Jump to content

User talk:House1090

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wady21 (talk | contribs) at 20:20, 13 September 2010 (→‎Hi american friend). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

To leave me a message click here, and I will respond to you as soon as posible, Thank-You.

License tagging for Image:Sb-2004-dt-002-600.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sb-2004-dt-002-600.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:CourtStSq.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 22:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Sb3.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Sturgescentersanberdoo3.jpg. The copy called Image:Sturgescentersanberdoo3.jpg 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 22:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:IeImages.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:IeImages.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Sbhallsmall1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sbhallsmall1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:1Chsm01.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 23:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Chsm02.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 23:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Chsm03.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 23:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Hchall01.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 00:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Carousel-mall-SB.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 01:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Sb park historic.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 02:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Sb 2003 dt 002a.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 20:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Sbca1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 20:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Sbcrtstsq8.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 20:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


House1090

A tag has been placed on House1090, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 article 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. Mhking 20:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with House1090. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:StDSB3.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 20:28, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent uploads

Hi! I was looking at your uploaded images, and noticed that you've been removing deletion tags without fixing the problems. You may not do that. I've reverted your removals, please add a VALID license and, if necessary, a non-free image use rationale. Continuing to violate image policy by removing tags or uploading bad images will result in a block. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs 20:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Chsb02.jpg

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Chsb02.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs 20:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Chsb001.jpg

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Chsb001.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs 20:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:001DCourtStSq.jpg

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:001DCourtStSq.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs 20:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:001DCourtStSq.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Sbcrtstsq8.jpg. The copy called Image:Sbcrtstsq8.jpg 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 21:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Fox Theatre of San Bernardino and Downtown San Bernardino

While you are taking a week off please read Wikipedia:Copyrights. The Fox Theatre article has been deleted as you copied it from here. For the downtown article you also copied material from here and it has also been removed form there and from the main San Bernardino article. If you restore or add any more copyright material then you will be re-blocked for a longer period. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


RE:unblock

I am back I took a long break I did not edit wikipedia what so ever and did not make any more sock puppets, I want to prove I have change and will not cause any more problems to wiki. if I become unblock. Thank-you! House1090 (talk) 05:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. This is currently on ANI, so I'd say hold tight for a day or so for folks to respond. So far, so good though ... - Alison ❤ 21:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you alison, but for other admin. please see my case here, thank-you.

{{unblock|I know I have been a sock master of alot of socks, I already tried to be unblocked once but Jayron32 told me to trie again about a month or two. But here I am again, apologizing to every one I gave a hard time to, but I want to be a part of the wikicommunity againn if you give another chance, please and thank-you for taking the time to see my case. please see my CURRENT CASE here, thank-you.}}

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Per consensus by involved parties (see: [1], you will be unblocked. Please be aware that this is likely your Last Chance and if more problems arise, there is very little chance that you will be unblocked again. Good luck, and we look forward to your positive contributions to Wikipedia.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request handled by: Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back

Cool - you're unblocked. Welcome back to WP "officially" :) If there's anything you need, or any admin help, just leave me a message. Welcome back! - Alison ❤ 00:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some reading material

Welcome back House. I see some of your new entries have been reverted. To edit seriously on Wikipedia, and it sounds like you want to, I have some recommended reading material that can help you on the Downtown San Bernardino edit that was not referenced. First, read the policy on verifiability. That will give you a better understanding of the importance of references. You can review other policies later to gain a gradual knowledge of how Wikipedia works. When you gain an understanding of the core Wikipedia policies your edits will be less likely to be reverted. Best of luck, Alanraywiki (talk) 05:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back

Good to see that you are back and I hope you enjoy the place. You know if you want you can archive all the stuff further up the page. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 10:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed your recent edits and thought you might want to become a member of the California State University WikiProject. We've recently revamped the project page and started a drive to improve California State University-related articles. We have a lot of articles under our project and would like assistance getting them to good article status. Hope you'll join us. Go STATE!

WikiProject California State University Collaboration for November 2008

File:Csusm1.jpg
 The current WPCSU collaboration for the period ending November 30, 2008 is:

California State University, San Marcos

Our December 2008 project is TBD. If you would like to nominate an article for a future project or see what articles we've already collaborated on, please visit the Collaboration talk page.

California map

Great work on cleaning up the map and making it readable! I hope you don't mind, but I took the opportunity to tweak the image description page to add a description and a source and to note that the image is a derivative of a US government work. It's just tidying loose ends. Cheers! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ in a one horse open sleigh 09:50, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art

First off, I apologize for the spam. You are receiving this message because you have indicated that you are in Southern California or interested in Southern California topics (either via category or WikiProject).

I would like to invite you to the Los Angeles edition of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art, a photography scavenger hunt to be held at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) on Saturday, February 28, 2009, from 1:00 to 7:00 PM. All photos are intended for use in Wikipedia articles or on Wikimedia Commons. There will be a prize available for the person who gets the most photos on the list.

If you don't like art, why not come just to meet your fellow Wikipedians. Apparently, we haven't had a meetup in this area since June 2006!

