User talk:Zbxgscqf/Archive2
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Regarding the ballet Sylvia
Yes I do as a matter of fact -
A few of my books on ballet history discuss "Sylvia" in pretty good detail - "The Life and Ballets of Lev Ivanov" (which discusses the 1901 production very well), "Ballet of the Second Empire" (the original production), and Beumont's "Complete Book of Ballets". I also have a few absolutely wonderful photos of dancers in the St. Petersburg Imperial production of 1901, which remained in the repertory until the 1917 revolution - Ashton saw Anna Pavlova dance an abriged version of the work based on the 1901 version, I believe in either Paris or London (?). When he went to mount his own version for Fonteyn (which is about 80% his own choreography - wonderfull if I say so myself), he used the knowledge given him by the old emigré Ballerinas from Tsarist Russia, including the Grand Pas d'action, the famous pizzicati variation, etc.
Wouyld you like me to add the info to the page and then have you edit it? Let me know, maybe I could make you a list of sorts for you to assemble as you like for the page.
Mrlopez2681 03:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC) - Adam
My RfA
Thanks very much for the support and confidence. Naturally if I can be of assistance at any time, you know where I am! Tyrenius 02:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Westport Country Playhouse
Hey man, I've been working my balls off on Westport Country Playhouse. I've recently added it to the good article nomination queue. Trust me, it's much better than divisibility rule.
Anywho, would you mind taking a quick glance at it before it reaches the top of the queue? No one else has been editing it, so I'd like a second opinion.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cryptic C62 (talk • contribs)
- Unfortunately, I can't take any days off, and even if I could, that's during tech rehearsal for A Marriage Minuet, for which I am a spotlight operator. Also, I really didn't know what to do with those images. They were given to me by my boss. They are the property of the Westport Country Playhouse, and everyone who works here has access to them. That didn't fit under any of the other licenscing options, so I just picked the one that I knew nothing about. *signs comment* --Cryptic C62 19:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
CPEP particle chart image
Hello, I am the graphic designer responsible for editing and creatiung the 2006 version of the CPEP Fundamental Particles chart and would like to change the current image up for 'standard model' to reflect the new poster design. I have a high-resolution version of the image ready, what do I need to do to upload it here to over-ride the current version?
Thanks,
Paul Schaffner Paul Schaffner 00:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
A second request for you to be an administrator
Given that it's been about 45 days since you withdrew from your last nomination, and that you now have between 2,500 and 3,000 contribs - I was thinking that you should give adminship another shot. You seem extremely dedicated to Wikipedia and are just fit to handle this task.
See: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rmrfstar (second nomination) and reply back over whether or not you accept. Thanks in advance --How dare you? 02:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Your RfA
I am sorry to inform you that your Request for Adminship (RfA) has failed to reach sufficient consensus for promotion, and has now been delisted and archived. Please do not look upon this outcome as a discouragement, but rather as an opportunity to improve. Try to address the concerns raised during your RfA and, in a few months' time, resubmit your request. Thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity! Redux 13:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- By all reports you are an excellent contributor. I think you may not need to wait as long as most for your next RfA (perhaps six weeks, but consult others), with good answers from the get go, you will pass easily. So, chin up and keep up the good work :-). NoSeptember 13:19, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- Please let me know when you decide to stand again and I will support you again. Don't be too downcast by this reverse. --Guinnog 13:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I did extend your RfA. Yesterday (or today, depending on where you are in the world), when I came around to close GHe's RfA, yours could have been closed as well, but I noticed the circumstances and left it open purposely. I closed it 24 hours and three or four minutes after the original closing time. At this point, and even after disconsidering certain participations, consensus was still at roughly 72%, which is not enough to promote. Guinnog, one of the users that had requested that the RfA be extended, and who you mentioned, has just posted on my talk page acknowledging the extension and commenting that it wasn't enough for consensus to promote to be achieved. Redux 14:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah I know this sucks, I nominated you to become an administrator because you absolutely deserve it. But I can make this pledge to you now: you will wake up some morning in the month of September 2006 as an administrator on Wikipedia. In the meantime just contribute enough to hit 3,000 (or seven pages of limit 500 on Special:Contributions/Rmrfstar and you should be good.) I'll set up your third (and most likely final) nomination in about a month's time or so. --How dare you? 21:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- Your welcome. Just make sure to be more willing and put in better answers to the questions - had you done this sooner more votes would have changed from oppose to support and you might have earned the mop. But with a few more contribs and now knowing well how to answer the questions you should have it all by the end of September. --How dare you? 02:13, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Inkscape diagrams
Hi, I fixed the two Inkscape diagrams on Atomic line filter. The problem with the arrows was that some interpreters (like the one Wikipedia uses to translate SVG to PNG, apparently), don't respect the 'arrowhead' stoke styles. The way to get around this is to build up your diagram the way you want, save it as an Inkscape SVG as your 'master', and then select all text and choose Path>Object to Path to convert text to paths, then select all the lines that use line styles other than basic stroke thickness, and choose Path>Stroke to Path. Then save as a Plain SVG, and upload.
