User talk:JYolkowski/Archive1

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Whosyourjudas (talk) 01:55, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for the kind greetings! 66.92.84.188 22:11, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Class 1 railroad list on template

I posted a response to your question on Template_talk:US_class_1. slambo 23:48, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

Category List of galaxies

The problem with galaxies is that not everyone has an agreed hubble type to everyone of them, and some have different types depending on which authority you use. And some galaxies don't have a type, since one has not been decided yet, or because the observed details lack sufficient elucidation to place a galaxy. Also there are two major classification systems, the de Vaucoulier (sp?) method and the Hubble method. Wikipedia doesn't seem to have any articles on the former, which is a pity, since it is used so much. So a list of galaxies seems somewhat advisable. I did put a note saying that anyone should categorize galaxies otherwise as well. (Galaxies by constellation, galaxies by cluster, galaxies by type). 132.205.15.43 23:15, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The trouble there is that there are articles about galaxies that do not pertain to a specific type of galaxy, or that would otherwise not merit inclusion into a Category Types of galaxies. 132.205.15.43 23:48, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

See Category talk:Stars#Category:List of stars for further discussions. 132.205.94.190 00:35, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The category has been placed under WP:CFD 132.205.15.43 00:55, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Katoomba scenic skyway

No, I have not heard of the urban legend in the article. I have a suspicion that it may be an invention, but I've never even heard of the band/artist in question, so I thought I'd leave it for someone better informed than me to do the verifying.--Centauri 03:29, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

(comment moved from User:JYolkowski - JYolkowski 15:18, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC))

WIkiLinks

I am using yellow because it is the colour designated for that line officially by the TTC. It helps for clarity as for me it is much easier to remember colours, rather than names. See MTR and KCRC for examples. Páll 10:05, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

British Columbia Railway

66.167.139.134 03:21, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC): I see your most recent change to British Columbia Railway as a step backwards. I thought having the box with the reporting marks accomplished two things:

It moves them out of the introductory narrative, making the first paragraph easier to read;
It still keeps the marks at top for reference purposes.

Is there an advantages to having the reporting marks in two places as you have done? Note that there's precedent for having reference information at the top in a box to the side: see peach and orca, for example, which make use of "taxobox" templates.

I'm still in favor of the earlier version:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=British_Columbia_Railway&oldid=9141608

I replied on User talk:66.167.139.134. JYolkowski 21:48, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Canadian Pacific Railway

James, congratulations on getting featured article status for the Canadian Pacific Railway article, you really put in a lot of work. Any idea when it will appear on the front page? Cheers Fawcett5 04:32, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Return of the Untagged Image project

You were kind enough to contribute to the Wikipedia:Untagged images project; I beg to draw your attention to part 2 of the project - there are about 12,000 more images in need of tagging. Any assistance you could provide would be most welcome. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

On the CL&N

Salve, JYolkowski!
Thanks for your support on the FAC candidacy of my Cincinnati, Lebanon and Northern Railroad article. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 17:56, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging

I am glad there are people looking out for new images and making sure that they get tagged, but that was the second time today that someone (in this case you) tagged an image I uploaded while I was in the process of writing a description. Give a guy a break and wait 20-30 minutes, would you? Thanks. Dragons flight 01:41, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for welcoming me! TAS 19:50, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Moved from User:JYolkowski

(moved by JYolkowski 01:21, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC))

James fixed my wikipedia article. He is a scholar and a gentleman. I won't tell anyone about that arm growing out of your forehead. Oh, wait... -- Zalasur 00:50, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

Amtrak routes category controversy

Hi James, would you please take a peek at the controversy at Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Strategy, I would appreciate your feedback on this - I'll be willing to go with whatever consensus emerges there. Cheers Fawcett5 21:13, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Eta Cassiopeiae B

Hi. Since when has Eta Cassiopeiae B has been a red dwarf? All sources I know claim it is an orange dwarf of spectral type K7. See for example [1] [2] [3]. --Jyril 09:23, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

Images and media for deletion

I am contacting people who previously helped to vote to delete a generally objectionable photograph by a vote of 88 to 21, and who might be unaware that immediately after that image was voted to be deleted someone posted another which was very similar in content. My objections to this, and the previous image that was voted to be deleted might be based upon reasons far different from any that you have, but I do object to it, and consider the posting of such images to be acts of asinine stupidity, which burdens the project and its major educational aims in ways that they should not be burdened, and can be extremely detrimental to the acceptance and growth of WIkipedia's use and influence. Thus far those who I believe to be in the extreme minority of Wikipedians who would like to include these images, many who have been channeled to the voting page from the article with which it is associated have dominated the voting, 23 to 12 (as of the time that I composed this message). I would like to be somewhat instrumental in shedding a bit more light upon the issue, and if possible, helping to turn the tide against its inclusion. It might also be necessary to begin making an effort to establish an explicit Wikipedia policy against explicite photographic depictions of humans engaged in erotic, auto-erotic, or quasi-erotic activities. To my limited knowledge such images have not been accepted as appropriate anywhere else within this project, and frankly I can agree with those who are casually labeled prudes for opposing their inclusion, that they should not be. Vitally important information that might be unwelcome by some is one thing that should never be deleted, but un-needed images that can eventually prevent or impede many thousands or millions of people from gaining access to the great mass of truly important information that Wikipedia provides is quite another matter. There are vitally important distinctions to be made. Whatever your reasons, or final decisions upon the matter, I am appealing for more input on the voting that is occurring at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion. ~ Achilles † 03:29, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I am still learning, when and wrher to make some comments. There recently was a photo added to the Rosetta Stone page, It was an " in situ " photograph of the erected stone, in the British Museum. Its clarity was Super, and its size and condition could be fairly well seen, because it was well lit. I was surprised to see such a nice micture of the real Rosetta stone. Don't forget the top 13 lines of Hierogliyps are missing, as well as the pictorial that was inscribed on its Rounded top. Some other equally good, "in situ" pic at the Bit. Museum, really should be added.. MMcAnnis,YumaAZ

Generic information about popes

I just saw your edit on Pope John Paul II - I would agree that the generic information probably belongs there now, but it seems to me that it would be silly to repeat this information on the page of every deceased pope. Ideally, I'd suggest that it be removed and put into the article about the next pope as soon as a new one is elected. What do you think? john k 20:46, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Canadian Pacific Railway to be on the front page on April 23

I just noticed that Canadian Pacific Railway is currently scheduled ([4]) to appear on the front page as the featured article of the day on April 23. Well done!. slambo 16:11, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

The turkey page

I just noticed i had reverted to an already vandalized page. My bad. Still new to this whole thing. Thanks for cleaning it up.

Bakudai 01:35, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Question about dates and links.

I noticed that you changed some dates to links at 18:29 today (using that only as an example for my question here). I have been puzzled by this, and I have removed brackets now and then. Is there a preferred convention to use links for all dates? If so, I don't understand the purpose, as other events on the linked dates are usually irrelvant to the article. But I am willing to follow whatever format is generally preferred, so I thought I would ask you. Thanks. Tropix 00:45, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)

Thank you very much for enlightening me about this. I will read the guide and just stay with the convention. Tropix 01:35, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)

Edit Conflict

I only wanted to mention the other (more important) significance of the term "government issue"

Just a simple thanks for the welcome :)

EOM - Equinox137

MediaWiki:Uploadtext

Yes, apparently templates don't work properly on MediaWiki pages. Thanks for pointing that out; it's fixed now. — Dan | Talk 02:05, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for supporting my successful RfA. I will do my best to live up to the responsibility and your trust. --khaosworks 07:07, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

See Template talk:Tfd please. -SV|t 02:29, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!