If you are interested in attending, please add your name to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art#Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Please make a note if you are traveling to the area (train or plane) and need transportation, which can probably be arranged via carpool, but we need time to coordinate. Lodging is as of right now out of scope, but we could discuss that if enough people are interested.

Thank you and I hope to see you there! howcheng {chat} 23:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Wikipedia Loves Art LACMA meetup

Due to some unforgivable confusion on my part, the meetup on Saturday the 28th needs to be rescheduled. Please see Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules#Rescheduling poll to vote for a day/time that works best for you. Thank you and I apologize for the inconvenience. howcheng {chat} 05:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input on the Inland Empire talk...

I couldn't agree with you more. Are you going to make the change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brad219 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Art

Question: Can you make it on Sunday at all? I need to take my daughter to a birthday party on Saturday the 21st, so that's completely out for me. BTW, "early morning" is actually kind of deceptive, since LACMA opens at 11. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 19:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Art new date

Based on participants' votes, Wikipedia Loves Art LACMA has been rescheduled to Saturday, February 21, 2009 starting at 1:00 PM. Unfortunately, I have a prior commitment and cannot attend. I will need someone to be coordinator for that day. Let me know if you are willing. Thanks, and have fun! howcheng {chat} 17:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Art preparations

Are you read for WLA this Saturday? Here are some last minute preparations you should do before you arrive.

  1. Be sure you have a spiral bound memo pad or notebook (and pen) to take notes and to use for writing the accession numbers, which you then have to photograph (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules for details).
  2. Be sure to print out the scavenger hunt list at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules/list. You may also wish to visit http://collectionsonline.lacma.org/mwebcgi/mweb.exe?request=onview1 to make a plan of attack.
  3. Since tripods and monopods are not allowed in the museum, consider making a string tripod (not as good as the real thing, but better than nothing).

Additionally, we will plan to eat out afterwards at a nearby dining establishment (TBD) -- hope you can join us for that. And finally, I was able to make arrangements for my daughter so I will be able to attend after all. Looking forward to seeing you there! howcheng {chat} 19:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

San Bernardino Wiki

Thanks for all your contribution and monitoring of the City of San Bernardino wikipage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.77.187.194 (talk) 18:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. demographics

"Inland Empire"'s a good solution. I made the change. Regards, DocKino (talk) 15:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CambridgeBayWeather

Took a bit of finding but it appears that I had been here 4 months and made 4,273 edits. RfA was way easier then. I would not want to go through today's process. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 06:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Wikipedia

I mostly do routinely maintenance, you know, fixing typos, doing minor tweaks to baseball-related articles, etc. Why, do you have something in mind? Let me know = ) --Dabackgammonator (talk) 17:27, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. You should be able to use the same ID as you do here. Go to Help:Unified login and there is a link there called "Special:MergeAccount" that will help. Also if you click on "My preferences" at the top of the page it should lead you to "User profile" and there might be some info there. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 22:41, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Glad to help. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 23:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IE

I sure am familiar with the Inland Empire. I've lived down here for three years. Let me know if you need help with something.--Dabackgammonator (talk) 00:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:66.92.14.198

On 03:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC) you added Please Stop Vandalism to User_talk:66.92.14.198. In this edit you included: [[Category:User warning templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]. Doing so added the user talk page to Category:User warning templates, which I don't think you intended to do. Because I am fairly new at editing a wiki, I have not removed this content myself, and leave the option up to you. --Meiskam (talk) 05:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should be okay its just a warning, but please dont vandalise the US Largest metros template itzzHouse1090duhh (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure you quite understand. I am not asking the warning be removed, that I don't care about. What has happened, is you have ADDED this user page to the category of warning templates. You can view that it shows up here. --Meiskam (talk) 22:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category has been removed! and was granted for the following reason(s): I did not see the category the category I added. itzzHouse1090duhh (talk) 23:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Southern California

Template:Southern California has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ameriquedialectics 23:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks will look into that. itzzHouse1090duhh (talk) 00:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

San Gabriel Valley

It does not snow in the SGV, could you provide a source? I lived there 15 years never saw snow until moved east to the higher country in San Bernardino County (2000 ft). Until you provide a source, your edit will be reverted, please disscus it in the SGV talk page. Thank-You itzzHouse1090duhh (talk) 04:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note - I have responded on the Talk:San Gabriel Valley page. I'm not sure where you lived in SGV, but I have to say I'm surprised that if you did you would not know how frequently it does snow in the high elevations of the northern communities - while still being in the Valley and not in the mountains per se. Sensei48 (talk) 05:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:San Bernardino International Airport Logo.JPG

It looks as if you figured out the way to do it, right? Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 15:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Yucca Valley San Bernardino.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.flickr.com/photos/76248783@N00/3118831988/. As a copyright violation, File:Yucca Valley San Bernardino.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Yucca Valley San Bernardino.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Ameriquedialectics 15:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the photographer has given permission. However, the licence on the page says that it's "All rights reserved". I left him a note explaining that in order to use it on Wikipedia it would need to be changed, here. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 23:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right now it's just a matter of waiting to see what the photographer says. So far it should be OK. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 23:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He needs to change it there. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 23:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All's good. The licence was changed at Flicker and the file got approved for the Commons. Cheers. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 11:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I glad it all worked out. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 02:31, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the barnstar. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 19:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiprojects

No you don't need to be. Anyone can start a project. If you need help Wikipedia:WikiProject Council will be able to help. Good luck. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 00:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Inland Empire

Hello House1090. Thank you for the invitation to join the IE project. I will try to add what I can when I have a chance. I am still a Wiki novice, and will be limited on the amount of time I can spend. I enjoy doing research. Let me know if there is anything specific you would like me to look into, and I'll let you know if I feel I am the right person for the job. I do have a number of historical books, mostly focused on Riverside. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 04:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Did you start with a standard template for metropolitan areas? I am wondering how to decide when information should be placed in an article for a specific city or county instead of the metropolitan area article. Is there a standard or guidelines to follow? It seems we could end up duplicating a lot of information, if we are not careful. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 15:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry ... I didn't mean to imply there is a template, I was just wondering if you started with one. I'm interested in how you know what to put in a city article vs. a regional article, but I guess I can figure it out as I go. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 01:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


File Copyright problem
File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:San Bernardino Logo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. J Milburn (talk) 14:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:San Bernardino Logo.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per the non-free content criteria, non-free images may only be used in the article space, not in templates. Further, the fact the template is used in so many articles means that a non-free image, which is basically decorative in nature, is used many times, which should be avoided. J Milburn (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

just wanted you to be aware of this

[2] Ameriquedialectics 23:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Plagarism

House, this is what I mean, you straight up plagiarized this [3] from this [:pittsburg.stateuniversity.com/admissions/index]. You have no idea what you are doing here. Ameriquedialectics 21:27, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know; it's been blacklisted as a spam site. That's not the point, the point is you just copied the text over as if you wrote it yourself. If WP were a highschool or a college, you could be expelled for doing that. Ameriquedialectics 23:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just don't use that site, and don't make direct copies. This site is considered ok:[4]. Ameriquedialectics 23:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Administrator

I've seen a few editors who've bounced back from a troubled past to have a successful RfA. I think Rootology (talk · contribs) is a good example. Typically, at WP:RFA, people like to see editors who have made a considerable number of edits (there's no bottom threshold per se, but I haven't seen an editor with less than 3000 edits pass RfA in the recent future) and have an excellent track record for article and administrator-related work. Some areas where you can get involved in administrator-related tasks include WP:AFD, WP:AIV, WP:RFPP, WP:CSD, etc. At the moment, I'd recommend you continue your article work and slowly involve yourself in the administrative side of Wikipedia to get a feel of things. You might want to go at it a few months and ask for a editor review to get the community's impressions of your contributions. Hope that helps. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009 California wildfires

Hi House1090, are you sure that the "San Bernardino Valley" fire you added to August 2009 California wildfires is not the same as the "Oak Glen" fire (see link: [5]) which seems to be very near the area you're talking about? Thanks, Joe. Scj2315 (talk) 00:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

bernardino di siena

i will grant you that it is much easier to execute a revert, however, it is probably better to take the extra step of checking to see if the point in question is covered in the article. as it was in this in this case. also, it is probably better to tag than revert, but....whatever. --emerson7 23:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

oops --emerson7 00:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1) please don't template the regulars see {{dttr}} 2) the information is accurate and properly cited. please let's not permit this to devolve into a pointless revert war...if you have information to the contrary, you are welcomed to share it. thanks !--emerson7 05:05, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

is it not logical and reasonable to conclude that bernadino di sienna is the namesake for both? --emerson7 05:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on San Bernardino County, California. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. emerson7 05:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inland Empire Categories

Hi House. The implication of leaving the Inland Empire in the San Bernardino and Riverside county categories is that it should be added to all lower categories such as all cities in the Inland Empire. That will be a lot of categories. I'm going to go ahead and leave the IE in those to categories, but it logically doesn't make sense to me. I believe that an article should be placed in a category that is a higher level. If we start placing articles in a lower level, then every article could end up with a huge number of categories. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 05:11, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another example would be Southern California. Southern California is a region, just like the Inland Empire is a region, but I don't think it would be appropriate to put the Southern California category into every county that happens to be in Southern California. Taking it to next next level, it wouldn't make sense to put the California category into every county category in the state. MissionInn.Jim (talk)
Given that there are only two counties in the IE, I don't see it as a big issue, so I am fine leaving as is. FYI ... I was using the word region in a generic sense. I see IE as a region of Southern California, So Cal as a region of California, and California as a region of the US, etc... MissionInn.Jim (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hi

viewed your pics of San Bernardino blizzard. I live in S.B.Email me Mattapillar@netzero.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.150.170.119 (talk) 06:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of SanSan

