anyone on Wikipedia and they will help you. Thank you. —Psychonaut 21:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You left this message on my page, I haven't a clue what you are writing about. If you want to discuss a change I made leave a link to that specific change so it can be discussed rationally. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is the edit in question. Unfortunately, the standard warning templates generally do not provide for linking to a diff; perhaps this ought to be changed. At any rate, I consider this matter closed. You did nothing particularly egregious; I just wanted to bring your attention to a policy of which you evidently were not hitherto aware. —Psychonaut 21:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And topics in Canada, should be using the Canadian spellings, eh? Why would you use the European spellings? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't. Most Canadian style guides and dictionaries I'm aware of double terminal consonants when inflecting words such as "travel". —Psychonaut 21:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on 23andMe, by Vegaswikian (talk·contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because 23andMe seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting 23andMe, 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. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate 23andMe itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
[reply]
Please read the very long Raoul Wallenberg changes made by Attila Lajos on June 24 2007.
Attila Lajos is far from neutral view! Text may be hidden vandalism - I think so. Tamas Szabo 10:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please read this: [[8]]
my english is not enough, please help to correct the vandalism Attila Lajos. Thank you! Tamas Szabo 04:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
problems with Raoul Wallenberg page
please read the discussion page Raoul Wallenberg Tamas Szabo 17:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Subcats of Living people
I tested that a few days ago after you first mentioned it. If you put [[Category:George W. Bush]] into [[Category:Living people]], only changes to the actual page [[Category:George W. Bush]] are reported by related changes, and not any changes to the articles within the category. So if we added the Bush category to Living people, and removed all Living people cats from all the Bush articles, NONE of the Bush articles would be monitored. That's probably the reason that is says "do not add subcategories" on the Living people cat page. - Crockspot 05:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fallasha of Ethiopia
There is no article on Wikipedia on the Fallasha of Ethiopia. There is no mention of them in the Ethiopia article. I would like to collaborate to possibly write one. Though my knowledge is so very limited it would be a tiny mention or stub at best.
LoveMonkey 18:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I used to be an inclusionist. Now, I'm something of a mergist, but certainly not an outright deletionist. What reasons do you have for your inclusionism? I'm interested. To what extent to notability guidelines on Wikipedia bother you? You can leave a message on my talk page, or respond here.--h i ss p a c er e s e a r c h 14:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy with the rule, if its been sourced by "multiple, non trivial sources" its notable. Merged or its own article, I never had a preference, unless the merge is "non-obvious".
Hi. I nominated this article, which you created some time ago, for deletion. I just can't find any reliable, independent secondary sources on this guy. I would appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederick K. Humphreys. Thanks! Skinwalker 18:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Gross-Jeff.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gross-Jeff.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The restriction in WP:RS is quite clear: Reliable sources are authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. Reliable publications are those with an established structure for fact-checking and editorial oversight.
The company's web site would fall under the category of a self-published source per WP:V#SELF. Further, it is a primary source, which we are not supposed to use.
A simple fix is to find some reliable, third-party citations about the company and what it does. However, if you insist on only citing the web site itself, the article will likely get deleted again for failing to show notability and provide verifiability. -- Kesh 05:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
primary source "Examples of primary sources include archeological artifacts; photographs; historical documents such as diaries, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, trials, or interviews; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; written or recorded notes of laboratory and field experiments or observations; and artistic and fictional works such as poems, scripts, screenplays, novels, motion pictures, videos, and television programs." --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 05:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:V#SELF "Self-published sources (online and paper): Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources." Sorry, I see no mention of corporate websites. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 05:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
... and? Did you have a point to make by quoting that at me? By the way, that is not an exhaustive list. Note the word examples. -- Kesh 05:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Examples of mammals are dogs and cats. That doesn't mean that a fish is a mammal. Your using logical fallacies to try and win your argument. If you think that corporate websites are unreliable, perhaps you should lobby to have them added to primary source and WP:V#SELF..— Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs) 05:38, July 4, 2007 (UTC)
I'm afraid you have that backwards. You are attempting to argue: "Examples of mammals are dogs and cats. Therefore, raccoons are not mammals." The examples are not comprehensive, nor exclusive. You're wikilawyering here. -- Kesh 05:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Wikilawyering is a personal essay and not Wikipedia policy. Also a corporate website is a secondary source not a primary source. If the website says they were incorporated in 1992, thats secondary. The primary source would be the actual incorporation papers, or the listing of the company in that states online database of incorporations.
