User talk:Fconaway/Archive 1

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

you and billlibob need to stop playing as master editors on the martin anderson page. stop vandalizing my changes. thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ford1206 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Were you trying to add an image that you have not yet uploaded? Remember that an acceptable copyright must exist for the image to be acceptable for Wikipedia. I would love to see an image for the Scinde Dawk article. Check out. BTW are you an active philatelist? If so don't forget about the philately portal which I hope to update ever now and then. There is also a philately project that might interest you. Please ask me any questions on my talk page. ww2censor 18:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you had reorganised this article and removed proper referencing I had added. Referencing is important and need to be able to be followed up by other users, hence the reference section. We don't put external source links inline with text so check this out and see how it works for your future editing. While the text seems pretty good, I have copyedited it into a more encyclopaedic format with the proper referencing and introducing the topic correctly in the first sentence that you had buried in the middle. I hope you agree that this is now a better article as reorganised. Wikipedia is not just a list of bullet points. Cheers and thanks for the input. ww2censor 19:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I sent a long response, and saved it. It seems to have disappeared.

In short, your editing and re-formatting make a big improvement! Thanks for bailing me out!

Sincerely,

Floyd Conaway

License tagging for Image:Desai.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Desai.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. 05:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Red Scinde Dawk stamp.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Red Scinde Dawk stamp.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. 03:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I added a fair use tag and hope that is acceptable to admins. Also put image in article that you helped write. ww2censor 04:39, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is PD actually - not even a really exotic interpretation of copyright law could keep any 19th-century stamp out of the public domain. Stan 17:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scinde Dawk again[edit]

You cannot make a change to the content of the infobox because it is a template intended for use in all rare stamp articles. All chnage made to the template must be carefully though out as it affects the look of several other pages. As you found out only the information on the right can be changed but I have entered the info you wanted to add with a line break, so it looks fine. Check it out. Where did you get the figure of 100+ existing from? We really need to have a source for such info. BTW, I am not sure it is appropriate to use a rarity term, like very rare because it is so subjective and undefined. I think we should really have a discussion about that at the philately project. Keep up the good work. Cheers. ww2censor 13:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply is on my talk page. ww2censor 05:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:D Stone Vermillion Madura C139.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:D Stone Vermillion Madura C139.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. 23:18, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Inverted_Head_Four_Annas.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Inverted_Head_Four_Annas.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 06:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Symbols on a Blue Scinde Dawk.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Symbols on a Blue Scinde Dawk.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. 02:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Gerald Davis[edit]

I removed the link between Gerald Davis, painter and Gerald Davis, philatelist. They are not the same person. Fconaway 01:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To alphebetize into categories[edit]

Hello. To class in alphabetical order inside a category, you must add " |Name, First name " in the category. Example : [[Category:President of the United States|Bush, George]]. Sebjarod 12:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Edward B. Evans, was selected for DYK![edit]

Updated DYK query On December 29, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edward B. Evans, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Larbot - run by User:Lar - t/c 11:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi![edit]

Hi there.. Saw you making some nice contributions to India related articles. Nice job. Do let me know if any help required. Leaving some links for you — Lost(talk) 13:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Preview[edit]

You can help other Wikipedia contributors by using the Preview button instead of the Save button when you are making many changes to an article, such as your edits to Nathan Huggins. When you are finished and you are satisfied with all of your changes, then use the Save button. This will help future editors in reviewing the edit history when necessary, because making many changes and saving each one clutters up the edit history of an article and makes it difficult for editors to review the history. Thank you. ●DanMS 03:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Satrunjaya 1949.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Satrunjaya 1949.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. 10:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John_Maurice_Clark.jpg[edit]

Image:John_Maurice_Clark.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:John_Maurice_Clark.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. Fconaway 00:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Philatelic edits[edit]

I notice your philatelic activity, especially your philatelists edits, and would like to remind you about the philately project. We seem to be loosing some philatelic editors or they are reducing in number or edit frequency for whatever reason. Perhaps you would join us in actively improving some articles(there is no commitment). I made an area on the project where newly created articles can be added and have added your recent Philipp von Ferrary to it as it seems pretty finished. BTW I have a suggestion for you. I notice that you make numerous small edits to articles instead of one or two major ones and while this increases your edit total, I prefer to start a sandbox page in my user space when I know it will take some time to complete. When I feel ready I paste the whole thing into the main space and leave a deletion tag on the page if I don't need it anymore. Here is a link to my other pages and you can see all of a users pages by changing the user-name on this link. You will see that I am working on a few better articles that will take some time. Just a suggestion because as you know there is really no wrong way, just bad info. Cheers and keep up the good work. I think I might use some of the Philipp von Ferrary info for a Selected article page in the Philately Portal. ww2censor 00:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. Of course I'll help with the philately project. Let me know how I can help.
I was supposing no one looked at the philatelic bios! I've put up a few of them, mostly people who've been in danger of neglact. Ferrary was an interesting fellow, especially his adopted Austrian identity, which seems to be a mystery.
I've not learned to use a sandbox, but certainly I should. I'm not looking to increase my number of edits; it's just that I work through extensive rewrites, which Wikipedia accomodatesFconaway 18:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]
I see you have been working on the infobox for the Hawaiian Missionaries. The linebreak in those tables is normally set on the left and for some reason you spent some time moving it to the right. No idea why, just more work for you. IIRC I have seen some reversions done to infoboxes constructed as you have mad that one, maybe by a bot. Anyway good work including those images, though I am not really sure you can be entirely happy about the copyright because you took images someone else had made, likely without permission, but we shall see and hope. Age is of course not a problem with the images. I must ask someone else who knows better than I do. I modified the "RareStamp Infobox" template a little as it seemed slightly too narrow, but by creating a line break in the value you seem to have helped the layout too.
As to the copyright on these very rare stamps: I've relied on Stan's opinion from last October 10: "[referring to an image of a red Scinde Dawk, 1852] This is PD actually - not even a really exotic interpretation of copyright law could keep any 19th-century stamp out of the public domain. Stan 17:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC) Seems to me the owner of such a stamp might gain from the publicity. Let me know, please, if there's any problem here.Fconaway 22:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While I tend to concur with Stan's opinion, I just feel that swiping other people's images may be the problem. It would certainly not be an issue if you actually owned the stamps in question, but I certainly can't afford any of them and I suppose neither can you, even if they were for sale. I would be prepared to stick my neck out but it would most likely be better to try and acquire these type of images from public places like the National Postal Museum or similar places wherever possible and not from private auction houses. It's just my opinion. Cheers ww2censor 01:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The headings on the left column were breaking awkwardly, such as
     Place of
     production
I was trying to discover why that was happening; and eventually discovered that the values in the right column were simply too long if not broken (duh). I can revert it now.Fconaway 22:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that, and assumed that was what you were doing, experimentation tends to teach us things here. I would not bother reverting it. If a bot does it then that's ok too. As I mentioned the line-break did most of the trick but I widened the infobox too. Thanks ww2censor 22:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your own sandbox, just type the new name like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fconaway/Sandbox where 'Sandbox' is the name of the page you want and you will get the option to make the name page in your User Space and just put something in there. Don't forget the name or put it on your Watchlist. While you are at it you might also want to tell us something about yourself, what you do, intend to do or have done on your own userpage. Cheers ww2censor 21:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to an old message[edit]