The background transparency isn't an issue. In fact, its generally preferable. If you want to remove the background transparency, just create a large square behind everything else with no stroke, and white fill at 100% opacity. But you don't normally need to do that. Just leave the background transparent. This way if the background color of the display website isn't perfectly white, its OK, and if someone needs a white background, they can just specify a background color for the particular cell or div. And besides, wikipedia's SVG to PNG translator uses white as the default background anyway. Hope this helps! SVG is really handy for diagrams and whatnot, but its still a bit tricky to make compatible. Hopefully these problems will go away as the interpreters get better. Phidauex 15:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Good work on Atomic line filter
Glad to see its now featured! Good work. Phidauex 17:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Can you explain how the image of Roman Vishniac on the Main Page – Image:Vishniac smiling.jpg – was authored by you? The description says it's a scan. Thanks in advance. -- tariqabjotu 00:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- The image was a scan of a print photograph taken by my father. I had this described at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Vishniac_smiling.jpg, but I don't mind your inquiry at all. Better safe than sorry. -- Rmrfstar 03:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- It wasn't described there. -- tariqabjotu 03:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Nice!
Good work on Roman Vishniac. I usually enjoy reading the main page articles, but this one is particularly good. Keep it up! savidan(talk) (e@) 19:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Yikes. Westport is not up to par. It has a lot of information, but it's not presented well, plus it doesn't have enough sources. Or pictures. We should make it gooder. --Cryptic C62 17:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Portrait of Roman and Edith Vishniac
Found it! Thanks for reminding me. I'll take the negatives into a lab to get them scanned. BTW, I would love to find a way to get my experiences with the Vishniacs into the article. I am a science journalist and photographer. I got to know Roman and Edith when I invited Roman to give a slide lecture at a Yale University seminar in Scientific Photography that I taught for 3 semesters in 1976 and 1977. All three of his lectures packed the Trumbull College Master's house. I'd love to write up a brief story about them. Any idea of whom might be interested? (And then you can cite it :-) Having known them is one of the most rewarding things in my life. I wish I had kept in contact after I left the east coast. That's one of the most regretful things in my life.Askolnick 16:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- The negative is at the lab and I should have the scan later next week. Should only take me an hour or two to Photoshop it into a masterpiece. Thirty years ago (almost) I printed up a really lovely portrait of the love birds. I'm eager to see what I can now do with it digitally. Will upload it and email you so you can add it to the article. I don't normally give my photos away, but this one's for Roman and Edith. I also am having them scan a second negative, of just Roman, that I never printed. Will see how that comes out. Askolnick 04:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you. My information would add little about Roman's great art and accomplishments. But it does have a lot to say about him as a loving husband and about the wife that kept his slide projector focused during his lectures and enabled him to focus his attention and energies on his life's work. I think my photograph captures that a bit. And few of the experiences I had with Roman and Edith when they visited Yale to deliver his breath-taking slide lectures for the three semesters I taught there, also tell about the gentle love they had for each other. Askolnick 15:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- I got the scans back yesterday, ran them through Photoshop, and put them into the article. Do you know where Roman had his summer home? It was in one of the towns north of NYC. I no longer remember. That's where the photos were made. Askolnick 13:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Atomic line filter: Spellcheck gone awry?