I was wondering when someone was going to get around to noticing me ;-) I don't do many big edits, so I stay under the radar, but I do like to tweak where minor tweaking is due. Thanks again! Rtucker 02:14, 2005 May 4 (UTC)

Gov. issue

I made another site like you suggested. Dbraceyrules 04:37, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mahajana High School

I have found a record of the school on an official Indian election website--it has been used as a polling station. The claim that the school did not exist was a falsehood. It exists and is in the location specified in the article. The article was speedied on the basis of a false report. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:43, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The school's age is not verified. We have a street address, a telephone number and a name. That's perfectly fine for a school stub; organic growth takes care of the rest. We don't delete an article because it contains one or two unverifiable statements, we verify what we can, expand the article, and remove the unverifiable. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:23, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick Chase Capreol

Hi JY, I need your help and CNR expertise with this article I just started... I think that the DoCB citation included might have messed up or confused the name of the railway he promoted, and I'd like your help to confirm it or get it straightened out. Check out this link of CNR predecessor companies [5] which lists BOTH an "Ontario, Simcoe & Huron Union Railroad" AND a "Toronto, Simcoe & Lake Huron Railway" with different pedigrees. Am I right in suspecting that the DoCB citation somehow conflated these two as "Toronto, Simcoe and Lake Huron Union Rail-road"? I don't know enough about this history to be confident either way, and I don't have a good dead-tree reference to hand.... Fawcett5 19:30, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

UK railway stations and Template:UK-depot-stub

Hi. Yes, I'm afraid in UK railway speak a depot could be a freight depot (where freight is loaded/unloaded) or a locomotive depot (where locomotives are maintained) but never ever a place where passengers get on or off a train. Depending on context that would be a station, a railway station or a rail station. The first is ambiguous with TV and radio here too, the second is more formal but perhaps tending to be replaced by the third.

There is a de-facto standard the articles on UK railway stations are called Name railway station, so I think I'd suggest the template becomes {{UK-railway-station-stub}} to be consistent, although it is a bit lengthy.

I've just looked at the number of articles with {{UK-railstation-stub}} on them. I certainly wouldn't want you to go through and change all of them by hand; if that is the option I can live with the stub name (which after all doesn't show up except in edit mode). -- Chris j wood 22:39, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

my proposal

Hi,

I just announced I am stepping away from the proposal discussion for several days. I know I have polarized the discussion, which I didn't want to do. If you are willing, I hope you will visit the page periodically and do whatever you can or think is appropriate to facilitate discussion between both sides.

Thanks

Steve

Thanks

Thanks for quickly reverting the vandalism of my user page before I even notice. :) --Golbez 21:16, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio

Nice job on DeSales High School, how did you manage to find the page? Plugging the text into google got nothing and neither did searching for it with desaleshs.org's on-site search engine. --W(t) 22:55, 2005 May 20 (UTC)

I used AltaVista to find it, using the search "DeSales, many of them distinguishing themselves professionally". JYolkowski // talk 22:57, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so altavista has it's uses yet, cool. :) --W(t) 22:59, 2005 May 20 (UTC)

Thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia!

I have actually been contributing to Wikipedia for several weeks (under my IP address), but anyway, thanks! I know I'm certainly not the best or most frequent contributor, but I try to help out where and when I can. Extraordinary Machine 15:43, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your Warning

This is a public high school computer with many users.

Caulfield Grammar FAC

Hi! You previously voted to object this FAC nomination, but the article has been significantly upgraded and improved since then. I would urge you to have a second look before leaving your final vote. Thanks. Harro5 08:17, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

I have tagged the other image as permission, as its a CGS photo, but there is implied permission on the site as photos may be saved. Any issues, talk to me. Harro5 (talk · contribs) 22:09, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments on the peer review. I'll sit down over the weekend (It's a long weekend in Australia!), and try to nut out a quality history segment. As for digging through archives, that will take some organisation and effort on my part, but I'll see what I can do. Again, thanks for these really good and constructive comments. Harro5 08:38, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Thanks for the welcome! (I know, that was a couple weeks ago, and I've been very active since, but hey, a belated thanks is better than none!) I just wanted to ask a quick question- how would I make a table on Wikipedia? I've been trying to do so on my user page, but I can't seem to get it to work. I've tried copying code from other pages, but that's not working out too well... thanks in advance! Also, thanks for your dedication to wikipedia! Flcelloguy 21:09, 28 May 2005 (UTC) Thanks anyways, MGM was kind enough to help me when he saw me deleting the table. :)! Flcelloguy 21:19, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by the way, from what I posted at your RfA: # Support. Funny thing- I was thinking of nominating him today, but it somehow slipped my mind and he beat me with a self-nomination... JYolkowski would make a great admin. He has been relentlessly reverting vandals (see his user contributions) and is extremely dedicated to Wikipedia. In addition, he is polite and professional. He has also been involved in a meticulous picture tagging project. Finally, he has welcomed a lot of new users (including me!) Thus I am honored to give the first vote of support to JYolkowski.

I was responding to your welcome and asking you the table question above, I looked at your history and thought, "This would be a great admin!" However, I had already thought that for several other people and had checked the list of admins and found that they were already sysops. When I looked up your user name and it wasn't there, I wanted to nominate you. Somehow or another I got caught up in some other business, and I guess you beat me to it- sorry 'bout that! Anyways, you would make a great admin and I hope you are voted in! Flcelloguy 01:28, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Holding Franks Hand

Written Guidelines

Hi -- Thanks for the welcome. I've been contributing on and off for some months now... I find my 50 y.o. eyes (and perhaps,AD/HD brain) aren't up absorbing video data easily -- esp. on the 14 inch monitor (portable) that I tend to interface with Wikipedia away from the office. Are the resources you suggest availabl;e in printed form, or is the format 'printer friendly'? I've another handicap -- a science/engineering track tech-heavy education wherein I 'Advance Placed' out of almost all English courses... leaving me a little retarded in matters of research/report conventions. So I need to study! Fabartus 17:59, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What's what, when?

Thanks for the speedy response... Another query-- Editing an article, I want to expand upon my rationale, so I go to 'discussion'... write my thing, then 'Save Page'. Suddenly I'm looking at what???... I haven't yet saved the editted page... or have I???? (when I saved the discusion page.) So far, to be sure, I've backed until I got my edit page, then saved (again?) explicitly. The Arty is changed, but when? Fabartus 00:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Email by accident

RU up late, or is Wikitime unrelated to our 'where', s.a. my Boston TZ? In any event, good thing I did save seperately... old programming habits die hard! Thanks again... whoa!!! My Touch pad on this laptop is a little spastic... Somehow it just put me into a wikiemail screen. How do I do that on purpose? Thanks-2 Frank Fabartus 01:26, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weights and Measures, Table of US Customary

I'd inadvertently had my preference tagging 'Watch' for everything I did the first week or so, I'm taking your talk off of me 'Watch' now... Is there a way to do that w/o leaving the sactity of my watch page? Just wanted to say hello again, as well. But since I'm here, I wonder if you can save me some work... Is there a Table of US Weights and Measures by another name (Other than the stub I just cited and created tonight). There are British TOW&M under Weights and Measures. That arty points to SI, Obsolete Russian, etc... but the 'Customary' Weights and measures seems to be nowhere. Thanks - time for bed!

See Rfd Drum wrench --> Drum for how I got into THIS question. (Penance, I think, if the vote trend continued).

btw - everything I've printed so far has worked out fine! Frank Fabartus 04:50, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

050616 - Thursday - Pre-word

As I start, I find myself wondering whether there is a protocol for talk pages -- like when to add under a heading, or when to tag on down the bottom. Some of these talk pages are more complicated and invoved than the article. e.g. See the furrball at Talk:Tsushima Islands I inadvertently stumbled into the middle of; See also the RfC on Mr Tan Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mr Tan. In any event, the kid is creating a lot of grief. I'm trying to take him under my wing but he's still proceding stubbornly. Just thought you should know about this issue, esp. since he's revealed his age, it may become a policy matter and probably should be. The lack of requiring a valid email or street address for any editor is nonsensical to me. I infer that such a record would cut down on vandalism at the least. Unless he sends me an email and agrees to be coached, I'm not sure what more I can do.