Hi, I missed your message of 24th Feb on my userpage. Please put the messages on the talk page as there is a notification and that is the page one checks for new messages. It is ok to add relevant information to a biography especially if that fact is notable to the person's biography. Else you can skip it. There is no specific policy about this. But we do have a policy about living persons. See WP:BLP — Lost(talk) 09:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

François Simiand[edit]

Hello, Fconaway. I notice that you've written a very nice article about this French sociologist. I do have a question about classifying him as a statistician, though. What theoretical contribution did he make to statistics? From reading the article it appears that he applied statistical techniques in his work, but I see no basis for categorizing him as a statistician. Comments? Thanks! DavidCBryant 14:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, David, Thanks for your observation about Simiand vis a vis statistics. It's good to know that someone actually reads this stuff!

Simiand's theoretical contribution to statistics is under the radar, as he devoted himself to careful applied statistical work and the exposition of scientific methods. He was considered to be the resident statistical expert of l'Année Sociologique.

Both in his methodological work and in practice, Simiand emphasized the statistician's critique of data itself, as noticed in Lebaron's article:

Especially see p. p. 58.Fconaway 01:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding, Floyd. Unfortunately, the link to u-picardie doesn't work well for me. All I get is the first page, and my Adobe Reader doesn't load. The image of page 1 is so small I can barely read it, and there's no way to advance to page 2, let alone p. 58. I'll have to try opening it with another OS/browser and see what happens. Does the link work well for you? Is access to this publication restricted somehow?
Something was wrong with the .pdf version, as you discovered. It worked yesterday, but not today. For me, it gave only the last page! So I have replaced the URL to indicate the .html version, which is working. I hope it works for you now.
I thought a while before listing Simiand as a statistician, but data issues are too easily neglected. Recent business school graduates seem to have no inkling of this.Fconaway 12:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I never would have seen this particular article had you not added the Category:Statisticians tag. That caused it to come up on the list of "new" articles about mathematics. Your explanation about critical review of the data themselves (and also, I suppose, the data collection process) makes sense to me – I trust your judgment. Have a great day! DavidCBryant 13:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits made to Abraham M. Radcliffe[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Fconaway! 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, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 18:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Yakshi of Tamralipta Ashmolean 1st Century BCE.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Yakshi of Tamralipta Ashmolean 1st Century BCE.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. 06:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

framing merge proposal[edit]

Please see Talk:Framing (sociology). - Grumpyyoungman01 13:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiian Missionaries‎[edit]

Replied on my talk page. ww2censor 14:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Dawson Cover.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dawson Cover.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. 19:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

San Juan Botanical Garden[edit]

Congratulations, I think we elaborated a Good Asticle (GA) in record time – Moebiusuibeom-en 02:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Schaffner was the director about 4 years ago, is he back? that info may be ancient – Moebiusuibeom-en 02:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you saw my notes about this on your talk page.
Hi Fconaway, the link or "cita" ^ Flora of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands–Agustín Stahl is not working correctly, please check it out!
Thanks for finding this! The website si.edu is the Smithsonian Institution, and of course that is working. However, the "cita" seems to be in error; so I removed the link. The link came from the Wikipedia page for Agustín Stahl. The work doesn't seem to be Stahl's. Several other things on that page seem to be questionable.
I've made some adjustents: I've included * The Herbarium as part of the Thematic Collection as described in their brochures and simplified Section
Perhaps I mis-translated from the Spanish, herbario: "Las colecciones vivas y el herbario son utilizadas para estudios de investigación."
My understading of "herbarium" is that it would be a collection of reference specimens (pressed), whereas a living collection would be an "herb garden". Surely they wouldn't give public access to their pressed specimens.
Un herbario es una colección de plantas secas debidamente preparadas para garantizar su conservación de manera indefinida. [www.jardibotanic.org/herbario.html]

...and also added New Section "Native species in danger of extinction" to cover what you've wrote. I've tried calling them all day today (all tel numbers) to find out if their concert series Ecocultura is still on their schedule but no one answered, so I've eliminated Tel Nº, it's not necessary, I hope you agree on changes, lets see if we can nominate this article as a GA, Lol – Moebiusuibeom-en 03:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all agreed except for the herbarium (see above). You did a fine job with the theme headings. They look great!Fconaway 07:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Fconaway; HI, article looking good, theme headings supposedly are OK by wikipedia standards, Herbarium according to their official brochure are a collection of scientifically classified “dry plants”, they also mention that the Herbarium has over 36,000 specimens available for study, are all those dry plants?, have no idea, maybe you can clear me up on this. - Moebiusuibeom-en 17:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they have some 36,000 specimens in the herbarium. They also have a protected orchid collection. Both are open to "serious naturalists".Fconaway 02:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Hey Fconaway, in Botanical Gardens of San Juan been trying to improve two redundant phrases almost next to each other and don't know how to approach this simple dilemma, maybe you can reshuffle the wording somehow and make it presentable. They are:

(top)[edit]

… “urban garden” of native and exotic flora serves as a laboratory for study, research, and conservation, …

Background[edit]

… center for the study, conservation and enrichment of the native flora, …


Also, the phrase: The Garden comprises a living laboratory for informal instruction of the community in all aspects of the native flora and and other plants which are cultivated here. They have a collection of bromeliads, as well. is somehow out of place and it should be integrated somewhere else, like to live Themes Collections by themselves!

The Bromeliads collection are in the Experimental Station. Since I'm presently living close to the gardens, I will visit them personally next week and get additional info!

I finally got a working phone number: 1-787-758-9957 (the others have been disconnected quite a while). By the way, I've visited several Botanical Gardens throughout the world and this one is truly serious and quite interesting!

Cheers ~ Moebiusuibeom-en 16:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to know you can verify the information by direct observation or by talking with people there. Working with written materials has its limitations! My guess is that the Bromeliads are kept away from the public.

I'll see what I can do with the redundancies.

Okay, I did some re-writing to make the beginning more readable and make the Botanical Garden more inviting to tourists and the public. Streamlining, so to speak, less cluttered with details at the beginning. Also, placed the New Millennium Forest project on the eastern side of the Botanical Garden (as the website says -- I hope this is correct).
I took out the Bromeliads for now, pending your verification of whether they are an exhibit, a research collection, or both. They are very interesting plants -- I know people who collect them and grow them in their houses!