they may be used for analyzing the earth's thermal libido, (diff)
I think you meant albedo. (The source requires a subscription.) -QuantumEngineer 17:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I meant background radiation, but was probably thinking albedo... The sentence from the Gelbwachs is "These ... devices ... possess ... properties ... that are ideally suited for the detection of weak laser signals against the solar background in the visibile and against the earth's background in the IR.". I have corrected the article. -- Rmrfstar 23:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
That refers to filtering out the thermal background to detect a narrowband infrared signal, not to analyzing the background itself. Since this also makes more sense as a use requiring such a narrow filter, I have changed the article accordingly. -QuantumEngineer 13:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Er, you're welcome but, according to my memory (and to the history page of said article), I only edited it once. --N. Harmonik, 00:37, September 8, 2006
It's a great choice, but please note that the edits for the contest will be those made after the contest was announced. Danny 22:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi again. One thing to note is that I am not judging the contest. I think that you should probably ask the judges their opinion, which I will certainly respect. You have done great work on that article, and it should be recognized. Danny 02:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Max Bruch copyright violation
No one has found the source for the copyright text that you've deleted from Max Bruch. Please leave a brief note at Talk:Max Bruch identifying the source of the copyright text (and re-delete if you choose). Don't alert me: I don't need to know. --Wetman 01:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Max Bruch
Abort! abort! Found the copyright text at http://www.richmondsymphony.com/concerts/note_04_21-24_06.htm and restored your quite correct deletion. --Wetman 01:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Sunrise
Hey Adam, can you have a look at the sixth paragraph in Sunrise, namely "Due to Earth's axial tilt, the direction of sunrise is always to the northeast from the March equinox to the September equinox and to the southeast from the September equinox to the March equinox." Sure there's a tilt but not so much to apply that statement to the southern hemisphere as well. Is it? Cheers. Moriori 22:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Tks for response Adam. I will contact one of the regulars over at Astronomy. Moriori 20:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Paloma Herrera photo
Hi -- I started a discussion on the Ballet article's talk page about the legal status of the photo of Paloma Herrera as Sylvia. Do you think you could shed any light on this matter? Thanks in advance! --24.52.254.62 04:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Dear Sir/Madam
I notice you edited my homepage. Please never do this again. I find it offensive and rude. I see you have edited my homepage again, despite my warnings. DO NOT do this again! You have no right to do so, especially if you are going to use PERSONAL ATTACKS and SINGLE ME OUT to HARRASS! So LEAVE ME ALONE AND MY HOMEPAGE TOO! WHY ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME AROUND AND DELETING EVERYTHING I DO!!! STOP HARRASSING!!! Stop following me around. I mean it. Ever heard of STALKING?
I would appreciate it if you would acknowledge the existence of my response at the talk page of Most common words in English. -- Dissident (Talk) 02:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Page disputes copyright, but this is a very good picture (which I use often) so can you help to clear the matter up? Thanks a bunch, — Editor at Large(speak) 22:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late reply... it has a speedy delete tag. see the image page on the commons. — Editor at Large(speak) 19:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Re:Hippocrates
Hi! The article is nice. Would comment in FAC soon. It must have been painstaking to go through all those non-web sources to build up the article! I am afraid the article is not yet "compelling", at least not by Tony's standard. It may need more work. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Please see the "Works" section that I added to the article. Also changed the initiation of the "Legacy" portion. Still there may are some rosy terms. Have to attend those.--Dwaipayan (talk) 11:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Hippocrates further
Watching the trend in the second FAC, IMHO some short sections need to be merged. For example, proper merging of the subsections Humorism and Crisis within Theory is possible, with linking to Humorism as a main article/ see also article. Again, Vis medicatrix naturae can be merged within methods of treatment. However Hippocratic oath should not be merged. It can be increased in size if need be. However, all the merging would need cautious approach and sequencing, not just cut-paste. I can have a go at it. What do you think? Meeting all the demands of Tony may not be possible by me, as i am not very efficient in English, and my writing cannot reach high standard of Tony's. But, I can try a cautious merging approach. Please let me know. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 07:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Well, then you should quote that sentence from WP:MOS in replying to the point raised in the FAC.
- Please have a look at User:Dwaipayanc/sandbox2 where I made a draft of "Hippocratic theory" without subsections. What do you think?--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Now that Sandy has striked out his oppose, the article stands a good chance. You should quote that WP:MOS there in the FAC. However, people may say that subsections should be more fleshy than what the article has now. For example, "Humorism", "Vis medicatrix naturae" are not exactly fleshy.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Hippocrates now
Yes, I will look it over, today hopefully, and recast my vote. Thanks for the allert. KP Botany 19:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I too would like to belately congradulate you on the work you did on the Hippocrates article. Raul654 18:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Articles for creation
For accepting/declining submissions to Articles for creation, please use the templates. Thanks. --Geniac 14:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Re: Inkscape diagrams
Hi, just got your message about the ALF diagram. I managed to fix the arrows, and uploaded the new version to the commons, so the file should be good-to-go now. Here is what I did... I'm using Inkscape 0.44, and used only Inkscape on the file. I opened the image, and selected the shapes. Here is where your issue may have been. In order to get the Stroke to Path command to work, I had to ungroup the image (ctrl-shift-g), and select just the lines w/ arrowheads. Then stroke to path worked. Stroke to Path doesn't seem to work well on grouped objects, just individual objects. You can test it by clicking on the "edit path nodes" tool, the one right below the Arrow tool in the toolbar. If you use that tool to click on an arrow head, you'll see that it is made up of four editable points, instead of just one point at the end of the line.
