Jump to content

User talk:BillyTFried: 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
Notification: tagging for deletion of File:Progress Bread Crumbs.jpg. (TW)
Line 798: Line 798:


If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "[[Special:Contributions/BillyTFried|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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If the file is already gone, you can still make a [[Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion|request for undeletion]] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion --> If you have any questions, please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no fair use rationale-notice --> [[User:Kelly|<span style="color:#060;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help">'''Kelly'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Kelly|hi!]]</sup> 16:54, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "[[Special:Contributions/BillyTFried|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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If the file is already gone, you can still make a [[Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion|request for undeletion]] and ask for a chance to fix the problem.<!-- Template:You can request undeletion --> If you have any questions, please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no fair use rationale-notice --> [[User:Kelly|<span style="color:#060;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help">'''Kelly'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Kelly|hi!]]</sup> 16:54, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

:I took that photo myself. Is that no longer good enough? [[User:BillyTFried|BillyTFried]] ([[User talk:BillyTFried#top|talk]]) 18:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:12, 28 March 2013

Hello, BillyTFried! Welcome to my talk page!

Welcome

Hello, BillyTFried, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! You 23:09, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Excellent image you made

I noticed you have an excellent image on Turkey-United States relations. If you made this, any chance you could do a similar one for either Venezuelan-Israeli relations or New Zealander-Israeli relations, preferably both? If you found it, where can I get similar ones? Respectfully, Republitarian 00:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sorry it took so long. I added it to the Venezuelan-Israeli relations page as well with the proper template. I'll try to do the one for New Zealand when I can BillyTFried (talk) 04:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey-United States relations

You have been entering obsessive and oppositional defiant reversals to the US Turkish relations article which amount to personal vandalism with idiotic explanations such as claiming a historic video with sound of being no reference value and one particular leader's personal views as not being the same person's vision. YOu were asked not to vandalize but add with references the points that you wanted to elaborate on but this went over your head. This article is not for you to fartz about in between your porno feasts and chatline ecztasies to have self satisfaction with personality fits. Keep you paws off. 72.74.102.164 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 23:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure buddy. Like I said, YouTube videos in Turkish are not proper references for the ENGLISH Wikipedia. And by the way, why don't you take a look at the history of that page and see just who it was that WROTE THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE. Yup it was me, and since then, 100% of my work remains, and has only been added to. Most of the additions have been legitimate. Yours have not. So don't get your hopes up of me "keeping my paws off" an article that I originated, especially with silly bs like YouTube videos. If you would like to take this issue further feel free to get a Wikipedia Admin involved. But I warn you, that if you continue with the personal attacks I will ask the admins to block your IP address so you will not to be able to edit Wikipedia articles AT ALL. Watch your step pal.--BillyTFried 00:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic extremist terrorism

Please vote in the AFD for this page. This is the only way Islamic terrorism will ever be addressed in Wikipedia. KazakhPol 04:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing! I voted:

Your edits to Sodium bicarbonate

No problem. I couldn't pass it up! :-D --BillyTFried 17:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The March of Those Who Disagree

A tag has been placed on The March of Those Who Disagree, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia.

Hey, don't delete my article! I'm just getting started! --BillyTFried 01:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Bookworm857158367 01:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete your article. I put a speedy delete tag on it because it lacked context and confusing. If you'd posted the article currently in place I wouldn't have tagged it.--Bookworm857158367 03:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Khomeini's marriage

Salam. I answered to your comment about this issue.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 03:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Great American Boycott

Hello there, BillyTFried. Perhaps you did not fully read through the "in-use" warning at the top of the Great American Boycott article. It asks editors to refrain from edits during the overhaul. Please respect this simple request, or if you have any concerns, please list them on the article's talkpage or on my talkpage. Thanks, --Rockero 03:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. --Rockero 05:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me again

Thanks for supplementing the info on California officials. You are correct: I really should have included that the first time around. Much of the other information you have provided to the article has also been quite useful (including vandalism reverts). I just wanted to express my appreciation. I realize we may have gotten off on the wrong foot, but I don't think that should impede us from working together to create a good article. Anyways, it appears you are still actively editing it (please use preview, btw), so I just want to ask you to let me know when you are done or have reached a lull. I want to add in info from recent news stories about turnouts in US cities and other effects, (economic, political...) etc. Gracias, --Rockero 06:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


No problem.
BillyTFried


Irony

Billy, please stop inserting "where illegal immigration is already a felony," into the GAB article. The place for that information in on the illegal immigration article, under the section Mexico. If it is not there already, please feel free to add it. Also, please do not revert edits, especially without discussing them first. I'm going to remove your comment again, so please do not restore it.--Rockero 20:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Image Hey did you take those pictures you uploaded? The SF one is a little blurry, but not bad. If the other one is from SF too, would you mind mentioning it in the caption? Any problems with copyrights/licensing, let me know and I'll do what I can to help.--Rockero 18:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first one I took from my office in SF.
The second was sent from a friend in LA.
I'm not sure if he took the pic himself or not.
BillyTFried 18:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If he didn't, he doesn't own the copyright, and has no right to release it to the public domain (which is how it is currently tagged.) Can you find out where he got it?--Rockero 19:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is important to always sign your comments on talkpages. All in all, I think the article turned out all right. My biggest concern is about the images, which I mentioned on the talkpage rather than on my own talk. Hope you didn't feel snubbed. I've been very busy and my lack of response to you directly was not intended personally. Gracias, --Rockero 19:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the reference does not have a hyperlink does not mean that it is no good. I would have provided a link, but unfortunately, the News-Press only makes its online version available to its subscribers, so it wouldn't do most of wikipedia's readers any good. Are you doubtful that one third of SBSD students didn't attend school? That there were 15,000 people in the streets? What do you want me to do, scan in the entire article and e-mail it to you? How do you think people cited their sources before every news article was available on line? I usually try to assume good faith but I think you are needlessly persecuting this addition...--Rockero 02:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish and Irish flags

If you watched the news coverage of the rally in Chicago, you would be able to see Irish and Polish flags being waved. Also, the Chicago organization, Chicago Celts for Immigration Reform participated in the rally, and they waved Irish flags. 75.3.4.54 18:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it on the People's Weekly [1]. Fort Wayne Journal Gazette mentions Irish flags. There are a few more out there too.--Rockero 18:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, now how about citing sources in the article. BillyTFried 19:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While the burden is technically on the person who seeks to include the information, anyone can do it. I've given you some news stories, why don't you include them?--Rockero 19:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dsindex/01-ds1a.htm -

http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_069125525.html

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/01imm.html

http://www.nbc5.com/news/9124104/detail.html

http://www.wbbm780.com/pages/29758.php?