Railroad Issue Heads Up

Historical references I'm researching (I'm going to soon post the list on User_Talk:Mr Tan - I've a message nearly finallized on another computer) suggested I needed to create an article on the Manchurian Railway central of course to the Russo-Japanese War Artys (Was it YOU that wanted to duck into a fox hole when I used that abbrev.? HEY! It's useful here!, LOL) I'm working to expand. As I was finalizing and checking links, I stumbled on the Chinese Eastern Railway arty, but strongly suspect they are one and the same - a language difference, or historical viewpoint - once removed, as it were. Any suggestions? A merge is in order if the terms map onto in mathspeak. I'm inclined to argue that the MRR has a sufficient history of it's own to justify an seperate article by that name up to say the end of WW-II when Russia moved to secure Port Arthur and the Liaodong, or 1953(?) when the USSR gave it over to the PRC. Contextually, the name change then matches the administering polity. The southern MRR is itself an appreciable RR, at 550 miles long (Harbin to PA/L.), which is my main focus since it's central to the R-J-War. The MRR arty hasn't yet seen many (history) changes, but there is the whole colateral issue of... (I'm tempted to write colateral damage <G>)

Colonial Era Names Issue

Colonial/Imperialist Western Era names in text references seem to be getting lost on Wikipedia. For example, I had to correct suspected mergest edit making Port Arthur/Lushun part of Dalian - the editor failed to make the distinction that Lushun is governed as an administrative district under the PRC... they are 25 railmiles apart/40 nautical miles by sea according to last night reading - the article now just cites the 40 miles from a different source. Obviously, the two should not be merged - LAT AND LONG are very different. While periphial to my research, that sort of stuff is worrisome, and I suspect typical of far eastern topics, esp. where the imperialistic Western powers made decades long sub-paragraphs in regional history. Basically 1840s to some date in the 1920s or 30s (ignoring Japan as a local power) or later.

Add in name changes in Africa, Indonesia, The whole emerging nations subset, I'd guess. It seems to me one of the better goals Wikipedia might take on is a project that keeps clear the history and meaning of these older terms for the reference use of scholars at every level. The electronic basis is perfect for it, otherwise textual printed matter is going to drift significantly from on line modern (politically correct) renaming. It also ignores that those older names are part of our culture, indeed the culture of all of the Imperialist Powers, no matter how deplorable said period was for the Inferior Powers. Has there been a RfC along these lines, or other guidelines in anticipation of such matters? My leaning would be to have an Indirection page, ala a combined disambig and redirect -- that is, the indirect page would hold a short synopsis of the names historical context and the relavant link (possibly links) to the modern name page with a fuller history. In said senario, my Manchurian RR stub would perforce be somewhat altered, with a large link promenently marked (DOUBLED BIG prefix, say) >>>>>>>> Click to procede to Modern Successor Article<<<<<<<< , or some such standard way of working it.

The Indirection Operation

If we assume my terminology for discussion of such an INDIRECT Redirect Operation, I'd assume it would best be implimented as a template along the lines of "{""{"INDIRECT | redirect to Modern"}""}" or some such. (Sans all the quotes I'm confusing the markup language processing with. Thoughts?

New and Old Article Topics

I can see in preview, I've just generated two new article to work on. Western powers redirects, and seems off point - to my knowledge, Canada for example has never demonstrated any colonial or imperialistic behavior, whereas in strict terms, the USA has done both in the historical record. Last I knew, a western power was far from equivilent to a nation making up part of the west culturally. There is a another case for an indirection operator - to build a link list... one for "{"1840s, 1845s, 1850s,..., etc."}". Unfortunately, my mind immediate jumps to a coresponinding need for a PreDirection scheme. (I'll let you work that aspect of a doubly-linked list out! I've embarrased myself enough.)

No I haven't! In proofing this, in occured to me that the doublly-linked-list ('DlL') has even wider scope and utility. Korea is getting very long, iirc. If the template were used with a title pipe, or implimented as an alternate form, the DlL could be used to break out the larger subtopics into an article (e.g. History of Korea), as a sub-program operates in a programming language. The History of text is itself a seperate article, referred to by the Main article with the template reference alone. The Predirection operator would indicate to the software to jump back to the main article context for additional text to build the page. This modularizes long articles, and allows control of what is displayed where. I'd assume the History of Article would have some header text you'd want to bypass in the Mother article, but include for someone typing that as a search perameter. The 'End Sub' or "Return" template would be ignored for the daughter topic, but alternatively might Tag the end of the daughter article with a Click Here to See Full WXYZ Article. I hope that's clear. Seems to be a small need at least.

Enough radical thoughts - go to get some Wikiwork done while the weather sucks! Hope my housekeeping meets with your approval. I find I need to look at Talk\history to see who left what note, so I figured it might as well be easy for you to zip down here! Fabartus 16:57, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 16:32, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, just want to add my congratulations too. And by the way, this may surprise you, but thanks for your help on a university assignment! I was doing an Open University course in computing, and was working on my final assignment last week. As part of it, I had to find and do an analysis of three websites that would be additional useful resources relevant to the course - and they had to be sites that were not already mentioned in the course material. I was a bit stuck. Everything that I found through Google seemed to be something already mentioned in the course. Then, I was just looking at your homepage before voting, and I found your favourite links with Eric S. Raymond's Homepage. It was exactly what I was looking for! Ann Heneghan 19:25, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

About the guy who just vandalized your userpage...

I managed to find out that he's using a dynamic IP registered to a ISP called Bulldog Communications. Just thought you'd like to know. --Chanting Fox 22:16, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Which test?

I'm curious, which test do you speak of? Was it the article for the IP address of 12.345.6.789?

My RFA: Thanks

Thank you for your support on my RFA. Now that I have been promoted, I promise to be as hardworking and fair with the admin tools as I have been with the other areas here on Wikipedia. See you around and happy editing. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:38, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations on your promotion too. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:58, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi JY, congrats also on your successful RFA, and many thanks for your vote of support. I look forward to working with you again in the future. Cheers, Fawcett5 18:59, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thank you for voting on my RFA. Have some pie! I was pleasantly surprised by the sheer number of supporters (including several people that usually disagree with my opinion). I shall do my best with the proverbial mop. Yours, R adiant _>|< 08:07, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for welcoming me a while back. I should've gotten around to posting this earlier, but never late than never. Thanks again! Bostonian71 19:32, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This guy needs to be blocked yesterday...

