Jump to content

User talk:AniRaptor2001

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 72.88.101.36 (talk) at 03:29, 26 August 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

AniRaptor2001 (talk) 03:55, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...is tired about people being so anal about damned residential college articles. College is, yes, about being dumb while you're being smart. Let them be...

Amen, brother!

Welcome!

Hello, AniRaptor2001, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

float
float

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. 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!

proposed deletion

I intend to propose the deletion of the individual articles giving plot summaries of the Animorphs series as unencyclopedia. What I suggest you do is to combined them into articles for the series, or parts of the series--that way, there will be a chance to preserve some elements of the work yo have been doing. Please see WP:NOT and the various discussions on the plot summaries. DGG (talk) 02:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rice residential colleges

Please review and participate in the discussion concerning these articles. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 06:17, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of residential colleges

You previously commented on a dispute at List of Rice University residential colleges but the issue at the heart of that dispute appears to be more widespread. A RFC has been submitted on the best way to deal with the existence of many Wikipedia articles on residence halls and dormitories at colleges and universities that may not be notable. Your input and feedback would be appreciated at the RFC. Madcoverboy (talk) 17:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sid Richardson College

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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. Madcoverboy (talk) 00:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FIle:Mcmaster coatofarms improved.png

GREAT JOB! I extend you a thousand thank yous for improving the image. I think that should resolve the entire situation. If at any point you need a favour let me know and I'll do my best to help out.--Labattblueboy (talk) 17:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus test on university topics

You previously commented on the RFC on the notability of residences at colleges and universities. A consensus test has been posted to evaluate what, if any consensus, has been reached on the issue. Please go and comment at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities#Consensus test. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Residential College Crests

I managed to get a hold of all the SVGs for each college (save Lovett, who I am told is making slight changes to theirs) from Rice Print Services and put them on Commons commons:Category:Rice_University_Residential_College_Crests. Although, I think the Owl looks a bit odd on Martel's... Kirlinator (talk) 02:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wiess College

Thanks for your many contributions to the Rice residential colleges article. There seems to be another editor who frequently undercuts the article, and appears to be on a mission to target this particular article. I know we are supposed to assume good faith on the part of our fellow editors, but based on past behavior (the heavy-handedness of his judgments, the impatience of his timing, the arrogance and absolutism of his tone), I have my doubts. Any suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.155.226.3 (talk) 18:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There unfortunately seems to be very little that can or will be done on an official level. The editor is very well established and is familiar with Wikipedia's many policies and guidelines. He does indeed seem to take particular issue with the amount of "original research" and "unencyclopedic content" in the Rice University articles; while I mostly sided with him on the issue of these articles being better suited to a list-type article, I do not side with him on his view that facts sourced from pages made by people affiliated with the university do not contribute positively and encyclopedically to the article. In your position, I would continue to work hard to cite the material within the article, and revert any edits you disagree with, giving a concise explanation as to why you believe the material should be left in. If you are reverting because another editor believes your sources are inadequate for the above reasons, I feel that you would have a great deal of support within the editing community. This issue is brought up periodically in the Universities Wikiproject, but always seems to flame out before a consensus can be reached. Given that there is no real agreement regarding the appropriateness of these citations, that much of what characterizes these residential colleges is unencyclopedic in "tone", and that bone-picking should *definitely* not be allowed, my advice is: keep on trucking, he *has* to get bored eventually. ;) AniRaptor2001 19:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Palm webOS

