Jump to content

User talk:A Stop at Willoughby: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 437: Line 437:
Ok, thanks. I don't know what DRV is, but you've been super-helpful. ([[Special:Contributions/129.96.234.232|129.96.234.232]] ([[User talk:129.96.234.232|talk]]) 08:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC))
Ok, thanks. I don't know what DRV is, but you've been super-helpful. ([[Special:Contributions/129.96.234.232|129.96.234.232]] ([[User talk:129.96.234.232|talk]]) 08:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC))


Hi, I found the right place, I hope? The information above is correct. The Japanese production team are happy to have the material on wikipedia, provided that the photographer is credited. We can get an e-mail from Kijimuna Festival office to verify this, but not sure where to post it? What sort've proof is needed here? ([[Special:Contributions/123.2.53.91|123.2.53.91]] ([[User talk:123.2.53.91|talk]]) 12:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC))
Hi, I found the right place, I hope? The information above is correct. The Japanese production team are happy to have the material on wikipedia, provided that the photographer is credited. We can get an e-mail from Kijimuna Festival office to verify this, but not sure where to post it? What sort've proof is needed here? ([[Special:Contributions/123.2.53.91|123.2.53.91]] ([[User talk:123.2.53.91|talk]]) 12:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

You should be an admin! ([[Special:Contributions/123.2.53.91|123.2.53.91]] ([[User talk:123.2.53.91|talk]]) 03:43, 22 March 2010 (UTC))


==[[Off Da Hook (album)]]==
==[[Off Da Hook (album)]]==

Revision as of 03:43, 22 March 2010

Thank you

Thanks for moving Articles for deletion/Downtown Norwich to the correct venue. Cnilep (talk) 03:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gideon Encarnacion

Hi there. I noticed your tagging of Gideon Encarnacion as A3 (no content). Please note what it says on Special:Newpages: "articles should not be tagged for speedy deletion as having no context (CSD A1) or no content (CSD A3) moments after creation." You tagged this article three minutes after creation. The reason for this note is that new users may not understand that their contributions are live as soon as they hit "Save". After a few minutes (at least five, I'd say), it's OK to tag the article. Cheers, Mm40 (talk) 17:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I believe it was added recently. I sometimes make the same mistake, and it wit a hard habit to break. Regards, Mm40 (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Republik of Peć

I have declined your G3 speedy and PRODded the article instead, as I am not sure it is quite obvious that it is a hoax, though a quick source didn't find me any confirmation. Peć is real and was in the Ottoman Empire at the time; it's not impossible that a revolt could have set up a "republic" and the Ottomans taken a few years to get round to squashing it. I will ask the author for sources and AfD it if none are produced and the PROD gets removed. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brian P. Stack

Hi. I know altering in the information in article Infoboxes can be tricky, and sometimes result in errors like this one, so please make sure to use the Preview function when doing so, and/or checking afterwards to make sure that the edit smoothly. If it doesn't, it's a good idea to either revert your edit, or contact someone with expertise with Infoboxes, and ask them to fix it, which is what I do. Thanks. Happy Holidays! Nightscream (talk) 23:50, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing that; I'm much obliged. Happy holidays to you, too. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thankspam

A piano keyboard encompassing 1 octave Hello, A Stop at Willoughby! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with a total of 93 support !votes, 1 oppose and 3 editors remaining neutral. While frankly overwhelmed by the level of support, I humbly thank the community for the trust it has placed in me, and vow to use the tools judiciously and without malice.
KV5 (Talk • Phils)
Congrats! Replied at your talk page. A Stop at Willoughby ([[User talk:A Stop at

Willoughby|talk]]) 03:00, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I did fix it in the template... after about the first 30 users *shames*. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 03:05, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know; the PSA was actually intended for the public, i.e. the 30 users whose talk pages got screwed up. Congrats on the RfA again. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

RfA Thanks

MrKIA11 (talk) 12:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Congratulations on gaining adminship; you've earned it. I'm glad to see you cleaning out C:SD already. Keep up the good work! A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 18:10, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wkicommons

Ok the page was already deleted by the time I got your message but thanks for telling me, I just wanted to make that article because I typed in 'Wkicommons' accidentally when I was trying to get to the page on Wikicommons so I made the redirect just in case anyone else made that mistake, just trying to make Wikipedia flow better... but I don't think I should recreate the page as there is a banner saying not to recreate the page with the same content. Thanks. Iminrainbows (talk) 23:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to be fair it was a pretty implausible typo, especially since the typo was for the title of a redirect page and not the actual target page. Anyway, you're welcome for the notice. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 05:52, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fabius Aconius Catullinus Philomathius