I won't even bother telling you the name of the user... all you need to do is look at this: [6] (Yes, he uploaded the image as well.) --Chanting Fox 20:05, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wal-Mart

Thanks for reverting Wal-Mart; I was in the process of sending you a message asking if you'd do that. I've reported the user for a 3RR violation (I don't want to block them myself as I've been reverting them) but I'm out of reverts myself and this isn't simple vandalism. Thanks again, JYolkowski // talk 01:49, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that's how I came across it. Glad to help, though I fear my three reverts aren't going to last long either. Still, there's bound to be an admin who wanders across WP:AN/3RR soo enough. --W(t) 01:52, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)

BC Rail is now FA

Just spotted the updates Raul made on the FA list. BC Rail is now featured. Way to go! slambo 17:10, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

thank you everybody

I would like to express my thanks to everybody helping in the nomination of Antarctic krill. I think 3 1/2 supports and a long long discussion are an unexpected and great outcome for a critter so remote and unknown - you should see how little and poor Antarctic krill is represented in Encarta and Britannica - this is the best reviewed and resourced general article of krill we know of - it is impossible to fullfill all wishes at the same time - this is what we did with our all product peer review stamp to qualify this stage of the article for academic exercises, especially for our dreams of a Virtual university within Wikiversity - good luck to you all Uwe Kils 21:48, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Revert on Wikipedia's patent nonsense page

Thanks for the revert! I'm not sure how to look into this, but the IP address 152.163.100.139 which vandalized Wikipedia:Patent nonsense could possibly be related to the IP address 152.163.100.196. The latter vandalized the Wikipedia:Reference Desk not so long ago, and the two vandalisms happened around 10 minutes apart from each other. Both left a similar message summary. --HappyCamper 21:57, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi JYolkowski! I know this is a bit late, but I want to thank you for your support vote on my RFA. Thanks to everyone who supported me, I now have the mop and bucket and have been using them to help Wikipedia. Thank you! Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 23:38, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for yout support

Hi! thank you for your support for my admin candidacy. I hope that you will always feel that I am a responsible administrator. JeremyA 05:25, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Theo RFA

Thank you for supporting my nomination. I appreciate your confidence in me. --Theo (Talk) 07:07, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Hi JYolkowski! Thanks for supporting my RFA! Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:35, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Miscellany 050617

Hi, sorry for not getting back to you sooner; I missed your initial post in a flurry of other people posting to my talk page.

Regarding the U.S. customary units, did you find U.S. customary units? That sounds like what you might be looking for.

There isn't any hard and fast rule as to whether to reply to an existing topic or create a new one on the talk page. Generally if discussion is stale, I find that it makes sense to create a new headline. On the other hand, if discussion on a topic is still active, it doesn't make sense to split it up unnecessarily.

Regarding the railways, if they are the same thing, then I would agree that it does make sense to merge. However, if they're not, then there may be advantages and disadvantages to merging. It might be worth a query on Talk:China Far East Railway and Talk:Manchurian Railway to see whether people think that the two articles should be merged into one.

For information on naming conventions, see Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Generally, older names are handled by creating a redirect to the page in question and mentioning the other names in the text. See for example the lead paragraph of China Far East Railway.

I'm not entirely sure I personally agree with the indirection idea, but it might have potential. You might want to mention it on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) and see what others think.

INTERLEAVED on the above thread -- See [| Added Note] (will this work?) [[User:Fabartus| User:fabartus || TalktoMe]] 00:02, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, JYolkowski // talk 21:13, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Iza replys

U.S. customary units is good, but I was thinking more along the lines of a table as a quick reference - not an exposatory article. Things like 1 gal = 16 cups, Teacup = 5 Oz... The Brits have a table up off Weights and Measures that is fine — but we don't use half the units posted thereon. ~~(See TBDL)~~ Cancel that - I can't find it again! I'll have to remember what computer I was on and puruse the history folder. At least I can rely on the date since I stubbed the arty name when I wrote you, or the day before. The W&M Arty above has a nifty external link called Calculator or such, and that's worth the failed visit -- check it out! I was about to close and found it! See Hogshead. Something like this for quick referencing w/o all the verbage of the USCU or W&M Artys.
The Talk postings on both make sense, but I should see to fixing up the MRR arty before taking that step. (Ahh what the heck -- it's only my first arty from scratch excluding redirects! I acted boldly and annotated the Talk:China Far East Railway that they should be merged. Youse knows it, Izz knows it, so why dance around. From my pov, it'll be about a month, if it isn't done by then. It does no harm in the meantime. They cite each other.
Most talk pages seem unused or stale, from what I've seen, save for a few like the furrball at Talk:Tsushima Islands. Though between the time I launch this and the time you see it, it may revert to the singular!!! (One of the issues is the proper name, as well as whether the island is actually now islands -- I hope it settles down some. I'm pretty sure I convinced User_Talk:Mr Tan to walk away for a month or so, and he's been an ire rousing stimulus. I've spent more time writing him the last three days than any other three things combined easily! May have to consider a career change to diplomat! (I like to think I make a pretty good Dad, tho')
Have yet to visit the village pump, I keep getting sidetracked.
I've come a long way in three weeks wrt the Wiki-society and conventions - heck I even learned to imbed a talk link in my signature today! Now I just need to get up on tables tools for the naval battles of the Russo-Japanese War -- which is the horse I Rode in on, so to speak, as missing terms and references in a history I was reading got me to commit to 'logging in and doing something about instead of the occasional anom edit. Sadly, I thnk I'm hooked! ~:) I even found one of those records yesterday. Just wish I could remember all the little fixes I put in here and there along the way - I've a lot of computers here 12+, but I gave up counting over christmas when three new laptops were under the tree! It makes for a fair number of IP addys to back-track.
How does the village pump differ from the Request for Comments pages? I volunteered to dig out some Nelsonian info based on the arty posted thereon for the Battle of Trafalgar — also need to puruse same to give a better critique - but there's been Tan, and now my two teens are out of school.
Somebody mentioned to 'Ask at the Help Desk' the other day, where is THAT? Off the village pump?
How would I best cut in an article edit saved on my local computer using wordpad (Someone altered the source while I was editing and it didn't want to save over as the edit was large) so that I could use diff to see the changes between it and others in the history? Just replace, then look, revert if necessary, then recompare to add the incremental differences, or paste it somewhere else (Say in my space) then use a command line arguement to force the compare?

Thanks for the guidance. I'll see what I can do about formulating my concerns on the historic names lossage for a pump presentation, but I want to wait until after I EDIT or create the various RJ-W battles. There are several (6 or 7) on loan to my library from other networked branches, and I'm fairly sure they are not renewable when borrowed across the library network this way. The clock is ticking, and the weather has improved after a four day rain. The yard and garden and pool all call. Hear them? Fraaaannnnk! ttfn [[User:Fabartus| User:fabartus || TalktoMe]] 22:35, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Added Note

I just stumbled across this on the 'Wikipedia Signpost' - I think if this is their argument, the INDIRECTION Scheme could be used to create a multilayer TERSE and EXPANDED arty. See | Link:

"The article quoted figures of 5 million visitors a month to the project, and noted that the current total of about 1.5 million articles in 200 languages far exceeds Encyclopædia Britannica's total of 120,000. Business Week described the quality of Wikipedia's volunteer-produced content as "surprisingly high". Wikimedia Foundation president Jimmy Wales was quoted as saying "Our work shows how quickly a traditional proprietary product can be overtaken by an open alternative", but a Britannica spokesman claimed that the sheer volume of Wikipedia articles may be too much information for most readers, and said nothing about quality."

OK - it doesn't work - how can I make that LINK??? Or is it never [[User:Fabartus| User:fabartus || TalktoMe]]

Muffin

Mothperson thanks you. Mothperson is feeling cranky and is most grateful to people who prevent it from being worse than cranky. Thank you. --Mothperson 01:18, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Article on Pasta

Hi! I editted the article on pasta, with the addition of the "minchiette". It isn't a joke. It is actually on sell in pasta stores, for example | Link and | Link --ianhfc 03:18, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Before I Vote on 'Move Tsushima Islands' Issue

Thanks for the reponse to my concerns. Things have deteriorated on Tsushima, so I'm busily posting this message (I'll be posting the equivilent notice and request to many other contacts I've made as this blantantly says! I suspect we not only have the kid I'm trying to take under my wing (Mr Tan), but another as well beating the hell out of Mel Etitis and anyone that ventures forth to make a change. Seems to me that the computer ought to have a provision for only X changes per day per article... Limit of two to a particular user. This is ugly with a capital UG — 0ver 70 edits in three days. I put an inuse template into the arty and am trying to mediate. Mel is caught up in finals, which means, as a professor, he has hands overly full. Anyway, I need to circle the wagons and summon the cavalry... I just elected you! Do you want a commision in the seventh or tenth? Armored or Horse? Frank
btw I put mergeto/mergefroms on the RR artys, and I need your opinion on Drum (container) Vs. 44 gallon drum, as I think the later is a brittish arty. Don't know whether we can or should merge them. Please, take a peek when you can. Thanx - fab
I'm hand posting this to everyone that's been active on Tsushima Islands or Talk:Tsushima Islands the last calendar month. Feel like a yo-yo and nanny rolled into one! The Talk page goes 66+ printed pages! Bad enough I've written a small novel to Tan (User_Talk:Mr Tan) while taking him in hand — alas, too late to prevent this!