The edit summary asked that editors read the article talk page for the reason to redirect. SanSan is not a place, it is a word coined the same time and in the same 1967 publication as BosWash and ChiPitts. Please read the talk page just linked and also the discussion at Talk:BosWash#Intention to rewrite article. There is not only consensus but unanimous agreement that the article should be about the term and not a poorly sourced collection of original research about which places should be included in BosWash, what a map of BosWash looks like etc. The same holds true for the other two terms. The BosWash article is not about the Northeastern United States, it is about the terms BosWash, ChiPitts and SanSan. None of them are used to any degree outside of discussions of the paper written by Kahn and Wiener, and only BosWash even has a dictionary entry where it is listed as "informal", or nearly slang. None of these words really deserves an article other than the fact that they might be searched for by people reading about Kahn's paper, so they are all placed in the single BosWash article to clarify that they are not real places. The article that you restored is not viable as it misplaces the meaning of the word as a geographic location definable by maps and lists of component cities. It has unfortunately been in existence under those false pretenses since since 2005. You have only edited it starting a few months ago, so you may be under the impression that it was a normal, acceptable article. It was not. Again, please see the linked talk pages for further rationale and consensus over this issue regarding the three terms. It's not that SanSan has anything to do with the northeast but rather through its relationship with and origin with the other two now outdated terms. BosWash is the most prominent of the three words in that it actually has a dictionary entry and receives far more Google hits, so that is where the article about all three terms resides. I am reverting your reinstatement of the erroneous text. Sswonk (talk) 23:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know you have been editing for over two years, I was talking about your editing the article, which this tool says you started four months ago. I am glad that as a project founder you agree with the move. Thanks – Sswonk (talk) 23:32, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Place Ville-Marie

Hi there,

I see on your user page that you live in Montreal. I am going to assume that you have heard of Place Ville-Marie in asking you this question. The reports of the number of floors in Place Ville-Marie vary from 43 to 46. Do you, with your Montreal expertise, know the actual number of floors in this structure, or could you possibly visit this building to find out? Thanks,

-Stuck in Edmonton 117Avenue (talk) 22:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Western United States

Thank you for your suggestion. It may take me a while to try to implement what you ask. I created the template for that region as well as the Midwest and South because New England and the Northeast already have their own. Mathpianist93 (talk) 06:25, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please undo your edit at the 3RR noticeboard

Please undo this edit. An admin has already taken action on your request. If you think your complaint needs another look, post to the closing admin's talk page. Better yet, instead of disagreeing about the close, you could follow the steps of WP:Dispute resolution, which is what he already suggested. EdJohnston (talk) 04:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:SBD-Logo.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SBD-Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file 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. -- Skier Dude  ►  08:00, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Box Springs Mountain

Hi House: For your consideration ... I see you changed the Riv-SB Metro reference in the Box Springs Mountain article to refer to the entire Riv-SB Metropolitan Area, i.e. both entire counties. In the case of this particular article, the reference really does only apply to the local urbanized area. The sentence is referring to the broadcast signals transmitted by the radio towers on the mountain. Those broadcast signals do not reach everywhere in both counties. (If you have a response, you can respond here and I will see it.) MissionInn.Jim (talk) 03:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it may only transmit to the SB-Riv Urbanized area but the mountain in the Riv-SB-Ont Metropolitan Area, thats why I changed it. If its talking location it should as I made the change but if its talking but if its referring to the broadcast signals, they you are correct. House1090 (talk) 03:38, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please take a look at Talk:Box Springs Mountain. House1090 (talk) 03:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your hard work reverting vandalism on wikipedia. Your watchful eye is highly appreciated! South Bay (talk) 05:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

<-----My Administrative Launch --->

Have you looked at Wikipedia:Administrators and the various links from there? Especially take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, some of the old ones as there are none running right now. Some RfA's can get pretty mean. If you still want to then take a look at Wikipedia:Admin coaching. They will be able to help you more than I can but I will still be here to help as well. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 05:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undoing my edits at Talk:Riverside and Talk:Palm Springs

For starters, the Riverside edit you undid had absolutely nothing to do with WikiProject Inland Empire. As you can see in the change page, it was solely Cali. Palm Springs was both, but I'd like to think that a Cali or SoCal project guy can interchangeably (after all, IE should be a part of WP:CAL, and you list Cali as being a "parent" of IE) Purplebackpack89 (talk) 16:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you didn't read this before starting an edit war on the Palm Springs rating, so I reverted your edit-warring on the SoCal and Cali ratings that I can do whenever and ???ed the IE rating. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:17, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring is a blockable offense. Please discuss controversial changes with one another on the relevant articles' talk pages before engaging in such actions in the future. I was just made aware of what you two were doing. If you have any questions, please let me know, and I can clarify. Killiondude (talk) 09:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've been told that anybody can rate or prioritize (assuming they take guidelines into account) Purplebackpack89 (talk) 18:01, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you missed the point that you were edit warring on at least one article's talk page. Killiondude (talk) 07:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Who me? Were? House1090 (talk) 01:36, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the very same pages listed in this thread title. 05:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Worldenc's charts