75.3.4.54 20:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I already took care of your work for you. BillyTFried 20:31, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? 75.3.4.54 20:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC) I already added a cited source for the Polish and Irish flags in Chicago, using Rockeros reference, as he had suggested. BillyTFried 20:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you. Good work. It's great to finally be vindicated. 75.3.4.54 20:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I absolve you! BillyTFried

Progress

What do you think? There are no more unsourced statements. Should we submit it to Wikipedia:Peer review and see if we can get it good article (or better) status?--Rockero 23:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I think it's actually a pretty good article now. Let's give it a shot. BillyTFried 00:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

we finally agree.

hey, billy. we don't have many times when we agree on something, but i think we do now. That name change for the Great American Boycott was wrong. We need to try to change it back. What do you say? dposse 02:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Daly and Prop H

Billy, I'm on your side in the gun-control debate. Pfagerburg 18:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! BillyTFried 19:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree images

Image:Chris Daly.jpg An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Chris Daly.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Chris! my talk 01:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Daly Cop.jpg An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Daly Cop.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Chris! my talk 01:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this image and this comment. If you have permission to release the photo into the public domain, that permission needs to be archived. First you'll need to get the copyright holder to send you an email from an email address that corresponds to the source URL (chrisdalyblows.com). That email must indicate that the person sending it owns the rights to the photo and agrees to release it into the public domain or license it under a free license. Then you need to forward that email, with a source link and Wikipedia image link, to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org. Otherwise, the image may be deleted. Taking these steps to verify that the image is free is your responsibility. It is not others' responsibility to prove that the image is unfree.--chaser - t 03:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Mass current event tag

Hello. I believe the current event tag was recently added to Critical Mass as a result of the addition to the article of information about the August 31, 2007 events in Minneapolis. Cheers, Doctormatt 17:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Your Article

Please stop canvassing people to contribute to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gun Nut. This is directly against the purpose of WP:AFD and against WP:CANVASS. --Durin 23:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I didn't realize it wasn't ok to contact people to ask them to vote. --BillyTFried 23:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for stopping. --Durin 23:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saikano's comments

I have removed Saikano's comments again. He is an indefinitely blocked sockpuppeteer with a history of disrupting the lolicon, anime, pedophile, and child pornography talk pages. Please consider this before reinstating such comments. Leebo T/C 18:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dan White's high school

I saw you recently made an edit on an article about Dan White. I saw that you added the high school he went to. I was just wondering out of interest how you know this and where can I find this information. Thanks! --Gndawydiak 23:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't me. It was this user Special:Contributions/70.56.24.31 BillyTFried 23:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from Mary

Hey Billy, The article is coming together, thanks for asking! Sorry for the delay in getting back to you--I was on a deadline yesterday. Anyhow, I may be emailing you follow-up questions in the not-too-distant future. Best, Mary Marynega (talk) 18:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the olive branch to Griot

I appreciate the two of you making the effort to work that out.

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem! I was glad to help resolve things. BillyTFried (talk) 00:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:SF Weekly.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:SF Weekly.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calton | Talk 01:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC) .[reply]

NOTE: Taking a photograph of an already-copyrighted image doesn't remove the underlying copyright: it's NOT releasable into the public domain. --Calton | Talk 01:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Venezuela Israel Locator.png. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Israel-Venezuela-relations.png. The copy called Image:Israel-Venezuela-relations.png has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 02:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your e-mail

Calton, did you really write this?

If you'd been paying the slightest attention (which I'm doubting) I've already said -- twice or more -- that I didn't write such crap. That you'd think so even after that is insulting. I'd have thought you'd have the slightest familiarity with concept sockpuppetry by now.

If you have anything to say to me, do it publicly on my User Talk page. Your next e-mail to me gets reproduced in full here, complete with headers. --Calton | Talk 02:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been paying very close attention thank you very much. And I'm sorry if you were insulted by my query but I only saw you deny making posts on the SFweekly page other than the highly offensive one directed at me, which I've quoted below. I am glad however that you are now stating that you did not write it.
And yes I know exactly what a sock puppet is and have witnessed the fullest extent of such abuse by your now permanently banned friend Griot, who you so passionately defended to the very end. BillyTFried (talk) 03:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He's not my friend, to know that, you'd have to be paying attention (which I'm doubting even more). As for the sockpuppetry, a modicum of common sense would have saved you from asking the insulting query in the first place, so no, I don't think you really understand the whole "sock puppet" thing.
It's interesting how I'm libeled, insulted, attacked, and my character assassinated by crude forgeries, and your only concern is whether I said something mean to you -- which common sense should have told you otherwise. That, and the hypocritical dig about "my friend" -- boy, you had no trouble whatsoever sucking up your own abusive sockpuppet friend when it was convenient. Your complete lack of shame and principles is hereby noted. --Calton | Talk 03:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Calton please be civil and refrain from insulting me and making anymore accusations that I am a hypocrite or that I lack common sense or shame or principles. Also please stop falsey accusing me of "sucking up" to this user Telegen whom I have never been involved with in any way whatsoever. That is unless you'd like to show even the slightest shred of evidence to the contrary (though none exists and you know it). I'm warning you Calton, do not insult me, harass me, or make false accusations about me on my talk page or anywhere else on Wikipedia. You saw what happened to the last guy who made that mistake. BillyTFried (talk) 04:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Filing Abuse Complaint against Calton

I understand that Calton has been harassing you, along with a number of other users. I would like to file a joint complaint with the arbitration committee against him, as he is clearly abusing other users and repeatedly violating the rule against personal attacks. Please join me in this important effort to help clean up wikipedia. Lirath Q. Pynnor (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with this procedure. Where can this complaint be found? Is it similar to this complaint about his personal attacks? BillyTFried (talk) 23:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Calton please be civil and refrain from insulting me and making anymore accusations that I am an axe-grinder or stalker who lacks credibility and who lies down with dogs and gets up with fleas. This is your second warning. Do not continue this abusive behavior or I will report you to the Wikipedia administration.
Reality check: you are. And am I going to have to explain the concept of metaphor to you? Go ahead and complain, and don't forget to mention that who it's on behalf of.
Speaking of which, don't look to your new friend for support, as he's been blocked indefinitely for trolling and general troublemaking. There's a lesson there, if you'll only take it: vindictive stalking? Doesn't pay. --Calton | Talk 06:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So rather than violating WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA you are really just giving me a friendly "Reality check" that I am a vindictive axe-grinder and stalker who lacks credibility and common sense and who lies down with dogs and gets up with fleas as well as a hypocrite who sucks up to a user I have never had any interaction with at all??? Calton this is your THIRD AND FINAL WARNING. Cease your abusive harassment towards me immediately or I will report you to the Wikipedia administration with the recommendation that you be permanently banned just like your friend user:Griot was. BillyTFried (talk) 06:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got your note

I'll have a look soon. Boodlesthecat Meow? 04:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks it also seems I will have more ridiculous behavior to deal with from our plebian-hating friend Calton with him trying to remove the quite notable fact that Nader has called for impeachment from Nader's article. BillyTFried (talk) 04:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's definitely notable. Didn't Kucinich also call for impeachment (it might have just been for Cheney). Boodlesthecat Meow? 00:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes he did. That's why I wrote that Nader's the only current candidate who did. BillyTFried (talk) 01:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But once the campaign is over, that info will be out of date, when he, like Kucinich, is no longer a "current" candidate. Might be best just to include the durable facts--Nader called for the impeachment of Bush/Cheneyon [date] etc. Boodlesthecat Meow? 01:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you're probably right. I'll just leave it for now and see how things develop. BillyTFried (talk) 02:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