I would appreciate a rational explaination (after you read my Comments in the subject dispute Talk:Tsushima Islands), of the arguement or arguments you consider vital and germane to the discusion and vote. Frankly, MOST all of you are being silly over nothing of particular importance, since both names can be redirected into the one used. I have left a comment concerning my contribution to the article, which contribution — seems to have triggered the current edit and revision wars. For that I apologize, but see the Comments on the vote. I am also taking the liberty of putting the vote section AFTER the Comments about same.
Still, I have just spent over four hours of valuable spare time, and would welcome your thoughts after you read and understand the distinction I put forth between a governments termonology as a governing body and a geographical reference like an archepelego, which it certainly is.
More to the point, I'd like to see your defense regarding your favorite POV of what I had to say viz a viz the mergest attitude of the senior editors and administrators that frequent the Wikipedia:VfD discussions. To my recollection, I don't recollect any of you hotheads in this dispute ever spending anytime thereon, possibly excepting Mel Etitis, but rarely even then.
In any event, I'm neutral here, and have asked that the article be kept EDIT FREE for the next three days by placing The Inuse template into it — I'd copyedited over two and half hours before I suspended that effort the other night because this shameful fued was going on — proper English grammer does depend, unfortunately, on whether one uses the plural or the singular. I saved that on my hard drive, but I don't need to wade through yet another 70 edits to finish the job. As it is, this matter will probably double the time it takes for such a simple job.
If you are local to Japan, some history of the canals or Sea-channel is certainly germane to the ongoing discussion, moreover, any cogent arguement you condsider being particularly telling needs to be clearly repeated in the current on going comments if you want them counted on in the vote.
I will make sure this message goes to each contributor to the article the past month, so you are not being singled out. Now is the time to take a deep breath, for rational concise summaries, not all the arguing that is so wearisome in 66 printed pages - half a novelette, I'd guess! It's certainly a lot to ask your fellow editors to wade through on a minor issue.
I will also personally be making sure that at least a dozen other Administrators I'm acquainted with take a look at the debate after the time below. I will in fact ask for twenty commitments, so be clear and respectful of our time!!!
Thankyou for your time, attention, and good professional behaviour. I'll check the Talk state again no sooner than Monday around Noon (UTC), And ask the uninvolved others to do the same. PLEASE BE CONCISE. [[User:Fabartus| FrankB || TalktoMe]] 00:37, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi! You appear to be an interested disinterested bystander... I'm just making the rounds to everyone that has made their mark in the last month trying to mediate this flaming revert war — I can use your help — Bring lots O water! (Better yet Beer) Frank

[[User:Fabartus| FrankB || TalktoMe]] 00:37, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppet template removal

Please don't remove it from his userpage. The consensus is to keep the template on.Yuber^(talk) 01:58, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Then you won't mind if the other people putting the sockpuppet template on continue to do so?Yuber^(talk) 02:00, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. To be honest, it was so amazingly stupid that I was thinking of leaving it there for my own amusement. :-) Cheers, FreplySpang (talk) 23:24, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Request for admin support

Hello, User:WeKnowItsYou has just appeared and vandalised my user page. This user has very few other edits. I suspect him/her to be the sock puppet of someone (as yet unknown). I take offence at both his/her accusation, and his/her vandalism of my user page. I was wondering if you might block them? ~~~~ 20:14, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikidiot

Deleted due to "personal attack???

Fonzie

left|Heeeeeeeeeeeeeey!

belated thanks

Thanks for supporting my RFA nearly a month ago, and congratulations on your own promotion! Unfortunately a sad event occurred at that time in my family, and I have not been able to participate in Wikipedia as much as I would like. I hope to get back to active contribution soon. Thanks again! Cheers, FreplySpang (talk) 00:02, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not "vandalizing" articles

I've been receiving messages that I've changed articles, but I've only been reading them. How do I stop the messages? This is my first time using Wikipedia, so is there some sort log in I should be using?

I replied on User talk:207.200.116.65. JYolkowski // talk 22:45, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Anonymous bot

Thanks for telling. I've had some connection problems just now that might explain that. - Mgm|^(talk) June 29, 2005 21:16 (UTC)

Photo Links

Good work reverting the links by 66.124.226.67. There seems to be a trend of late by photographers (who often have very good photos) trying to slip in links here and there, mainly for their own gain. I wouldn't mind it so much if these users contributed to the commons, but generally its a single link on 6 or 7 articles and nothing else. Anyway, glad I'm not the only one chasing down these. Thanks! Jgritz 2 July 2005 20:39 (UTC)

Woops! Sorry

I had no idea that my post of the 19th above ran so long, and junked up your page so! 'Humbled' apologies. I guess I was a little intent that evening! Considering the lack of results, I probably should have yelled to AND for more cavalry too. (What unit did you choose, btw?)

Just visited IP talk page: Talk@IP203-26-16-66 where you added a bann, ca 21st or so. Since the IP is a sourced multiuser, I was wondering if has anyone made an attempt to contact them for aid to track down the vandalizing users rather than a Wiki-block of all users on that IP.
Whomever was editing my prose did a workmanlike job, and edited in good faith. Certainly that individual wasn't an vandal, but probably didn't understand the latin 'cum' as equivilent to 'with', which is the word I probably should have used.
In any event, the conversation between our server people and a IP-in-common to/of many users is something that I thought I should mention as one way to resolve and sort out some of these vandals. If they were given UTC information, their internal records should lead to the originating subnet IP beyond— at least one step closer to the vandal(s). If nothing else, having their IP threaten to pull all service should get their attention! <G>

User:Fabartus || Talkto_FrankB 3 July 2005 04:41 (UTC)

G8

Just wanted to warn you that the G8 article has been messed with again and needs to be reverted one more time. Porcher 3 July 2005 17:47 (UTC)

Request

Hello, JYolkowski! I have a favor to ask of you (and several other admins), and I hope you would mind helping. User:Ashida Kim has been giving several of us some trouble regarding the factual accuracy of the article Ashida Kim. I was first made aware of this issue after someone listed the user on Wikipedia:Clueless newbies. Therefore, I contacted User:Ashida Kim and left him a friendly message and welcome note. He responded with insults, and I again politely replied, telling him that he needed to follow Wikipedia policy and provide sources/proofs to back up his facts. After checking out his history, I see several other users have been attempting to talk with him as well. He insists on talking to an administrator, via email. He claims that he cannot contact any administrator (despite being pointed to the list).(For appropriate sections regarding this matter, see the two sections on my talk page, see his talk page, see the section titled "Personal Attack" in the help desk (Wikipedia:Help desk#Personal Attack), see his contributions, and see Wikipedia:Clueless newbies). I do not wish to get involved in this dispute (several other users & admins are already involved), but he basically requested (challenged?) that I contact several non-involved admins after I made a friendly offer. Therefore, would you mind taking a look at this case and seeing what you can do? Thank you very much. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 3 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)