Do they have an aviary or bird conservation program? Plants do not live without animals in their biologic community. They have such a program in St. Vincent, where bird conservation is a project within the botanical gardens.Fconaway 19:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fconaway; will get back shortly Moebiusuibeom-en 18:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday stamp[edit]

Just in case you don't have the philately project on your watchlist, Holiday stamp has been nominated for deletion, so you should make your comments here to avoid the AfD being successful. Mind you the article could do with expansion. ww2censor 04:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rare Stamps List page[edit]

What is the reason for the removal of www.famousstamps.org/famousstampsindex.htm on List of notable postage stamps? It is a secondary source that is highly relevant to the topic. Can you show me a place where there is a more comprehensive list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.106.64 (talk • contribs) (01:20, July 11, 2007)

The Stamps Magazine link, that I will revert to (again) is the secondary source with mostly far superior images and contains more information. The famousstampsindex web link seems to have been added by the webmaster, or site owner, and is therefore blatant self-promotion as confirmed by one of the edit summaries, if it is such a good site he should let others add the site but I do not think it is a very good philatelic site. ww2censor 15:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not only is that page designed for commercial purposes: it is poorly written, and it has substantial errors of fact. For example, the red Scinde Dawk is shown with a value of GBP 1,000.Fconaway 16:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have it on my watchlist and have already given the editor 2 spam warnings. ww2censor 16:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well said.Fconaway

Spam web links[edit]

those links on martin anderson are one-side, have nothing to do with the court case and have nothing to with this article.....if you allow this then everyone should be able to put what ever we want to write about the gang member.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ford1206 (talk • contribs) 21:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC) [snip][reply]

It is very difficult to follow what you are saying if you do not give the appropriate links so one can look at them easily. Cheers ww2censor 01:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[snip] For the I Love Lucy page you can go to the history and choose the old and new edit you want to refer to, view the edit and paste the full URL. Cheers ww2censor 02:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Okay, just to connect the dots: There were many similar warnings earlier, when many pages were added. The links were all made anonymously from a private company's network, they all contained promotional links, and they seemed to come from the same editor who had been linking to various "rare stamps" pages.[reply]

The same editor then began to link to popular culture pages on Wikipedia. Here's an example from I Love Lucy: <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=I_Love_Lucy&diff=126267567&oldid=126012201> Ten or so like this appeared on various WP pages describing TV shows.

Today I noticed another, a used car Bulletin Board: <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indian_Automobile_Industry&diff=130209288&oldid=130097575> <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indian_Automobile_Industry&diff=130494204&oldid=130309813> Also, an even earlier one offering used cars.

I know these aren't new to you, and maybe this is over-wrought, but these do seem to form a pattern of commercial activity using Wikipedia's resources.Fconaway 03:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not over-wrought, just annoyed at commercial linkages. Most of these links are not good and even some of the ones still on those pages are pretty awful too. Did you ever read this page or this? You might find it useful to decide what links to revert and what to leave in. BTW, when you remove or revert such links you might want to look at that editors other contributions and give him a spam warning. There are various levels of warning available to use as shown on the Spam page but you can also point the editor back to the offending article by posting the {{subst:uw-spam1|name of offending edited article}} template with the name of article added and the number can be altered depending on the level of warning you wish to give. Check out the "notable stamps" guy here. Cheers ww2censor 04:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is all good and useful information. I'll be careful in using it. Thanks!Fconaway 05:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Feldman[edit]

Boy you are quick! I only just posted David Feldman about 35 minutes ago - hope you like it. Nice edits. This could do with expansion, especially his books but I was unable to find a list easily. There used to be one on the website but it is gone. Cheers ww2censor 04:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't mean to jump on it, but came across it by accident as I was looking at the Treskilling Yellow. One thing leads to another. As a philatelic friend said, "I love a good digression." And, wasn't aware it was your work. I am happy to see you have put this together. I know how much work it takes to go at something de novo. The real challenge is in the proportions of the parts to the whole. Thanks for all the good work!Fconaway 04:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No apology needed at all. Of course it could not have been on your watchlist so it is curious that you arrived just after I fixed the link on the Treskilling page after I posted the article. Cheers ww2censor 04:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I should confess that all of my changes were prepared well in advance! Anyway, I have one more, which I'm not quite sure of -- hope you will scrutinize this carefully to be sure of accuracy.Fconaway 05:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Both Feldman's website and the article say the Bordeaux Cover sold for $5 million USD. However, it seems the price paid was in Swiss francs. The 1993 article says ~$3.8 million USD, while the Encyclopaedia Mauritiana says the value was 5 million Swiss francs or ~$3 million USD. Does anyone have a Prices Realized?Fconaway 06:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the difference may arise between the hammer price and the paid price that would include the 15% fees and maybe also VAT or whatever type of sales tax there is in Switzerland. Also the currency conversion could have been changed to reflect a current US $ value, so maybe some notation needs to be made about the quoted selling price. I will look into it more. ww2censor 16:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! You have this nailed down! The information agrees with Helen Morgan's Blue Mauritius research page. Feldman needs to correct his web page. If we could get a good illustration of the Bordeaux cover this could be worked up as a good "Did You Know?" item. The price might be "excessive", "astonishing", or simply "outrageous", but it's certainly phenomenal.Fconaway 19:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I happened to come across the prices realised right here at home. Actually I already put it up for DYK here for the Treskilling Yellow single stamp record price! I also added some info about the 2 recent controversies. I will look for a Bordeaux cover image too. ww2censor 22:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ther bast quality Bordeaux cover is here and I suppose there is really no copyright issue with the image. We could do with a page about the cover alone. BTW, this was a DYK on the main page but I missed it even though I got a notifivation it was gone before I got there though it is still on the DYK recent additions page. Cheers ww2censor 17:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just now saw your comment. Yes, this is the best illustration of the Bordeaux Cover, by far, although the colors are unrealistic. It should be an article in its own right.Fconaway 06:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I will upload a .jpg of the Bordeaux Cover. Maybe it could be worked into the "Blue Penny" page (a misnomer -- that should be Post Office Mauritius).Fconaway 07:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's at Image:Bordeaux Cover.jpg. Fconaway 07:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(deindent) Thanks for doing that. Cheers ww2censor 15:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harmers[edit]

The Tre Skilling Yellow page says, "In 1937, King Carol II of Romania purchased it from London auction house H. R. Harmer for £5,000..." H. R. Harmer is in New York. Currently the London company is "Harmers of London", without H. R. in its name. Did H. R. Harmer have a London location in 1937?Fconaway 07:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page clarifies the setting up of the New York office but after that there is no information about whether there is still any connection between the two. Don't forget that Matthew Bennett stamps acquired HA Harmer SA in 2003. Look here]. All the same last name needs some figuring out. Maybe I will ask some dealers that I know when next I see them. Cheers ww2censor 16:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes[edit]

How come you are putting userboxes on your talk page instead of your user page? ww2censor 18:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno. Dumb, huh? Thanks for the tip!Fconaway 18:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portal page[edit]