I would just like to inform you that I've started a thread here about Worldenc's charts. If you could take a look, that'd be great. Killiondude (talk) 20:53, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Amerique reported by User:House1090 (Result: both warned)

Please see my comments at that thread. I seriously considered blocking you, but ultimately I decided that the encyclopedia would be better served by requesting input from a broader spectrum of users and following whatever consensus develops. You seem to be passionate about the topic of IE and to have put in the research to be able to contribute productively; this is great - the region (MSA) is beautiful, and thanks in no small measure to your edits I now know considerably more about it. You do, however, have an apparent tendency to couch your edits to other articles in the context of someone who is interested in the Inland Empire. Please when you edit such articles have as your mindset: someone is interested in articleX, I can improve the part of this topic which bears on IE rather than the IE is cool and relates to articleX and everyone obviously wants to know more about IE using this article as a jumping off point. - 2/0 (cont.) 20:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested a possible remedy to this including you limiting to a single revert per article at the WT:CAL discussion. The purpose of three revert rule is to set a clear limit, but edit warring can also include you reverting each other over several pages, which is more of a long term pattern than any specific single page, with three reverts per 24 hours. Even if you start the talk page discussion, it doesn't make reverting the other person ok. Remember in edit wars both parties are going to think theirs is the right version. The world isn't going to end if you leave their edits in place for another day while you wait for more people to respond. In the end the Inland Empire articles are going to better, with people more accurately informed, which is the whole point. -Optigan13 (talk) 10:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

San Diego metro in template

Thanks for agreeing! We are having a heck of time with SD because of this confusion. It is congruent with the SD County article (would rather not resolve template to say that because it might cause confusion!) Our editors have either been slopping over to the Tijuana metro article which is fine when appropriate, but we have very little idea as to the validity etc of their statistics, so sharing a metro area with them (it does, blast it!) is quite confusing. Or just inserting it in the city article which is equally inappropriate. Anything you can think of to help editors resolve this at the higher level would be appreciated! There are a number of articles that refer to MSAs. I've become lost before wandering through them. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 00:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good start! Allowing trusted editors to edit a piece in a sandbox is normalluy done only for controversial material. This isn't controversial. Just put {{stub}} at the bottom and move it to the correct name. Let us know under San Diego discussion when you have done this. Then all editors will develop it "in the open" with all other editors looking on. A very credible process. Student7 (talk) 13:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is your decision, but the longer you wait, with people "waiting" for it (which they weren't doing before!), the more likely someone is to stub it which just means it might have to be merged when you feel ready to publish it. BTW, here is my brilliant article on Huntsville Metropolitan Area. Nobody's whined yet!  :) 00:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Also, one of the most brilliant articles I started was a mere stub on something that I knew absolutely nothing about, but knew it "had" to be out there. After moving it, I put links in every other appropriate article I could think of. Geniuses found it and turned it into a magnificent article. Kind of like sewing a seed! Student7 (talk) 00:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again, your decision unless someone else starts one first.
The people who are predestined to not like it won't like it if it is perfect. If it is eventually deleted, you may feel a lot better if you haven't put dozens of hours into it first. A stub is always acceptable for anything. I've never seen a stub that wasn't. For presidents, kings, Paris, France, anything. They all started out as stubs. Bios are different and sometimes have to have all qualifiers in them. The reason SD metro is less likely to be deleted than a smaller city - because it is recognized as important already. It's the importance of the article that is at stake here, not the quality of the content.Student7 (talk) 12:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nice looking article! Hadn't expected it to be so robust! Congratulations!Student7 (talk) 01:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:San Bernardino International Airport Logo.JPG

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 07:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Do you think you could stop deleting information i have on the socal regions? I have it so it fits symmetrically. I mean no harm or disrespect but it is very rude to delete information that i am trying to inform people with. That would be great. In all seriousness i created the page and worked very hard on it since there wasnt one so i hope you wouldn't mind leaving it alone. Unless your adding information. You have also edited that page more than three times in a 24 hour period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SoCal L.A. (talk • contribs) 04:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts on Portal:Los Angeles and page moves

Hi, I saw the latest round of edits on Portal:Los Angeles, and while it's a step in the right direction, there's still a few things you should consider.

  1. While you did go to Portal talk:Los Angeles/Other SoCal Metros after reverting, you still continued to revert. Once you found that User:SoCal L.A. wasn't responding, you should have tried a post to WT:CAL to get additional opinions on the material. He's new so a little patience in the matter will help things. The talk page posts seem to have gotten his attention though.
  2. When you suggest a page move which might be controversial please follow the steps at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves, including applying {{subst:move|New name}} followed by a brief explanation and your signature. That allows it to be picked up by bots for all moves, and article alerts for relevant WikiProjects. Specifically I'm talking about Talk:Inland Empire (California) and if you are still considering something for Portal talk:Los Angeles/Other SoCal Metros.

Otherwise nothing worth escalating at this point. Please limit yourself to a single revert at a time, even if the user doesn't respond to talk page comments, and even if it is spread over two days. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I.E. Portal

I am going to create one and was wondering if you would be of assistance in the making of it since you know a great deal about the region.SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Starting.

