User:BD2412/Archive 003: Difference between revisions
→Proposed deletion of Charles Hamilton Aide: Thanks, I already have. |
removed redundant sub headline |
||
Line 274: | Line 274: | ||
:Hey, nice of you to stop by! The program is indeed keeping me busy (expect to see a lot of updating of various articles on Patent, Trademark, and Copyright once I get through with it). I hope all is equally well with you, my friend. [[User:BD2412|<font style="background:gold">'''''bd2412'''''</font>]] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 05:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC) |
:Hey, nice of you to stop by! The program is indeed keeping me busy (expect to see a lot of updating of various articles on Patent, Trademark, and Copyright once I get through with it). I hope all is equally well with you, my friend. [[User:BD2412|<font style="background:gold">'''''bd2412'''''</font>]] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 05:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
==prod:Charles Hamilton Aide== |
|||
==Proposed deletion of Charles Hamilton Aide== |
==Proposed deletion of Charles Hamilton Aide== |
||
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]] |
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]] |
Revision as of 09:19, 23 November 2008
I have divided my archived pages by topic, rather than by date:
Copyrights of machine-generated picturesI'm wondering now about machine-generated images such as x-rays, MRI pictures, etc. Since those involve no human creative input, are they even eligible for copyright protection? Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Please consider joining the working group for the WMF DC ChapterPlease consider joining the working group for the WMF DC chapter. Since we have a very active and very community oriented DC/MD/VA area group of Wikipedians, it only makes sense to develop it as a chapter, especially given the recent changes to the Board of Trustees structure, giving chapters more of a vote. Hopefully we will be either the first or the second officially recognized US Chapter (WMF Pennsylvania is pending as well), and hopefully our efforts will benefit WMF Penn as well. Remember, it's a working group, and this is a wiki, so feel free to offer changes, make bold changes to the group, and discuss on the talk page! I hope to see you there, as well as Wikimeetup DC 4 if you're attending. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 16:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC) Enjoy!!BD. enjoy your travels! -- DS1953 talk 18:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC) Hello!Hello I noticed that you have interest in legal articles and great knowledge. Can you plz. take a look at this article i just wrote Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New York and tell me what you think? Do you want to team up to work on legal articles together? JeanLatore (talk) 01:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC) Would you be willing to edit an article that I have started?I picked you in a semi-random manner and am wondering if you would care to come and collaborate on Toibb v. Radloff with me? Didn't realize how badly it was written until I self-nominated for WP:GA and got a reality check from a more experienced editor. I want to see what it takes to fix my work up into a good article; more interestingly, one of the comments left by the reviewer ("And how it's studied in law school etc.") is something about which I am absolutely clueless. Please edit it mercilessly. By the way, I like the forum-selection clause at the top of your user talk page. Very clever. Bwrs (talk) 04:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Requesting administrative interventionHi BD2412, can you please explain to User:Pseudomonas that pages like the one I just did on Dickinson Wright PLLC aren't candidates for speedy deletion simply because they mention a private company? This guy doesn't seem to have a good grasp of the guidelines. --Eastlaw (talk) 16:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Nightmare or Gordian knotHardly urgent but...
Thanks! Nice to say hi again. My oldest boy is starting college this August down your neck of the woods--Florida Tech. Got nearly a full scholarship which is definitely a good thing! Cheers // FrankB 17:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC) A little helpI wouldn't mind a little help if you have time. :-) The FairTax article (FA) was listed on the main page this week, so it's now receiving its share of comments. I don't know what your position is on tax reform nor do I care if you support or oppose such a bill. I've always found you to be honest, provide good discussion, and you know taxation and wikipedia policies very well, which is what we may need there with many new users making comments (we get the extremes). We've been through FAR on similar things and just so stressful. I'll warn you that it is a controversial subject, so like many of our tax protester articles, it could get a little heated. Anyway, thank you for you help if you have time. We need some level heads. Morphh (talk) 18:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I wanted to thank you for taking your time to do some research on this. At this point, it looks like my changes address the main disputes and hopefully additional issues will be easily resolved. I know how researching a disinteresting topic can be, particularly when you have limited time and much to do. While it appears I was able to resolve it, I wanted you to know how much I appreciated you taking a step to help resolve the disputes. Things can get overwhelming here at times and your involvement reduced a great deal of stress, allowing me to work through the issues. Morphh (talk) 21:17, 04 September 2008 (UTC)