I then saved the file as a Plain SVG, and reuploaded. Inkscape is a bit tricky sometimes, especially when creating things for wikipedia, which has an odd interpreter for the SVG files that doesn't support the newer controls (like arrowheads).
Hopefully this helps! Let me know if you have any more troubles with it, I'm happy to lend a hand. Phidauex 20:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Rmrfstar!
I recall that we discussed me adding in information about the 1901 Imperial Russian production of "Sylvia", and you making all of the necessary copy-edits and citations, etc.
Would you still like to do this? Please let me know. Also, I responded to your message on the "Le Corsaire" talk page.... :)
Also, considering your love for copy-editing - I would really like someone to go through a few of the articles I created (or at least completely rewritten) and do a good copy-edit. Would you like to?
--Mrlopez2681 09:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Excellent! I am pleased.
By the way, our parents have good tatse in names.....my name is Adam to. --Mrlopez2681 06:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Admin coaching
Hi Rmrfstar (Man, your name is nearly as hard to correctly spell as my own!),
Thanks for your note on WT:ADMINCOACH. I'm sorry you don't see the value in coaching. As an active admin coach and as a former coachee, I think the program is very useful. On the talk page, you stated "by working these pages, we are institutionalizing the creation of cookie-cutter users and fostering editcountitis and related illnesses". While I think that could be a valid concern, there doesn't appear to be any mention of edit count or editcountitis, either on the talk page or in the archives. It's mentioned at least four times on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship, and at least 31 times on Requests for Adminship. In other words, if there's an unhealthy focus on editcount, it is not at Admin Coaching, but at RFA. Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 03:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Editor review
While I understand your viewpoint about admin coaching, I don't see why you think editor review should be deleted. It isn't necessarily a preliminary step to becoming an admin; it's just an organised way for a Wikipedian to find out what others think of their work, and whether they're doing the right things to improve the encyclopedia. Personally I also think admin coaching is useful; it's all very well to say "adminship isn't a goal or reward" or "users shouldn't concentrate on becoming admins", but where there's a situation where some users have more powers and privileges than others, the rest of us are inevitably going to feel like second-class citizens, and are going to want to achieve the same privileges that the admins have. It's a human imperative. However, I will say that I completely agree that "editcountitis" is a serious problem; just because someone has 20,000 edits doesn't make them any more worthy than someone with 2,000, nor does it necessarily mean that they have more knowledge of policy. But I think the solution is to change the adminship system itself, not the preliminary procedures - personally I think that, provided a user has more than 1,000 edits, RfA voters should be banned from mentioning numerical editcount as a reason to oppose. Anyone who's trustworthy, committed and understands the job should get to be an admin. Walton monarchist89 11:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi
Hi! How are you? Any new project after Hippocrates? Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- Conatus - very interesting topic. I knew absolutely nothing about it. Hope it gets featured status soon. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Rmrfstar!
Thank you for your work on the Pugni article.
I will soon begin sending you info on the Imperial Ballet's production of "Sylvia". For now, heres a photo I thought you'd like of Mme. Olga Preobrajenskaya in the title role of Lev Ivanov's revival of "Sylvia", 1901 -
--Mrlopez2681 05:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrlopez2681 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC).
Greetings
Happy Holi !!--Dwaipayan (talk)
Hi. I noticed that you transcluded or substituted a template to respond to or notify a regular editor with whom you disagree. The main purpose of many of these templates is to inform the receiver of policy (e.g., that there is a numerical limit to reversion on content of an article within a time period, that personal attacks or vandalism can result in a block, that they can edit a page constructively without permission, etc.) It is likely that this editor knows this, and if he or she has breached or ignored these, please respond with a personal message. Thanks!
