User talk:Ryan Norton/Archive2

Re:Hi

When I first saw it, I was shocked. It wasn't intended to be mean or out of line. But when I reread my comments, I understood where you and Nichalp were coming from. Acetic'^Acid 23:35, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

I, Acetic Acid, award Ryan Norton this barnstar for remaining cool, calm, and collected. 01:12, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure if RW24 knows of my past experiences. But just to reassure you and everyone else, they are in the past and are going to stay there. Thank you for your future vote of support. You're pretty kind yourself. :P You handled my comment on WP:MC very well. You could have warned me with WP:AGF, and made it a big mess, but you kept it under control. I award you this barnstar for putting up with me. :) Acetic'^Acid 01:10, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Auto FAC

Glad to see you think it's ready. I think it strikes a reasonable balance between the inclusionist and deletionist views about the level of detail (which was a point of heavy contention in the past) at this point. Everyking 03:41, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. You're obviously better than I am at satisfying objections. I tried to do it with the old noms but I'd get too combative about it. Everyking 08:35, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Summarize info from A. Simpson article

I'd be okay with summarizing from the main A. Simpson article into the Autobiography article. Since this all happened while she was promoting the album, I think it's important to be in the album article too so that people can understand the album's cultural impact. Best,--Alabamaboy 13:07, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Image:Album ashlee simpson autobiography.jpg

In the fair use rationale you referred to this album cover as a screenshot, so you may want to fix that, and maybe in other images as well. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:23, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Done Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 15:27, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Ryan:
Thanks for support and supporting comments in my recent RFB nomination. I'm now WP's newest bureaucrat. :) Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:49, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Einstein etc

I had a quick look and I like the content but not the English. I'll do a copyedit later if Neko or somebody else doesn't beat me to it. Right now, though, what I want to do is add the long-promissed bit on prevalence - I said I'd do it nearly two weeks ago, but I'm only getting around to it now. PurplePlatypus 20:13, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I just did a tiny bit of rewording on the first sentence of that section, but didn't mess with the Einstein stuff much. I posted a reply about it on my Talk page as well. I'm going to be swamped with work today, so I probably won't be able to do much else for now. :) ManekiNeko | Talk 20:24, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

re your edits

Ryan,

I saw your edit comments and your revert of my last edit.

I am sure you mean well, but did you even read the talk page? You put up the template for edit wars, but did you not read that it says this? It says: "Please view this article's talk page before making any possibly contentious edits." I have read the talk pages, and, right or wrong, I have tried to resolve Wagon's continual bickering, but he is absolutely wrong in his definition of "atypical,"; you are too if you side with him, but I'd like to know if you read the Schiavo talk page before I go any further --after all, it is Wikipedia policy to read the talk pages before making edits like you did (according to the template) -since the edit you made is certainly and arguably "contentious," whether you're right or not in the actual edit.--GordonWattsDotCom 04:51, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

I am just a casual watcher/editor on the issue. My revert was based on the principle that if someone reverts an edit of yours you are generally supposed to come to a comprimise with that person. Anyway, I'm not going to revert again until I investigate futher, but please do keep this in mind, as generally when someone reverts you it means it could be improved. Hope that clears it up :) - take care! (P.S. please don't revert so fast though, you got me in the middle of a vandalism revert there :)) Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 05:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

"I am just a casual watcher/editor on the issue." Not only that, you are a fair and thoughtful user, who cares about truth and respect -and hearing all sides of the story (it is an honorable thing to be a good listener, and I thank you for it), as I have learned from your handeling of the recent Featured Article nomination (and failure). Thank you for your review and analysis and concerns to further look into it. Your concerns are noted and considered.--GordonWattsDotCom 05:23, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

"P.S. please don't revert so fast though, you got me in the middle of a vandalism revert there" PS: You're OK; don't worry: No one would have look for your head on a platter for your edits. We all saw that you were only trying to help -do have faith of that fact.--GordonWattsDotCom 05:25, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Quartization

Nice to see you editing the Quarto! the next edition will take shape next week. And we need to get people writing about Q3 events now for Quarto #5... +sj + 22:32, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

ulayiti's RfA

Hi Ryan, and thanks for your support and the kind words you left at my RfA. I'm an administrator now, and I hope that I'll live up to the community's expectations as one. Your vote of confidence is much appreciated. - ulayiti (talk) 15:56, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

