User talk:Atlantis Hawk: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:06, 19 February 2007

Hello there, If you feel the urge to say something to me, please don't hesitate to post a message on this page.

School articles

Only non-notable schools. And no, I do not buy that BS that all schools are notable. TJ Spyke 20:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Quakers_hill_station.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Quakers_hill_station.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Morristown West High School Copyvio

(Copied from my talk page for your convenience. -S.)

How does this infringe copyright? Atlantis Hawk 08:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entire article is copied practically verbatim from the "student handbook" section of the school's website. In fact, the earliest version looks as if it might be a cut-and-paste. Shimeru 05:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Image:Quakers hill station.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Quakers hill station.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Sorry I had to do that. If you want photos from Flickr that are usable on WP, do an Advanced Search and click all three buttons under the "Creative Commons" list at the bottom. Ones that comply with all three boxes are usable on Wikipedia. Make sure you put a source. Thanks for the photos anyway - it's great people are looking for them. JROBBO 12:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - there is an Advanced Search. Do a search on anything, and you'll see it come up in the top right hand corner of the screen. JROBBO 03:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid link?

Yes I did check the external link at Girraween High School. It's nothing more than a Mediawiki installation which students or ex-students of the school slag off students and teachers and other local schoolyard gossip. How is that encyclopedic? -- Longhair\^talk 21:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The alumni link probably isn't encylopedic either. Take it out if you have an objection with it. I didn't review that one. -- Longhair\^talk 05:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\^talk 21:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spreading your POV

Firstly, why have you decreased the importance weightings of several VFL/AFL related articles ? Can you please explain the reasoning for this ?

Secondly, what gives you arbitrary right to decide to upgrade the quality rating of the Brisbane article ? --Biatch 04:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a good reason that I have given a 'mid' or 'low' importance rating to many of the AFL/VFL articles and that is because they are insignificant to the whole AFL picture. What I mean by that is the AFL article would be a 'top' importance article, each club would be of 'high' importance, historic grand finals would be of 'mid' importance, considering they are just a single game, and the draft as 'low' importance because the draft really does not mean much as when most people watch the footy, they don't give a damn about the draft. If you are really that concerned about it not being rated highly enough, you are free to change it. If you look closely, you might be able to see that those AFL/VFL ariticles had no previous rating.

Also, the thing that does give me arbitary right to rate the Brisbane article is that I'm on the assesment team of Wikiproject Australia which you are welcome to join. If you have an objection to the rating of the Brisbane article, discuss it with a few more editors and then change its rating. I won't have a problem with it

Your review

You're welcome. Well, it depends. You don't have to stick to a specific number of edits every day, there may be days when you'll make a lot of them, and days when you'll make just a few. But try to make at least some edits every day, otherwise your flow may be deemed unsteady in your eventual RfA. I usually make around 150 edits a day, but I'm obsessed. :-P I'd say that a few tens of edits per day and involvement in administrative-oriented tasks, and you'll be walking the right path to adminship. Regards.--Húsönd 05:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Next thought

I think you were right about Political economy of drugs. But if you were really trying to be perfect for RFA, I'd say you could have done a tad more than a comment. I've now added a welcome message and a suggestion to the author's empty talk page. --Mereda 10:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC) Hope you don't mind the unsolicited thought. :)[reply]

my edit count per day

Hi there, nice to meet you. The number of edits I make per day depends on how motivated I am, how energetic I feel, and (if it's nighttime or early morning) how insomniac I am feeling. This generally varies from just a couple of edits a day to as many as 20 or 30. I try to check Wikipedia at least once a day in order to check for messages and monitor my watchlist. This doesn't mean that you have to do the same, by any means. I hope you find this helpful. --Kyok o 13:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