Well spotted correction on Stamp of the month. Cheers ww2censor 22:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Image copyright problem with Image:Portrait de Pierre-Joseph Redouté.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Portrait de Pierre-Joseph Redouté.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 06:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Portrait de Pierre-Joseph Redouté.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Portrait de Pierre-Joseph Redouté.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. 07:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to the Battle of Bad Axe. I noticed on my watchlist that you tend to edit without an edit summary. It would be very helpful if you could include even a short summary of the work you are doing on each edit, something like "copy edit" would be sufficient. You can even set your preferences to prompt you when you forget. : ) See Help:Edit summary for more information. IvoShandor 02:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion. I am derelict in failing to provide edit summaries. Partly, this is because I feel that the reasons for most of these are obvious at a glance, but others may require an explanation. Anyway, I'll try to learn how to set my preferences to prompt for an edit summary. That will be very helpful!Fconaway 03:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The only reason I ask is because it makes it much easier to see what kind of work is going on without digging through the page history or diffs. It should be pretty easy to set the prefs, link at top, check the last option under the editing tab and save, viola! Anyway, thanks for attempting to address said issue, it's not the end of the world if you forget it just helps us monitoring from afar. If you are interested in the Black Hawk War, a few other users and I have been working to get the whole topic to featured topic. So far I have basically raised 8 of the battle article to good article status, and eventually will bring the main war article to FA, hopefully. Bad Axe is one of the articles I haven't had a chance to expand yet. You're welcome to join our little project, I have a page in my user space for it: User:IvoShandor/Black Hawk War, with a bunch of information and a place to list yourself as a participant if you'd like. Anyway, happy editing. IvoShandor 04:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary." I'll give this a try. I hope I have the patience.
I don't know much about this era, although I once taught American history when I was young and foolish. I don't remember how I wandered into the Black Hawk Wars on Wikipedia, as I'm usually working on South Asian Indian topics. But, once there, I couldn't resist an edit or two.Fconaway 04:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • ) Well, there is a significant amount of really interesting reading linked on that user page and its sub pages, so if you ever feel the need to find out more, check it out.IvoShandor 04:31, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the DeKalb county history page I noticed this interesting passage:

The area, unknown to the native Americans, was a strategic location in the game of chess that turned into the War of 1812 between America and Great Britain. What is now Chicago provided access to Lake Michigan. There was an abundance of lead, used for bullets, near what is now Galena. And there were the giant Sycamore trees, used for masts on the great ships, in the Kishwaukee country that contained what is now DeKalb County.Fconaway 04:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, the county seat of DeKalb County is Sycamore. I am soon to be taking a trip to the Galena, Illinois area, which is quite a historic city and one of the older settlements in the state. Important during the Black Hawk War as well as the War of 1812. One thing I would like to do but may not be able to because of private property restriction is climb this state's only excuse for a hill, Charles Mound. IvoShandor 06:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Frederick Douglass as a younger man.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Frederick Douglas.jpg. The copy called Image:Frederick Douglas.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 22:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Def02.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Def02.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 02:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Def02.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Def02.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hazard's Pavilion[edit]

I just wanted to drop you a note and thank you for the superb additions you've made to this article. I created it early in my Wikipedia career, added what info I could find, and later, as I learned more of the Wikipedia way, I always intended to go back and add material, but never had the chance. So, to see you digging out the material and images that you have is a delight. Many thanks! AKRadeckiSpeaketh 23:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your very kind words. I have the feeling that there's a lot more to the story. I started from an obscure reference to Clune's, which I hadn't heard of, and your article gave me an excellent clue!

Some pictures seem to help bring the story to life for modern-day viewers. I see pictures of the Temple Auditorium, for example, and would like to put one of those up, but maybe there's a problem of copyright. An anonymous photo can't be used for 120 years after the demise of the photographer??

So much of Los Angeles' history needs to be told! Do you remember Clifton's cafeteria? It's hard to find information about such places.

I hope you will pick up the thread and let us in on some of your knowledge about this.Fconaway 06:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any photo that was taken before 1923 can be considered to be in the public domain. Also, if you have access to Google Earth, you might want to doublecheck me on the location coordinates. It was a bit of a guess on my part to get the location as close to the intersection as I could. You're right about the history of LA...unfortunately, I'm up in the Antelope Valley, so I know this area's history better than "down below" as we call the LA basin. The focus of much of my study of LA has actually been the water issues, and I've had the priviledge to fly over much of the aqueduct route, and even have hiked a small bit. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 13:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Inauguration Jan 26 1950.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Inauguration Jan 26 1950.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 04:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mahatma Gandhi 10 Rupees.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mahatma Gandhi 10 Rupees.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 04:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

Thanks for uploading Image:Nathan Huggins.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 01:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop this reversion nonsense[edit]

I suggest you read WP:MOS, years should not be linked. Then I suggest you read Project Gutenberg, even they call the book "The History of Sumatra by William Marsden". Having a "works" section is nonsense when his works (notice there are more than one!) are already listed in the article text. (Caniago 22:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks. I am fully aware that years standing alone should not be linked. The linkage was not mine; it has been on the page since July 2005 and probably before. I deleted the links, but restored them because I mistakenly believed they were yours.
The basic issue here is the lack of references. Beyond that, the article doesn't recognize Marsden's accomplishments. Because of the value of the History of Sumatra, it deserves a citation -- as do some of Marsden's other works. Simply naming works in the text, using a run-on sentence borrowed from Britannica 1911, is not a substitute for citations, descriptions or comments on the scholarly work. It would be better to discuss this, rather than resort to deletion. And how many have died from "apoplexy" -- a very Victorian disease!Fconaway 01:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Listing works is fine as long as you list them all, and don't include unnecessary detail. The emphasis should be on the work, not on the publisher or details of particular published editions. Take a look at similar sections for other authors on Wikipedia. (Caniago 05:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:William Marsden.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:William Marsden .jpg. The copy called Image:William Marsden .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 20:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


AfD nomination of Alluvial desert[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Alluvial desert, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alluvial desert. Thank you. Paleorthid (talk) 07:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thorold Rogers[edit]

Hello Fconaway
I'm puzzled that you see the caricature as prejudicial, since even when published originally in the pages of Vanity Fair, the idea was never to denigrate the subject, but rather to portray features in an exaggerated fashion. A large number of WP articles use these caricatures, so I presume that their is some consensus that their inclusion is useful rather than derogatory. See also Vanity Fair caricatures. Could you reply on the Thorold Rogers discussion page? Rotational (talk) 13:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marjat baor[edit]

