Jump to content

User talk:Killiondude/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8→Archive 10

Removal of photos

Thanks dear. As per the policy of wiki I have removed all the photos (and frames) from Baba Faqir Chand with suspected copyright violation, even from Hindi adaptation-cum-translation of the article with Hindi wikipedia. We can wait.Bhagat.bb (talk)--B3 00:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I have contributed a photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bhagat,_M.R1.jpg. It is part of a family photo. Can you guide me whether I can use it now for the article Bhagat Munshi Ram?--Bhagat.bb (talk)--B3 15:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
If you own the copyright to the photo, you can release it under that license. If you don't personally own the copyright, we need permission sent to OTRS stating that they give permission to license it under a free license. As for File:Bhagat Munshi Ram.jpg, if we get an email in OTRS saying we can use it, it'll be fine. If not, it will be deleted soon. Killiondude (talk) 06:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I have utilized a photo in the article Bhagat Munshi Ram. I had given this photo and kept in the category of FAL images for more than four days now. Please see if is in order.--Bhagat.bb (talk)--B3 15:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're asking. My statement above should cover what I have to say about the situation. If you have any questions about what I said, feel free to ask for clarification on whatever doesn't make sense. Killiondude (talk) 00:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 October 20#Template:$

On what grounds was this deleted? None of the arguments for deletion fall under the criteria expected for deleted redirects. Please overturn this. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Please also note that this diff appears to have accidentally messed up my rationale. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:35, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to take that to DRV. My job is to gauge consensus, and there was clear consensus there that the redirect should be deleted. Thanks. Killiondude (talk) 06:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Where by "consensus" you mean "head count". I'll take it to DRV. Sheesh. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:15, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Dr. Anymouse again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/208.39.255.25

He seems to have taken a liking to reindeer jerky! -- Brangifer (talk) 00:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Hah. Blocked for 48 hours. If his habits keep popping up, maybe an abuse filter should be written to catch them in the act. Thanks for letting me know. Killiondude (talk) 02:26, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Need help for bar chart

File:Worldenc example1.png
Example 1
File:Worldenc example2.png
Example 2

I want to create bar chart for population (for determine an annual trend), please advised me for starting point of bar chart.

example : if county has population 

July 2000 Estimate 	43874
July 2001 Estimate 	44437
July 2002 Estimate 	45160
July 2003 Estimate 	45766
July 2004 Estimate 	46941
July 2005 Estimate 	47882
July 2006 Estimate 	49039
July 2007 Estimate 	49830
July 2008 Estimate 	50364

for this chart what should i take starting point???

usually i take starting point 40000, its ok or not???

some one tell me that you must take starting point 0 (zero) is that correct???

Which is better example 1 or example 2 ???


Thanks Worldenc (talk) 07:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I think the first example looks better. It gives a better visible difference between the bars. Killiondude (talk) 07:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

Deletion Question

Hi, why did you remove the file Flag_of_Puglia.png from Commons?--Pascar (talk) 09:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, it was deleted per Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Puglia.png. The {{PD}} tag on Commons has been deprecated for some time, just like its counterpart on Wikipedia ({{PD}}) has been. Killiondude (talk) 06:02, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

RE: Notability

Hello, Killiondude. You have new messages at Thornder's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thornder (talk) 10:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Mwah!

{{User:Mixwell/facekiss}}

Eminem Picture

hi this is 68.50.8.134 (talk) 03:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC), and glenjamn2 allows me to give these pictures (current pictures of Eminem at DJ Hero) up for wikipedia as long as i give him credit, could a snapshot of an email work? If so, the snapshot link is right here:

http://s824.photobucket.com/albums/zz169/pclinuxmac/?action=view&current=ScreenHunter_01Nov202237.gif

Sorry, thats my IP address, heres my actual wikipedia account signature: Thedeadmanandphenom (talk) 03:42, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I have also emailed the permissions-commons@wikipedia.org the way you wanted it, so don't delete! AND the link of glenjamn2 saying that its okay is also on the actual photograph page, so look under source and you should see the link there. Thanks! Please email me back as soon as possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedeadmanandphenom (talk • contribs) 03:57, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Please check your email. Killiondude (talk) 07:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Tsk tsk tsk...