J Street

Interesting, I heard about it here. I'll look into it. Boodlesthecat Meow? 14:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

next time you ask someone to start a discussion on an article talk page before making edits, perhaps it would be a good idea if you actually looked at the talk page in question first. I did try to start a discussion, but you didnt bother looked at just reverted again. But it was nice that you conceded that I was correct about the POW image. It had nothing to do with total war, and I am glad you did not put it back in. thanks Sennen goroshi (talk) 18:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That page is on my watched list which I have been checking constantly but never saw a notification of your talk page addition, which I have now responded to. BillyTFried (talk) 18:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
on that article, due to our differences, you actually reverted me 4 times, I have no problem at all with your last edits, as they merely moved my image to the correct section, due to my mistake. I worry that someone is going to whine about the 3RR and try to get you blocked or something. For the record if that happens feel free to quote me (as the person you reverted) as saying your edit was not a revert as such, it was an improvement to the article, and gets my full blessing. Maybe you dont have idiots watching your every move, but I have at times had people whining about my edits, and they would love to see me make 4 reverts, just so they could whine on ANI about me.Sennen goroshi (talk) 19:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I know what you mean. BillyTFried (talk) 19:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Everest

I see that you move the section to controversy section. I agree that there are controversies for the Everest climb. But since not the entire section is about controversy, such move is not a good idea. What I am thinking is split the section up. One part named "Mount Everest" remains in the Sequence of Event and is devoted to info about the climb itself. Another part can named "Controversies regarding the Everest climb" or something like that in the Controversies and is only about the controversies surrounding the climb. How is that? —Chris! ct 23:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we just leave it there for now and see how everything else around it develops. I'm more concerned with how to handle the mainland China section I created right now (which includes Tibet). BillyTFried (talk) 23:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images on wiki common

I don't mean to revert your contribution. But since this image is in common and you upload this again to wikipedia, it is redundant, hence the speedy deletion. —Chris! ct 23:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you has uploaded several images. For those found on wiki common, you don't have to upload images again to wikipedia. Since the two are interconnected, you can just type the image name (the same one on wiki common) on wikipedia and the wikipedia article will be able to show the same image. Just a friendly note. Cheers. —Chris! ct 22:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that but it didn't seem to work. Can you do it for me so I can see how it is done? Thanks! BillyTFried (talk) 23:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you have to spell the image name exactly the same including the ending (.jpg). I think since the Seoul image spelled in capital letter (.JPG) on common and you might have spelled it in lowercase (.jpg), I think that is why it didn't work when you uploaded it. —Chris! ct 23:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, great. Thanks! BillyTFried (talk) 23:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capicola

If everything was left to consensus and discussion pages, Wikipedia would be more full of garbage than it is. How relevant is it that a product was used in a TV series or movie, if we did this for every product it would make Wikipedia worthless. It had no relevance to the article and trivia is discouargaed by Wikipedia. Riveira2 (talk)Riveira —Preceding comment was added at 06:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion of WP:Consensus is noted, however that does not justify removal of info without discussion on its talk page, especially since Capicola already has a section where it has been discussed. As a compromise I left your removal of the semi-hokey Trivia-like section, but added a more relevant blurb about it in the main paragraph. I understand what you mean about being mentioned on a TV shows not being relevant, but I believe that a little known cold cut becoming well known world wide as a RESULT of being frequently mentioned on a show that "is the most financially successful cable series in the history of television[8][9] and has also won numerous awards, including twenty-one Emmys and five Golden Globes.[17][18]" is quite notable. I see it in the same light as this: "In the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan was President of the United States, he was known for keeping a jar of Jelly Belly jelly beans on his desk, which was credited with helping to increase the candy's popularity in the U.S." I've also made other edits to the article in an attempt to improve it. BillyTFried (talk) 20:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find anything to back your assertion regarding increased sales due to the Sopranos. Riveira2 (talk) 08:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)Riveira[reply]

I never made any such assertion of increased sales. BillyTFried (talk) 18:03, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am disappointed that you saw fit to delete the USDA definition, especially since a good number of editors seemed to think that capicola is some kind of ham, a notion which that reference (one of the scant few citations for that article) clearly disproves.--BillFlis (talk) 23:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bill, I hope you understand that anyone who shares my name is obligated to share my opinion as well. It's only proper, especially when it comes to food! hahahaha :-D But honestly, I don't really care dude. Put it back in if you want. I took it out cause it wasn't really any more informative than the info I added under "Manufacture and use" above it, and it wasn't terribly appealing sounding either. It also didn't even mention the word ham. I also removed it (and a few other things) to appease the Anti-American crowd who's assembled to constantly remove the Sopranos/Godfather references as well as anything else US related. I even changed Hoagie to Italian subs! GASP!.. Sorry Philly Boy! :-P My mom grew up on Green St in Philly and swears there's a difference! :-) Anyway, The article now only has the word US mentioned once, so I'm hoping the DOWN WITH AMERICA crowd will chill out now. And as far as HAM goes the very first paragraph says, "Capicola is often incorrectly referred to as a type of ham", which I think pretty much covers your concerns, no? If not, like I said, feel free to change it back if you really want to. I'm not gonna fight you on it. But look at it this way, in the article for the All-American Big Mac, wouldn't it be odd to have a blurb that said: "The official ingredients for the Big Mac listed by the European Commission on Common Agricultural Policy in 2005 are: Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun. This product shall always be labeled with "Cooked" as part of the product name. Water added is permitted.[1]", know what I mean jelly bean? Me and a lady friend had Prosciutto and Capicola last night, but I guess I drank too much and she didn't pay any mind, and we left it all out over night with all the cheese and olives too. :-( BillyTFried (talk) 05:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bill, I am not down with America - I still have a US passport being a US Citizen (Texan :-)). I have just lived in the UK and Netherlands since I was sixteen and have had exposure to the outside world. My Mom has retired to Florida - so I still visit regularly. A certain company in the UK has a slogan "There's a World out there". I just finding it frustrating North American's changing articles, Shrimps are not Shrimps and Prawns are Shrimp, Harry Potter has a different publication date or publisher, I just thing there should be a North American edition and I cannot see why articles about food products or articles about fine Cognac become articles about TV Shows that are buried late at night in Europe and watched by 0.5 of the viewing audience in Europe or about Hip Hop culture and rap lyrics. Riveira2 (talk) 19:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GoodBye! West!