May I ask why you tagged the article Fabius Aconius Catullinus Philomathius as a stub? The definition of stub is: an article containing only a few sentences of text which is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, but not so short as to provide no useful information, and it should be capable of expansion"; as far as I know those are all the informations about this politician, so no further expansion might be possible. --TakenakaN (talk) 17:13, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in my view the article might not have be long enough to be termed full encyclopedic coverage. However, if you feel there is no potential for expansion, I'll remove the tag. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 17:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wafaa (name)

Could you please look at the talk page of the page you've just tagged here? The webpage's own content is copied from another WP page that I branched this text from. This is the second tag, third strike and you could just delete the page. --Djihed (talk) 12:36, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I thought you'd copied it over from Freebase, which contains some Wikipedia content but is not solely comprised of it. We need to sort this out to avoid GFDL problems; I've replied at Talk:Wafaa (name). A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 13:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Replied. --Djihed (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009


Happy Holidays

File:Father Winter Solstice.jpg

Ret.Prof (talk) 13:03, 19 December 2009 (UTC) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone![reply]

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.


San Juan High School

The site in question http://www.softcom.net/users/whiskeystill/SJhistory.htm also derived their text from http://www.sanjuan.edu/NewSanJuan.cfm?subpage=75204, so I can't really be said to have a copyright issue with softcom.net site. We both got out info from San Juan's site independently.

Please let me know what I can do to fix this as I am interested in incorporating the content in a non-copyright way and the San Juan site appears to be the only source of this limited information. And, as you noted before you tagged the information, I cited the San Juan article in question.

Any advice would be appreciated. Moogwrench (talk) 01:59, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the advice, but am still kind of confused. If I took the information directly from the San Juan site, and I cited it, is that a copyvio? It appears that the softcom.net site took the information directly from the San Juan website: http://www.sanjuan.edu/NewSanJuan.cfm?subpage=75204 Thanks in anticipation. Moogwrench (talk) 03:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thank you for the clarification. I will rewrite the history, and put it under the alternate page link. Thanks! Moogwrench (talk) 03:37, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Drew Sheneman

Updated DYK query On December 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Drew Sheneman, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Thank you for your contributions to WP:SCV. If you didn't know already, there's a template called Template:SCV that might be helpful for you. :) Regards, Theleftorium 19:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks! I was wondering what template you were using. I appreciate it. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 20:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

William Pidgeon

In the case of William Pidgeon the name was changed to William Edwin Pidgeon because WEP is more commonly used with his middle name (see his websites) and to prevent confusion with William Pidgeon (archaeologist), who has no middle name. William Pidgeon was then made a disambig page. If you want to arbitraily change William Pidgeon from a disambig page to a page on WEP again, that is fine (even if it shows poor understanding of naming convention) but you must also change all the redirects from William Edwin Pidgeon to William Pidgeon. If you do not make all the changes in all the articles that link William Edwin Pidgeon, I will assume that your action was based on a whim, and I will make William Pidgeon a disambig page again. Thank you, Bill Whittaker 14:18, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Susan Walker

That's fine, a dab page can be created. Wizardman 01:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

Notification: Proposed 'Motion to Close' at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at this page. Jusdafax 04:49, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amphibious Antelope

You mean you don't believe that there really are amphibious antelopes living in hot springs on the border between Kazakhstan and Norway? Nyttend (talk) 04:33, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

William Pidgeon

As I said before, if you want to change it back that is fine, but you should also change all the redirects from William Edwin Pidgeon. As well, you need to move the discussion page along with the article. Please fix this. Thank you, 15:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

Suiciders

I've declined your R3 speedy because the page wasn't originally a redirect. I've restored and prodded the original version instead. Some may argue that a G3 speedy would apply. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 06:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct; I forgot that redirects must lack a page history in order to be speedied. In any case, I agree with your proposed deletion of the current "article" and will add {{prod-2}} if my G3 tag is declined. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 22:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In media sections in city articles