Wikipe-tan is very annoyed that you neglected to update the Images/Files for Upload Wizard, resulting in three requests being submitted incorrectly! I've updated the Wizard, and left messages on the talk pages of the affected users ([1][2][3]), asking them to resubmit their requests. Regards, AJCham 12:00, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. Thanks for fixing it. I stated on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Images for Upload where I was going with that massive page move. I'm sorry that I didn't think about how that would affect the requests. Killiondude (talk) 17:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009

Laura Kirkpatrick

Hey Killiondude. I'm not sure if approaching you or going to Deletion Review is the right way to go here, but since Deletion Review (which I've never done before) suggests talking to the administrator first, I figured I'd approach you first. I made a page for Laura Kirkpatrick (contestant in America's Next Top Model) in Notepad, but when I went to copy-and-paste it in an actual page, I found the page had already been deleted. (I didn't participate in that RFD discussion because I didn't know about it until today, when it was too late.) I think the page should be made, and was hoping you could take a look at my proposed page and see what you think. (I made it as a subpage to my user page.) As I said, I didn't see the previously deleted page, but I imagine it was an unsourced stub made by fans of the show, which I know is common among reality TV show contestant pages. I think Kirkpatrick warrants an article because not only does my page meet Wikipedia standards (inline citations, verifiable sources, comprehensive coverage), but there are elements of Kirkpatrick that distinguish her from other contestants and I believe establish notability for her. Firstly, she is the runner-up of the series, which by itself is almost enough. But she has also won a poll hosted by the show which determined she was the fan favorite of the season, a fact I've cited in reliable, verifiable, secondary sources. Also, my proposed page already has information about her continued post-show modeling career, including her job offer from Bankable Productions. Also, Kirkpatrick's official blog is featured on the website of the Kentucky newspaper, The Advocate-Messenger, which makes her a writer with a state-wide and nation-wide platform. I think all these things, coupled with the pre- and post-show info I have on her, indicates she is worthy of her own article, and I think if I had been able to add this info to the page before it was deleted, I'd argue it wouldn't have been deleted at all. Is there any way we can reconsider blocking this page from future creation and to put my new article in its place? If you like, I'd be happy to seek comments from the people who voted for deletion and see if we can form a new consensus about my proposed article. Let me know. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn (c) 18:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

What you have is a lot more in-depth than anything that was there before. I think it is acceptable for you to move that into the mainspace. If somebody disagrees with it (which is a possibility), they can take it to AFD. Killiondude (talk) 19:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • But when I try, it says the page is currently protected and can be edited or moved only by administrators. Is there any way you can lift this so I can make the page? — Hunter Kahn (c) 19:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't notice that. It shouldn't have been protected. In any case, I lifted it. Make sure you move your subpage over to that page, so your edits are attributed properly. Killiondude (talk) 19:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Authoritative Deletions

Hey dude,

You might want to read this article to see how your deletions are impacting the Wikipedia community:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1230790/Fears-future-Wikipedia-49-000-volunteers-leave-site.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattpearson99 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

There are many things wrong with Wikipedia, I've read many articles about it and experienced it first hand. I try my best to do what I think is good on Wikipedia. If you're referring to Bruce D. Schulman & Associates, the deletion was warranted. If you want to, I can userfy it so you can work on it in your userspace. Killiondude (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

MISC27x.jpg

Deletion of photo MISC27x.jpg

I do not understand why this photograph was deleted. This was a Christmas Card sent to me by my friend Allan Sandage 25 years ago. As such, it was a personal gift to me and I am the owner. I scanned the photograph and put it on the page. Please explain why the deletion was made.