Thank you for responding to my request. I'm pleased to say that User:Ashida Kim has calmed down and remained civil in the discussion at Talk:Ashida Kim. Thank you very much! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 9 July 2005 02:36 (UTC)

CSD

Hi there! Regarding your comment that some of the proposals are redundant with present CSD #1 - you are sort of correct. But one of the proposals is to deprecate CSD #1 (because many people disagree over what exactly it means). It could then be replaced by one of the more clear examples that would otherwise be redundant. FYI. R adiant _>|< July 4, 2005 21:05 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you but might I suggest voting 'support iff proposition G1 passes' (e.g. CSD#1 is deprecated)? I'll sort out the counting mess even if lots of people make multiple-clause votes :) R adiant _>|< July 4, 2005 21:26 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/I1

Dragon's Flight pointed out a serious omission to this proposal: that the image description page of WikiCommons should include the content of the one on Wikipedia. I have reworded the proposal to include that. Because the wording changed, I have hidden your vote; please read the new version and see if you support it now, and reinstate your vote under the appropriate section depending on whether you do. Yours, R adiant _>|< July 5, 2005 08:17 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3

PBurka pointed out that an important omission from this proposal: a band could meet WP:MUSIC criterion #5 (sharing a member with a famous band) and still be speedily deletable by this criterion. I've added a sentence to the proposal to reflect this: it now reads An article about a musician or music group that does not assert having released at least one album, nor having had media coverage, nor having a member that is or was also part of a well-known music group. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to VFD instead. I believe you voted for different reasons, but you may want to vote on the alternative proposal as well. I'm sorry for the confusion, and let me assure you that I won't be asking for any other revotes on this (it's just ironic that you can discuss something for nearly two months, only to have two omissions pointed out within hours of asking for a vote...) Yours, R adiant _>|< July 5, 2005 09:59 (UTC)

CSD Proposal 3-B

You voted or commented on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-B or Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-A or both. I have proposed a revised version, at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-C. This version is intended to address objections made by many of those oppsoed to 3-A or 3-B. The revised propsal refers explicitly and directly to the criteria at WP:MUSIC. If you have not already done so, please examine the revised proposal and vote on it also. Thank you. DES 6 July 2005 05:29 (UTC)

Anon user pages

Thanks for working on cleaning those up. Could I ask a favour of you: If they don't have any prior history, could you tag them for speedy deletion instead of blanking them? Thanks. JYolkowski // talk 8 July 2005 20:49 (UTC)

Doh. It hadn't occurred to me that they would count as patent nonsense. I can speedy them myself. This is most likely User:Elle20 having a strop from some other deletions earlier. -- Solipsist 8 July 2005 20:54 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you

I'm grateful for your earlier work on the Bible chpater issue, but -Ril- (talk · contribs) is back to his old patterns. Currently he is removing all the text from Bible chapter articles on the questionable grounds that they should be disambiged. At this point I feel that he is basically trolling. I've reverted him a couple of times, but perhaps if another user did so the message would get through. - SimonP July 9, 2005 18:23 (UTC)
- Thank you again for all your work in this area. I have listed -Ril-, who I more and more feel is likely user User:Lir, on the 3RR list, so hopefully this will all quiet down for at least 24 hours. - SimonP 20:38, July 9, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism concerns

I have some concerns about this user: User:Willy on wheels. Could you look please into blocking this user? I think the ban is not in place anymore. I decided to leave a meesage here for you after checking the page history in Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism --HappyCamper 21:12, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting page

James, Stop reverting the Crapsey page and purge it as requested! -- there were never any copyvio issues on the page regardless of your colleague's snap judgement! A biographical blub on any person's life is, by definition, going to be similar to other blurbs on the same person.

Deleted our work

James, I have a VERY furious volunteer on my hands right now. She e-mailed me and told me that you have deleted all the work she has been putting into Wikipedia over the last 5 or so days. She as you can imagine is furious. I put her to task to go through Wikipedia's bands and find any that are also on our website and have a good, detailed profile. She has being doing such so that when people visit the Wikipedia site they have good quality external resources to find out more info about that band and check out songs etc. Could you please re-instate all her work as I am very confused as to why it was removed in the first place!?!?!? Isn't the aim to build a quality resource here?? Please advise.

Just to let you know, this is referring to the Altsounds owner, and the volunteer is probably User:68.38.148.76. I've been talking to that user on their talk page as best as I can. Please take a look at what I've said over there and make sure it's right - I hope it is, but maybe I'm feeling too much of a sense of responsibility to do everything myself, since I discovered their edits first and reverted about 100 of them in the last two days. So you might want to offer your comments, since you've been here longer than I have and probably have a clearer perspective than I do. --Idont Havaname 20:21, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. It feels good to know there are people out there trying to make Wikipedia a nice place to be. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 02:17, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

That goes for me too! It is always flattering to have anonymous strangers try to help me by analyzing my personality and offering constructive criticism, but after a while it gets old fast. :-) Keep up the excellent work, and thanks again for the helping hand, Jwrosenzweig 23:16, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mind blocking my little friend? I'd do it, but I always prefer not to be the blocker when the insulted party is me. :-) Not that I feel too personally distraught/damaged by his vandalism. Jwrosenzweig 23:23, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated! :-) Jwrosenzweig 23:30, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I stopped by to thank you for the prompt reverting of the vandalism to my user page. Wow, you do this often enough that I don't even have to create a new heading! Your help is really appreciated. I note in particular that your revert had the same timestamp as the last vandalism. Jumping on this in less than a minute was pretty impressive. JamesMLane 07:17, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte

Please don't tell me to add articles to non-existant categories when I am in the middle of creating the category! 69.134.50.153 17:36, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain to me why you keep banning me, whatever username I choose?

Thank you. 213.16.156.218 20:36, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the polite warning

Well I just now made another change. At any rate, this user (209.86.1.9) began making very substantial changes with little or no documentation early today. Often making very substantial changes indeed. Initially I was taking care to revert and supply detailed documentation when I soon realized he was not. If you want I'll leave Wikipedia with nothing more than being asked, but this person has been throwing head feints all day long. J. Michaels

Again, I do appreciate the polite warning, but another issue as well. For the past four days a new user ID has been making these types of changes. Today it has been 209.86.1.9, yesterday it was another ID and the day before that another still. I don't know if these three or four numbered IDs all stem from the same IP address, but it seems like it may be the case. J. Michaels

And again, I will respect your decision and will leave Wikipedia by virtue of someone simply asking. But this user - or set of users - has been doing this same thing all week long, only modifying this one article. J. Michaels

As a clarification, yes, I've been editing that article all day long. Some changes you may consider substantial, some you may not. Every change I make has been accompanied by comments in the Edit Summary. As I've said to you, both on the Discussion page as well as in the Edit Summaries, if you take issue with any of my edits, please raise those issues on the Discussion page. Instead of discussing your concerns with me, you have chosen to simply revert my contributions to the article. You have also reverted the contributions of other editors. You even revert simple edits such as spelling, typo and grammar corrections. Frankly, it's getting out of hand. I'd rather not see you leave, J Michaels. Wikipedias success depends on more editors, not fewer. I'm just pleading with you to be more communicative, and less competitive. 209.86.1.9 02:32, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is very much out of hand. Today it's 165.247.208.72, yesterday is was 209.86.1.9, prior to that it was 165.247.214.231, all IDs who stick around for 24 hrs., only edit the Massacre at Hue, then leave. Let's take the simple emphasis concerning the massacre per se - which I attempted to discuss but was simply ignored in the discussion area. The massacre per se, much like the My Lai massacre or the Katyn massacre in Poland during WWII concerns the summary executions or mass killings, not the subsidiary or accidental killing of civilians or military as a result of military battles per se. There were civilians/military killed in the Katyn area of Poland as a result of military battles as well, but the Katyn Massacre, like the Hue Massacre or the My Lai Massacre concerns, summary executions. This is an absolutely critical point of departure and one you (whether one or many) have attempted to subvert or alter more directly. That represents one of the more fundamentally important and blatant examples. --J Michaels 20:58, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agent003