Hi, Willoughby. I'm currently involved in a conflict with another editor over the inclusion of a a section in the Union City, New Jersey article that details notable examples of the city appearing in various media. Although the entries are sourced, and are, IMO, non-trivial examples (such as the town being used as the setting, being mentioned, appearing in the title, or being used as the filming location), the other editor, User:Djflem, insists that they are Trivia, do not establish connections to the city, and are best mentioned, if at all, in other sections without any elaboration. Although I do not favor including examples that constitute a mere throwaway line reference to a city, examples that I think are of greater importance such as these merit inclusion. I was going to start a consensus discussion on that article's Talk Page, but then I figured that this could have broad pertinence for all NJ articles (and maybe even all city articles), so I thought the NJ Project Page would be a better place for everyone to participate. (Hoboken and Weehawken, for example also have such sections.) Has there ever been a discussion on this topic before? Nightscream (talk) 23:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously I want to have a discussion in the hopes of returning that section that one article, but I figure it could be a precedent that may have broader ramifications for city articles in general. Are you sure a discussion on the Project NJ page wouldn't be more appropriate? Nightscream (talk) 22:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My main concern is having a wide range of "votes", given how it might set a precedent, so if you want to do it at Project Cities, I'm fine with that. I can start the discussion, but I contacted you because I'm not sure who I should invite, and you arranged that discussion before on the Project NJ page. Should I invite people from Project New Jersey, or just invite those who I see have participated on Project Cities? Nightscream (talk) 02:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you prefer ProjectCities, then I'll start it there. Nightscream (talk) 04:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Marianas Variety News & Views

Updated DYK query On January 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Marianas Variety News & Views, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The Did you know? project 00:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Admin?

While I don't always agree with you, I've found your contributions to be solid and your understanding of policy and guidelines to be very good. I suspect I'd not be the best RfA nom for you (there are probably a handful of people who would !vote against you because I was the nom). But I'd encourage you to consider going that way. We could use more admins who are both good at communication and understand AfD and related policies. Hobit (talk) 07:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem on the month. My life gets hairy from Feb 2 to the 12th or so and I likely won't be here during that time. But other than that, no issues. Hobit (talk) 04:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And again. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well done

You just delivered one of the most powerfully demolishing 4 line arguments I've seen here, mit policy even.Bali ultimate (talk) 03:26, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! But kudos go to Chillum for the sound original close. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

Talkback

Hello, A Stop at Willoughby. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ex Post Facto.
Message added 22:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hope this helps. Taelus (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Governors PR

Looks good, nice photos. I briefly commented again at PR. You can close the PR at any time; instructions are near the top of the main PR page. Please ping me if you have trouble closing. Finetooth (talk) 05:15, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

Your AFD Question

The concerns were raised over notability and sources, all of which were cited. If you would still like me to reverse, I can. Please let me know. DustiSPEAK!! 04:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)</>  Done DustiSPEAK!! 04:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hi there A Stop at Willoughby. I just wanted to say a somewhat belated thanks for your participation in my RfA. The nicest surprise of the process was realising how many editors I've seen around and developed respect for had actually noticed me as well - it's easy to think of yourself as invisible when you're mainly a gnome. I definitely count you in that group, so thanks for your kind words and the vote of confidence. Best wishes, Olaf Davis (talk) 22:42, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

  • gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

Six Bells Colliery Disaster

Did you agree the tag with User:Coren? I was awaiting a response. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was expecting an answer to the question I posted above. I'm really not sure how it is possible to "reformulate the concepts" when these are simple facts, and when the sentences containing them have indeed been re-written and re-ordered. I don't suppose the copyvio tag from Coren would have been added if I had omitted the source as an external link. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010


Happy A Stop at Willoughby's Day!

User:A Stop at Willoughby has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as A Stop at Willoughby's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear A Stop at Willoughby!

Peace,
Rlevse
02:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

Congrats

Congratulations on the promotion of List of Governors of New Jersey to featured status. Finetooth (talk) 18:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thank you very much for the barnstar. I appreciate your thoughtfulness. Finetooth (talk) 02:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Cohen

An IP editor seems to think that Scott Lee Cohen's article should not mention the details of the allegations that could very well make him step aside. Could you take a look. -Rrius (talk) 00:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Participation at my RfA

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work (and been reminded of the sad state that a couple of articles I created are currently in). Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherlleft 12:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

Thanks

Hi there! This might bit of a wierd remark, but the current RfA for TTTSNB is the first one I've participated in, and they're quite an intimidating thing for a reasonably new user such as myself. That off-hand compliment about the points I raised made the whole thing a lot less scary for me than it could have been, so I'd just like to say thanks for that. -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 04:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Pendizzle/ksport

You can't redirect userspace to article space can you? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not. Such redirects are created relatively often when users develop articles in their userspaces and then use the move button to transfer the contents and history to the mainspace. Some users tag the redirects that are left behind with {{db-u1}}, others leave them be. There's certainly no policy against them.
In the case of Ksport, I (as you know) tagged the article with {{prod}}. When the PROD expires and the article is deleted, the userspace redirect would probably be tagged with {{db-redirnone}} and deleted. However, that's a moot point now that PhantomSteve deleted the userspace draft you sent to MfD. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010


