User talk:Nichalp/Archive23

Images[edit]

Hey Nichalp. Can you explain which government images are free under the Right to Information Act, and can be used with the tag {{PD-IndiaGov}} ? Thanks.deeptrivia (talk) 15:49, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know if images of coins are eligible for copyright? Can I use {{money}} for them. deeptrivia (talk) 18:35, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RFAs and email addresses[edit]

Hello there. I have noticed that you have a number of Oppose votes in RFAs due to lack of email address. May I ask why? --TheParanoidOne 19:58, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your reasoning makes sense. Email address added. --TheParanoidOne 12:16, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image size[edit]

Hi Nichalp. Regarding the Malwa page, I'm having problems deciding on a uniform image size, because the aspect ratios of the images are quite different. A uniform image size makes some images either too large or too small. deeptrivia (talk) 04:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shoe polish (for the last time)[edit]

Hi Nichalp, thanks for the congratulations, anf for all your help in getting Shoe polish to FA status. You are a prince amongst men. My next article is washing-up liquid (again, can't believe it doesn't exist). Proto t c 12:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ha ha. I don't deserve such adulation. :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:38, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mindmatrix adminship[edit]

Hi. You asked me to notify you after I had configured my email, so here I am... Mindmatrix 13:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BBC News Peer Review[edit]

Thank you very much for helping with the peer eview of the article. When you said the Output section header should be renamed, what did you hav in mind? I'm struggling to come up with an alternative! :) Thanks for your help. Wikiwoohoo 20:03, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Joan of Arc Peer Review[edit]

If I knew how to archive that enormous feedback I would. It loaded automatically with the new request for peer review. Durova 00:47, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

shoepolish subheading[edit]

Can you expand upon how the Alternative uses subheading you removed from Shoe polish is a misuse of headings?—jiy (talk) 06:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

Hi. I removed Image:Ratlamcraft2.gif from the Malwa article since it was based on PD-IndiaGov licence. Please delete it. (I can't delete images myself, can I?) Thanks. deeptrivia (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IP checking[edit]

What is the process to request checking the IP of a suspected vandal ? Tintin 13:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Tintin 04:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi Nichalp,

Thanks for voting to support my RfA — and for implementing the promotion. I wasn't expecting an unopposed promotion (I thought I'd hit some die-hard edit-counters at least) and I'm touched by the trust shown in me. I'll try my best to continue to earn that trust. But first, I'll have to work on not sounding like a politician; that last sentence was awful. Oh well. Let me know when I screw something up with the shiny new buttons. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:34, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Navi Mumbai[edit]

Just read the Navi Mumbai article started by you. It is excellent by any standards. As a naturalized Mumbaikar, I was under the impression that I knew everything about Navi Mumbai till I read the article. Keep the good work. PeaSea 18:27, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliments, but there are many contributors to the article too :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shreshth91's RfA[edit]

Hello Nichalp,

I just wanted to thank you for supporting me on my RfA. It finally closed with a tally of 22/0/0. I hope I can live up to the expectations of the entire community. If you ever need anything, please just let me know. Cheers!--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 00:47, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hog badger[edit]

Nice first edit to the article. I was going to delete it as vandalism before I saw you had created it. You must be in a terrible hurry to make such mistakes.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 10:11, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Treaty of Sugali[edit]

Sorry about that. I don't generally click through references links in article unless the article indicates that it was taken actually from that source. Also, I do usually delete CP articles that are listed but not tagged since I see no need for us to retain copyvios and WP internal procedures don't give us any escape from that obligation. -Splash^talk 17:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I always do look at the history in every single case to make sure that I really do have to delete the whole thing rather than just rollback to an earlier, copyvio-free version. I also check the copyright status of the source for every single CP article I delete. Most websites carry no copyright notice, but US law grants them protection anyway. But like I said, I don't click through every link in the article, especially those that don't identify themselves as the source of the article — even a note on the talk page would be enough, because I check that too. In future, I'll tag and relist articles by registered users since there's actually a chance they might notice the tagging. -Splash^talk 18:21, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New taklk page-Injector[edit]

This new talk page is prepared for comments please.

--Dore chakravarty 21:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

consensus[edit]

I was wondering what you consider a standard consensus for promotion for RFA's and RFB's? Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 00:21, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot that clarifies it quite a lot, I just wanted to know since I think it's good to have at least some idea of what bureaucrats are thinking even though I entirely understand that every RFB is unique. Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 04:58, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]