User talk:Hult041956

My Wiki welcome[edit]

Welcome! Hello, Hult041956, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! AKRadecki^Speaketh 20:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Alan, I didn't know there was a wikipedia welcome wagon. ;-) Thanks. You made my day with the first entry on my talk page. I joined about a month ago. So far, mostly been content with surfing around and making style, punc, and readability edits. Lately discovered (in myself) an odd need to look for "non-notable" bios and on-this-day entries. Even odder--there's a bunch of other people already doing the same thing. LOL. This place has the feel of something that I'll probably get VERY in to.Hult041956 21:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome! And yes, this place can get very addicting! If you're into bios, and want to try your hand at writing some small ones, let me know...I happen to know where there's some that need to be done. AKRadecki^Speaketh 21:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I'll take you up on that offer. Hult041956 21:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Over at Women Airforce Service Pilots, there's a list of notable WASPs. Ideally, each of them should have their own bio, but a number just have links to external pages, some of which are USAF fact sheets. The USAF site are public domain, and so the text can be used in part here, but would need to be trimmed, and conformed to our manual of style. The ladies with existing wiki bios should serve as a starting place for examples, if you need them. Let me know if you need any help or have any questions! AKRadecki^Speaketh 01:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

portals and protection[edit]

Hi! The reason that portals are not typically semi-protected is that the default is to have everything be open season. For the reason that you've found, I don't think that makes sense for portals, but there isn't really a convention for or against semi-protecting portals—simply because there hasn't been much discussion about it. It's against the letter of our Protection policy (semi-protection shouldn't be used "With the sole purpose of prohibiting editing by anonymous users"), but I think portals are a special case. For most portals it's not much of an issue, but the History portal is particularly high traffic, and I never once saw a constructive IP edit.

It's weird that the lack of pipes caused rendering issues...for me, it shows up the same before and after your changes. But portals behave oddly on different computers sometimes. Anyhow, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you like it and decide to stay.--ragesoss 01:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did my first merge today[edit]

{{helpme}} Two articles--Declan O'Sullivan and Declan O' Sullivan (with a space)--had both been marked with a merge proposal. Today I performed that merge. Following directions for "how to merge," I did the following:

Cut all the text from Declan O' Sullivan; left a {{redirect}} construct there
Pasted all that text into Declan O'Sullivan
Cleaned up the merged article as well as I could, not having any subject matter knowledge
Left a comment on the merged article's talk page.

I registered just about one month ago. Have done some copyediting here and there. (See my contribs.) I'd like to graduate up to "wikifying" type chores. This was my first attempt at a merge. How did I do? Any mistakes? Hult041956 22:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did very well. The only thing that I would suggest is to place a link to the old article in the edit summary like merged from Declan O' Sullivan. Since it seems like this started as a cut-and-paste move, though, I'll merge their page histories. WODUP 00:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, it looks like Cdlaois copied the content from Declan O'Sullivan and pasted it into Declan O' Sullivan. When there's a copy-and-paste move that needs to be fixed, we follow the directions at Wikipedia:How to fix cut and paste moves. If there are two articles that should be merged (for example, Colocation centre and Data center), then you'd merge them following the directions on Help:Merging and moving pages. WODUP 00:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding merging page histories, only admins can do that because it involves deleting and restoring pages. I apologize if I'm not clear; when there are two pages whose content needs to be merged into one page, the directions that you followed are correct. In this situation, it appears that the user who created the new article at Declan O' Sullivan copied and pasted the content from the existing article at Declan O'Sullivan. That's why I followed the instructions to repair a copy-and-paste move. WODUP 01:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I use album & book cover thumbs from online stores?[edit]

I would like to write an article regarding a book. (My first article from scratch.) I created a near-empty empty stub today. I see thumbnail images of album covers and book covers all over WP. I've found a pic of my book here. May I upload this image and claim fair use? There must be policy/guidance on this subject, but have not been able to find specific help on this subject. I'd appreciate some pointers.

I don't think so. But, you can upload it under that poster option, that might work. I'll look for someone to help you because that's all I know.

Goodshoped35110s 23:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Non-free content is the policy on fair use, and it's worth a read. The biggest thing with fair use is citing exactly where the image came from (the page you linked to, for instance), and your fair use rationale. In your rationale, you need to specify exactly where the image is being rationalized as fair use (i.e. what article will it be used in), how it's permitted under the policy, and why it's not replaceable with a free image. Then you need to use the {{fairusein}} tag with it, or a more specific tag if applicable.

I do, however, think that this image could be permissible under fair use for an article about the book. Make sure you cite some reliable sources to verify the information you provide.