Puzhok 03:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Let me explain it this way, if somebody writes a book, and gives you a copy of the book, that doesn't mean that you own the copyright to that book. It's the same sort of situation. Killiondude (talk) 05:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Writing a book and giving it to a friend is completely different than taking a photograph yourself and giving it to a friend as a gift. If a friend gives me his book with no copyright restrictions as a gift, I can copy it as I see fit, provided my intent is to not copy it in a fashion as to claim economic or intellectual value of the item. Of course, if the book is published it is copyrighted. But if the book has not been published and copyrighted, I can claim fair use of the whole material unless I willing know that my actions will interfere with the intended use of the book - like making money. I know this because I was curator for a scientific library and had to organize and copyright historical images in astronomy. If the card sent to me had the logo of Microsoft, clearly this would be a copyright violation. But if there was no restriction stated on the use of the book or the photo, I have the right to copy it and distribute it, provided that my intent is not to derive benefit from the distribution if no other restriction was placed on its use. Since the Christmas Card was sent to me as a gift, other friends, and professional colleges, I think it is in the public domain.

Or let me put it to you another way. If my friend Pablo Picasso creates a print and gives me a copy as a gift, provided that he did not copyright the image, I am free to copy the work of art as a photo and distribute it because it is mine. A Christmas card is legally a gift and I am the owner. If I scan a picture out of a book, I am not the owner and cannot distribute it. I shall appeal your restrictive opinion of the usage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Puzhok (talk • contribs)

I've asked here for somebody to check this situation out. Killiondude (talk) 23:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Puzhok, I think you have some misconceptions here. Copyright is fundamentally the right to control copies. Your friend (the same applies to your Picasso) gave you a copy of an image over which they hold the copyright. When you buy or acquire a copy that is all you have gained. You have not gained the right to make more copies as this right remains with the creator. Copyright is created when the work is created—neither your friend nor anyone else needs to specify that an image is copyrighted....it simply is from the moment of creation. The card is a gift and is yours. The right to make copies was not a gift and is not yours. Does this make the matter clearer ? - Peripitus (Talk) 02:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Puzhok may want to read the relevant Wikipedia policy. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 02:49, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

mapzones.org

Thanks for help, i have taken few data from mapzones.org and create graph some graph data don't taken from mapzones.org like http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US01A0130045_Age.png which are completely taken from cencus this age chart don't found in mapzones.org so i only sourced census site. i have linked both website where data and concept taken from census and mapzones.org. Worldenc (talk) 05:20, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

you can check it

http://www(.)mapzones(.)org/Mckenzie_Town_Alabama.html

Worldenc (talk) 05:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I would really like to think you're telling the truth. I see what you're telling me with those examples. Do you own/run mapzones.org? Why is it that File:US53A033 Income.png and http://mapzones.org/images/united_states/washington/King_County_Washington_GDP.png (the mapzones.org equivalent) look almost exactly the same? There's just a few color changes, and some extra details on the Commons chart. If you are legitimately not a spam account, it would be best if you could explain things a little further. If English isn't your native language, I'm sure we could get somebody to translate if you have trouble explaining in English. To put it simply, if you are here to spam mapzones.org I don't wish to help you, but if you're here to here to help Wikipedia then I want to assist you in that. Killiondude (talk) 07:14, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Please read my last comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#mapzones.org

i create more better graph then mapzones.org (thanks for other editor who help me to do graph more and more better) (work negative for mapzones.org)
give this to wikipedia with licencing cc-by-sa-3.0, means everyone can use it even for commercial (work highly negative for mapzones.org)
in wikipedia link is no follow so its not help in search engine (for ranking etc..)(no plus or minus for mapzones.org)
i have added this graph for even tiny settlement which of them even not getting single (1) visitor per days and even article get 1000 hits per day its very little chance to transfer single (1) visitor to mapzones.org (work little positive for mapzones.org)
because of this chart wikipedia get more visitor then mapzones.org, because wikipedia has better search ranking then mapzones.org or any other websites. so user who looking for this chart or related information visit wikipedia not mapzones.org, if i am not add this chart in wikipedia they may be visit mapzones.org (work highly negative for mapzones.org)

so above all fector (and others) my conclusion is that mapzones.org got negative effect from my work.

i have tell many times that chart concept were taken from mapzones.org, the data is same because they and i used same source (census) so my chart and their chart are exactly the same (only color and other information were different), if i get concept from that sites and some data (like state data not found in same census page and all data found in single mapzones page and also help full to user's verification, i also verified that data wih census thats why i linked both sites)

for same county age chart http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US53A033_Age.png were not available, so i added single source.