This wetland is one of the Ecologically Critical Areas in Bangladesh. I have created a redlink for it, but can't find info to start an article. Can you help? Aditya(talk • contribs) 13:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for working on this. In Banglapedia, Marjat Baor is noted as a designated Ecologically Critical Area (ECA), implying urgency, but the ecological danger is not specified on line. The usual information found is that Marjat Baor is a small (200 ha) biologically significant (also not specified) ox bow lake near Jenaidaha 23° 35' N 89° 10' E.
Information for Jenaidaha District appears at http://banglapedia.org/ht/J_0105.HTM and http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/Maps/MJ_0105.GIF . Nine baors are found in the area, as well as canals and beels.
I do not know what studies have been made for this area. The information needed would include 1) is the baor supplemented by rain and river floods? 2) flora and fauna? 3) how many people live here? 4) their agricultural activities, such as growing paddy and grazing animals, as well as fishing and catching birds. 5) what is the ecological threat? 6) what are their alternatives?Fconaway 18:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has an article on Jhenaidah District, with a different set of coordinates. Of course, several alternate spellings exist, such as Jhinaidaha. It appears there was some significant migration into the District.Fconaway 18:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Reference from Kalinga War[edit]

I deleted that reference (see Kalinga War) because the user Tikoo S has been adding references by exactly the same author "R. P. Mohapatra" everywhere (see Cuttack Dhenkanal District Rock Cut Architecture Kharavela Bhubaneswar Puri Konark Hathigumpha inscription Puspagiri University). Further, notice the eulogistic language in that link. Most likely, Tikoo S is R. P. Mohapatra or his associate. I also placed a warning in his/her talk page. Clearly the links are being used for promotional purposes. SDas (talk) 06:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the eulogistic and promotional aspect is clear. And I see others you haven't removed. The references he's been adding could contain some very pertinent information. It might be proper for him to integrate the references with the text, showing the relevance.
In the reference added to Udayagiri and Khandagiri Caves we find the identity of the editor: see http://mohapsa.tripod.com/rpmohapatra/id3.html. R. P. Mohapatra may have been his father. Thanks for the explanation.Fconaway 18:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know who is Mr SDas SDas and how much he knows about Orissan Culture History, Art and Archaeology. What is his right to edit the others content, What is his competent level for this. I have no vested interest here and not promoting anything. His contribution and work itself is so monumental it does not require this kind of promotion. I thought many people will benefit from his pioneering work on Orissan History, Culture, Archaeology, Art and Culture. I have all his work listed in my website so provided the link. Yes I want people to get further information on Orissan Culture, History and Archaeology and refer to his pioneering work. I suggest Mr SDas SDas please read the works provided in the link you will get more knowledge that will let you do constructive work rather destructive work of deleting others contribution without having proper knowledge at first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tikoo s (talk • contribs) 00:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tandava[edit]

Hi. I've nominated Tandava, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created.2Fexpanded on December 13, where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks, Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for thinking of this. The only self-nominated article I put up went unnoticed, whereas the ones which "made it" were a complete surprise to me. The "hooks" themselves seem to be the decider, rather than the quality of the article. This one is quite good, although it's a bit complicated for some readers. Thanks for your excellent additions and emendations.Fconaway (talk) 19:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Updated DYK query On December 18, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tandava, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Looks like this one made it! Royalbroil 03:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Philately Portal help[edit]

I am setting up a series of short articles for the "Stamp of the month" to be rotated automatically by a template I am using on the main page. I thought that the Scinde Dawk would be a good candidate for another stamp to make some variety. You are the Scinde Dawk expert, so maybe you would go to the stamp of the month archive and add some info on one of the redlink pages, or easier, you could just put it on the suggestions page. I would transfer it later using the format I have developed. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 18:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Yes, I will be very happy to help with this. It should be done by the end of next week.Fconaway (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. If you have any other ideas for "stamp of the month" where there are suitable existing articles, let me know. Cheers & have a great new year. ww2censor (talk) 21:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, okay. Now we need another. People do seem to get excited simply by the awesome amounts paid for rarities, so it's good for a stamp of the month to have some other interesting background story, and especially good if it has a striking appearance. My notion would be the "Red Revenues" of China which were overprinted for use as postage (1897). The small $1 overprint is quite rare and pricey, with some 32 extant. However, we don't seem to have an article on this subject, and it's beyond my ken.Fconaway (talk) 09:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I presume you are talking about one of these. I don't know anything about them but will try to fins enough to make an article. I have been trying to just use the existing articles but more is always better though the articles should have some substance. While that section is called "stamp of the month", a monthly change is not actually necessary though I am have set up the Random portal component so that a new article will be rotated automatically. I started that with the stamp section and will do the same for the biography and article sections if this function works out well. That would mean I could, sort of, forget about the portal per se as an actively ongoing project that need work on a regular basis. Cool aspiration indeed. Thanks for any input. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 14:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you don't mind but I fiddled around with your Scinde Dawk edit. But thanks. ww2censor (talk) 17:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's "all to the good". Thanks for the improvements! We should use existing articles which are fairly complete, wherever possible. In that line, I'd suggest Blue Penny and Basel Dove, where we are on firm ground.Fconaway (talk) 21:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I posted a substantial revision of the Mauritius "Post Office" stamps. Please visit and revise as needed. FarleyKatz (talk) 11:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Red Revenues are shown well at [1], and the key stamp is the "Small $1" overprint, "the rarest regularly issued stamp of China, in fact its most legendary stamp". See Lot 249 on p. 63. We need someone who specializes in this area. A naive article on this stamp just might draw in a China specialist.Fconaway (talk) 09:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Qtab_Minar_SG323a.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Qtab_Minar_SG323a.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, then 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, then 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:Fair use, 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 23:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Stamp of Independent India[edit]

I turned this into a redirect to Postage stamps and postal history of India because it had no substance that is not already in this article. ww2censor (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Qtab Minar SG323a.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Qtab Minar SG323a.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Satrunjaya 1949.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Satrunjaya 1949.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) 04:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed fair use rationale has been added.--PremKudvaTalk 10:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pusyamitra[edit]

Please revert yourself. Have a look at the history, User:Ghanadar galpa, and WP:BAN. Relata refero (talk) 08:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no agenda for or against any party, but I am against deletion wars like this. This specific edit is pertinent and supported by a sufficient reference. In the context it is cogent and responsible.Fconaway (talk) 08:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then please justify it, along with a mention of whether or not you personally are aware of the reference, the specific quote, and that it has not been taken out of context, on the talkpage of the article. Otherwise please revert yourself. We don't allow banned editors to edit or their edits to stand without that kind of justification by someone else. Relata refero (talk) 08:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR[edit]

I noticed you put "Beware: 3RR" in the Martin Anderson editing regarding recurring deletion. What does that mean? Thanks! Billollib (talk) 05:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit wars with endless deletions are prohibited, and cause for blocking an editor. I was alluding to the repeating deletions by Ford.
See: Wikipedia:Three-revert rule at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:3RR Fconaway (talk) 05:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I think that article is about as "done" as it's going to get. Obviously, I have a particular interest since I helped organize the Medical Examiner establishment in support of Dr. Siebert, but it's pretty much over with unless the Feds decide to get further involved. However, having been a fed, I don't see that happening. Billollib (talk) 01:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fighting Edits[edit]