I don't know the specific circumstances of the message, and I could certainly be wrong here, but a talk page discussing peer reviews and featured article reviews doesn't seem like a user prone to vandalism. Just something to keep in mind. :) —Disavian (talk/contribs) 19:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message, but the circumstances that precipitated my use of that template were special. First of all, I know Cryptic personally and was conversing with him over AIM when he created the article Zoobkar and told me about it, as a joke. I marked the article for deletion and merely used that template as a way of saying, "Don't act like a common vandal"; I was almost making fun of him, in a good natured, albeit public, way, of course. We discussed on AIM this very out-of-character action and the matter was resolved quite pleasantly. Please understand, this was not a matter of disagreement, but a joke which he took too far, and for which I told him off in a light-hearted manner. -- Rmrfstar 22:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Tuesday
I probably won't be at tech on Tuesday, as I'll be in the city. I should be back Tuesday night. I figured this was the only reliable way to reach you c|8^). --Cryptic C62 · Talk 11:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Re: Hey, FAC
He he, you gave me wrong article. You wrote Contus, in stead of Conatus. I see User:Yannismarou has already given support. That's good. I'll see the FAC soon. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Contact
Hey Adam, I called you at tech, why don't you check your messages? Anyway I won't be here for a while, If you could call me I'd appreciate it. Thanks
-Tucker
I know I saw you too. Yesterday in health I blacked out. One of my friends reconized it and took me to the nurse where I had Grand Mal. (I don't know if you remember but that's the big one) It sucks because I havnt had one in about 9 months. Anyway I'm being admitted to the hospital today so I'm missing even more school. Sorry that I won't be able to come to workshop, hopefully I'll be back soon before you guys finish all of the platforms and stuff. Hopefully I'll be able to watch House in the Hospital.
-Tucker
P.S. What does this mean, "sign your comments with a Tucker46527 14:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC), and also you should put your talk page comments under a header using the syntax, "== Header ==" When I come back could you show me.
Hi. I didn't write the para which you reverted, but I'm curious to know which parts you thought were POV and which inaccurate. Il tabarro is indisputably verismo, Gianni Schicchi can probably be proved to be the most often performed (which must be pretty close to "most popular") and Suor Angelica ... pass, as I'm allergic to it. Since you've removed about half of the substance of a pretty short article, maybe you could supply something NPOV and accurate to replace it? Best. --GuillaumeTell 00:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the switch over. I read through the article last night and I like it very much. You've got a big support from me now. Btw, nice picture at the top of this talk page! Turner's Slave ship is one of my favorite paintings. When I lived in Boston I would go to the MfA all the time to look around and I'd always stop at Slave ship. Very moving. Ciao! JHMM13 16:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello Rmrfstar. I've done some pruning and some forking, which has economised the article size by 8%. Hopefully, this can maybe decrease by another 10%. It's pretty amazing how much my prose style has improved since this thing passed in November, to when Harbhajan Singh passed in March. I was wondering if you could take another look. Thanks for helping to improve the article. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Beauty and the Beast
Hey adam I don't know if you've been busy but I'm still in the hospital so I know it maybe inconvenient but I'll be in the hospital up till saterday morning, could you call me at the hospital with the info for Beaty and the Beast, 1-212-263-1283, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tucker46527 (talk • contribs)
Sorry of the omission
Regarding the newsletter, I quickly scanned the recent contributions of project members to compile the list of items under "editing news"; the main purpose was to draw others to articles that are being worked on, to foster more collaboration. It was pretty much shooting from the hip, not intended to be comprehensive. No slight was intended by leaving you out with respect to Conatus, and I've remedied the situation.--ragesoss 04:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Francium
It should be updated by tomorrow. --BozMo talk 17:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
your profile
Hey, I don't feel comfortable editing another user's page, but I merged "List of works in the Hippocratic Corpus" with the "Hippocratic Corpus". It will redirect anyone to the HC page if they click a List page link, but I'm trying to track down all the links to the List page and get them to go straight to the HC page. They tell us to clean up the redirects as best as possible, so I just figured you'd wanna know. Icehcky8 02:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)icehcky8
Candide Part II
I've just noticed that you removed the section added by me to Candide about the second part of Candide. You asked for sources. I have added these sources now, but I think it's silly of you to have removed the section, when the sources were to be found in the article which I had written (Candide, Part II). --Thus Spake Anittas 12:10, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks. --Thus Spake Anittas 13:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- It's just a stub. The article is short and the text could have been integrated into the Candide article, but since it is a different book written by a different author, I thought that it deserved its own article. Unfortunatelly, I had only one available source to work with. Yes, perhaps more info from that article should be added to Candide, so it is a good idea that you do so. --Thus Spake Anittas 13:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Francium todo
I've deleted Talk:Francium/to do: These sub-pages are intended as a public noticeboard about things to-do with the article, they're not a list of reading recommendations for related books. Femto 12:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, restored it. You should add an explanation about the purpose of this linklist and its relevance to the editing of the article though. Femto 13:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Excellent short articles
Now that I think about it, I have an idea for a genuinely light process that would do what GA is supposed to be doing, but it needs a core of nominees to start. I was going to copy the GA backlog, but ESA may be a better source. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:30, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Candide
I'd really appreciate it if you would re-read the documentation of Wikipedia's NPOV policy. It seems to be that you are bent on bolstering Voltaire's image wherever possible in this article, and it is very frustrating for me to spend so much time on minor things like comments and wording that don't make out Voltaire to be a saint. Perhaps you should also check Wikipedia:Verifiability. I think if you better understood these policies, you'd understand better where I am coming from. Thank you. -- Rmrfstar 11:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Have I made statements on Candide and Voltaire without using sources? Why then direct me to wiki Verfifiability? And I who thought that you were a fellow Voltairean. --Thus Spake Anittas 11:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I saw on your userpage that "Candide" is next on your list. Does that mean you intend to rewrite and strengthen the article? Woo-hoo! After the torture of copyediting it, I'm very nearly inspired to take it in hand myself, because none of the experts cited (or the writer) seem to have a very good idea what it is. Everybody seems to forget that Voltaire was smarter than we are, whoever we think we are. I can't wait to see what you do with it. --Milkbreath 01:37, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
ESA
I've looked through them and it doesn't seem like they're very useful after all. Its a pity.