Once again thanks for help, now i decide not to work for wikipedia. Worldenc (talk) 07:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw your comment there. I'm sorry you had a tough time here. We tend to bite newcomers, instead of helping them out. If you feel like coming back, you're welcome to. :-) Killiondude (talk) 08:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Note to self

Figure out what the heck is going on with File:Unfinished Portait of Danial Boone by Chester Harding 1820.jpg. Killiondude (talk) 08:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup/2010 Signups

Hi, would you mind just expanding on your reasons for leaving the Cup? I'm assuming it is to do with the new point reassignments? J Milburn (talk) 10:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

When I signed up, I did a lot more work in the mainspace, and was mostly prodded by a few other people to sign up. As the date has drawn closer, I haven't been too interested in competing. Thanks for asking though. :-) Killiondude (talk) 09:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Inland Empire Project merger discussion

I've responded over at the Inland Empire page, and tagged the WT:CAL side as moved and archived to keep it all in one spot. Assuming MissionInn.Jim or House1090 decides in favor of it I'll go ahead with the switch. Could you add Palm Springs, California and Riverside, California to your watchlist, since House1090 and PurpleBackpack89 are edit warring over the importance ratings on those pages, and use the admin tools if they're needed. Also I think this all started at Talk:Log Cabin Wilderness Camp, where I redirected the page, and disagreed with him when he reverted, and then after I responded at the talk page there, and at another discussion I had just commented at (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Mount Whitney importance rating), and so I'm getting a bit of a talk page stalking/general hostility vibe from him at the moment. I know he means well and has the best intentions for California subjects in the long run (AGF, etc.), but if I start losing my cool, in this let me know if I need a clue adjustment. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up about the edit warring. I gave them both a warning. I've also watchlisted the pages. I checked out your assessment comment, and it seemed fair. :-) I don't believe it was harsh or condescending, if that's what you were asking. Killiondude (talk) 09:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for letting them know. I didn't feel comfortable doling out {{subst:uw-3rr}}'s when I have that minor hostility about the scouting page and the importance ratings themselves. Having to pull the yes I'm the sort of coordinator here was especially groan inducing, especially since I probably will have to follow this up with some sort of formal coordinator nominations and titles. Hey at least WP:CAL has some more involved members now. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009

Deletion of Chelmsford Theatres Wikipedia Page

Hello Killiondude, I must confess to being a bit of a wikipedia novice, but it appears that our page has been deleted by you, is that correct? And if so could you please explain what exactly it has been deleted for? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.Chelmsford Theatres (talk) 10:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Yes, I checked and I did delete the article you're referring to. It was deleted as a copyright violation, essentially a copy of another website on the internet (in this case, the website for the theater). This doesn't mean that an article cannot exist for the theater, just that we don't want a copyvio version or promotional content.
I would, however, like to bring up the fact that your username doesn't really meet our username policy. Most specifically, it is the name of a company/organization. We don't allow the use of those usernames because it could infer to our readers that Wikipedia endorses those companies, which we do not. It could also mean that more than one person is using the account, which is not allowed do to our attribution requirements. There's a simple solution, which is to request a rename of your account. I strongly encourage this, because unless you rename, you run the risk that your account will be blocked as violating our policy. As long as we can you're cooperating, you needn't be afraid. If you have any more questions, I would be happy to help you and answer them. Just let me know. :-) Killiondude (talk) 22:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Eminem Picture (2)

allright, well this is Thedeadmanandphenom, ip address being 68.50.8.134 (talk) 01:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC), and I have sent permissions @wiki an email, so has the owner of the picture, so if you could get please replace the template on [File:Eminem at DJ Hero Party.jpg] with {{PermissionOTRS|ticket=URL}. Thank you.