From now on, I don't believe the so called western freedom, human rights and democracy can influence any place within the great CHINA!! GOOD BYE!!AlexBlues (talk) 16:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might be right. Sad as it is, sometimes people just have to learn to civilize on their own, whether they be Nigerian, Lebanese, or Chinese. BillyTFried (talk) 22:27, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right, but I think you just missed one country:USA. Tell me how many American natives Whites have killed? Why there is no a independent native nation in America?AlexBlues (talk) 22:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "Whites"? You mean all Caucasian people on Earth from Rome to Moscow? So are Vietnamese to blame for the brutal massacre of 30 million Europeans by Genghis Khan? Are Filipinos to blame for the torture and killing of 200,000 Europeans and Americans by Imperial Japan? They're all Asian right? Yes, the Americans treated the Natives brutally hundreds of years ago. The thing YOU seem to be missing is that China still behaves that way TODAY. But I understand and have sympathy for you. I know how hard it is to see the truth when your county's leaders hide it from you, and punish you if you try to find it. Here's a good quote from today's news:
"Revisionist history
One 27-year-old information technology employee from Shanghai, who asked that his name not be used for fear of retaliation, said that through the Internet, he discovered different versions of what happened during China's Cultural Revolution and World War II. A friend shared a documentary about the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest that had been downloaded from an overseas file-sharing service. It was completely different from what I learned in school," he said. "It's hard to believe the first time you see a different edition of history. At first I felt it's unbelievable. Then I felt angry because I was deceived for such a long time." SFgate.com
BillyTFried (talk) 01:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Advance knowledge?

Re your comment here:

"::*This is an INSULT: gain the respect of the conspiracy nuts.
"::*This is not CIVIL: the conspiracy claims... deserve ridicule.
"::*This is not ASSUMING GOOD FAITH: I refuse to dignify them with serious comment.
":::*This is just LAUGHABLE: Elvis & Franco are both still dead.

I don't start from "nuts", & I've only come across 1, total, who falls in that category on WP. I'm not the only one who thinks so. Have a read of some of the archive posts & you'll see who I mean. Civil? It's the claims, not the editors, that deserve ridicule; they're absurd. Ditto "serious comment" & Elvis. So you know. (Evidently, as usual, I was less than clear...) TREKphiler hit me ♠ 22:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just remember that the people you like to call conspiracy loons and nuts sometimes actually turn out to be right about things like:
Operation Northwoods 1962 US government plan written by the DOJ and Joint Chiefs of Staff that proposed having the CIA murder civilians and stage acts of terrorism in the US and blame them on Fidel Castro to create public support for war against Cuba. JFK rejected the plan, sacked the Chairman and others involved, and was dead within a year.
The Business Plot Political conspiracy in 1933 by wealthy businessmen and corporations who plotted a coup to overthrow President Roosevelt. The coup was thwarted when a USMC General who was approached by the conspirators testified to Congress. The Congressional committee concluded that the plot existed but no prosecutions or further investigations followed.
Project MKULTRA 1950's-1970's covert CIA mind-control and chemical interrogation program. Investigation by Congress in 1975 hampered by CIA Director's ordered destruction of files
Tuskegee syphilis experiment 1932-1972 clinical study of 399 poor, illiterate, and ill-informed African Americans to observe the natural progression of the disease if left untreated
Operation Ajax 1953 CIA coup operation that overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran so BP could regain control of the county's oil after the Iranians tried to nationalize it.
Iran Air Flight 655 Iran Air Flight 655, also known as IR655, was a civilian airliner shot down by the United States Navy on Sunday 3 July 1988, over the Strait of Hormuz.
McCollum memo Proposal that detailed an 8 step plan to provoke Japan into attacking the US. FDR implemented all 8 recommendations and following the eighth, Japan attacked. Contains to notable quote, "If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war. -- A. H. McCollum".
American mutilation of Japanese war dead During WWII some US troops mutilated dead Japanese soldiers including the taking of body parts as “war souvenirs” and “war trophies”, such as teeth, skulls, and other body parts.
Operation PBSUCCESS 1954 CIA operation to overthrow the democratically elected government of Guatemala because its policies that the US deemed Communist in nature.
Grant's Memoirs Published by Mark Twain in 1885, includes notable quotes such as, "[The Mexican-American War] was one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation."
Disarmed Enemy Forces US re-designation of WWII POWs to circumvent Geneva Convention and allow for prisoners to be used for forced labor.
Eisenhower and German POWs After WWII Eisenhower oversaw the deaths by starvation and exposure of one million German POWs‎
Military Commissions Act of 2006 US re-designation of prisoners captured in "War on Terror" to deny rights normally granted by Geneva Conventions to POWs
American support for IRA IRA terrorists were armed by Irish-Americans and funded through NORAID
Swiss banks and World War II Helped Nazis hide looked money during and after WWII
US vs. De_Beers Resulted in $10M fine for DeBeers/GE diamond price fixing conspiracy
US Biological Weapons Tests US Biological Weapons Experiments on Non-consenting Individuals
Sinking of USS Maine By self-inflicted torpedo accident, blamed on Spain, sparking Spanish-American War, ending with US control of Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam.
No Gun Ri massacre US Army troops officially ordered to gun down 150 unarmed South Korean civilians.
My Lai Massacre Cover-up US Army Cover-up of My Lai Massacre during Vietnam War
2005 NSA Gulf of Tonkin Fabrication Confession Report details how US military officials lied to civilian personal about the incident
The U.S. vs. John Lennon Richard Nixon ordered FBI to silence and deport then Peace-activist Lennon on any grounds they could find.
Taft-Katsura Agreement Secret agreement signed between US and Japan in 1905 where the US promised to ignore Japan's dominance of Korea in exchange for Japan ignoring the US's dominance of the Philippines. No Koreans or Filipinos were consulted or informed.
Vatican-Nazi Treaty Pact between the Holy See and Nazi Germany, signed in 1933, which is considered by most historians as an important step toward the international acceptance of Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime.
Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US US President's Daily Brief given to George W. Bush on August 6, 2001, which warned of terrorism threats from Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda just a month before 9/11, including warnings of on imminent attacks from the governments of France, Germany, UK, Israel, Jordan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Morocco and Russia.
Iraq oil law (2007) The Iraqi Oil Ministry announced plans to go ahead with small one or two year no-bid contracts to Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — once partners in the Iraq Petroleum Company dating back to 1912 — along with Chevron and smaller firms to service Iraq’s largest fields.
Project SHAD US Biological and chemical weapons tests on uninformed and unwilling humans. Until 1998 DOJ claim it was a myth and remained classified until Congressional hearings in 2002 with data finally released in 2007.
Urban Moving Systems NJ moving company that received $665,000 from the US government according to records. Owner was questioned by the FBI on September 12, 2001 and then fled the country September 14, 2001. A suspicious van traced to the company was reported with occupants recording the collapse of the World Trade Center. According to FBI sources, Urban Moving Systems may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation.
USS Liberty incident 1967 Israeli attack on a neutral US Navy ship in international waters during the Six-Day War, which killed 34 and wounded more than 170 crew members, and damaged the ship severely.
Iran Contra Scandal Secret arrangement in the 1980s to provide funds to the Nicaraguan Contra rebels from profits gained by selling arms to Iran, in order to aid the Contras who were conducting a guerrilla war against the Sandinista government, and at the same time, placate “moderates” within the Iranian government in order to secure the release of American hostages held by pro-Iranian groups in Lebanon.
Here's one only a conspiracy "nut" or "loon" would believe:
Between 1951 and 1954, several studies were conducted to demonstrate the vulnerability of US cities (20). Cities on both coasts were surreptitiously used as laboratories to test aerosolization and dispersal methods when simulants were released during covert experiments in New York City, San Francisco, and other sites. Aspergillus fumigatus, Bacillus subtilis var globigii, and Serratia marcescens were selected for these experiments (7, 20). Organisms were released over large geographic areas to study the effects of solar irradiation and climatic conditions on the viability of organisms. Concerns regarding potential public health hazards were raised after outbreaks of urinary tract infections caused by nosocomial S. marcescens at Stanford University Hospital between September 1950 and February 1951. The outbreak followed covert experiments using S. marcescens as a simulant in San Francisco. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1200679
BillyTFried (talk) 02:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The existence of other conspiracies isn't proof of one around Pearl Harbor, only proof conspiracy happens; that's faulty reasoning. AFAIK, I never said conspiracy didn't exist, just that it isn't established re Pearl Harbor. It isn't. So far, the conspiracy theory depends on ignoring evidence there isn't one, ignoring sources cited by conspiracy theorists there isn't one, in favor of believing there is; that shows a depressing lack of intellectual rigor. I might also add your "alternative outline" is unhelpful. Ridiculous as I find the claims, it's not up to me to decide they're "BS". TREKphiler hit me ♠ 01:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Faulty reasoning? Please. Only when you interpret things wrong, as you have, purposefully. I know you're smart enough to realize that I'm in no way saying, "Duuuh... Cuz one really happen... Errrr.. Dat mean, DEY ALL REALLY HAPPEN!!!", come on dude. The fact that MOST Conspiracy Theories ARE BS wouldn't make me feel any better about calling people Nuts & Loons in the 1990's who ended up proven right in the 2000's. Has that happened? Yes. And it's gonna happen to you one day because that's exactly where your attitude leads. Trust me. And your criticism that my proposed outline that IS GOING TO clean up that joke of an article is unhelpful, is just silly. Any form of organization for that article would be MORE than helpful. First you say "ignoring evidence there isn't one, ignoring sources cited", then you say, "it's not up to me to decide they're BS". Um, no. You've already clearly "Decided" they're BS. You just simply refuse to state your case why they are. Pretty childish, and certainly NOT what Wikipedia is about. Act like a child all you want. Just don't get in my way. I'm not about to have my time and energy wasted on childish petty tantrums. BillyTFried (talk) 03:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let me see if I understand you. Project MKULTRA was a Top Secret project, not a conspiracy. The Reichskonkordat was a secret treaty, not a conspiracy. DeBeers was greedy, & it didn't start a war. The Swiss bankers were secretive (This is a surprise why?) & bigoted (This is a surprise why?). And your laundry list of conspiracies & secrets says nothing to whether there actually was advance knowledge at Pearl Harbor, or to evidence this "fact" was suppressed. Nor, I notice, does it address the issue of refusing to accept any explanation except conspiracy. That is simply demanding I take the theory on faith, & it is for that reason I refuse to take its proponents seriously. "You just simply refuse to state your case"? I'm not the one demanding inclusion of a theory running contrary to the overwhelming weight of evidence. If you expect me to believe it, show me the evidence; as the saying goes, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". You've failed to offer even ordinary evidence. It is also for that I refuse to take them seriously. "that's exactly where your attitude leads"? In over 60yrs, all that supports the "conspiracy" at Pearl Harbor is the fact there are documents allegedly still secret proving it's a fact. Absence of evidence is not evidence. It has damn all to do with whether MK Ultra was real, or whether DeBeers committed fraud. "childish petty tantrums"? You're the one who went & deleted sources, valid published sources, simply because you couldn't find them online. Whose tantrum? TREKphiler hit me ♠ 08:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You just don't get it. UNLIKE YOU, I am not PUSHING any "Case", so I have none to state other than trying to improve an obviously terribly put together article. THERE'S MY CASE! So, now would you really like to try and REFUTE THAT? I thought so! And BTW, The REF LIST is the list of SOURCES, not the damn Recommended Further Reading list, which appeared at a glance to be mostly Pro-Conspiracy Theory Books anyway. Jeez! BillyTFried (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Billy, that's a great list above. I need to copy that one! I have had lots of my letters to the editor published in the Examiner (you found one), but when I submitted a carefully prepared list like this, proving my point, you better believe they didn't print that one! I have been meaning to bring up patriotic, nationalist, "America can do no wrong" philosophy we learn in high school & grade school and how it conveniently leaves out this important history of American Foreign Policy, and that if there was indeed advanced knowledge of Pearl Harbor, you can pretty much bet you'd never learn it in American history class. That would be "unpatriotic." Sounds like you know your Howard Zinn. I told Trek I trusted Zinn over more traditional historians & he didn't care much for that. I'll bet you have a hunch why I might...--David Tornheim (talk) 08:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks David. Glad you liked it. It started as just a couple lines and then I got way carried away. You might like this Critical Mass video I took also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6R810JiJiUk BillyTFried (talk) 07:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting tape. It's weird she was blaming all the bikers for getting hit by a car. At first I thought she was on the sidewalk & a biker had hit her--it bugs me when bikes are on the sidewalk. I bike and don't use the sidewalk, but if you confront bikers on sidewalks endangering pedestrians, half get aggressive & nasty--I'd hate to see them in a car after some pedestrian got in their way. Their view seems to be "MY safety matters, but not YOURS." I liked the way the cop handled her. I was in a cab this week and the cabbie was whining about a pedestrian getting in his way, and I gave him a long lecture about how from my view cabbies and motorists on cell phones make it hazardous for me EVERY DAY I try to legally cross the street, often just missing me as the rush to and frow from red light to red light.--David Tornheim (talk) 20:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