I am going to start it right now. Going to get the skeleton up and you can fill it with info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SoCal L.A. (talk • contribs) 01:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I didnt add the county cities. Someone else did. It has both riverside and SB to though. So i am not sure what you mean. SoCal L.A. (talk) 03:17, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Do whatever you feel necessary.

SoCal L.A. (talk) 04:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Hopefully you can keep an eye on it so it stays that way!

SoCal L.A. (talk) 04:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New IE task force member, question about template

Hello, I am new to the task force. I am requesting that the San Jacinto Valley article be added to your template. It's still in the early phases, but I have been told it is a good start. Thank you for your time Jstroudr 05:42, 17 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstroudr (talk • contribs)


Replaceable fair use File:Littleleaguewestsb.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Littleleaguewestsb.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. Melesse (talk) 21:04, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Southern California/Cities

I noticed your edits on that page and i undid all of them. First of all it is a Cities sub page and thus doesn't need information about the metropolitan areas which you changed it to. You also added much duplicate information and added thumbs making the images much smaller. It is quite obvious that those pictures of cities are of those next to the cities. I modeled it after the SBFA cities sub page to which it correlates. It would be nice if you could start a discussion topic next time you want to make such a major edit. Please do not revert the page to how you liked it. Much thanks. SoCal L.A. (talk) 02:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

San Bernardino - an All-America City?

You have added the city of San Bernardino to the Template:All-American City Award Hall of Fame. My understanding is that the Hall of Fame is an honor acknowledging cities or regions that have received the All-America City award 3 or more times. The list of award cities shows San Bernardino one time, in the 1970's. Can you offer substantiation for why San Bernardino should be included in the HOF? I would like to delete it from the list again unless I understand why you are listing it there. Thanks. Jlhcpa (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yea I did so already. House1090 (talk) 05:24, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3O Talk:Los Angeles#CSA

Sorry, I'd be glad to give a 3O, but when I click on the Talk link you give me, it goes straight to the full CSA article. Please be more specific and I'll try again. ─AFAprof01 (talk) 02:41, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion

Thanks for giving a third opinion on the Big Time Rush article! When you do give a third opinion, however, please make sure and remove that article from the third opinion page. I went ahead and did for you. Wikipediatoperfection (talk) 17:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Different topic, but still about a third opinion so I'll put my comments here. As Alanraywiki told you, he/she is not what Wikipedia considers a third opinion because they are involved in your article. A third opinion serves to give some outside perspective to the article. It's great that you have another editor who is involved giving an opinion, but the point is not to outnumber an opponent. The point is find consensus with a fellow editor who you disagree with. My outside perspective is to ask you, if the page stays with SoCal L.A.'s edits for a week while you guys work stuff out, who cares? And I would ask SoCal L.A. the same thing about keeping the article with your edits. As I said on the article's talk page, it's not like SoCal L.A. is a holocaust denier who has edited a page to say that Hitler was really a swell guy. You're discussing what to include in different articles about L.A. You can always request temporary page protection to stop an edit war. Just remember you're a part of that war. You both need to deescalate, stop treating the other person like they're the enemy, and work together. Wikipediatoperfection (talk) 01:07, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My advice is to talk to SoCal L.A.. SoCal L.A. has add more stuff on the talk page, trying to make clear that he/she does not intend to leave mistakes in the article or have an edit war with you. Talk, talk, talk and assume good faith. SoCal L.A. is really not out to fight with you or have an edit war, but to make the article better. Wikipediatoperfection (talk) 02:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Can you please take a look at the talk page? I left some more messages. Thanks. SoCal L.A. (talk) 01:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bitg Time Rush 3O

Thanks for helping with the third opinion on Big Time Rush. 3Os can be a thankless task, but you have my thanks! - Tim1965 (talk) 02:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on Los Angeles metropolitan area

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Los Angeles metropolitan area. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when you get the chance can you please respond at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Amerique to some questions I left for you and Amerique about where you want to go from here in terms of the agreement. Thanks, -Optigan13 (talk) 03:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, can you take a look at the latest at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Amerique, I've left some suggestions on how we can go forward on this. Thanks -Optigan13 (talk) 00:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Another Gospel

Hi House1090, thanks very much for providing a third opinion at Talk:Another Gospel. Could I ask you to be a bit more specific? What do you mean, are you saying Richwales (talk · contribs) should be encouraged to randomly add that tag to the article? Or are you recommending that he suggest sources to use to improve the article? Cirt (talk) 01:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please now see Talk:Another_Gospel#.28Over.3F.29using_a_single_source. Richwales (talk · contribs) refuses to stop making vague complaints without backing up his claims to alternative sources. Cirt (talk) 20:38, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I feel I am being characterized unfairly here. I am attempting, in good faith, to improve the article. I do not believe I am misusing the article's talk page as a general discussion forum. I do not believe I am making vague, groundless complaints in violation of policy. The fact that I have requested additional sources, or that it's taking me some time to find additional sources of my own, does not mean that I am ignoring your "third opinion" or that I'm intentionally abusing the talk page. (You did, after all, propose that I be given two weeks to come up with sources — and it hasn't even been half a day yet, and I'm already being stomped on.) I feel intimidated by Cirt's dismissive responses and what I am perceiving as attacks and even threats against my good standing as a Wikipedia editor. I really don't want to make a huge case over this, but I feel I'm being backed into a corner and am being forced to defend my position (in some appropriate forum). I need assistance from a neutral third party who is willing to see that the right thing gets done. What actions would you recommend I take at this point? Richwales (talk) 21:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RFC for Another Gospel