So, what is the protocol for what's happening with the Martin Anderson page? Do I just check in every two weeks and repeat what's been going on? I'm not a big poster to the Wikipedia, so I don't know what folk are supposed to do in situations like this. Billollib (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with all of the rules we play by. But, we (editors) are supposed to work things out between us, if we can, using restraint and being considerate. I'd say that process has gone about as far as it can: Ford is "Stonewalling" (not Jackson) and consistently violating the rules. When all else fails, we're supposed to call in an administrator to act as referee, give appropriate warnings, and eventually put on a block. I'll look up the next moves.Fconaway (talk) 02:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it looks as though we are expected to make suitable warnings before calling in an administrator, so I have placed one on the Ford1206 talk page at User talk:Ford1206‎; 02:29 . . (+427) Assuming continued non-compliance, this leads to a block, and to an eventual ban on Ford1206.Fconaway (talk) 02:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i did not vandalise. i have put up facts and history about tha young man. it was up there for almost a month before one person has a problem with it. i have played by the rules of wikipedia and there are others who dont. just because you dont like what i say does not mean it is vandalism. there is one person who wants to put is own blog page as a media source. how is this possible. also i have not attacked anyone about this page. thank you very much....... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ford1206 (talk • contribs) 08:29, March 17, 2008
OK. Maybe we can work this out. Ford1206, I have addressed your statement on the Martin Anderson discussion page rather than eat up Fconaway's space. Billollib (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I MADE CHANGES BASED ON FACTS....THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO WANT TO MAKE THINGS THEIR WAY...AND THEN ADD WEB SITES WHICH ARE BLOG SITES9 THIS AGAINST WIKIPEDIA RULES). THERE IS ONLY ONE PERSON WHO DOES NOT LIKE WHAT I ADDED.IT WAS POSTED FOR OVER A MONTH OR CLOSE TO IT. THE OTHER PERSON REVERTING MY CHANGE SHOULD BE ALSO WARNED FOR VANDALISM... THANK YOU

Famous Stamps[edit]

I deleted www.famoustamps.org above -- I couldn't add my question above because it had been "blacklisted." I tried to do as little as possible -- just getting rid of the "http" part... Billollib (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. That's about someone who kept adding advertising (using Wikipedia as a Bulletin Board). That eventually stopped, and we have others monitoring that.Fconaway (talk) 02:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Junagadh[edit]

Hello, I used to visit junagadh and I had many photographs or junagadh. So, I uploaded it as I found that Junagadh article did not have any good photo. I appreciate you notice towards my small work and thanks to consider my work. Gaurang | Talk 08:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not perform original research[edit]

Wikipedia is not a place to indulge in original reseearch. None of your citations specifically mention Tata mining operations. You are trying to put two and two together [b]which is considered original research[/b]. Furthermore, you are giving undue weight on these controversies which is pushing your PoV.--Blacksun (talk) 18:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mauritius[edit]

The Bordeaux cover, or "La pièce de résistance de toute la philatélie," is now used in The "Post Office" stamps of Mauritius, 1847. FarleyKatz (talk) 13:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That artcle is a mess now and the name is rubbish imho. What do you think? ww2censor (talk) 16:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FarleyKatz may have gone too far, and I understand this may be jarring; but he has done us a service by finding a good illustration of the 1 penny orange-red! Putting in the Bordeaux cover isn't a bad idea, but beyond that the article is edging toward being a comprehensive piece on "Postage Stamps and Postal History of Mauritius" (not the original concept of the page) when it gets into the "Post Paid" issues. The infobox illustrations are too large. The 1d illustration we had shouldn't be labelled a fake unless we can document the fact (I suspect Farley Katz may be correct); until that's documented the "fake" illustration had better be removed.
I'd say the proper heading would be simply The "Post Office" Mauritius without "stamps" or year, as that is the nomenclature used in most traditional philatelic literature (witness Robson Lowe Encyclopedia v. II, p. 376. Beyond that, we get into picayune questions.Fconaway (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like I may have stepped on some feet here, but I really don't understand the fuss. The original title referenced only the Two Pence stamp and didn't even identify the country. Surely, it should address both PO stamps; Wikipedia doesn't need a separate page for each. And how can you not mention the Post Paid issue in an article on the PO issue? Finally, what's wrong with including the brief discussion of the subsequent locally produced issues? If you want to change the title or split it into two, that's fine, but I removed a lot of misinformation and added a great number of significant references. FarleyKatz (talk) 03:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly the article name fails WP:NAME 1.9 by using The at the start of the title and I don't believe quotation marks are to be used in titles either, unless specifically know as such. As you say this is now starting to become Postage stamps and postal history of Mauritius and maybe we should just work on making it into that, then make a new individual stamp article. What do you think? But I did fix the images in the infobox that were a complete mess. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:56, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help with the images. The article does have other format problems, which may be beyond my limited skills, so any help would be appreciated. Doing two articles seems fine if that is more consistent with Wikipedia philately articles. If you can refer me to a good sample postal history article, I can give it a try. Regards, FarleyKatz (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let's go and discuss this on the article talk page rather than on a user's talk page. I am sure Floyd will be happier too. OK? ww2censor (talk) 04:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Lal Bagh[edit]

'Specially Saved' Cookie on Public Computer is Responsible for 'mass' of Article Lal_Bagh. Forcedly deleted cookie, Password Changed. Hope it will work. Sorry Bauani (talk) 07:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Charles Hind[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Arthur Charles Hind, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Arthur Hind. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed this attempted move which violated copyright. Please don't remove copyright tags which you don't understand. See Help:Moving a page for information about how to move a page. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 12:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your DOIbot edits to Epsom College[edit]

It looks to me as though you have used this bot to remove the accessdate from several entries rather than edit them to remove a blank space

I have reverted this and edited it manually and ask for your comments. If this is a DOIBot failure, please report it.

Fiddle Faddle (talk) 06:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Revolt[edit]

I've stubified this, cutting out all but the first paragraph, it is just a crib from Rawlinson with some modification by later editors. 'Aryan race' indeed. It could be a decent article, but the editor who created this and other articles really doesn't understand Wikipedia at all. --Doug Weller (talk) 19:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite so. You picked up on both the Rawlinson crib and the Aryan thesis, which have no place in Wikipedia. Also, there's another (related) article which is largely conjecture. The other side of this, as the earlier editor perceived, is the subject's importance, which is too great for it to be left as a stub. It could be part of another related article about the development of the Persian state / empire through successive generations. I'm not competent to write that, unfortunately.Fconaway (talk) 20:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Which is the related article that is largely conjecture. There are a lot of 'battle' articles which are one or two lines without any references (and in some cases to battles which I can't even find, like the Battle of the Median Border which I assume replaced a speedy deleted 'Battle of Media'.

WP:INDIA[edit]

Welcome!