KumiteI noticed your post on Kumite (tournament), and I tagged the article to be merged with Bloodsport (film) but I'm not entirely sure thats the right place for it. Perhaps you could reiterate your viewpoint on the talk page smooth0707 (talk) 16:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC) New templates with red links reportsNow available at the usual locations. However, after looking at the output, I think another sort step would be helpful, so I think I'll re-run it later today. --Russ (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC) Hi, BD. Just want to let you know that I will be out on vacation starting Monday and will be gone for a week. I won't be able to review the artcile then. However, there's no need to rush on finishing the GA nomination. We can keep the GA nomination open for a while longer if you need extra time. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 13:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Painter disambigYou recently edited this page, removing a crucial qualification. If you can think of a way to shorten the distinction I was trying to make, then please do it. But it is necessary. Why? Because as you have left things, someone who paints murals would qualify as a "painter" under the second definition, just like a house painter. A disambiguation is inadequate if it doesn't clarify the distinction being made, and it's too bad if it takes more words than you'd like to see. If you don't restore that distinction, either in my original version or in a new version improved for brevity, than I will restore it myself. MdArtLover (talk) 14:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
This is probably pure speculation, but...I know that there were rumors that Frank Murphy was allegedly the first gay SCOTUS justice. I doubt you could find any mention of this in reference sources, so I doubt that it warrants any inclusion in the article (i.e. it wasn't like the situation with J. Edgar Hoover, where persistent rumors surrounded him his whole career). --Eastlaw (talk) 23:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
And on a totally unrelated note...User:Java7837 has been on a tear, removing links to Sourcewatch in articles.[1] I asked him on his talk page why he is doing this, and he hasn't answered me. What should I do? --Eastlaw (talk) 01:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I just noticed that User:MZMcBride has been removing links to this list from case articles. He's done it to like a hundred articles. Did I miss something? I left a message on his talk page but haven't heard from him. In any case, I could use a third opinion. It's been my impression that the links were ok because they were thought to be useful but before I revert his edits maybe we should talk about it and get a general consensus.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 17:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
"Law Review" vs. "Law Journal" TitleHi, I appreciate you getting me on the right track as a new editor! I have posted a detailed rationale for why I wanted to move the Law Review page to Law Journal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Law_review Thanks, Brewsky83 (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC) MeetupWikipedia:Meetup/Tampa -- You're invited! Hires an editor (talk) 02:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC) My newest essay/rantI just wrote a really long new essay that you may find interesting: not all business articles are spam. I'm going to post it at the village pump for policy. I would, however, appreciate hearing your thoughts on it. --Eastlaw (talk) 03:46, 2 August 2008 (UTC) Discussion about the next DC MeetupGreetings! You are receiving this message because you said you wanted to be reminded about future DC meetups on Wikipedia:Meetup/DC_4. We are planning the next DC meetup in late August/early September at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC_5, and would love to have your input. Staeiou (talk) 15:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC) The NLJ 250Hello again, BD2412. I have created this table based on the National Law Journal's rankings of the 250 largest law firms in the USA by headcount. I was wondering if you think such a thing would be a valuable addition to Wikipedia (we already have a listing of the largest UK and EU firms, by revenue). Also, if you do want me to make this an article, let me know if I should delete the salary information, as I am unsure if such data is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Eastlaw (talk) 08:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
OK, I already made the page: List of largest U.S. law firms by number of lawyers. I didn't think that listing the same number that NLJ did would be a copyright problem. As far as the numbers becoming outdated, I'm not sure how much of a problem that is. I know the other lists of law firms are already outdated, since they use revenue figures from 2006 and 2007. Several of the firms on my list have already merged (which I've noted at the bottom). By the way, if you feel more comfortable responding on your own talk page, that's fine with me. --Eastlaw (talk) 06:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikiproject Correction and Detention FacilitiesThanks for your expression of interest in Wikipedia Prisons, otherwise known as Wikiproject Correction and Detention Facilities. Seven people have now indicated here that they would like to help out so I am now assuming that this project will actually happen. I suppose we need to take care of a few preliminaries: getting through the proposal stage, and creating a wikiproject page, page tag, and maybe an infobox. Thanks again for your interest. --Cdogsimmons (talk) 00:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC) I sent you an e-mail recently. If you can't help me with the issue, could you point me to someone who can help? Everyking (talk) 09:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC) As you can see, this project has now taken off. Thanks for your support!--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC) Fair use questionHi, me again with another IP law question for you. I have a bad feeling that a lot of what we claim as fair use here on WP is actually not. After reading [2] I'm concerned that our overuse of non-free photos of deceased individuals doesn't come close to being fair use: Edward Boyd (one article that I worked on a bit), for example. Although WP may be non-profit, I think we might fail the first factor in that the use is not transformative, and being in the top 10 sites on the Internet means a small copyright infringement is visible by a large number of people kind of makes the non-profit aspect moot. Anyway, I'd like to get your thoughts on it when you have time. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Fair use comment and request for adviceHi there. I was reading an old discussion and noticed this comment. Would you be able to advise here. In particular, there was an old discussion for best practice for NFC images. See here. Would you have opinions on those images and their uses? Also, I wrote part of the comment at point 6 here: "A photo from a press agency (e.g. AP), unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article. This applies mostly to contemporary press photos and not necessarily to historical archives of press photos (some of which are later donated into the public domain: example)." - does that sound OK? Sorry to pile all those questions on, but getting some knowledgeable opinion really helps in such discussions! Carcharoth (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC) Proposed deletion of Chapter 13 (song)![]() A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Chapter 13 (song), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Rwiggum (Talk/Contrib) 18:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Are/Were you a brother in TEΦ?I'm working on the List of Tau Epsilon Phi chapters, which is currently the best consolidation of TEΦ chapter information on the internet (better than national HQ, though that isn't hard...). I am looking for help finding information on the Missing Chapters, and any help or information you can add to the discussion page or the article would be most appreciated! TΓ 703 Timmccloud (talk) 22:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Re: DC 5Plz. see this site. (I'm not familiar on how to add a IPA pronunciation to witk.) ffm 01:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
BD - I see you were over at the Pro Se article doing a little cleanup. Have you taken in what's going on over there? Any opinion?? Non Curat Lex (talk) 07:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
WP Law assessmentHello BD2412, since you are a participant in WP Law can you help in a WP Law dispute? Several months ago a non-participant in WP Law removed the links to WP Law's assessment department and essentially squatted it: the editor did not make enough changes to return the link to the assessment department on WP Law's project page, refused to let others make necessary changes (and said the status quo would last a year longer), and adding content from WP India that specificially linked to WP India assessment department links (rather than WP Law). In the past week or so I have reopened the Assessment department after cleaning it up and reduced the number of unassessed articles by about a third (+3000 unassessed articles to about 2300 unassessed articles). Now the editor who squatted the assessment department is lashing out in two ways: (1) reverting the article assessment's I've made that assessed articles as a C class. The editor's argument is that WP Law has not adopted the C class. However, the assessment bigwigs of Wikipedia stated that the C class is a default opt-in and a consensus opt-out. Two WP Law participants (including myself) support the C class and the editor with whom I am in this disupte is the only editor against it, and so there is no consensus to opt-out. (2) the editor in disupte is reverting the changes I've made to the assessment department to return it to the defunct state. Could you please just state some of the rules, reiterate that the C class is an automatic opt-in, and suggest a possible mediation? Thanks. EECavazos (talk) 20:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Are you sure it wasn't Ted White?Hey BD. I have come to chide you about an amusing edit you made to Seminole Tribe v. Florida. Ed White (11/3/1845-5/19/1921) took no part in the consideration of Union Gas Company. I have fixed it - but not before having a good laugh. It was brought to my attention by User:Mind the gap. Non Curat Lex (talk) 09:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Cheers!It has been a great 3 years my old friend, I wish you the best. Thank you so much for everything, it really has meant a lot to me. Perhaps I will email you some time, though I don't know I have it. Good luck with your practice, and thanks for being there. If you could watch over the Analytical Graphics article that would really be great. Thank you so much, Prodego talk 23:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
BD: I put this proposal on the talk page the other day intending to be a request for urgent action, but no one seems to have noticed. Feel free to leave any thoughts you might have - if you feel like it. Non Curat Lex (talk) 07:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC) CfD nomination of Category:Fictional duos![]() A little help when you come back?United State congressional apportionment. An editor ran his own numbers and for some reason thinks his numbers are not original research and that the link cited for the article is. World's gone topsy turvy... Foofighter20x (talk) 05:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:TauEpsilonPhi.gif)
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) 06:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC) AfD nomination of Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina![]() No content in Category:1042 BC![]() To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:1042 BC, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 19:10, 3 November 2008 (UTC) The Violin DiaryThanks for flagging my article on The Violin Diary, although it may be published through a vanity-press, doesn't mean it's not notable. It's perfectly notable. So BRING IT ON. Amelia Nymph (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Howdy thar, pardnerHey, pardner, just thought I'd say howdy. I still watch the tax articles (and in particular the tax protester-related articles) like a hawk; things have been fairly quiet for many months -- but you know how that goes, things can change at a moment's notice. For about a year and a half, I have also been posting at the tax protester forum at www.quatloos.com. Very interesting forum. I hope the LL.M. program is suitin' you fine. Yours, Famspear (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Charles Hamilton Aide![]() A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Charles Hamilton Aide, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 121.220.222.139 (talk) 09:17, 23 November 2008 (UTC) I proposed this page for deletion without relaising what a large contribution you have made to wikipoedia. I'm sorry for any offence and hope you can improve the page :) 121.220.222.139 (talk) 09:17, 23 November 2008 (UTC) |