In other news, congrats on Hippocrates being on the main page; I think the idea of writing a featured article for each section is really interesting. Atropos 19:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Coa_playbill.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Coa_playbill.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 15:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
WTF?
Do not cite rules to far more experienced editors, it is patronizing and insulting. Further, if there was any incivility in Bog's post, it was certainly not clear by any stretch of the imagination - leaving me completely astounded that you could post this on his talk page. Try to be a good bit more civil yourself, as your pedantic pompous tone is insulting and very clearly uncivil. In short, your silly "warning" makes you look like an ignorant ass at best, and a troll at worst. KillerChihuahua?!? 19:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Adding, do not EVER edit someone else's post again. KillerChihuahua?!? 19:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- MOVED from User talk:KillerChihuahua to unsplit thread:
- == "WTF"? ==
- I don't know what to say beyond this: I don't believe there is anything wrong with removing uncivil language from someone's sarcastic personal attacks. Especially in a discussion in which he had no part, and contributed nothing but those attacks. If Theodore7 is uncivil to other Wikipedians, it is almost understandable.
- Nor was there anything uncivil, as I see it, in my simple and fully justified warning to an uncivil user. Also, last I checked, every user of this Wiki is allowed to critique the behaviour of users who break the rules, regardless of eithers' "experience". I am thus astounded that you are astounded at my humble actions! -- Rmrfstar 19:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- You may believe it or not, as you choose; however modifying someone else's talk page posts is a blockable offense. You have been warned. Do not do it again.
- Your "simple" warning was rude and unjustified; it is tantamount to templating the regulars. You did not "critique the behaviour of users who break the rules" you made a snotty "its the LAW" post about what you, personally, considered "naughty language". If you wish to remove posts which use language which you find offensive from your own user talk page, in their entirety, feel free to do so, but your personal views on what language is or is not acceptable has no bearing on Wikipedia's civility rules. KillerChihuahua?!? 19:31, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- This is not a matter of personal views; but Wikipedia policy. Bunchofgrapes' comment was entirely out of place, uncivil and instigating. I should have removed the whole comment; it added nothing. According to WP:CIVIL, Bunchofgrapes, in this one comment (in which he had no part and added nothing) simultaneously infracted three times, he taunted, made personal attacks, and directed profanity at another contributor. Each of these three infractions is listed as a serious example of uncivil behaviour. There was no proximate cause for this that I could see (he wasn't even involved in the subject matter). Even if there were, it would be grossly inappropriate. I thus believe I was justified in removing the profanity and warning the offending user. I did not mean this warning to be rude or patronizing. If you like, I shall reword it; I thought in making a pithy, vague comment on his talkpage, I was helping Bunchofgrapes save face. I did not use a template on his talk page; but even that is not directly in violation of well-established policy. In fact, rewording of comments is documented as acceptable practice when mediating disputes (even informally), see Wikipedia:Civility#Removing_uncivil_comments. You'll note that I did not even significantly alter the wording of the uncivil comment, I merely removed unnecessary profanity. This is certainly proper procedure, if anything too lenient. -- Rmrfstar 19:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- I can only repeat that you are in error. Profanity is not viewed as offensive by all; and I don't know whether Theo cares one way or the other. It matters little; the post was not yours to alter, nor was the page yours to delete posts from. As regards mediation; you have not been applied to for either formal nor informal mediation by either of the parties, and so that point also goes begging for a valid application in this instance. Had you removed Bog's post entirely, I would have reverted you the same, and warned you the same, as that is also a blockable offense. In short, what you are calling "proper procedure" is all blockable offenses, and I advise you to familiarize yourself more with our policies and guidelines before claiming "procedure" supports you. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- This is not a matter of personal views; but Wikipedia policy. Bunchofgrapes' comment was entirely out of place, uncivil and instigating. I should have removed the whole comment; it added nothing. According to WP:CIVIL, Bunchofgrapes, in this one comment (in which he had no part and added nothing) simultaneously infracted three times, he taunted, made personal attacks, and directed profanity at another contributor. Each of these three infractions is listed as a serious example of uncivil behaviour. There was no proximate cause for this that I could see (he wasn't even involved in the subject matter). Even if there were, it would be grossly inappropriate. I thus believe I was justified in removing the profanity and warning the offending user. I did not mean this warning to be rude or patronizing. If you like, I shall reword it; I thought in making a pithy, vague comment on his talkpage, I was helping Bunchofgrapes save face. I did not use a template on his talk page; but even that is not directly in violation of well-established policy. In fact, rewording of comments is documented as acceptable practice when mediating disputes (even informally), see Wikipedia:Civility#Removing_uncivil_comments. You'll note that I did not even significantly alter the wording of the uncivil comment, I merely removed unnecessary profanity. This is certainly proper procedure, if anything too lenient. -- Rmrfstar 19:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
(outdent)Question: How do you explain calling "That is so fucking cool" a "malicious personal attack"? Characterizing that as a personal attack at all, let alone a malicious one, is, for want of a better word, quixotic. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- I would prefer that we do not continue this discussion. I believe I'm right; you believe you're right. I don't expect either of us is going to change in that respect. Of course, if you'd like to continue for the sake of argument, and because you'd really like to discover who is correct, I shall oblige. For now, I shall only answer this most recent query of yours.
- Since you're interested, it is the rest of his comment that constituted a malicious personal attack... theh part, "you ... never, ever, ever supply any actual citations from real reliable sources. Love it. Love it love it love it. You're the best, Theo!" I would call that a malicious personal attack, meant to instigate Theodore7. -- Rmrfstar 20:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Then why did you not delete that part of the post? You deleted only the word "fucking". Revisionist?
- And one final comment before I leave this, as you request: If you modify another editor's post again, or delete other editors' posts off of talk pages, I will block you. You have been warned. Don't do it, whether the post in question offends your personal sensibilities about profanity or not. Puppy has spoken, puppy is done. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Because deleting that part of the post would have significantly changed the meaning of Bunchofgrapes' comment, which I did not believe I had the right to do. I tried to change as little as possible in order to mollify the situation as much as possible. Removing a completely unnecessary, and yet almost certainly provacative word was the best method I could devise. As I said above, the whole comment should be deleted ideally. I left a message for Bunchofgrapes about this.
And your "request" isn't a request. -- Rmrfstar 20:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
What request? Pls clarify. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Nevermind. I read your last comment wrong. My apologies. -- Rmrfstar 22:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
NOTE TO SELF: discussion on Theo's talk page; apology to Bunch; policy at the time
Candide review
Per your request, I'd be happy to review Candide, and I'm honored that Awadewit recommended me for the task. I must strenuously object, however, to the claim that I am an "expert" in literature, French or otherwise. =) I'm just a guy who likes to read. – Scartol · Talk 13:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Candide isn't yet a GA. Please see the comments I left on the talk page, and please notice that I want to help fix what's wrong. (I generally don't like to put articles on hold, especially if I'm going to be involved with fixing them.) Hopefully I can start making some more detailed notes tomorrow. – Scartol · Talk 00:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your dedicated work on this article. I enjoy working with people who are responsive and diligent – you certainly shine on both counts. Good luck on the re-GA process (I don't re-review articles I've worked on, as a rule), and please keep me posted.