WikiServer

Nothing to do with Wikipedia. I just wanted to say thanks for creating WikiServer. I've had a copy on my laptop for years now. It's great for demonstrating what a wiki is. I've used it quite a few times at work for wiki Lunch'n'Learn sessions now. Cheers -- Derek Ross | Talk 19:02, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Terri Schiavo

GordonWattsDotCom started an edit war on the Terri Schiavo article, violated 3RR, and then got an admin to lock the page. He is trying to insert language to imply that Terri Schiavo's transfer to a hospice was illegal or improper. I proposed a solution to add language to the section of the article where the Schindlers challenge Michael's guardianship where they list the transfer to the hospice as improper. Gordon won't accept it. He insists on saying the transfer was illegal or improper or wrong or anything POV. Since the article is locked, I've presented my proposed version and asked for vote here. your input would be appreciated. FuelWagon 20:53, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

That is false: I have no problem with Wagon's proposal, except that it leaves out reporting one major action by the Schindler family attorney -I am not seeking to say she was illegally transferred -I am instead -seeking the reporting of her having been transferred to a hospice AmID CONCERNS of the family and their attorney (ash shown by the proper links and court actions) amid their concerns that it was illegal. Wade thru the page -and see.--GordonWattsDotCom 20:57, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Everyking's post regarding link for 50 Cent, Ashley Simpson, etc.

Here. But I think it's a mistake to do anything to accommodate Worldtraveller. He will never retract his opposition, no matter what, so to reduce the quality of the article for his sake is pure waste, in my opinion. But I'm not going to interfere with it. Everyking 04:35, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

[1] Everyking 06:10, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Vandal

You are vandalizing the picture that is on several pages. This is bad faith editing. Stop it. --Noitall 07:06, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

There is no source for that image - if you are going to claim a copyright on that image you need a source Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:16, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Excuse me, I provided the source. You are in violation of Wiki policy assume good faith. Quit behaving like a vandal or hanging out with other vandals like User:Hipocrite. You aren't the Wiki police and, even if you were, your actions are in bad faith and in violation of Wiki policy. --Noitall 07:20, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

I do not understand, what is the source? Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:58, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Several times now I stated that I vouched for the source and that the picture was being used with permission and in fair use of the owner's intent. This is all that is required. This is what is stated on the copyright notices that should be applied. Wiki is an anonymous forum and everyone wants to keep it that way. FYI, for the future, if you have evidence that a picture came from a copyrighted source, such as it looks like it came from an online source or a professional photographer of a well-known model, then you can require the source. With this picture, if you are going to retract your actions, then we have no problems. Otherwise, you are apparently attempting to vandalize a picture that is used in 2 articles. --Noitall 11:59, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Everyone participating in this bitter (for no good reason) fight over image tagging should be versed in the Wikipedia policy on Image Use - WP:IUP. Hipocrite - «Talk» 12:56, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

You are right, it is bitter and it is for no good reason. But I was not the one creating the trouble, you were (again). --Noitall 16:06, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, really? Just two of your edits before I even knew about your failure to insert correct tags: [2][3].

I'm afraid you are the one here not assuming good faith, and please stop calling us vandals. There is still no source for the image - if it indeed did come from you you need to state clearly that it did so and provide contact info, otherwise it will eventually be deleted (and I feel sorry for the person who has to do so). Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 16:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Joolz's RFA

Hey Ryan, thanks for your vote on my recent RFA, your support was appreciated :) -- Joolz 11:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Splash's RfA

Hi Ryan. Thanks for your support on my RfA; I was shocked to receive so much support. Both pieces of advice you give are well taken, although I shall be careful over exactly which parts of me I detach; some are more important to me than others ;) Thanks again. -Splash 13:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your support on my adminship nomination. --ZappaZ 18:58, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Boyfriend (song)

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Are we going to have an article on every single that is ever released? Why not wait to see if this song even breaks the top 40 or top 10, or has a decent sales quotient. Zoe 05:50, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Hi, thanks for voting for me in my RFA. I was really touched at how many people voted for me! --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 22:43, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

My RFA is spicy?

Maybe, but this is spicier.

Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. I promise I will use the admin tools wisely! (mutters something about supporting the cabal by banning non-admins for no reason). Seriously, though, thanks again; I really do appreciate it. Ral315 04:16, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

A thanks for the support on my admin nomination. I'm now WP's newest admin. CG 18:21, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA....I'll try to be good...and your wow is welcome Lectonar 11:08, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you very kindly for your support for my nomination. I promise your trust will not be misplaced; I may occasionally be slightly buzzed with power, but never drunk. ;) Oh, and I'm trying to be better with edit summaries -- it's something I need to improve on for sure. · Katefan0^(scribble) 22:03, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your support in my recent RFA! All those extra buttons might not be a big deal, but getting all this positive feedback sure is, please let me know if you have any problems or comments regarding how I use all these shiny new levers and cranks! Rx StrangeLove 00:47, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

RE: red warning

I removed the red message since: A)I don't want "Rdos" to use that as his argument, even though, yes, the article clearly is OR. B)You fixed it. All caps looks really idiotic and unintelligent(no matter what you are saying), and I know that you are none of those things. BTW, the red text is much less obnoxious than all caps, IMO. I will continue to use red text if I see all caps or personal attacks though, its all part of the job...;)Voice of All (talk) 05:18, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

And also, don't ever let the trolls get you down, as that is their purpose in life :).Voice of All (talk) 05:21, September 13, 2005 (UTC)

Just a question...

Did you by any chance actually read the WNL 0.2 text, and compare it to the BSD text? The WNL is based on the BSD, modified to fit a Wiki and to work in other languages and legal systems. - Amgine

I did not mean to be combative. I merely meant to point out that your comment in opposition to WNL 0.2 would apply exactly equally to BSD, and your praise for the latter likewise. The WNL would not be maintained by Wikinews, but by the WMF Board and its volunteer lawyers (those lawyers, btw, have already been editing and vetting the license because they prefer it to the others.)

The primary benefit of the license is that should Wikinews have need to modify the license in the future they can ask the Board to do so, rather than request an unrelated organization which has no reason to be responsive to the needs of Wikinews. To give you an idea of why this is important, the CC group has been being asked for more than two years to modify their licensure to meet the needs of wikis, but especially the WMF. At one point they considered a CC-wiki, but that project has been killed. Wikinews has directly communicated with Mr. Lessig on at least two occasions, and Jimbo has talked with him indirectly more often than that. And there is, as yet, no licensure from CC which directly addresses collaboratively developed text articles. Let alone one which works across legal systems and languages (iCommons does *not* do so, according to lawyers I have spoken with about this.) - Amgine 19:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

There's a huge number of fake celebrity journals scattered across those sites, so I wouldn't give any of them any credibility. If any were real it would be well-known. Everyking 07:42, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Android79's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA and for your kind comments. android79 15:27, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

The Resilient Barnstar

I, Extraordinary Machine, hereby present The Resilient Barnstar to RN, for his admirable eagerness to satisfy the comments of users who voted "object" on the featured article candidacies for Ashlee Simpson and Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album). Your outward enthusiasm to improve those articles, and Wikipedia as a whole, when faced with criticism (constructive or not) is an attitude that many of your fellow Wikipedians could do with adopting, including myself. Extraordinary Machine 18:10, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks awfully

Ta for supporting my RfA, much appreciated. I'll endeavour to contribute more to those necessary tasks and hope to bring the benefit of years of experience of tactfully sorting out recalcitrant contractors to bear in the gentler arena of wikipedia....dave souza 23:15, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your support of my RfA, which I have formally withdrawn. The full text of my withdrawal and statement of appreciation is on the RfA page. Best wishes, Leonard G. 03:34, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Ashlee Simpson back on the candidates list

Lol. sweet. --Phroziac ^(talk) 05:40, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Speculation of famous people who might have autism

Things are getting interesting at the Speculation article. I think it is improved, but... some major work is needed with citations, etc. And there is a certain issue with an external link on the page. Fun. And a couple of us have suggested a merge. So if you haven't stopped by lately, now is a good time. :) ManekiNeko | Talk 20:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Bmicomp's RfA

Well, my RfA has not quite completed yet, but either way, I'd like to thank you for your vote and your support, regardless of the outcome. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 23:24, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Re: sorry

Apology accepted. However, next time inform the person that you are talking about. I would like to know if I was being discussed. At first I didn't know that you had even called me a troll, so I had to check your contribs to see if you had called me a troll recently. I found the page, and thank you for apologizing. I am not a troll though, it's just I believe that you can improve an article both by adding information and taking it away, some of that "new information" could be horribly biased, or outrageous. --Revolución (talk) 02:30, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

I thank you for your support for my RfA, We shall surely interact more. I am certain that our association shall grow. --Bhadani 10:58, 18 September 2005 (UTC)