I am sorry but I cannot resist making a comment to "2001 (before the dinosaurs in internet time)" on your user page :-) I suppose in Australia the Internet was still not very widely used in 2001 (I had to cope with modems when I came to Australia in 2001 when I was already using 1.5 Mbps broadband for about the same monthly cost in 1999 where I was from), but you are making Australia sound sooo backwards :-) How can 2001 be "before the dinosaurs"? Not too far away in southeast Asia, practically all computer users had Internet access in 2001. 1991 would be more like dinosaurs time. Anyway. I hope you change it and then remove this comment of mine. :-) -- 15:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your invitation,

but the recent events of l'Affaire Publicgirluk were extremely disheartening to me, as they showed (to my way of thinking, at least) that WP's editing and administrative community are really not mature enough to handle articles on sexuality both responsibly and fairly. I've seen the toughest, nastiest political POV disputes resolved fairly and openly following WP's policies, but I've also seen those procedures summarily thrown out on their ear when sex was the topic. For now I'll just stick to watching those sex-related articles I already watch. But by all means, if you notice a sex-related article that is in bad shape - specifically in those issues where sexuality and law or community standards come into conflict, such as prostitution or the various genital mutilation/alteration articles (all of which I watch) - then definitely let me know. :)

Wikiproject sex

Hi: I see the tremendous effort you have put into making the Wikiproject sex. We already have a project, WikiProject Sexology and sexuality and although only a few people currently active, we are pretty busy. I have a guideline for images in sexology and sexuality that is fairly active and being worked on to help with the multitude of problems that exist in this area. (See Wikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexuality/WIP-image-guidelines) We also maintain the sexuality portal and Sexuality category

In the mean time I've tagged your wikiproject before you spend too much effort on it. I notice from your userboxes that we have a similar interest in aviation, among other things.

Regards, Atom 08:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on my talk page to your response at User_talk:Atomaton#WikiProject_Sex Atom 09:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian fauna

Hi. I've taken the liberty of moving your new WikiProject on Australian fauna. It was accidently created in article space, and not the Wikipedia namespace as per conventions. You'll find your WikiProject at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian fauna.-- Longhair\^talk 06:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems a stray space created the problem. No drama. It's fixed now. -- Longhair\^talk 02:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the welcome. Would you be able to respond to the thing I have asked on the talk page. Changing the scope is a big step (even though it is just starting), and I would like to reach concensus before changing it. Thanks. --liquidGhoul 13:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed your move of this page. In the future, would you be able to use the move button at the top of the article. More help is available here. I have fixed it. Thanks. --liquidGhoul 07:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Biota

Sure, would love to come aboard :-) •Elomis• 10:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AC/DC

Hi. I'm one of the persons who reviewed the aforementioned article at the FAC page. I'm just here to give you a little encouragement. The article is quite good as it stands, and with a little collaborative effort, I'm sure it will be featured. Hope you are working on the objections (sources and deficient intro etc); there is still time to address these issues before time expires. Come to me if you need further advice. Though university/work constrains me, I may still be able to offer a word or two. Orane (talk • cont.) 02:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, I passed. I appreciate your input. Please keep an eye on me(if you want) to see if a screw up. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review

Thank you very much for reviewing me in Editor Review. I appreciate your advice. Hope to see you voting for my RfA one day ;). LestatdeLioncourt ^talk 20:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Dear Atlantis Hawk. Thank you for supporting my rfa and for the kind words you used.--Berig 11:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating Crossbow for GA

I doubt it is fit for GA. It has just been restructured. Perhaps there should be a peer review first and if this goes well a GA nomination. Wandalstouring 13:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Kookaburra sport logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Kookaburra sport logo.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 10:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Airmanship

So, I take it that you fly for QANTAS or a subsidiary thereof? AMStecker

Well that's too bad, mate. But either way, I'm a fellow enthusiast.AMStecker 17:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 04:31, 18 February 2007 edit AMStecker (talk \| contribs) 64 edits →‎Airmanship ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:06, 19 February 2007 edit undo AMStecker (talk \| contribs) 64 edits →‎Airmanship Next edit →
Line 121:		Line 121:

	So, I take it that you fly for QANTAS or a subsidiary thereof? [[User:AMStecker\|AMStecker]]		So, I take it that you fly for QANTAS or a subsidiary thereof? [[User:AMStecker\|AMStecker]]

			: Well that's too bad, mate. But either way, I'm a fellow enthusiast.[[User:AMStecker\|AMStecker]] 17:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)