- I think you must have a wider screen than I. You've specified the width of the picture at 600 pixels; this crowds the screen on my humble 15" or so monitor. Shrinking the picture is a shame (it's a lovely image), but it would look less unsightly for us small-monitor people. It's your call. – Scartol · Talk 02:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I know it was long time ago, but would you please try to remember what happened here? I'm half-watching this article and I don't recall anything resembling copyvio, and the history displays quite a normal development cycle. I can't google anything resembling an original page, nor there's a trace of evidence in Wikipedia namespace. Duja► 12:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
hello
hello r u adam wat colledge do u go 2? r u that mean sailing instructer from longshore srry 4 editing ur page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.112.233 (talk) 23:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- If you would like to speak to me about personal matters, such as my current residence and jobs, please email me (you can do this through a button on my User Page). -- Rmrfstar 00:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- adam why are you notproud to liv in america? Whay are you a strong atheist! that does not make sense! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.112.233 (talk) 21:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Please email me. There is a link on my User Page. -- Rmrfstar 14:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Yoshida watercolor
hi, I just wanted to let you know that the Hiroshi Yoshida watercolor on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshi_Yoshida
is not by Hiroshi Yoshida, in my professional opinion. It is by one of the artists who was employed to create paintings for the Japanese tourist trade in the 1930's. This artist used a signature (A Yoshida), that is often mistaken for Hiroshi's signature (H. Yoshida). You can see another example of A Yoshida's work at:
https://www.walton-antiques.com/yoshida_boat_river_watercolor_2.jpg
I wanted to tell you this as you posted the image on Wikipedia. If interested, I could send you images of other Hiroshi Yoshida watercolors for your comparison so you could see the stylistic and signature differences. best wishes, Robin
- www.hanga.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.119.118.38 (talk) 01:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Vote for a post-meetup restaurant
I'm charged with making the reservations for us, so let's make it official. We'll do this via voting and everyone including anonymous voters, sockpuppets, and canvassed supporters is enfranchised. Voting irregularities and election fraud are encouraged as that would be really amusing in this instance. Please vote for whichever restaurant you would like to eat at given the information provided above and your own personal prejudices at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC#Let's make it official. The prevailing restaurant will be called first for the reservation. If a reservation cannot be obtained at the winning restaurant, the runner-up restaurant will be called thus making this entire process pointless. Voting ends 24 hours after this timestamp (because I said so). ScienceApologist (talk) 17:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Longshore Sailing School
I have nominated Longshore Sailing School, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Longshore Sailing School. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Moosato Cowabata (talk) 18:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
New mailing list
There has been a mailing list created for Wikipedians in the New York metropolitan area (list: Wikimedia NYC). Please consider joining it! Cbrown1023 talk 21:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
You are invited!
|
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, and have salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).
Well also make preparations for our exciting Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, a free content photography contest for Columbia University students planned for Friday March 28 (about 2 weeks after our meeting).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
You're also invited to subscribe to the public Wikimedia New York City mailing list, which is a great way to receive timely updates.
This has been an automated delivery because you were on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 03:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sylmurbel.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Sylmurbel.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sylherrera.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Sylherrera.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Whittington Castle
I am responding here to your last message about the above, becasue I think I have identified a wider problem. There seem to be sufficient articles about Welsh principalities, but very little about their successors, marcher lordships. It may be possible to approach this by producing more detailed histories of their castles, together with lists of their lords, as i have done with Baron FitzWarin and Baron Mortimer. Can you help, or do you know how to get people together to tackle this? A start might be to produce a list of lordships and the families that owned them. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Roman Vishniac Photos
Hello, Rmrfstar. I am translating Roman Vishniac, which you promoted to a featured article status, to the Portuguese language Wikipedia. The Portuguese language Wikipedia does not allow Fair-use images, if you want to upload a photo there you must upload it in Wikimedia Commons (which allows only free images). All of the photographs in the article Roman Vishniac are crucial for the article in Portuguese but most of them are fair-use. I have noticed that you are (or were) trying to contact Mara Vishniac for her to authorize the free usage of the photographs. I want to ask if you contacted her or if you are ever going to do so. (Please respond in my talk page) Thank you, Idontknow610TM 22:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- I did indeed try to get freely licensed photos from Mara when writing Roman Vishniac... I did not succeed. What you see in the English article is what you get, unless you can get Mara to change her mind (you have as good a chance as I). Thanks for translating, by the way! Sorry I can't help you. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 07:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Romeo and Juliet
An interesting article, indeed. I hope you already have tickets for the show. Every performance is saturated or nearly so. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 20 | 12 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
NYC Meetup: June 1, 2008
|
|
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).
We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts).
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Blooddonesign.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Blooddonesign.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 23 | 2 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 24 | 9 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 25 | 23 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 26 | 26 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you
Your kindness in reaching out to a stranger who is in emotional distress is appreciated more than you could ever know. On behalf of my beloved Isaac, and myself, I thank you for your kind words. Strange as it may seem, the messages I receive from my Wikipedia colleagues make each moment a little easier to bear. God has a special place in Heaven for people like you, who take the time to console strangers who can't for the moment take care of themselves. Jeffpw (talk) 19:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 27 | 30 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 28 | 7 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use Image:Sylmurbel.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Sylmurbel.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the media description page and edit it to add
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template. - On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 09:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 29 | 14 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| From the editor: Transparency | ||
| WikiWorld: "Goregrind" | Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block | |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation | ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 30 | 21 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:12, 27 July 2008 (UTC)