Hello! You look like someone who might be interested in joining the India WikiProject and so I thought I'd drop you a line and invite you! We'd love to have you help us :-)

Links for Wikipedians interested in India content

Register: Indian Wikipedians | Network: Noticeboard | Discussionboard Browse: India | Open tasks | Deletions
Contribute content: Collaboration Dashboard - India WikiProject - Wikiportal India - Indian current events - Category adoptions


-- Tinu Cherian - 08:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been awarded for your Dilligence[edit]

Per discussion WT:AN this award is being moved here. Keep up the good work. --AdultSwim (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:TroutStar.png The Trout Barnstar
I hereby reward Fconaway the TroutStar for brining this important global issue to our attention. AdultSwim (talk) 17:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


bot errors?[edit]

I wonder if you meant to do these: [2] ? It seems to me extremely unlikely that a journal is called "Proc Natl Acad Sci U S a" rather than "Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A". --BozMo talk 13:10, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bot does that consistently, with other citations of Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A and I also found that doubtful. I am bringing this to the attention of the bot maven. Feel free to correct it.Fconaway (talk) 22:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The journal is correctly cited as "Proc Natl Acad Sci USA", not "Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A".Fconaway (talk) 04:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thais and Khmers vs NPOV[edit]

I'll admit that "an editorial" is certainly a neutral point of view. However, I would also say that "highly slanted" is an accurate description of that editorial (which, by nature must put forth an opinion), even by the standard of editorials. Perhaps you should read it before deciding whether or not the point of view is neutral.203.144.65.25 (talk) 06:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most readers know that an editorial is a statement of an opinion, inherently slanted, and not a (relatively) tame bit of reportage. Considering that it came from The Nation, that would be understood implicitly. Why characterize it? btw, this belongs on the article's "discussion" page.Fconaway (talk) 07:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Jal Cooper commemorative.jpg)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio stamp[edit]

This edit re-introduced a copyright violation. A copyrighted stamp can only be used as a Fair use, to "illustrate the stamp". A one liner mention of the stamp doesn't qualify use of the stamp in the subject's biography. Please refer to centralized discussion at ANB. --Ragib (talk) 06:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The previous message said, "You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media)." Given that guidance, this is the only picture of Jal Cooper which has been found anywhere, after diligent searching. If we had a fair use photograph that would be preferred, certainly, but a replacement is not available anywhere.Fconaway (talk) 06:42, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is not correct ... the stamp shows a photo of the subject, so definitely a photo of the subject exists, and is probably under PD. You are free to find that photo and use it under PD. But the stamp in its entirety cannot be used. --Ragib (talk) 06:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fighting edits again[edit]

It seems that Ford1206 has started a revisionist editing attack on the Martin Anderson Controversy page again. I really don't want to get into another round of battling edits. I suspect that nothing particularly interesting is going to happen in this case (though, it turns out, Charlie Siebert and Vern Adams are both presenting their respective versions of the case at the National Association of Medical Examiners meeting week after next -- I'm presenting on another subject just before them, and the discussion should be interesting). In any case, is it possible just to freeze the article or something like that? Billollib (talk) 05:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to keep the page at status quo ante. It could be improved upon, of course, but, as you say, not much is happening. Ford again seems to want to erase the controversy, the subject of the article, which is bizarre. If this continues, we'll need to get into arbitration again. I am simply putting things back the way they have been. Most viewpoints are represented well enough. Interesting that Siebert and Adams are presenting on this topic. I suppose everyone knows something (the science) got lost in the political and legal mess.Fconaway (talk) 05:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
you and billibob neeed to stop and decease in undermining and putting in your own words. at one time i had my statements in here untouched for months and you two are the only ones to change it. i will report any more of your actions a vandalising. so i ask you kindly and stop this. thank you Ford1206 Sept.5, 2008
i am not erasing the controversy..which i still dont where this is or happen at. you two need to stop the controversy and blowing it up out of proportion. the outcry you two are saying never happen like you say. there was no racially motivated attack. so how come your opions can be added but no one elses? Ford1206 Sept.6, 2008

i did not vandalse you and billibob are changing my edits to what you want. so you would be a vandal thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ford1206 (talk • contribs) 13:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


STOP IT.....YOU VANDAL —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ford1206 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:First Stamp of Independent India.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:First Stamp of Independent India.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 06:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Revolt[edit]

Take a look at it. It's dreadful. Doug Weller (talk) 05:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Dreadfuller and dreadfuller. I decided to remove it from my "watch" list because it was so troubling. The editor (who's doing a "major revamp"!) would brook no criticism, seeing that as interference with his/her project. An introductory course on historiography seems to have been skipped. Eventually this stuff will have to be rewritten from scratch.Fconaway (talk) 06:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also see Battle of Opis, especially the talk page. I wish I'd protected the page last night before another Admin decided to implicitly endorse wholesale removal of sourced text. I am beginning to think that some formal warnings to editors are needed, rather than just discussions on talk pages. Doug Weller (talk) 07:36, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:In 01.gif[edit]

An image you uploaded, Image:In 01.gif, is not displaying correctly. -- Suntag ☼ 02:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decompensating[edit]

I'm beginning to wonder if Ford1206 is decompensating. S/he is now insisting on inserting edits in inappropriate places in my discussion page and on my user page. How does one go about getting people to stop this, do you know?Billollib (talk) 03:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes. S/he shows variable competence; sometimes quite reasonable, but other times off the wall. I have encountered this only once before on WP. The usual methods used to mediate and direct the editor to constructive work don't seem towork well in these cases. Personally, I do not respond to provocations, and that seems to help a lot. If all else fails, the editor (rather than the article) will be blocked by an administrator. Thus far, I've asked for help only from the Mediation Cabal, which resolutely avoids such drastic measures. The next step would be asking for the intervention of an administrator who will act decisively.Fconaway (talk) 03:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you have more experience with this than I. I'll follow your lead. Billollib (talk) 00:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The "talk" page is ostensibly to discuss approaches and objective issues with an article, but sometimes people use it vent their frustrations or complaints. That's just as well; I don't mind as long as it doesn't spill over onto the article. In this case, the article is frozen for a month so the participants can unwind and cool off. The trouble is coming from someone who has to be "a winner", which suggests they really are afraid they will lose. Gioven that it's best to let the quarrel die. Formal arbitration is more exacting; it's like going to court. Lawyers usually don't want to do that because of the costs, the time consumed and the uncertainty of the outcome. They'd rather compromise "in the interests of settlement" without admitting liability, guilt or innocence. So, let's see whether a cooling off period helps.Fconaway (talk) 00:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can't freaking believe it. Now she's playing this game on *my* user:talk page. I can't believe that I have to get into an edit war on my own page.Billollib (talk) 01:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. She has to win! You could ask the Mediation Cabal to intervene. She's out of her tree.Fconaway (talk) 03:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I do that? Thanks. Billollib (talk) 20:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Billollib, what about asking for page protection for your talk page? ww2censor (talk) 03:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, something magic happened. I poked around and found, somewhere, a "what to do" page that suggested that I ask an editor for help -- and there was an ask-an-editor-for-help-page (which I can't, frankly, remember how to get to again, but I'll keep trying for awhile). I went to that page and asked for help, and this afternoon, someone named Slakr had restored my page! So apparently something is happening... Billollib (talk)
Yes, (s)he's been blocked. That's what she gets for "winning". Cheers!Fconaway (talk) 07:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Penny Black[edit]