I'm sorry, but you're flatly wrong. If you continue editing in this manner, you'll learn that as you go to new articles and find no one agrees with you. As it stands, the article has been deleted as a recreation of previously deleted material, so the point is moot for the moment. -- Kesh 15:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The deletion log says this was deleted as an A7 notability not asserted. Try recreating with an assertion and it should then go to AFD if there are still issues. SpartazHumbug! 17:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CORP is the guideline to be followed with companies and notability:
A company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. Once notability is established, primary sources may be used to add content. Ultimately, and most importantly, all content must be attributable.
So whatever a company's website is (primary, secondary, etc.), it is not independent. Therefor it can be used to add content, but other sources are first needed to demonstrate notability. Aboutmovies 22:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cemetery
Yes, use one of the templates such as this {{coord|45|31|14|N|123|00|22|W|type:landmark||display=inline,title}} and paste into the line. See Hillsboro Pioneer Cemetery for an example. Aboutmovies 21:30, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you enter any coordinates into Google Maps it will the display both. Here are yours converted: +40° 31' 40.50", -74° 35' 29.68"
As to size, the infobox has been fixed so it should work fine now. Aboutmovies 22:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making this page. I was about to make it, but I realized that it was already made. I am trying to improve Delta Sigma Theta and was going to make a page for her, b/c I thought she wasn't on the project. She was the first National President of the organization. Also, I tweaked the image of her in the cap and gown, and is now located on Commons. The image is Public Domain b/c it was taken before 1923. Cheers! Miranda 16:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for noticing. We should work on switching the article to inline citations. It was created before the standard developed. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe later. I am kind of busy. Miranda 19:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What's wrong with them? The personality listings are long enough as it is, so the use of columns with bullet points shouldn't be a bad thing. From a structural point of view, everything is kept tidy and there is less clutter. Please consider this before you remove the columns again. Rollosmokes 02:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Before I even got a chance to try out your method, I saw a bunch of stuff I deleted from the articles in question back. Another editor did a complete revert on both WABC-TV and WNYW, and it wasn't you; it was someone called Biohazard2000 (contribs). I didn't want you to think I didn't take your suggestions into consideration. I just got in from work and would have done it sooner. Rollosmokes 04:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we're using different browsers, because all I see is still one long column of names using your preferred method. And, why did you eliminate the alumni section from WNYW and add a link to the separate WNYW News Team article (which I think should have been merged back with the main article a long time ago)? Rollosmokes 08:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Ahh, perhaps they aren't rendering in IE, let me experiment and test the hypothesis. If they aren't I will move them back to your method. I am getting rid of the duplicate list, because there was no consensus to delete the lists as separate articles, and now I am correcting errors in two copies. Many of the blue links lead to spurious articles because of errors in disambiguation."
Okay, that explains it, because I use Internet Explorer as my browser. I had tried to get those separate articles on news staffs deleted back when they were created (there were articles created for chs. 2, 4, 5, and 7), and they consensus was to keep them. It should be easier to merge the articles than it was to form a consensus for deletion. Rollosmokes 09:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Richard Bocking
Hi! Thank you for the tip, he's actually my grandfather! :) - kevinbocking 02:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, thats fine with me! But it isn't showing up on google anymore, is that because of the AfD? - kevinbocking 18:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! could you get back to me on that? - kevinbocking 10:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At the stub Genealogia deorum gentilium I just made an article from. Please edit to make any improvements you can see or give me some suggestions on the article Talk Page. Thanks.--Dougtalk 12:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 22:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
, see Talk:Albert Fish for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Soldan 17:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
In a recent edit to the page Margita Bangová, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.
