User talk:Christian Roess

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Karmafist 18:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary[edit]

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 0% for major edits and 0% for minor edits. (Based on the last 116 major and 0 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 04:16, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Pittsburgh sports lore[edit]

Regarding Pittsburgh sports lore: Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Because you did not include an edit summary, your recent removal of content from Pittsburgh sports lore was misinterpreted as vandalism and therefore was reverted. Remember to please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes. Thank you. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
All of the wiki syntax markup are listed on Wikipedia:How to edit a page. The problem that you saw was that the paragraph started with a space, which therefore made it formatted exactly as typed, in a fixed-width font and lines that do not wrap. By the way, a colon indents a line or paragraph. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Also, Wikipedia:Sandbox is the page you can use to test and experiment with the wiki syntax markup. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:15, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Anselm Berrigan[edit]

Can you please explain what you meant by this edit summary:

Revert to earlier version; look in the contributor's notes; the author himself seems to approve of this so-called "auto-biographical" version

Obviously someone would approve of their autobiography since...well...they wrote it. Please take a look at WP:AUTO to see why I had reverted it to the previous state. Writing about one's self in the manner that was done in that article is highly frowned upon on Wikipedia. Metros232 14:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

George Oppen & Mary Oppen[edit]

Hi there. I noticed you added a stub tag to both these articles. Tagging an article as a stub means that the article is very short, but both of these articles are long enough to not qualify as stubs. I have removed the tags. VegaDark 19:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Michael Palmer reverted, vandal blocked[edit]

Pleasure :) Glen 16:35, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I hear you there! Anytime, just say the word :) Keep up the great work! Glen 02:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

William Styron[edit]

Hello, first of all I apologise for the unsolicited nature of this message, but I noticed your name as a contributor to the above article. I was doing a bout of New Page patrolling today when I came across an interview article at William Styron - interview. At first, the copyright alarm bells were ringing (as they had been all day, to be honest), but after the author of the article asserted that he owns the copyright to the original article (being the interviewer himself), the next problem is whether this has any encyclopaedic worth to the Wikipedia project. Seeing as I know nothing of the subject, I assured the author of the article that I would try to gather some opinion on the matter. If you have any comment, could I ask you to leave it at the article talk page, please? I am still making enquiries as to the validity of the copyright claim and it may be that the article ends up on Articles for Deletion. However, I feel obliged to at least try first! Thank you for your time. Bubba hotep 19:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the input on this. I don't take speedy deletion tasks lightly and I knew this might have a place somewhere, as the author's enthusiasm would indicate. Credit where it is due, it was my "fountain of knowledge" Alf who lead me in the right direction (again). I will be sure to let you know what happens. Cheers. Bubba hotep 22:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Fernando Botero[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Christian Roess! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, and try to reinsert the link again. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 15:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

No, this was a legitimate offering of "good" links. I'm not trying to add spam. I'll have to read up on this to see why this may have detected spam.???? Christian Roess 15:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
The bot probably latched onto "Abu Ghraib" or maybe "Smurf" as a reason for flagging it. Just a thought. GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Poets[edit]

Please don't add Category:Poets to articles that are already filed in national subcategories such as Category:American poets. This goes against Wikipedia's rules on duplicate categorization. Thanks. Bearcat 09:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Set this house Styron.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Set this house Styron.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CarverR Will.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:CarverR Will.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sebald Emigrants.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Sebald Emigrants.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 12:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WalkerPMessageBottle.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:WalkerPMessageBottle.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


Objectivist poets article review[edit]

Objectivist poets has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. –Dream out loud (talk) 03:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Information.svg Hello Christian Roess! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2,549 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. Anthony Wilden - Find sources: "Anthony Wilden" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · wikipedia library

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

(and all the others of course) for your article on Donald Allen's anthology. For some mad reson I have begun recently to map (de:User:Radh/US Lyrik in Westdeutschland) the German reception of US-American poetry (all kinds of poetry, but basically after 1930 only) in post-45 Germany up to 1978. At the moment I mostly have to rely on internet sources and your work really helpes.--Radh (talk) 23:42, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Woland1234[edit]

I replied to your question. Psychiatrick (talk) 15:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

