User talk:Famartin

Why did you un-redirect Middlesex Freeway and Bergen-Passaic Expressway? They cover the same road as the articles they were redirected to.

There should also be a source for the names actually extending along the full route if you're going to add that. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:36, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:JohnFitchParkway.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JohnFitchParkway.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Battle_of_Bajor.jpg

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

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 01:34, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:USS_Odyssey_Destroyed.jpg

I have tagged Image:USS_Odyssey_Destroyed.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 12:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Battle of Chin'Toka.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Battle of Chin'Toka.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:USS Odyssey Attacked.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:USS Odyssey Attacked.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Jason Handman

Well, you got most of it right. The only part you missed was the "preloaded debate". You can use this template so that AfD listings will be formatted properly:

{{subst:afd2|pg=Name of page you wish to delete|cat=Category|text=Reason why page should be deleted}} ~~~~

Also, please don't forget to sign your posts. Happy editing! Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 22:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Undoing reverts

I meant no disrespect by saying that there's a history of undoing reverts of a few highways. I gave two examples where it had been done before and just went ahead and undid it like the rest until we can have a discussion about it. I somewhat figured you might get upset over me saying a "history" of it, but I couldn't find any resistance to those reverts in the past, so I just brought attention back to the topic. If there needs to be a separate Trenton Freeway article, then let's discuss it at Talk:U.S. Route 1 in New Jersey#Merging Trenton Freeway. The main question will be: does the Trenton Frwy have enough information to warrant a seperate article and pass WP:N? --Triadian (talk) 04:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Pinelands Revert

I looked at my photo on another monitor and saw the grain, so I will not revert it. BUT! First, unless you have some sort of special job at Wikipedia, you shouldn't be unilaterally deleting other's donated work!At the very least, you should give some sort of notice of your intent and explanation. For example, how 'bout asking me to replace my own photo with a less grainy version, which I could do and would have been pleased to correct??? You are very wrong about everything other than it being grainy! I have decades of professional experience to back up my case for which photo is a better view. You and I know the view from that tower. So, you see your photo with that vision in mind. The reader has no sense of what a scrub (I believe) pine looks like looking at your photo. Mine shows the tree in the foreground and the background offers what yours shows -- pines as far as the eye can see. I have shots from all angles up there. This is one shows what we're talking about -- what the (individual) pines look like -- plus shows the impressive (IMHO) landscape. AND -- Are you the person who said the caption is *opinion*? Again, backed with related credentials -- a degree and years of professional experience I can tell you there is no OPINION/POV in "In the U.S's. most densely populated state [FACT], Pinelands National Reserve is shown stretching across sandy soil [FACT] towards the beaches around Atlantic City [FACT]. The country’s first National Reserve [FACT], also known as the Pine Barrens [FACT], encompasses over one-million acres [FACT] in seven southern New Jersey counties [FACT], serving as quite a contrast to the state's more familiar city atmosphere [FACT, believe it or not], in its New York suburbs." I presume it's the tail end of that that you feel is opinion. Is it NOT a contrast? Do most people think of N.J. as a tree filled place? Aren't you in Nevada and a meteorologist? (Cool job! But not exactly qualifying you to be a photo OR text editing czar. Although, ironically, I'm pretty sure I could predict the weather more accurately! But, surely I digress.) Most of my life has been spent in N.J. and in my travels over 50+ years, as well as keenly watching media portrayals of our frequently bashed state, to say "more familiar city atmosphere" (meaning simply that roughly 51% or more -- one can *safely* understate -- think of N.J. that way) is truly fact. I realize the scientific equivalent wouldn't cut it, but this isn't science -- writing is more of an art. And -- in my opinion -- scientists and artists are at opposite ends of the spectrum). Oh, ANDdddd, sorry about the "Bozo" remark -- I just think what you do takes some nerve. Sincerely, the actual Bozo who posted a photo that appears grainy (although on only few monitors) photo. I'll try to fix it and repost it where it was, leaving yours as well.

Sleet

Question for you on Talk:Sleet. --Una Smith (talk) 07:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Eureka Airport (Nevada)

Hello. This is in response to your question on my talk page. I removed KP68 from Eureka Airport (Nevada) because it is not the airport's ICAO location indicator. If an airport in the 48 contiguous United States is assigned an ICAO location indicator, it is always the letter K followed by the 3-character FAA location identifier (05U for Eureka Airport). As for P68 (or KP68) showing up in Google searches, that appears to be an ID used by the National Weather Service for the Eureka Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS), not for the airport. -- Zyxw (talk) 04:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

New Jersey Turnpike vs. I-95

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on New Jersey Turnpike. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:39, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I-95/New Jersey Turnpike

It seems that we've been having a disagreement as to where the Turnpike offically ends. I'm confused as to why you think it ends at US 46 when it's offically part of the turnpike.

It is part of the Turnpike for at least three reasons: 1) On the website map, that portion north of US 46 is highlighted in green meaning that it's officially part of the Turnpike (where it ends at the Fletcher Ave overpass. 2) The maintenance of the road is that of the turnpike authority (lane markers, signage, etc). In addition, there's a sign on the expressway that says "END NJTP" in Fort Lee, which officially designates the northern of the turnpike. 3) According to Turnpike documentation, that part is officially classified as the mainline of the turnpike. Mlaurenti (talk) 18:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Graupel hatnote

Famartin, please familiarise yourself with the WP guidelines about disambiguation hatnotes. Hatnotes are to be used to clarify ambiguity between articles, not topics. A reader looking for the Graupel article, through the search engine or by following a link, has no chances to end up by mistake on the Ice pellets article instead, which is why there is no need for a hatnote. On the other hand, a reader looking for the rock band Hail might well end up on the Hail article instead, which is why a hatnote pointing to Hail (disambiguation) is appropriate.
If related topics like graupel and ice pellets are at risk of confusion and the See also section is deemed inadequate to clarify it, then a clarification could be added in the article lead. If you don't agree with these set guidelines, please take the matter to the relevant talk page. --Giuliopp (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Requested articles

Hello. Would you be interested in contributing to this Wikipedia:WikiProject New Jersey/Requested articles? Tinton5 (talk) 20:20, 4 February 2012 (UTC)