FYI. Some excitement going on at the main Attack on Pearl Harbor site (not the Advanced knowledge one.) I predict a call for dispute resolution will soon be introduced. --David Tornheim (talk) 21:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Not sure why there would be on a historically factual page rather than a controversial page, thanks, I'll take a look. BillyTFried (talk) 03:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea

I loved your idea of doing a re-direct from Racism and Zionism to the UN resolution! Now why didn't I think of that?!

I'm sure you did think of it, but it just didn't fall in line with your obvious goal of fighting Israel's battles on Wikipedia. BillyTFried (talk) 19:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

duh, I really don't get it. #1. I didn't think of it. I wish I had. It was intended as a compliment #2. It falls in line with my way of thinking. #3. My goal is not to fight battles on Wiki #4. I have no idea what your link is supposed to convey. Anyway, have a good day. Sorry to have bothered you. Tundrabuggy (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I mistook your comments as sarcasm because: #1 I saw that you HAD already thought of it. #2 I found the decision for deletion of that page to be rather dubious. #3 A quick review of your User/Talk/Contrib pages shows that you almost exclusively write about Israel and always from a pro-Israel perspective. #4 You seemed to be mocking my conspiracies table above. BillyTFried (talk) 03:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good heavens, I must be losing my mind. I didn't remember saying that. How did you happen to find it? Re your conspiracies table, I was not mocking it at all. It is a great table even if I do disagree that all of them have been proven true, is all. Some are "alleged" to my way of thinking. I deeply value truth and that may be why my edits appear to be from a pro-Israel perspective. Best regards. Tundrabuggy (talk) 13:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SF Meetup #8