Hope this helps. If this makes you more confused, buzz me. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan & Gospel[edit]

There was a discussion already a ways back where a stance was agreed upon; you can find it here. If you'd like to resuscitate it, then be my guest; but I don't know why you would assume that your contribution means any more than mine, especially when I've discussed this very topic before & came to an agreement with another user. To place gospel right alongside the genres Bob Dylan has helped to reinvent over the years is borderline ridiculous; he's had as much to do with the popularization & innovation of gospel as he did with, say, folk? Blues? Country? Rock? Absolutely not. Did it play a part in his career? Yes. Does it merit a mention in the article? Yes, & an entire section is devoted to it. Does it deserve to stand next to the genres Dylan has been widely known to have played & reinvented over the years in the infobox? No. There's no way gospel has played as significant a role, or as influential a role, or as crucial a role, or as critical a role in Dylan's career as the other genres mentioned. It'd be like mentioning Cape Fear alongside Goodfellas, Raging Bull & Taxi Driver when discussing Martin Scorsese's work; it just doesn't merit the same significance. ————Anthonylombardi 22:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My page move goof[edit]

I have left the following comment both on Talk:Jacobin (disambiguation) and on Talk:Jacobin (politics). I repeat it here for good measure, and to ensure it's seen.

I was good intentioned, but have found myself in over my head and need help. I moved "Jacobin" to "Jacobin (disambiguation)", intending then to move "Jacobin (politics) to "Jacobin". I felt the (politics) article was the most notable of the disambiguated articles and the most like to be sought by a reader doing a search. Well I discovered a) I cannot do the second move because the name conflicts, and b) an old discussion on Talk:Jacobin (politics) had resulted in exactly the opposite renaming. (That is, I was inadvertently undoing the agree-to work of others.) Can I now have an administrator help me put things right? Jacobin (politics) should be left as it is; my "Jacobin (disambiguation)" should be move back to "Jacobin". Make sense? I do apologize.

I have also filled out a page move request template on that page. Hult041956 00:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you'll need an admin to sort this out. We've posted at ANI, so one should be here eventually. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 00:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be sure if I understand, you want the moves reverted?--Sandahl 01:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could have speedied Jacobin redirect and then quickly moved jacboin politics to it. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 02:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done - fixed :) - Alison ^❤ 04:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kuhn Copernican Rev.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Kuhn Copernican Rev.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 05:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have supplied a book cover fair use rationale (by template) on the image page. Please advise further as to whether I have do so adaquately. (This is my first attempt at this.) Hult041956 18:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unpiping dab pages[edit]

Nice to see this edit. I'm often disappointed to find that yet another dab page wuth piped links, so it was a rare but pleasant surprise to see my watchlist include someone fixing a disambiguation page per WP:MOSDAB. Good work! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Stanford Band's Name[edit]

The "[pause]" is actually part of the short form of their official name. The full name is The One, The Only, The Truly Incomparable Leland Stanford Junior [pause] University Marching Band.[1] It is humor, but it's serious humor. Would you mind self-reverting? --Dynaflow babble 01:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's odd. Stanford University Marching Band doesn't have the "pause" in the middle of the written name. It does say (in the Trivia section) that the name is commonly pronounced with a pause. Hult041956 (talk) 01:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the link I left above. --Dynaflow babble 06:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did see your link, and I did look at that web site. My point was about the Wikipedia article. That article, Stanford University Marching Band, does not have the "pause" either in the title or in the (bold) subject of the lead sentence. So then, why should a link from another article, namely Stanford Tree, pipe the page name through alternative text which contains the pause? My advise would be to create a consensus at "Band" rather than at "Tree". (In fact, there does seem to be some "move" discussion going on at the Band article's Talk page.) Best regards, Hult041956 (talk) 17:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits made to Philadelphia Convention[edit]

Just to let you know these (my ones) have been edits due to the GA review, which it passed 10 minutes ago. And I also notice you have started making additional corrections, please remember most of these were pre-existing before my editing. Thank you. Regards, Rt . 18:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, I must've gave the wrong impression. Please carry on! I'm not as good as you with punctuation, I agree with your current changes to the punctuation. On another note, I've finished editing the page now, due to the GA review being completed. So yeah, carry on! :)Regards, Rt . 18:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe maybe... I liked your edit summary :) Rt . 20:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Al Gore[edit]

Al Gore is now a Good Article and is up for peer review: Wikipedia:Peer review/Al Gore/archive2. Please spread the word. -Classicfilms (talk) 14:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trois Nouvelles Études merger[edit]

This issue has re-emerged. If you have time could you leave a comment on the Trois Nouvelles Études talk page? Thanks. Jubilee♫clipman 18:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Time 100 list copyrighted?[edit]

Hi Hult041956,

The article on the Time 100: The Most Important People of the Century list has a comment in the source saying that publishing the actual list would be a copyright violation. You're the one who added that comment, but I was wondering how sure you are about that? Because I think that would not be the case. The contents of the list are an uncopyrightable fact. Only the expression of that fact in the form of the literal text as published by Time magazine is copyrighted, but I don't see a problem with listing the actual persons in the article.

It would undoubtedly be a big improvement on the article to have the list there, with links to the relevant articles. Would you care to comment on the article's Talk page?Captain Chaos (talk) 14:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to Stanford's WikiProject![edit]

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Stanford University, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Stanford University. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

ralphamale (talk) 22:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kuhn Copernican Rev.jpg[edit]

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:10, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]