That was a fast correction!!!! ww2censor (talk) 15:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's like catching a rare Sumatran Tiger in a camera trap. When I am awake, armed with a cup of coffee, I usually glance at my Watchlist. Ta.Fconaway (talk) 16:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NITJ[edit]

JC (talk) 07:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC) You asked me for the correct link for NITJ - well the links seems to be correct - it's just not responding !!! JC (talk) 07:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!Fconaway (talk) 17:34, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Tigris[edit]

I noticed that you expressed some concerns about the sourcing of this article: Battle of the Tigris. Basically it's original research on Ariobarza's part. He was told by several editors, including myself, that he couldn't add it to Battle of Opis (see Talk:Battle of Opis) but has evidently gone off and created a POV fork based entirely on his personal views. You won't find any textbooks or articles with a discussion of a "Battle of the Tigris". I'll be nominating it for deletion in due course, and will post a link to the discussion for your interest. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The editor does not respect the need for references and citations, and seems to have no background in this area. On several articles he has done the same thing. In the first one I noticed, he had cribbed from Rawlinson at length, *without* attribution, apparently in an effort to glorify Cyrus. See above comments on Persian Revolt, where the story has been changed several times. The latest is the addition of "Battle of the Median Fort", a non-existent article, to the infobox about Cyrus' battles. He casually promises to provide documentation, but later.Fconaway (talk) 02:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there does seem to be a wider problem here which will need to be dealt with. I'm looking through his edits at the moment and this seems to be his standard way of working. As you can see, the problem isn't just that Ariobarza doesn't understand the prohibition on original research - he doesn't appear to believe that there's any need for such a prohibition. He freely acknowledges that he's engaging in OR but considers that to be fine. Could you tell me on which other articles he has done the same thing? -- ChrisO (talk) 09:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great, ChrisO has gotten to you too, now I know why your in such a hurry to delete the Battle of the Tigris[citation needed], I havent even started the background, so how could you judge it yet? I will take it step by step, because currently I have a hectic life, so please do not rush this dispute, first get the Battle of Opis dispute finished before particapating in ChrisO's crusade again. I hope you can see through the rogue side of Wikipedia, or are you going to be another ChrisO victim? Best regards.--Ariobarza (talk) 03:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk[reply]
This is not a personal issue. You must, repeat must, provide verifiable citations and sources for your statements and not indulge in personal research. If such an event occurred, that should not be so difficult; but I see no evidence. Otherwise, this is your imagination at work.Fconaway (talk) 04:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am currently in the process of pre-production for the best message on the evidence of the Feb Battle, so please do not further embarass yourselves with invalid comments, and let daddy go to work. So remember, when finished, it will be the most mindblowing message for the Feb battle that you all will ever read!.--Ariobarza (talk) 05:13, 27 October 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk[reply]
Taken to AfD, Ariobarza, you've done this before, you should know better. Doug Weller (talk) 10:17, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the AfD that Doug mentions is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of the Tigris. Please feel free to comment if you have any views on this issue. -- ChrisO (talk) 20:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-Pakistan disputed area[edit]

Floyd, as someone interested in Indian affairs, perhaps you would look at some edits to Nun Kun, K6 (mountain) and other mountain related article where an anon user keep adding the disputed information to the article which I think is unproductive and unnecessary. Here is one talk page attempt to defuse matters, but if you follow his history you will find a second IP who may be the same person based on the style of edits. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 04:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Yes, I will get a look at this. Sorry to take so long responding. I've been distracted by the economic mess.Fconaway (talk) 07:41, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is still ongoing though at a lower level for now. ww2censor (talk) 15:24, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bishop mark[edit]

Nice work and so quick. I stumbled across it yesterday and you did not even give me a chance to look up any of my books, but you seem to have some better references than I do. Next thing to do is to start an article for Henry Bishop. I will see what I can find that is well referenced. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 15:24, 20 November 2008 (UTC) T[reply]

I'm sure you can improve on that stuff, and I hope you will. It's something which has been on my "to do" list, and it jumped up in my watch list, so I did what I could. The RL "Handstruck Stamps of the Empire" appendix probably has some good material.

The story of Henry Bishop gets into some of the interesting political intrigue of those days. It seems Bishop was a "Tax Farmer" who had paid 20,000 Sterling ++ to purchase the postal franchise in 1660 (against some competitive bids). By 1661 there was a purge of employees in the post office who were considered not sufficiently loyal. Although Bishop himself was suspect, he was kept on. By 1663 he was dumped for political reasons. His exact dates in office are in Allan Oliver's "Bishop Marks", on line. There's a book about political intelligence gathering / espionage by the post office with lots of details. Apparently Charles II had a hand in this. I'll look up the reference for you.Fconaway (talk) 20:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here's the reference:
Intelligence and Espionage in the Reign of Charles II, 1660-1685 - Google Books Result by Alan Marshall - 2003 - History - 353 pages. The Restoration Act of 1660 concerning the Post Office was essentially a legal ... under the control of John Wildman and his intermediary Henry Bishop. ...books.google.com/books?isbn=0521521270...
I got a lot of interesting stuff from Google, searching for "Post Office espionage" +"Henry Bishop". One of the items identified Bishop as "Colonel Henry Bishop, an ex-royalist spy".Fconaway (talk) 21:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have started a sandbox page here if you care to join in. I am just reading some of the old books I found on GoogleBooks plus some stuff I have at home. Hope you will help. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 22:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I had a thought that because the biography article will not really be very long, that when it is ready for prime time, it would probably be best to merge them and turn the Bishop mark into a redirect. Would you support that when the time comes? ww2censor (talk) 03:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's the right way to do it.Fconaway (talk) 07:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meroe (Sudan_map_narrow)[edit]

  • Dear User:Fconaway & dear User:wikid77 thanx for givin me that link , I become a ravenous reader probably spent bout 3 hours & u were 100% correct the city which has the name meroe now is totally different from the ancient meroe & now days is known as bagrawiyah only for the local arab tribes >> Thanx for the extra infos.--Prof.Sherif (talk) 22:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, one of the maps showed a place with a similar name, which may be Marawe (my poor memory!). It was to the north-west of Meroe, along the river beyond Atbara. The names do change through time, and then the maps must change. The latitude and longitude do not change, and they are exact.
I hope we can find some good illustrations to dress up the article. Meroe was a very important place in history.Fconaway (talk) 06:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mungo Park[edit]

Why did you undo my edits to this page? Please cite a source for change of DOB. Place of death is as given in DNB. This page is clearly in need of improvement and I have tried to make a start doing this. --JBellis (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry; that was an inadvertent edit. My intention was to remove the link to Medical history, as the WP article by that name is not the journal. Something slipped, maybe in my brain! Fconaway (talk) 21:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fconaway/Archive_1&oldid=1090512687"