Please see Talk:Another_Gospel#RfC:_NPOV_and_article_Another_Gospel. Thank you for your time, Cirt (talk) 00:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like me to add my thoughts to the talk page by filling in the blanks? House1090 (talk) 00:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your comments would be appreciated, in the section under previously uninvolved editors. Cirt (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that I just added a statement of my own position to the RFC — a few minutes after your comments — in case anything I just wrote does (or does not) affect what you would want to say there. Richwales (talk) 00:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm keeping it on my watchlist. House1090 (talk) 01:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

House1090, thanks very much for participating in the RFC. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 01:05, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome, let me know if you need anything else. House1090 (talk) 01:09, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you might like this!

So i was looking through development for the San Diego Skyline online and this image led me to a link where i started to browse through and i found this link about the GLAA (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2321) and in that i found this link http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=442019 and this http://www.city-data.com/forum/san-bernardino-riverside-counties/ - all about the Inland Empire. Has some pretty good visuals and possibly references. Definitely looks cool though. From the site it looks like they are trying to centralized the I.E. more and more in the anchor cities. Just thought you should know since i know how much you like the I.E. SoCal L.A. (talk) 03:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime! SoCal L.A. (talk) 22:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How's it going

Hi, I added the one revert rule to Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Placed by the Wikipedia community, as well as added the adopter box to my userpage. Just to get started, can you do me a favor and go to Special:Preferences and under Editing, can you check the box marked "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". I'm going to go leave a note for Amerique as well as Alison to make sure they're aware of the situation. At this point do you have any questions or concerns? -Optigan13 (talk) 09:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay done. And no not right now, I'll let you know though. House1090 (talk) 22:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple signatures

Torritorri brought it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California, but I noticed it too and am wondering why you are using more than one signature. Usually you use House1090 and sometimes you use Salcan. This is especially disconcerting when there is a discussion thread and it looks like two different people want to retain the IE project, when in fact it is the same person. Any special reason for this change? Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 21:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not really I was experimenting with it last night as you can see on my signatures page and I guess I forgot to change it. Sorry, and I was in a hurry this morning, I didn't mean to make it seem as if there were two people, I will change it back. User:House1090 (talk) 23:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you keep your signature pretty close to House1090 given your past issues with multiple accounts. Also when you add additional comments to an AFD you've already expressed delete, keep, etc. don't add another Delete in response to someone else. So please just strike through the delete/merge and go with something like Delete/MergeComment. Admins will discount double deletes like that anyway, but it helps clean it up. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're free to make additional comments and discuss delete, etc with people, just that the nomination statement is an implied Delete so no need to add that part to any further comments you make. Just strike through the delete/merge not the comments that follow it. -Optigan13 (talk) 06:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. House1090 (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Amitava Kumar

Hello House1090. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Amitava Kumar, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: sufficient context provided; includes a New York Times review. Thank you. —SpacemanSpiff 03:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking in

Hi, saw your revert on the CSU LA page and how you followed up with the editor right away, which was great. The only other recommendation I would make is to maybe consider leaving the notice on the article talk, and not directed at any one editor. Glad to see you bounce back from the block and get back into work. The thing to take away from that encounter is once you've done the revert and seen it go back in to just post to the article talk page and say why you want x removed/added. That way you don't get stuck trying to explain why in heated little edit summaries and a back and forth between you and one other editor. When you post to the talk page it tends to open up in people explaining why, as well as having multiple editors involved so it isn't necessarily a 1 on 1 situation. Do you have any questions or concerns lately? -Optigan13 (talk) 11:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks. I am currently working on expanding and getting the California State University, San Bernardino article into FA status eventually, but first into GA status. Any recommendations on how to do it so other editors wont suspect anything wrong. I'm using my sandbox and creating sections there, and once they are complete I'm adding them to the article. I wrote about on the talk page about expansion and I left a "construction notice" on the the top of the article. Do you think thats enough? I am following the model of University of California, Riverside and a link Alanraywiki gave me on his talk page. House1090 (talk) 21:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "wrong", anything specific? I think the under construction tag is largely for when things might be out of place temporarily, or other formatting or cleanup issues while you work through it. I haven't take a serious look at it yet, but for now just work on it with Alanraywiki as you've been. Let me know when you get to a nice stopping point and if you want me to take a look through it. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong as in anything suspicious, removing or adding stuff. I will let you know in a couple of weeks, as I think Alanraywiki and I are so far doing a good job. House1090 (talk) 23:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non Free Files in your User Space