  In the area? You're invited to
   San Francisco Meetup # 8
  Date: November 8th, 2008
  Time: 2PM
  Place: Metacafe, Palo Alto, California
  prev: Meetup 7 - next: Meetup 9
You received this invite because you added your name to the Invite list. If you don't wish to be invited any more, simply remove your name. Thanks. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 18:25, 31 October 2008 (UTC) [reply]


Requesting Help

Due to the IP range and recent edit history and comments pertaining to Ralph Nader and Ralph Nader presidential campaign, 2008, I am becoming increasingly more concerned that User: 71.139.23.95 is the one Wikipedia banned for sockpuppetry, User:Griot. I am uncertain how to proceed. Please advise. Thank you, EagleScout18 (talk) 20:45, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request granted. I reported him as a suspected Sock Puppet and requested a new Check User on his IP. BillyTFried (talk) 23:28, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, I'm trying to fix the articles now. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do. EagleScout18 (talk) 23:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a puppet of any kind, but someone who is contributing to this online encyclopedia. 71.139.23.95 (talk) 16:06, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added my comments to the report. EagleScout18 (talk) 20:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but do you have any evidence to support this claim? "71.139.23.95 has also been identified as an IP address used to stalk the journalist who wrote "Wikipedia Idiots.""? BillyTFried (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do. EagleScout18 (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can I see it please? BillyTFried (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To preserve the privacy of certain individuals, I will send it via you MySpace listed on your page. EagleScout18 (talk) 20:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mr. Fried. I added more to the sock puppet report, though I'm not sure if it's formatted properly or if another Check User is required for the new IP I listed. Thank you, EagleScout18 (talk) 18:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mr. Fried. I've added more information. EagleScout18 (talk) 19:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoagie

Bill, It looks like your propposal to merge Hoagie to Sub did not receive enough support to demonstrate consensus after a week. You might try submitting an AfD with the recommendation of a merger as the outcome; however, with the amount of current references and those likely to be found with further research, I suspect that an AfD would not prevail. I watch this article for vandalism and POV on a regular basis; while trying to remain objective on the varied opinions, I try to keep the article on an encyclopedic track. That being said, this article is due for a major cleanup again.

I notice from your bio that you are in SF; I’m across the Bay in Walnut Creek. --Kevin Murray (talk) 19:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFCs will be automatically removed from the lists after a period of thirty days and right now it is 6 to 3 for MERGE!. BillyTFried (talk) 19:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin, please show WP:Good faith while editing the Hoagie article. Unilaterally shutting down my RFC after a week when they go for 30 days, and falsely claiming That I "did not receive enough support" when I was in fact AHEAD 6 to 3, and constantly removing the perfectly valid photo of a Hoagie from Subway, are NOT what I would call showing "Good Faith". Thanks! BillyTFried (talk) 23:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Billy, I admit that I missed the count on the RfC as it was strangely formatted. It is now clear that there is more support for that merger than I assessed, though RfC is a demonstration for consensus it is not purely a vote. To merge a long standing article you will need more than a simple majority. As to the picture, it fine but the reference to subway must go as spam. --Kevin Murray (talk) 23:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Wikiapples screwed up the whole thing and I had to fix it. The reference to Subway should stay. It is not spam. It is an illustration of the world-wide availability of Hoagies, which some of my fellow NJ-NY-PA natives would like to falsely claim are not hoagies, and that you can only get "real" Hoagies from that region. Read the opening paragraph that I revised today to clarify that hoagies are available not just in NY-NJ-PA, but all over the US and because of Subway and Quinzos... all over the world. That, I believe is very relevant to the topic. It doesn't need to be removed any more than the pic and ref of a Burger King burger needs to be removed from the hamburger article. If so, THIS would be spam beyond belief. BillyTFried (talk) 23:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, I modified the caption to remove the Subway reference, but won't oppose the return of your text for now. I'd prefer seeing the discussion of the widespread availability handled another way in a rewrite, but that is pending on the success of the merger. I didn't mean to get contentious with you; I was looking for a compromise and didn’t realize you were vested in the photo-- I don't have strong feelings on this just keep an eye on it since it seems to be an orphan-article that attracts a lot of POV.
  • I don’t see this as hugely important as a sandwich article, but very interesting historically as to the various explanations of the name. I stumbled here months ago working on shipping articles as a result of a reference from the Hog Island shipyard article. Shipping and especially as it relates to SF Bay is among my areas of interest.

Have a great Thanksgiving! --Kevin Murray (talk) 00:00, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry if I was a bit aggressive. I am somewhat personally attached I guess. Of course since high school or so I knew of Subway and what not, but until I moved out of NJ at age 31, I actually had no idea that pretty much nobody else anywhere called them Hoagies. Then I checked Wikipedia and was stunned by the article that was clearly written by former neighbors of mine pretty much claiming Hoagies were some kind of unique special variety of a sandwich that's not related to Subs at all. It was ridiculous how the article was a few months ago. It also seemed that a good number of people tried in the past to fix and/or merge it with Subs but got ganged up on by NY-NJ-PA folks who shut them down. That ain’t the way it's supposed to work, so I took it upon myself to handle it. I suspect a few of them realized once they were dealing with one of their own that the BS wasn't gonna fly. BTW, if ya do skip Subway and Quiznoes you actually can get really great authentic Hoagies out here. Try http://www.mortysdeli.com in SF. Hoagies? The Bay Area's got it covered! Pizza? That's another story! And they make Calzone but NO STROMBOLI!!! :-P Happy Thanksgiving! BillyTFried (talk) 00:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Morty's: http://picsorban.com/upload/san_francisco_hoagie.jpg BillyTFried (talk) 00:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Re:Hoagie

In case you're still interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hoagie#Merger_proposal BillyTFried (talk) 21:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BTF. I think you've said it all, and better than I could have. At this point it might be better to dial it down a bit, so as not to drown out other discussion. / edg ☺ ☭ 22:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Good faith

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Hoagie. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] - SummerPhD (talk) 15:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


NPA2

Regarding your comments on User talk:BillyTFried: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. "...an overzealous Phili-nut out to defend the Hoagie at all costs who has shown ZERO good faith herself."[11] - SummerPhD (talk) 19:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


NPA3

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: Talk:Hoagie. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. "...You are neither an uninterested editor nor are you one who is here to strive to make great food-related articles on Wikipedia (like the rest of us). You are a Philadelphia-o-phile...despite being outvoted and having tons of solid sources posted clearly showing that it is the same thing as a Sub, Hero or Grinder. (lots wrong with that)...All you have done is attempt to hijack any attempts at a merge....Because you are not NYC is my guess. That's not cool. And you have still to this very day failed to answer the cardinal question from months ago of What Is The Difference, proving that you have no real arguments on that issue."[12] - SummerPhD (talk) 20:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Listen, you can continue to focus on making false "personal attack" claims all you want instead of focusing on the cold hard facts and tons of sources I have provided regarding the article, but all that does is clearly show that I am right on the money about your intentions of hijacking the merge process rather than making any constructive good faith contributions, just as your deletion of sourced info (you didn't like) showed. 1 2 As I said before, please move on. BillyTFried (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please assume good faith. I did not remove either of those items because I "didn't like" the info. I removed the first, as my edit summary explained, because it was building on an unestablished assumption (see WP:SYN). The second one, as my edit summary explained, used a photo of one hoagie as a source to claim that "Hoagies are also available from many US supermarkets...", extrapolation of an unsupportable degree. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.[13] —Preceding unsigned comment added by SummerPhD (talk • contribs)