Hi, AniRaptor. I don't have any objection to moving Palm webOS to WebOS, but the only issue is doing a cut and paste move makes contributor attribution extremely difficult. The best thing to do is request a page move so this can be done properly: WP:RM. In the meantime, I've restored the article at Palm webOS and restored WebOS to a redirect. Take care,   user:j    (aka justen)   21:51, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, you can also tag the WebOS redirect with {{db-move}}, which will request its deletion. Then you will be able to move Palm webOS over yourself using the "move" button at the top of the article. Normally this is for uncontroversial requests, which I believe your request to be, but others may disagree. (Especially as there is also a bit of an edit history hiding behind the WebOS redirect.) If you'd rather be on the safe side, though, I'd say go with WP:RM for potentially controversial moves as I indicated above. Just wanted to let you know you have options.   user:j    (aka justen)   22:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. It was not my intention to cause trouble, but was unsure of the proper procedure that should have been undertaken. Shall we attempt to rectify the situation? AniRaptor2001 02:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
No trouble at all. I went ahead and tagged webOS with the "deletion for move" template. If an admin agrees the move is reasonably uncontroversial, then all should be good. If not, you can just begin the "requested move" process, which isn't too difficult. Take a look here to see how it generally works: WP:RM. Let's see what happens with the {{db-move}} first, though. Take care,   user:j    (aka justen)   03:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
User:SoWhy took care of the the move, so I think everything should now be exactly how you envisioned it...   user:j    (aka justen)   11:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Thanks very much! AniRaptor2001 14:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:51MX03KPGXL.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:51MX03KPGXL.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:PalmVII.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:PalmVII.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TAME Flight 120

Funny running into you again! :) I am actually doing some research on how Wikipedia covers breaking news stories, particularly something like airline crashes. I noticed that you recently created an article on TAME Flight 120 and included it in the Aviation accidents and incidents in 2002 category but not on List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft. It seems that we need to make sure that the category and list are both updated, would you mind giving me a hand? (I was using the list when it appears the category is more populated) Madcoverboy (talk) 20:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed! I'll do my best at making sure the lists and categories are matched. AniRaptor2001 20:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

St. John's University (New York)

A content dispute at St. John's University (New York) between an IP editor and a registered editor with a potential conflict of interest has gotten a bit out of hand and devolved into personal attacks, outing, and general nastiness. A 24-hour page protection has been imposed, but I'm requesting that other editors intervene to develop a consensus on the dispute while the protection is in place. Madcoverboy (talk) 19:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Google search.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Google search.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Red and Silver EV1s.jpg

Replaceable fair use
Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Red and Silver EV1s.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 13:52, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:GM Impact Promo Shot.jpg

Replaceable fair use
Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:GM Impact Promo Shot.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vehicle was shown publicly at the 1990 Los Angeles Auto Show. roguegeek (talk·cont) 18:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wing configuration

Hi, I reverted most of your recent edit to this article, due to a number of errors.

  • A tandem wing is not usually thought of as a "biplane" - the latter has the two wing sets overlapping, the former has them far apart, and both structural and areodynamic behaviour are very different.
  • The "diamond" wing is (also?) named for its diamond planform rather than its frontal elevation.
  • A "cylindrical" wing cannot be described as anything else. Other smoothly curved closed wings exist, but would need listing under another name (I am not sure what that would be - "curved box", perhaps?)

-- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 09:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most interesting. I completely accept your changes, I'm glad to see that someone is paying attention to the wing configs, since the closed wing article that I wish could get some traction is so neglected. I was not aware of the distinction between tandem wings and a biplane, there is indeed room for some confusion. What would be an example of a non-cylindrical, smoothly curved closed wing? AniRaptor2001 (talk) 09:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen proposals where the box wing tips are smoothly curved up or down to blend with each other, forming a vertical region along the way. The frontal elevation is something like a sausage. I have a vague memory just surfaced that it was referred to as an "annular" wing, but I cannot recall for certain, and I no longer remember the context, hence the "fact" tag in the article. -- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So this and this are both cylindrical annular wings, and this is a box wing (almost a joined wing?)... well, the more I look around for images, the more I realize that the terminology is still widely misused, probably as a result of the absence of closed wings IRL. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 10:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, almost. The first example is cylindrical, the second elliptical. Aircraft terminology is often misused, especially for unusual types where there is no official term. You could ask the Aircraft WikiProject to get involved, but some of those folk will delete everything that does not carry a formal citation, so I prefer to just leave my articles to chance. -- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that some matters are best left relatively unheard of. Perhaps the creation of some explaining diagrams is in order; have you ever thought of adding descriptive images to the wing configs article? AniRaptor2001 (talk) 22:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, it is somewhere around 4,097'th on my Urgent ToDo list. Maybe next lifetime. ;( -- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. Let me see how I can help. ;) AniRaptor2001 (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template: Sustainable energy