Midnight Image Ruling

Hi there. Request for guidance re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_16#2010_January_24 and your comment that The only reason to overturn this FfD result would be the revelation that the image was, in fact, in the public domain. However, I do not see any evidence that this is the case. If you re-read my original post you will find the following sentence. For proof, this image accompanied all the articles listed on the bottom of the wiki page and is publically available. So there is conclusive evidence that this is the case. In fact, the image was released to the media in conjunction with the original production poster, at no expense. It is a completely free image. I worked as assistant stage manager on the Adelaide production, so admit to some bias towards the show, but the rationale the admins are using here is overzealous and misinformed. The image is free and if you had the time to source the articles listed, you would see so for yourself. It also incorrect to state that an alternative free image is available, because you are simply not allowed to photograph theatrical events. I'm not a member, so maybe there's something I'm missing, but the discussion seems to be confused. Is there a way to demonstrate to the admins' satisfaction that the image is free? Please advise :-) (129.96.234.101 (talk) 02:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I'll reply on your talk page. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 February 28#Simple Instant Messenger

Hi, A Stop at Willoughby. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 January 14, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 February 28#Simple Instant Messenger. Cunard (talk) 08:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly am interested. Thanks for the heads up, Cunard. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010

RfC on Community de-adminship

You are receiving this message because you contributed to Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC and have not participated at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/RfC or been directly informed this RfC has opened. Please accept my apologies if you have been informed of and/or participated in the RfC already.

This RfC has opened and your comments are welcome and encouraged. Please visit Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/RfC. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Steve Titus#Requested move

Hi, A Stop at Willoughby. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Titus (2nd nomination), you may be interested in Talk:Steve Titus#Requested move. Cunard (talk) 18:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly am interested. Thanks for the alert, Cunard. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Honest services fraud

Hi, I went to review this article, one of the oldest on GAN. Are you still working on it? I notice someone else has recently given a somewhat tongue in cheek review, I'm not sure how helpful it was. Are you happy if I take it over? --Ktlynch (talk) 16:53, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am still working on it; I was disappointed by the review by CheeseDeluxe (talk · contribs), which strikes me as tongue-in-cheek or at least rather unhelpful. I would very much appreciate it if you'd take it over. Thanks, A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 19:17, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've started going through it section by section, adding comments to the review page as I go. I want to give it a detailed look over, and it seems like a nice slow moving article, so I've not finished yet. Let me know if there's anything you don't understand. --Ktlynch (talk) 22:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks very much for volunteering to review the article. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 17:06, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your recent edit

at Racism in the United States. Even if that paragraph were not totally insupported (and probably unsuportable) the grammar alone should have gotten it pulled. Good work. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 05:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Thanks. A Stop at Willoughby (talk)

Midnight image

Sorry, is this how you reply? I don't know this site. You requested further proof: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/entertainment/festivals/mythology-of-two-cultures/story-e6freepu-1111117488034 the image accompanied many such articles in the Australian media, free of charge. Thanks for your help. (129.96.234.94 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 04:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, you figured out how to reply just fine. You can add your next comment right below this.
I notice that the image was apparently published in Adelaide Now without a copyright notice; however, it says that the photo's source was The Advertiser. The article was originally published in The Advertiser. Are you sure The Advertiser released the photo into the public domain? It looks like maybe the photo was distributed via a newswire service (like an Associated Press or Reuters photo) along with the article, so it might not be public domain after all. Your thoughts? A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks again for your advice. The shot was released to The Advertiser first (main newspaper in Adelaide) and then went viral. It appeared in SA Life, Sunday Mail, TAASLA Review, BBC radio website and others. I worked backstage, as I said. The actual photograph was taken by a Japanese photographer who took many similar shots during the production's run in Okinawa and gave permission for the crew to use them. They were released to the Australian media with the photographer's encouragement when the production moved to South Australia, and appeared all over the place. That particular shot became a signature image, though the earliest version of the wikipage held a whole bunch of photographs, which have been gradually removed by admins citing copyright. It's a shame the wikipage has become so sparse because it was quite a unique event visually and it's all well-documented in reviews and articles. Tt's all public domain. (129.96.234.232 (talk) 04:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Interesting. Thanks for the detailed response; I'll bring the image back to DRV, because this information should be considered by a broader audience. Thanks for your patience. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 17:06, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I don't know what DRV is, but you've been super-helpful. (129.96.234.232 (talk) 08:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, I found the right place, I hope? The information above is correct. The Japanese production team are happy to have the material on wikipedia, provided that the photographer is credited. We can get an e-mail from Kijimuna Festival office to verify this, but not sure where to post it? What sort've proof is needed here? (123.2.53.91 (talk) 12:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should be an admin! (123.2.53.91 (talk) 03:43, 22 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Off Da Hook (album)