SummerPhD, please show WP:Good faith youself and refrain from picking and chosing intermediate unfinished edits of mine and use the final one instead, thanks.
"You are a Philadelphia-o-phile (nothing wrong with that) who is here to fight for Phili's "official" sandwhich's right to keep its own page despite being outvoted and having tons of solid sources posted clearly showing that it is the same thing as a Sub, Hero or Grinder. (lots wrong with that) Finding and posting all the sources I have has been my good faith effort, as well as Demonstrating a Practical Merge Example as Kevin Murray said. Yet you have provided none. All you have done is attempt to hijack any attempts at a merge. And why have you not fought to defend the pages for Grinder and Hero also? Because you are not NYC is my guess. That's not cool. And you have still to this very day failed to answer the cardinal question from months ago of What Is The Difference, proving that you have no real arguments on that issue."[14]
BillyTFried (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Clarifications

Frankly, I don't care if you remove notes from your talk page (removing them from other talk pages is certainly not acceptable, of course). Others might. What I objected to was your changing my comments. The "threats" to have you blocked, etc. are not my wordings, they are part of standard templates. I have placed them as I deemed appropriate for each personal attack. I am not using your intermediate edits to challenge your unfinished talk postings. They are legion. I used them to highlight specific pieces that you added that I consider to be personal attacks. So, this is to highlight your specific charge, as is this. I consider both of these personal attacks because they are a) negative, b) they focus on me rather than the content and, sometimes, c) they are included in a broad forum, rather than a talk forum addressed to me (i.e., my talk page). If you believe some of my actions have been disruptive, say so: "This (link or description) edit seems to be needlessly disruptive." If you feel my edits in general are disruptive or that I deleded "sourced info ([I] didn't like)", please discuss this with me on my talk page, or follow any of the several recommended dispute resolution procedures. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Call it what you want, but in my view referring to someone who makes thousands of edits to Philadelphia-related articles a "Philadelphia-o-phile" is about as much of a "personal attack" as referring to a person who makes thousands of edits to Japan-related articles a "Japanophile". You think I would try to get a fellow Wikipedia editor blocked for referring to me as a "Foodie" or a "History Nut"? And you're calling my claims (1 2) that your removal of sourced info is disruptive "personal attacks"?!?! Come on! Your behavior is the epitome of Good faith alright! BillyTFried (talk) 21:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


For what it's worth, I absolve you of any wrongdoing in calling me a "Phili-phile". I remain concerned over claims that I am "degrading Wikipedia with your unreasonable and unrelenting defense", "un-doctorly", "quite unproductive", "(dodging) questions", my claims are "laughable", I'm an "unreasonable Philadelphia-fanatic with no arguments of any substance who just came here to support her city's reginal name for the sadnwich", etc. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When I responded, you had not yet asked the question about considering the edit summaries personal attacks. I consider the blanket assumption, despite evidence to the contrary, that I am deleting material because I "don't like it" a personal attack. I consider the blanket statement, in an open forum, that I am "disruptive", a personal attack. Both make negative assumptions about me, without furthering the goals of wikipedia. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Well then for what it's worth, I apologize for my abrasiveness, but I'm still pretty sure I got you pegged. My mother grew up on Green St. and my grandfather played sax in the Mummers Parade. So, none of this "Hoagies Are Unique" jazz is new to me. :-) BillyTFried (talk) 21:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Bold, Revert, Discuss

WP:BRD You boldly merged the articles, ignoring my concerns. I reverted the merger. This is when we discuss it, not revert, re-revert, re-re-revert and re-re-re-revert. Please discuss on the article's talk page. (While you are there, please review the talk page history re "10 days". Please note, I will not be able to respond for several days. My silence is neither agreement nor disagreement. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:58, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Hoagie#Mediation_Cabal.2FCases.2F2008-12.2FHoagie BillyTFried (talk) 20:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTF: I mostly agree with you on the Hoagie merge, but you're flooding the discussion page. I think your point is basically made, and further Talk page discussion will change no opinions among the Keep diehards. Can you save this energy for the Mediation discussion? / edg ☺ ☭ 15:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How's this for showing WP:Good faith? Talk:Submarine_sandwich#Merger_to_Sandwich BillyTFried (talk) 18:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comment on content, not editors

On article talk pages, please limit your discussion to efforts to improve the article. Discussions about other editors' actions on other articles' talk pages, such as your edit here, are not helpful. If you have a dispute with an editor about hir conduct, please direct your comments to that editor on hir talk page, or take the matter to one of the dispute resolution procedures available. Thank you. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:06, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please spare me another one of your lectures. Yes it IS helpful, as it is directly related to the current conflict as NOTED by Kevin himself and also shows the levels of ridiculousness he is willing stoop to in order to cause problems for those who won't just let him have his way. It also helped bring to light what he was up to for our "Conflict Mediator" who in fact ended up commenting on THAT section of THAT page just after my comment and yet he didn't feel the need to come pester me on my talk page like you. Here is another example of Kevin's WP:Disruptive editing. Speaking of proper discussion etiquette, it's rude to ignore someone when they've asked you a direct question and even more so to ignore their question and then turn around and nag them about something that wasn't even directed at you. Why not spend your time answering my challenges on the article's discussion page instead of wasting it offering unsolicited and unwanted advice here? BillyTFried (talk) 14:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Three-revert rule

You have added disputed content to a page three time. Please follow the Bold, Revert, Discuss protocol rather than edit war and then acuse others of edit warring.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hoagie. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Kevin Murray (talk) 07:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

allegation by BillyTFried of view-pushing

BillyTFried, you alone perceive and allege "improper POV pushing edits" by me, in Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki. What point of view by me do you perceive? -- that the second atomic bombing was justified, or that the second bombing was unjustified, or some other POV? When you disclose your perception i'll re-read my edits to try to see what you perceive. Please put your disclosure on such article's talk page. Bo99 (talk) 23:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Douglemeister

New case, possible User:Griot reported by you in prior case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/User:Douglemeister CassiasMunch (talk) 03:41, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

Um. I didn't mean to offend you with my removal of mountain range from California. Your edit history (with the UPPERCASE emphasis on some words) seems a little hostile and frankly was a little rude. Killiondude (talk) 06:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terribly sorry there chap. Please find a way in your heart to FORGI... oops... forgive me. :-D BillyTFried (talk) 07:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arby's

<br\> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerem43 (talk • contribs)