Please reconsider your decision not to block Agent003; he has escalated to vandalism of my user page, despite his announcement that he has left Wikipedia. [7] [8] —Cryptic (talk) 19:45, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked Agent003 for ½ hour; hopefully that will give him some time to cool off. JYolkowski // talk 19:59, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. (And I apologize for the inappropriate post on WP:AIV; I would have sworn "recreation vandalism" was listed on Wikipedia:Vandalism, but the only pages I'm finding on google that mention it now are Category:Pelican shit and some old TFD discussions.) —Cryptic (talk) 20:05, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Veronique diabolique

Hi. I'm wondering why you decided Véronique diabolique was not a speedy. As I noted, the article does not seem to assert importance or signifigance, which is one of the criteria for a speedy delete. Doing a quick check, searching for "Véronique diabolique" (with or without the accent) on Google yields 173 hits, giving a rough indicator of pretty low notability to claim, anyway. Wanted to ask before putting it up for VfD or anything. Thanks in advance. --DNicholls 04:13, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Same thing for Brent Walters. I got only one relevant Google hit. These vanity articles are flowing in out of control and are now speedy deletion candidates as such. Best, Lucky 6.9 02:14, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Frederica Santos

I don't think that Frederica Santos asserts any meaningful notability at present. See my comments at Wikipedia_talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Proposed Examples for A7 (non-notable_bios). The only arguable assertion of notability is "Ms. Santos is the author of several scientific papers" (one of which is named). I don't think that simply being the author of several scientific papers is notability, not unless there is somethign notable about at least one of the papers or the entire body of work is large enough to be significant. If you feel you must remove the speedy tag, please nominate for VfD instead. DES 22:36, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

GamerWiki

Please can you comment at: Wikipedia_talk:Votes_for_deletion/GamerWiki? -- Tyagi 22:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Just a note of thanks for your support on my adminship nomination. I'm gratified and appreciate your vote of confidence. Hope I'll see you around and happy editing, Slac speak up! 22:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alex_Zaitchik

How does the article assert notability? Do you think that freelance journalists are intrinsically notable? These days, anyone with a blog could be claimed to be a freelance journalist. The article makes no assertions whatsoever about Zaitchik's journalism. Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 03:36, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

VfD on Miles Smith

Added a VfD as you suggested... Anyway, googling (and looking at the formula itself) turns out it to be an hoax quite efficiently. --Raistlin 15:06, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pope Benedict XVI

Hi, do you think it was a good idea to unprotect Pope Benedict? I know it's not desirable to have a page protected for too long, but today, the Palpatine vandal started deleting the entire contents of the talk page and replacing it with the article text and the Star Wars pictures, since he couldn't get at the article itself. Have a look at the history. I think that the vandal is in Amsterdam, and uses different IP addresses. (See here.) I predict that he'll be right back now that the article is unlocked. And he's very persistent. So have lots of fun tonight reverting, all you admins! It's bedtime in Ireland! Ann Heneghan ^(talk) 23:29, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

???? The articles' titles say they are popes, the first sentence says they were pope from x to y, we don't need a title. Common sense. Antipope 22:15, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use

I wanted to thank you for your aid on the WikiProject -- it is a big help to me, the Project, and Wikipedia. --Fastfission 19:29, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don Pancho

Hi. I noticed you removed the delete tag from Don Pancho.

If you have a look at the talk page, you'll find it was unanimously voted for deletion. The history shows it was recreated a few days later.

Possibly non-notable algebraic graph theorists

Hi, I'm not convinced, so I've reflagged the articles. Isn't the custom to discuss such things, not to summarily remove the articles (or the flag)? Look foward to hearing your thoughts, maybe on the talk pages of the articles in question ---CH (talk) 23:16, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, J, I see you voted to keep those biographies. I guess I'm still a newbie, but I have read the Wikimedia guideline on biographies; I assume you have also. I don't understand what you mean by verifiable. The fact that this person recieved a Ph.D.? But do we really want to set a precedent for having a biography of everyone who ever recieved a Ph.D.? What about the issue of balance? I mean, as far as I can tell, the three people I object too are utter non-notables (you can convince me otherwise by pointing me at an imnpressive paper I missed, or giving me a CiteSeer url showing an impressive number of persons have cited a paper by one of these fellows.

Can you explain? I really want to understand why you think it best to keep those biographies despite the issue I mentioned.---CH (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Al Denson

Why did you remove the speedy tag from Al Denson? it says he is a musician. It doesn't say he has ever performed anywhere, made any recordings (even a demo) or done anything notable in the music world (or anywhere else). I don't see any claim of notablility, not even anything that could remotely be called a claim. DES ^(talk) 06:45, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

what is NOT notable, according to you?

i'm puzzled by your removal of CSD tags, on such grounds as "article asserts notability (e.g. releasing two albums))". released two albums! this means nothing. i'm going to stop tagging these bogus pages, since you're just bringing them back. most of the pages i've tagged are obvious wastes of bytes. fine. enjoy. "seems notable". right. what's next — "raised 2 children"? does my mom get a wikipedia article now? SaltyPig 22:13, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

any bonehead can "release an album". it takes $500 and an ego. this is notable? no. your criteria need tightening. SaltyPig 22:23, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

VfD closure

Hey there. I was looking at the closure of Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Nero (band), and wondered how you decided it was a no consensus? -Splash 23:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I agree that this one was fairly on the edge. Although, as a general principle, I'm not sure that a last-gasp rewrite should override the previous votes. -Splash 01:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am also curious about Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Robert Knight (principal). Thanks, android 79 01:00, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Protecting templates

I have responded to your posting on Template_talk:User_en. Regards, --Janke | Talk 20:54:17, 2005-09-02 (UTC)

Mediawiki:Newarticletext

You removed the text I just added to this message. While I don't object the spirit of wanting to make the message shorter, I do see two problems. One, linking to Wikipedia:Copyrights is awkward as it spends the intro and more than half the page discussing the copyright of Wikipedia, not the effect of other people's copyrights on contributing to Wikipedia. Are there any pages that cleanly lay out copyright law with respect to articles? Secondly, I really think it deserved the bullet point and bold Caution text. The majority of copyvios in article space are created as new articles copied from somewhere else, and calling someone attention to this when they go create a new article is useful. Some people even support the idea of big flashy warning boxes, i.e. this discussion. Dragons flight 23:44, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Actually, this is better discussed at the talk page, I'm going to copy it there. Dragons flight 23:46, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Brett thompson

Thanks - will reconsider. Dlyons493 19:22, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for supporting my RFA. I really appreciate that you supported me even though it had been a lost cause for a long time. Rl 12:48, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your work on VFD/AFD

You've been working hard on keeping the junk out of WP, it seems. Thank you for correcting my erroneous VFD nominations. What can I say, I'm a n00b. Keep the dream of a junk-free WP alive! Paul 16:10, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About Leap Year

James, this is Michael McAnnis,YumaAZ. I just left a message wtih RHaworth about the Leap Year page, on my talk page. I had changed the year formula (starting two months ago) and did a final change about a week ago that got the 400 year rule figured out so it was visibly correct, though the entire first paragraph is still messy. I was just trying to make sense of it.. I just started looking at History's My first 4 weeks was Just EA Amarna Letterss, so I was busy. But I left a note about year 2000 ( No leap year) and just gave him the scoop on "my talk". the History on the Leap year page, shows that others also thought it confusing over the previous months. As of noon today, I think it is accurate. MMcAnnis