Hi, thanks for pointing out that the link for electric vehicles was piped to electric car. I've removed the pipe, and now it goes to electric vehicle, like it should. BTW, there's a RfC currently ongoing on the talk page. If you have time, would you mind commenting? Thanks LK (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. No problem, I'll zap over right away. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 21:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seal

Sooooo, we can use the seal? I'm confused. I'd love to use it, and think that we should, but a) I still don't know enough about WP policies to defend my argument and b) no one came rushing to my aid or anything last time I tried. --King of the Arverni (talk) 22:09, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This whole seals/logos business related to universities seems to turn into a mess quite often. I think Madcoverboy will support us on this one; we adopt the policy of using the academic seal to represent every other university on wiki, so there is no reason why we shouldn't do it for Tulane as well. Often you'll get people parading around the fact that their particular alma mater's manual of style prohibits use of the seal but for this and that and bla bla bla. Every university does it; most of these seals are old enough that they are long out of copyright; and Wiki clearly doesn't care about trademarks. Either way, this is something that no sensible university department of external affairs would care to moderate, as we are not using the seal inappropriately, and are in fact giving it topmost, regal placement in relation to the article. I'm heading back over there, let's take care of this quickly and reinstate that seal. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 22:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can we use this one? I'm an idiot and can't seem to crop it properly. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 20:54, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese copy

re: Chinese copy

See http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Chinese_copy_method

- Leonard G. (talk) 20:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. ok. I can see the argument that much of the content that was deleted applies to any form of reverse engineering. I'm going to give the article some attention over the next few days, see what can come back in reasonably. My main concern is that there will be lots of random deleting going on, leaving little gems like BYD Auto, before I added an IP violations section.AniRaptor2001 (talk) 20:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Necesito un poco de orientación

Hi! bueno mi inglés no es que sea muy bueno, es que no es y punto. Por lo que al encontrarte al azar me he preguntado si eres capaz de ayudar o de orietarme con un problemilla de la wikipedia inglesa. No sé como funciona esta wikipedia que puede subir imagenes sin registraral en commons, pero he visto este logo en Unidad Falangista Montañesa y me gustaría saber como poder denunciarla ya que no tienen permiso nuestro para publicar esa imagen. Si no puedieres ayudarme por lo menos conoces algún bibliotecario que sepa castellano. Muchas gracias. --Villeguillo (talk) 21:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hola, bienvenido a english wiki. Bueno, en el Wikipedia en ingles tenemos una manera distinta de tratar las imagenes que tienen derechos de autor. Ya que la ley americana permite el "Fair Use" (uso justificado) de trabajos que llevan derechos de autor, en esta Wikipedia se considera que el uso de una imagen de baja resolucion, de un logotipo que representa la empreso, organisacion o institucion descrita en el articulo, no infringe sobre los derechos del autor. Como puedes ver, la imagen de el logotipo tiene un Non-free media use rationale (justificacion para el uso de la imagen) y un tag que la identifica como tal. Si requieres una traduccion mas avanzada de los terminos de las polizas de Non-free Media estoy completamente dispuesto a ayudar. Si deseas someter una denuncia, tambien puedo indicarte en que pagina se puede hacerlo.AniRaptor2001 (talk) 21:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vease es:Wikipedia:Sobre el uso legítimo. Personalmente, creo que una denuncia sería poco util, como el imagen (logo de la UFM) esta solamente utilizado en el articulo sobre la UFM. Hay muchos casos en wiki ingles cuando se dispute el uso de imagenes fair use, pero esto es un caso muy claro de fair use legitimo. --Soman (talk) 08:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
Too AniRaptor2001, for all the contributions you made to improving the Lamborghini article, thank you and keep up the good work. South Bay (talk) 05:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:Cornell lab logo.gif)

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cornell lab logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 20:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Galgadotfastfuriouspromotional.jpg

Replaceable fair use
Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Galgadotfastfuriouspromotional.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 72.88.101.36 (talk) 03:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AniRaptor2001&oldid=310093920"