User talk:Gobonobo

User:Gobonobo from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

best viewed in mozilla firefox                                 main talk contributions email me my logs sandbox to do other

Alan Grayson

For whatever reason, you reverted perfectly unobjectionable edits to Alan Grayson, which incidentally did not remove content but rather moved it to other sections so the article would be more reader-friendly. Please be more careful when you revert possible vandalism. --SchutteGod (talk) 15:14, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lafayette fcu logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lafayette fcu logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:22, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Updated with a svg file, so I've marked it for deletion. Thanks, Gobonobo ^{T C} 03:39, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Not a personal attack

It was not a personal attack by myself, he suggested it for himself I linked the definitions of the term. --93.82.8.84 (talk) 10:09, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Meg Whitman

Good on you for finding a reference. --Nuujinn (talk) 02:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I knew I had read about that the other day. Cheers, Gobonobo ^{T C} 02:30, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

United States Congress & Dab solver

Hi, you recently used this program (or some other additional program?) to make many changes to the above article. Unfortunately, in correcting miscapitalizations, the program introduced some of its own. For example, in author names, it changed RICHARD L. BERKE to Richard l. berke (there are many changes like that one). Anyway to fix this other than by hand?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for leaving a message. It looks like there were some changes with the autofixing that Reflinks does. I can revert the change(s) and turn off the autofix function for the time being. Gobonobo ^{T C} 23:10, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I can see you struggled to make that work and ended up having to do a fair amount of manual work. It was very good of you to do so, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

• News and notes: German chapter remodeled to meet Foundation requirements, and more

• In the news: Spanish police pursues BLP vandals, Jimbo interviewed, advice for experts and spammers

• Book review: Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia, by Joseph Reagle

• WikiProject report: Hot topics with WikiProject Volcanoes

• Features and admins: Milestone: 2,500th featured picture

• Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution

• Technology report: Code reviewers, October Engineering update, brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Larry Bucshon

The article Larry Bucshon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:POLITICIAN ""Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Arbor832466 (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

• News and notes: Board resolutions, fundraiser challenge, traffic report, ten thousand good articles, and more

• In the news: Free culture conference, "The Register" retracts accusations, students blog about Wikipedia, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Smithsonian Institution

• Features and admins: Big week for ships and music

• Dispatches: Tools, part 3: Style tools and wikEd

• Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 06:55, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

I keep running across your userid in various articles, and just wanted to say thanks for all your efforts to keep things cleaned up. :-) Flatterworld (talk) 20:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Flatterworld. I appreciate all of your work on political articles as well. Let me know if you need help with anything. Cheers, Gobonobo ^{T C} 16:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Woman's World magazine cover.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Woman's World magazine cover.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Lossy compression artifacts in File:Wired magazine June 1997.png

I noticed you swapped out the article image for Wired (magazine) with a picture of the cover, replacing the .svg logo that was already there, but the image you replaced it with is a .png with visible .jpg artifacts. Now, I've looked around at some of the other magazine articles, and I noticed that they have covers and not logos for their article images, but the image you put up is blurry, even in the thumbnail on the article. I've decided to revert your change, because overall, I think the logo looks better, even if it isn't the whole cover. If you have the original jpg image that was converted to png, or better yet, a png of the cover, it'd be great if you could upload that to replace the logo. Or, if you think having a cover image instead of a logo is more important than decent quality, go ahead and revert my edit to put yours back up. Lx45803 (talk) 07:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Lx45803. Thanks for your note. I've uploaded a new version of the file that I hope is devoid of .jpg artifacts. I took the cover image from here as it was one of the only images I could find of that particular cover. I wanted to use this specific cover as it was listed as one of ASME's top 40 covers of the past 40 years [1]. Could you take a look at the new version and see if it looks any better? I'm not attached to having the magazine cover in the infobox and could see including it in the body of the article if it's not too blurry. Gobonobo ^{T C} 16:53, 16 October 2010 (UTC)