I see it is already been made incorrect again. Year 1600 was Not a Leap year. Year 2000 was not, And 2400 will also not be a leap year. 1700, 1800, 1900 were leap years, and 2100 will be. the formula should say that if divisable by 400, it will not be a leap year, ( this rule was done in 1592 (?) or 1589, 1600, 2000, 2400, 2800 are all divisable by 400 and were not, and won't be leap years. Thanks James MMcAnnis,YumaAZ

I took a first crack at rewriting this template, the first screenshot one I was attempting (they seem to me a bit different than the cover art ones in what they require) — if you wanted to take a quick look at it, I'd be appreciative. Thanks! --Fastfission 23:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll double-check on that, but I'm pretty sure each actor's performance is considered copyrightable. In Free Culture, Lessig has a whole chapter about the difficulties in securing copyright permissions for small clips from movies, because each actor in a scene has a claim to royalties on usages of the scene. But I'll double check exactly what that implies, if anything, for these tags. --Fastfission 12:00, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit confusing, but "part of a movie or other audiovisual work" is one of the nine statuatory categories of "work for hire" which seems to count as "contribution to a collective work"[9]; which I believe means that each contributor to the work has some sort of limited copyright claim unless it is expresses transferred to the overall copyright holder.[10] --Fastfission 12:27, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for butting in

I apologize for completing your ifd (although I'm glad you don't mind). I usually do mine in reverse by putting the ifd tag on first, notifying the uploader and then listing on the ifd page. I went to look at the image and when I did not see an ifd tag, it was just kind of instinctive to add it. I'll try not to do that again. --Regards Nv8200p (talk) 21:21, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support on my RfA. I was very pleasantly surprised to see so much support throughout the week. I didn't really realize I had a reputation as a deletionist, although I do say 'delete' more than I say 'keep'. I certainly will not abuse any trust you and others have placed in me. Nevertheless, please do keep an eye on me and my logs, especially while I'm learning the ropes with the new buttons. Thanks again! -Splash 23:45, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you very kindly for your support for my nomination. I promise your trust will not be misplaced; I may occasionally be slightly buzzed with power, but never drunk. ;) · Katefan0^(scribble) 22:36, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Camp Mario

Thanks for restoring the page. Goodness knows the stuff isn't encyclopedaic but someone apparently loves it since they've put hours of work in. It deserves due vfd process. Dlyons493 08:17, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Copyright Tags

Unless I'm missing a news announcement, doesn't {{fuus}} perfectly describe Chokepear2.JPG, the source is unknown but its use in the article falls well into the boundaries of fair use as I understand them. I'm trying to prevent the recent pogrom on un-tagged images from causing more harm than neccessary, and this image seems to me like it is one of the ones that could easily be saved. Sherurcij 16:47, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's what fuus is, it states "This work is presumed to be copyrighted, but its source has not been determined. The individuals who added this tag or placed the image in articles assert that this qualifies as fair use of the material under United States copyright law. An image with a known source should be considered as a replacement if available." By definition, the tag applies to images with unknown sources. Sherurcij 17:16, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have the same concern, because you tagged Image:Lowdin.gif, Image:Balaton.gif, Image:Karel Ancerl.jpg, and Image:Kolakowski.jpg with additional tags that will have these images deleted within a week if a source is not given. The point is that the source is unknown, so how shall I provide it? Karol 07:32, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK... let me list the suspected images one by one:

Image:David Bohm.jpg - the "most original" source, I think, is here. What does this qualify for?
Image:Lowdin.gif - this is from this file. What does that qualify for? Karol 08:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Kolakowski.jpg - this is from here, which is copyrighted. I have written to the copyright holder indicated and asked for permission. Should I do anything else? Karol 09:01, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Astor Piazzolla.jpg - this is from here. I have no idea what to do with this. Karol 09:12, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Karel Ancerl.jpg - this if from here, in french. I think it's a free site, though. Karol 09:12, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Balaton.gif - this is from here. What should I do? Karol 09:12, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Nominations

A couple of weeks ago, I nominated an article for deletion (Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Khier). You made the comment that the nomination was malformed. If you can recall the incident, would you please tell me what I did wrong in the nomination so I can do it right next time. I am still fairly new at this and have a lot to learn. Thanks. ♠ DanMS 01:15, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fairuse tags

I replied earlier to your replies on Jimbo's page, don't know if you caught it yet. If you're going to change the operation of the new fair use tags, you need to update the instructions on Wikipedia:Fair use since they now make no sense. --Gmaxwell 05:54, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cortes in Veracruz.jpg

Did you have any other objections to the {{fairuse}} tag on that image besides it not having a source? I have IDed the image, but I have the feeling it's still not "fair use" (too large, glaring colors). Maybe someone should write to the Diego Rivera Museum and ask them for a free release of their picture of that fresco. Or does this fall under the "plain reproduction of 2D-work, no creativity involved"? And if so, does it infringe on Rivera's copyright on the original fresco? We're not copying the fresco itself, after all. Lupo 08:54, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please review these images

I have added source info to 4 images whose fair use tag you disputed, as having no source. Please review them, and remove the disputed tag if you feel so moved. Here are the images: Image:Ac.casey.jpg, Image:Ac.cowen.jpg, Image:Ac.kerr.jpg, Image:Ac.snedden.jpg.

 Thanks for all your work on the Image Tagging project, BTW. JesseW, the juggling janitor 19:39, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

User:DESiegel

I've seen him tag a lot of things as speedies that aren't valid speedy candidates, so I'm not confident I would trust him with a delete button. JYolkowski // talk 00:00, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give any examples of this? --fvw * 00:36, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at articles where I personally have removed CSD tags placed by him, I see [11] [12] [13] [14] [15], and there are probably one or two or three others that were deleted through a proper VfD process. Looking at Special:Contributions/DESiegel I see a significant amount of other examples of stuff he's tagged as {{nn-bio}} that's still around as well. JYolkowski // talk 13:49, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What a coincidence, I was just moving to neutral based on what Dragons Flight linked. Thanks for the extra links though, and for bringing this to our attention. --fvw * 13:52, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Class I in Canada

I have a question about this edit. You say that "In Canada, a Class I rail carrier is defined (as of 2004) as a company that has earned gross revenues exceeding $250 million for each of the previous two years from providing rail services." Who defines this? I see nothing on the AAR site dealing with it. --SPUI (talk) 06:30, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; I forgot that Canada doesn't use the term "railroad". --SPUI (talk) 08:17, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

I have responded at some length to your comments and questions about speedy deletes, and those of others, at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DESiegel. Please look over my comments and see what you now think. DES ^(talk) 16:07, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeats image

Why did you tag Image:WBYeats1908.jpg as PD-art-US? The photographer died in 1966, as I keep trying to point out, so it is not out of copyright. If you think there is some reason, please say so. Justinc 14:43, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah now I see on vfd. Can you add that comment there to the image, because it is very unclear otherwise. Justinc 14:46, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:JapanCopyright

Nuked. IceKarma ॐ 20:32, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chevert coin

Hi. The coin came from googling "François de Chevert" for images. The website is www.lioncoins.com/ frames/60535.htm--J heisenberg 00:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BC Rail

[16] turns up a few pages that say it was one, but if you have more accurate info, feel free to remove it (from the template too). --SPUI (talk) 01:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: BC traffic signs

I got the general shapes of those signs from this PDF file, and put the individual numbers in on my own. I had to make them small so they'd stand a chance as fair use images. Denelson 83 01:37, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image source cited

I've cited the image source for Image:Thumbnail_cliff.jpg. Also, I already provided reasons for fair use further down. - Gilgamesh 18:56, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]