French dip

A french dip sandwich can be made from any sliced beef. I believe Quiznos uses sliced steak while Applebee's and Arby's use beef loaf (like chicken loaf). It is what it is I guess --Jeremy (blah blah) 00:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, got it. Thanks. BillyTFried (talk) 00:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are all the no include, onlyinclude tags about? ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They handle how the Transclusion works: WP:Transclusion#Transclusion_markup. BillyTFried (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. Shouldn't they be removed since there is no consensus for a merger? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let's wait and see, since I believe the main reason for opposition to a merge was because the individual pages would disappear, but with this solution they remain as they are. Hence it's not really a true "Merge" at all. BillyTFried (talk) 20:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion

There is an interesting merge discussion going on at Talk:Cupcake. You might want to poke your head in on it. --Jeremy (blah blah) 08:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merges for Food and Drink

Based on your recent participation in several Food and Drink related merge discussions, I would like to point out several open discussions that might interest you:

--Jeremy (blah blah) 05:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Ok, I'll check them out. By the way, on Wikipedia Capicola and Coppa are treated as synonymous, but I am still finding places that actually serve them as two different things. On the talk page for it I posted a photo I took a while back where they actually explain the difference, and now I ran into another place the other day and I took a pic you can see here. I can only imagine the places serving them are writing on their boards exactly what is says on the package it comes in, but I dunno if that means much. I think at the very least the article should address this is some way. What are your thoughts? Thanks. BillyTFried (talk) 19:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SF Meetup #11

  In the area? You're invited to
   San Francisco Meetup # 11
  Date: Saturday, February 6th, 2010
  Time: 15:00 (3PM)
  Place: WMFoundation offices
  prev: Meetup 10 - next: Meetup 12

This is posted to the groups by request. Please sign up on the Invite list for future announcements. Thanks. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 23:43, 4 February 2010 (UTC) [reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 05:14, 20 June 2010 (UTC) [reply]

File source problem with File:SF Protest.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:SF Protest.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:13, 27 December 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 05:13, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The photo was taken by me with my camera from the window of my former employer on Bush st in San Francisco. How do I add the source? Thanks. BillyTFried (talk) 15:45, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated, thanks for the info! (and the picture) Kelly hi! 22:39, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Great American Wiknic

Hi there! In the past, you've expressed an interest in local meetups of Wikipedians. Well, here's your chance! On Saturday, June 25, we'll be joining Wikipedians in cities all over the country for the first annual Great American Wiknic -- the picnic that anyone can edit! We'll meet up at a park in SF -- hopefully in the sun -- all other details are still in deliberation!

If this sounds fun, please add your name to the list: Wikipedia:Meetup/San Francisco/Wiknic and add that page to your watchlist. (And of course, feel free to edit that page with your ideas, questions, etc.) I look forward to wiknicking with you! -Pete (talk) 23:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

San Francisco Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon

San Francisco Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon!
Who should come? You should. Really.
The San Francisco Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon will be held on Saturday, March 17, 2012 at the the Wikimedia Foundation offices in San Francisco! Participate in editing subjects about women's history and beyond! Workshops will also be hosted. New and experienced editors of any gender are welcome!
We look forward to seeing you there!

File:Safeway Hoagie.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Safeway Hoagie.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited: San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2!

San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2! You are invited!
The San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon 2 will be held on Saturday, June 16, 2012 at the Wikimedia Foundation offices in San Francisco. Wikipedians of all experience levels are welcome to join us! This event will be specifically geared around encouraging women to learn how to edit and contribute to Wikipedia. Workshops on copy-editing, article creation, and sourcing will be hosted. Bring a friend! Come one, come all!

San Francisco Wiknic 2012

San Francisco Wiknic at Golden Gate Park
You are invited to the second Great American Wikinic taking place in Golden Gate Park, in San Francisco, on Saturday, June 23, 2012. We're still looking for input on planning activities, and thematic overtones. List your add yourself to the attendees list, and edit the picnic as you like. —Max Klein {chat} 18:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you would not like to receive future messages about meetups, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Meetup/San Francisco/Invite.

Hi. When you recently edited Windows Communication Foundation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Runtime (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 03:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I fixed it. BillyTFried (talk) 22:56, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited! - Wiki Loves Monuments - San Francisco Events

Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco

Hi! As part of Wiki Loves Monuments, we're organizing two photo events in the San Francisco Bay Area and one in Yosemite National Park. We hope you can come out and participate! Feel free to contact User:Almonroth with questions or concerns.

There are three events planned:

We look forward to seeing you there!

You are receiving this message because you signed up on the SF Bay Area event listing, or have attended an event in the Bay Area. To remove yourself, please go here. EdwardsBot (talk) 00:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited! Ada Lovelace Day San Francisco

You're invited! Ada Lovelace Day San Francisco

October 16 - Ada Lovelace Day Celebration - You are invited!
Come celebrate Ada Lovelace Day at the Wikimedia Foundation offices in San Francisco on October 16! This event, hosted by the Ada Initiative, the Mozilla Foundation, and the Wikimedia Foundation. It'll be a meet up style event, though you are welcome to bring a laptop and edit about women in STEM if you wish. Come mix, mingle and celebrate the legacy of the world's first computer programmer.

The event is October 16, 5:00 pm - 8:00 pm, everyone is welcome!

You must RSVP here - see you there!
SarahStierch (talk) 19:53, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've got me curious

Just out of curiosity, what happened with this and also the next edit? The AfD you added is from 2007. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 04:36, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Only this so far: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sir_Nicholas_de_Mimsy-Porpington#Terrible_Asian_pride_article BillyTFried (talk) 18:06, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Do you want help in starting the AfD? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 19:07, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that would be good since when I tried to before it just popped up that 5 year old AfD that never accomplished anyting. Thanks. BillyTFried (talk) 02:07, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done here. Note that there was actually a second AfD in January 2008. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 03:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please leave a note by your comment at the top so that it is clear that those are your words and not mine, just to avoid any confusion? Thanks, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 16:11, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I signed and separated it. BillyTFried (talk) 17:41, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 18:19, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-a-thon tomorrow (Saturday) in Oakland

Hi, I hope you will be joining us tomorrow afternoon at the Edit-a-thon at Tech Liminal, in Oakland. We'll be working on articles relating to women and democracy (and anything else that interests you). It's sponsored by the California League of Women Voters, Tech Liminal, and me.

If this is the first you are hearing of this event, my apologies for the last-minute notice! I announced it on the San Francisco email list and by a banner on your watchlist, but I neglected to look at the San Francisco invitation list until this evening. If you can't make it this time, I hope to see you at a similar event soon! -Pete (talk) 04:40, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Junk food, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burgers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tsuji's family

Unfortunately, I am not sure if we should include her family and marriage in the lead of the article. Her article later states she has two kids and is married. There is no such guideline to be followed on WP regarding the matter, but I've found biographical articles generally do not cite this information. ToriJana (talk) 05:25, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry, you can remove it again then, but it's not a big deal either way. What I won’t back down on was the previous categorization of Minimoni and W as "Moderately" successful that I removed. Thanks! BillyTFried (talk) 10:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Progress Bread Crumbs.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Progress Bread Crumbs.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 16:54, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I took that photo myself. Is that no longer good enough? BillyTFried (talk) 18:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BillyTFried&oldid=547481359"