Why you delete my work? I spent my time to collect very hard to find data and try to make wikipedia better and you delete it. Why you doing this. If you don't know what's up?...Don't touch it!!!

article: Off Da Hook (album) —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Liotta (talk • contribs) 12:54, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, John. First of all, you should know that I didn't actually delete your article and can't do anything about it now. I only recommended it for deletion; Alexf is the administrator who actually deleted it.
Second, I'd like to answer your question about why the article was deleted. While it's unfortunate that your hard work was deleted, you have to understand that Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia about everything. We cover many more topics than traditional encyclopedias, but we do limit ourselves to have articles only on things that are notable. Click here to read about what that means on Wikipedia.
The problem with your article, Off Da Hook (album), was that it gave no indication of why its subject was notable. Because it was a musical recording by an artist without an article, it was eligible for speedy deletion (see here).
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010

Thanks

For this. :) -RobertMel (talk) 01:24, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I see you discovered Twinkle shortly thereafter, so I'm sure you'll format AfDs fine from now on. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 01:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I did use Twinkle for the first time too, I don't know why it did not work. Weird. -RobertMel (talk) 01:41, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Really? That is weird...as you might have noticed, Twinkle didn't show up in your edit summary (see?). Then again, just look at the size of WP:TWBUGS; such problems aren't unusual. This is why I personally don't think Twinkle is worth the trouble. It saves you time until it wastes your time, you know? A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 01:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not vandalism

Will Smith's name is WILLARD not William. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.235.52.142 (talk) 04:14, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, but look at the top of the disambiguation page for William Smith. It says, "William, Willie, Will, or Bill Smith may refer to..." (emphasis mine). So yes, while his first name is Willard, he goes by "Will" so it seems useful to keep his name on the disambiguation page. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:18, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

None of those options are WILLARD. Willie Will and Bill are all versions of William. WILLARD is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.235.52.142 (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. However, Will can be a version of both William and Willard. Because many readers may not be aware of the fact that Smith's full name is Willard, some may try to find him through William Smith. That's the purpose of a disambiguation page – to aid readers with navigation. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:26, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some people might search for a major star using the wrong name? They wouldn't just search "Will Smith"? That makes no sense —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.235.52.142 (talk) 04:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ours is not to reason why. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:30, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So Wikipedia makes no sense but it isn't anyones job to ask why? That is stupid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.235.52.142 (talk) 04:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed speedy deletion tag: User:Bank108/Books/bank

Hi A Stop at Willoughby! Firstly, thanks for helping out in CSD areas. I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on User:Bank108/Books/bank- because: CSD G2 does not apply to user pages. Try MfD instead. If you have any questions or other message, please contact me. Thanks Kingpin13 (talk) 08:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The same for User:Bluedog1100/Books/ian and the good times, while these are attempts at books, so they might be a bit different, I feel we should let the users test in user space (even testing WP:BOOKS). - Kingpin13 (talk) 08:32, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010

Admin?

G'day there - I just noticed a way up your talk page that a couple of months ago User:Hobit had suggested you run for adminship but that doesn't seem to have materialised. I can only but re-inforce his sentiments; having seen some of your article work and DRV contributions, I can't think of a more qualified potential candidate. I'm probably not a suitable nominator (but I can only but encourage you to go for it, especially as the community seems to be crying out for a good candidate right now. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

McCormick Tribune Plaza & Ice Rink FAC

Since you commented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Park Grill, you may be interested in commenting at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/McCormick Tribune Plaza & Ice Rink/archive1, which has not received much commentary.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:49, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NJ Legislative templates

Thanks for your work on the NJ Leg templates. One question: I'm not sure where to find the "WT:NJ consensus" to which you refer in your edit summaries, but surely we're missing the word "the" in these templates now? In other words, they should start: "The Nth legislative district of the New Jersey Legislature..." —Offenbach (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and also, the first sentences are all now sentence fragments. So how about "The Nth legislative district of the New Jersey Legislature is represented..." rather than "...which is represented..." Sorry if this is already covered by WT:NJ somewhere. —Offenbach (talk) 22:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Offenbach. These changes are all the result of the consensus reached in this discussion, which has been archived. I've spent quite some time trying to figure out the least messy way to go about implementing the changes, but I came to the conclusion that there has to be a brief period of time during which there are sentence fragments in the articles. However, I'm working to clean up all affected articles as quickly as possible. Thanks for asking me instead of mass-reverting. :) A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A_Stop_at_Willoughby&oldid=351296993"