Hey there House1090, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some files that I found on User:House1090/Sandbox/Cal State San Bernardino. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

  • See a log of files removed today here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Largest cities in the Inland Empire

Would you be interested in helping me create and article of the sort? Similar to the one for the Southern Border, but maybe a longer list since the IE has more incorporated cities. Thanks in advance :), if not, well i think i can handle it! Cheers. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, let me know what you want me to do, I just don't have much time as I am still working on the CSUSB article, but I can squeaks some time. House1090 (talk) 00:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well I will start right now. Feel free to drop in and correct the populations if they're wrong. You may want to add sources to. Just give me a few and i'll see what i come up with. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great, I will keep an eye out for your contributions so I can find the page. House1090 (talk) 00:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So i got the list done, but i don't know which city goes it which county, so i will leave you to figure that out :). SoCal L.A. (talk) 01:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great job, I will add the counties and try to make the list to 50 cities. Thanks, House1090 (talk) 04:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problemo ;). SoCal L.A. (talk) 21:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:PSPAirport.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PSPAirport.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file 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.

Proposed deletion of Uptown San Bernardino

The article Uptown San Bernardino has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails the general notability guideline

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 05:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of University District, San Bernardino

The article University District, San Bernardino has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no sources, fails the general notability guideline

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 05:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts

In several of your reverts, you have reverted edits completely while taking issue with only a certain part of the edit. Please take care to make sure you revert only the part of an edit you take issue with. While Twinkle is convenient, sometimes it is better to actually edit the page to make sure you do not remove a useful edit. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 05:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not used twinkle, and if I did remove stuff I apologize, sorry for the inconvenience. House1090 (talk) 03:42, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Downtown San Bernardino

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Downtown San Bernardino#Two sentences in introduction. --TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 23:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of University District, San Bernardino

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is University District, San Bernardino. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University District, San Bernardino. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Inland Empire (California)#Murrieta and Temecula

Feel free to participate in this discussion. --TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 04:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited!

Hello, House1090,

You are invited meet with your fellow Wikipedians by attending the Montréal meetup scheduled on Sunday, June 27, 2010; between 1500 - 1700 to be held at the Comité Social Centre Sud (CSCS), located at 1710 Beaudry, in Montréal. You can sign up at the meetup page.

The meetup is happening in concurrence with RoCoCo 2010, a free, bilingual, weekend unconference including many people involved with Wikis both within the Wikipedia/Wikimedia Community and abroad. You do not need to attend the conference to sign up for the Wikimeetup, but you are certainly welcome! Bastique ☎ call me!

(PS: Please share this with those you know who might not be on the delivery list, i.e. Users in Montreal/Quebec) 

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) 00:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:66ers-acup.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:66ers-acup.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 06:29, 15 June 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. Salavat (talk) 06:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:66ers-acup.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:66ers-acup.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use 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 you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 01:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer granted

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.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xenotalk 18:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Devore, San Bernardino, California

Hello, I noticed that in July 2008 a sock of this account moved Devore, California to Devore, San Bernardino, California with the justification "It is part of San Bernardino City." I have started a move discussion and since you appear to now be in good standing, I would like your input in light of what I have found. Thanks! —KuyaBriBriTalk 16:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Csusb logo.gif

⚠
⚠
 Thanks for uploading File:Csusb 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:66ers-acup.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:66ers-acup.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 or which could be adequately covered with text alone. 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. Solid State Survivor (talk) 00:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This cookies are delicious I love it ja,ja, i don'y speak very good english. But can you teach me? and I teach you speak spañish.

I love USA and the north american people. Where do you live? I in Recreo, Argentina.--Wady21 (talk) 19:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this cookies are delicious ja, ja. I love USA, and the north american people. Can you teach me english and I teach you spanish. I'm from Recreo Argentina.--Wady21 (talk) 19:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi american friend

This cookies are delicious jaja. I'm from Recreo, Argentina. Can you teach me english? and I teach u spañish. I love USA, it's my favourite country because is the most power of all.--Wady21 (talk) 19:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, first off in english we don't have the ñ so it would be spanish not spañish. Y no te preocupés que yo tambien ablo un poco de español. House1090 (talk) 20:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pero si te falta saber mas te ayudo. And the spanish argentine noy use "tu" use "vos" and other formes of verbs.
Claro mi madre es de El Salvador y tabien usan el vos. Cuales son los articulos que mas te interesan a vos? House1090 (talk) 20:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Of the cities and some others. I know what in other lenguage it's more dificulty beacause I speak you in english.--Wady21 (talk) 20:14, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay very good, just to let you know I have friends from Buenos Aires, Argentina. I live in California near Los Angeles. I work on Southern California and Central America articles. House1090 (talk) 20:17, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
wow it's the best country in the world and I'm fan of M.Jackson, Madonna and Zac Efron. I was born the 18th february of 1994. What city more of Argentina know you? --Wady21 (talk) 20:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:House1090&oldid=384647287"