The saga continues... as mysterious as ever. —Zujine|talk 00:21, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Dewey Bunnell[edit]

I saw your comments on the WP:BLPN. Note that ANYONE can undo a change to a redirect, just like ANYONE can WP:DEPROD an article - you don't need any approval to do so. Ideally, in a friendly collaborative world, you shouldn't do either, especially to a BLP, without ensuring that the resulting article ends up satisfying all the requirements of WP:BLP, and explaining why you are doing so. WP:PRODs can only ever be applied once, so if anyone in the future wants to delete it, then they have to go to WP:AFD. Of course, they could always switch it to a WP:REDIRECT again, but that is unlikely to occur if you can show that this persons notability isn't solely associated with one band - ie they have solo releases or have been in another band. See the note in the WP:MUSICBIO guideline.

Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases. Members of two notable bands are generally notable enough for their own article.

Regards, The-Pope (talk) 15:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Woland1234[edit]

I know that you have had problems with this editor in the past. I just wanted to let you know that his behavior has not ceased, and I think it is time we take him to AN/I. As your involvement with him goes back further, and you have left him messages, would you care to make a report, and I will endorse it and my tuppence worth? ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 15:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled[edit]

Wikipedia Autopatrolled.svg

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 15:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference[edit]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Robert Stone[edit]

Yer Welcome! Tapered (talk) 18:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Timeline of Occupy Wall Street[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Timeline of Occupy Wall Street has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Already a timeline of protest on the "Occupy Wall Street" page, so seems redundant to have this page

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AMERICAN 1 ENGINEER (talk) 09:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Timeline of Occupy Wall Street for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timeline of Occupy Wall Street is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of Occupy Wall Street until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. AMERICAN 1 ENGINEER (talk) 09:30, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to wikiFeed[edit]

Hi Christian Roess,

I'm part of a team that is researching ways to help Wikipedia editors find interesting content to contribute to Wikipedia. More specifically, we are investigating whether content from news sources can be used to enhance Wikipedia editing. We have created a tool, called wikiFeed, that allows you to specify Twitter and/or RSS feeds from news sources that are interesting to you. wikiFeed then helps you make connections between those feeds and Wikipedia articles. We believe that using this tool may be a lot of fun, and may help you come up with some ideas on how to contribute to Wikipedia in ways that interest you. Please participate! To do so, complete this survey and follow this link to our website. Once you're there, click the "create an account" link to get started.

For more information about wikiFeed, visit our project page. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask via my talk page, or by email at wikifeedcc@gmail.com. We appreciate your time and hope you enjoy playing with wikiFeed!

Thanks! FifthCrow (talk) 19:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

WP Poetry and The Canterbury Tales task force[edit]

As someone who is listed as a participant for WikiProject Poetry, I hope you will be interested to learn of an attempt to revive the WP and alongside this the creation of task force to improve coverage of The Canterbury Tales. We are currently looking for participants to help set up the basics. Please get involved if you can, and we can hopefully revive this important project within Wikipedia! Many thanks, MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 18:34, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Deletionist at work on Death of The Liberal Class[edit]

Deletionist User:Bobrayner has deleted the entire contents of Death of the Liberal Class, replacing it with a redirect to the book author's (Chris Hedges) Wikipedia page. I reverted his changes. Based on the deletionist's edit history, I suspect the deletion of being an apparent partisan edit by that user from a conservative bias similar to other previous deletions for other articles. As I noted in my edit summary, this suppression of disagreed-with "liberal" content ironically seems to be an example of the book's main point. He then deleted the article's contents again and I reverted it again. I asked that the deletion of the page's content be discussed before he deletes it again. Looking at that user's edit history, he/she seems to be good at making up short edit summaries citing Wikipedia guidelines to justify what seem to be biased partisan deletes to suppress content -- including labeling changes by me as "sock" when they are not (that being an undeserved slur perhaps intended for you as the main author of that article). I suggest you discuss the deletion of the article's contents with him/her on the article's talk page as that user may well delete the contents again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.90.187 (talk) 12:29, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

May I remind you of a few things?
If you're unable to comply with wikipedia's (admittedly rather low) standards for notability and civility, there are plenty of other websites you could try instead. bobrayner (talk) 19:52, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12[edit]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)