I haven't found the copyright holder's email. Killiondude (talk) 06:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
We sent it twice, but I'll do it again. He sent it to "permissions@wikimedia.org". Can you check it again, because I sure got it on the CC. If "permissions@wikimedia.org" is the wrong email address, can you tell me, I forwarded the message that he sent me to the aforementioned email address. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.8.134 (talk) 02:37, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
If you could tell me the email address of the copyright holder who emailed OTRS, it would be easier to find it. Email me at Special:EmailUser/Killiondude. Killiondude (talk) 02:40, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge discussion

I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas K. Dye as merge. User:Barberio disputed this close and opened a deletion review, which was closed as the admin argued that merge closes are not considered at DRV. I merged the material to Newshounds and redirected the article; Barberio has reverted the redirect, though the material remains merged. A discussion on the merge is at Talk:Newshounds#Merge of Thomas K. Dye; your participation would be welcome. Fences&Windows 01:40, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Get on the floor make it bump more shake it mammy

--MZMcBride (talk) 07:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

:-D Killiondude (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Edit War?

Which Article Talk page edit war was I involved in that I am not aware of? You said I was in my talk page. House1090 (talk) 01:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. It's good to keep conversations together whenever possible. Killiondude (talk) 05:15, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Fiat Automobiles

Please DO NOT revert my edit. It has been worded and sourced appropriately. G87 20:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Left a note on your userpage regarding the ANI discussion. Killiondude (talk) 21:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

ANI question

Excuse side comment: I see that your actions were (mis)characterized as "edit warring." Have you witnessed that kind of rhetoric from that editor before at ANI? (Yes, I have been on the receiving end. Gathering information for possible follow up. No intention to link instances, but scanning for pattern. ANI is complex enough without perhaps misleading commenting.) Proofreader77 (talk) 01:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I can't say that I've encountered that user before, but the accusation that I was edit warring was quite surprising to me. I've always tried very hard to stay away from anything that could characterize me as edit warring. I double checked my actions after I posted there, and I don't think it was anywhere near accurate to say that my actions should be called into question. And yes, there's lots of obfuscation that occurs on ANI, sadly. Killiondude (talk) 01:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks. Re "obfuscation" at ANI - Since I have just posted a comment on Civility policy for Signpost, I guess I should avoid using the word "bullshit." Oops. lol Again thanks, and happy holidays. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:08, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Hah. You're welcome. Merry Christmas (reminds me... I need to do some shopping tonight!). :-) Killiondude (talk) 01:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
PS Glancing back at participants: Oh, I see the problem ... We're evil Americans, (oops, United Statesians? Ah, Californians! :-) Good luck on shopping hunt. Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:30, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: The patterns of interaction of that editor are evident elsewhere. Continuing to observe (and analyze) what happened re this topic's case. Whatever basis of argument there is, the matter of (perhaps inappropriate) rhetorical tactics is very much an issue. No further reply necessary.—looks like we've covered the happy-holiday territory completely. :-) Proofreader77 (talk) 00:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

My talkpage reply

I read your reply on my talkpage concerning a userbox for WWII. I have not found one, but I have found a couple that would be close enough or similar to what I am looking for. Thanks for your help! Adamdaley (talk) 13:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Killiondude. You have new messages at Taelus's talk page.
Message added 19:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Taelus (talk) 19:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Open proxies

Is there a way to know whether it's likely to stay open or not? For example, my talk page got hit with vandalism from a bunch of proxies. They're all blocked, but none are indefinite. Enigmamsg 21:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

We usually only indef block IPs in very limited circumstances. Like if they are open proxies, known static IPs abused by trolls/vandals, etc. I looked at a few IPs from your talk page history and none looked like open proxies. I was just using this limited service. There are programs (free) that you can download and use for that kind of stuff, but I like simplified things. :-) Beware that the link I gave you only allows 3 checks per IP every 24 hours. It's probably 'cause they want you to pay or something. Killiondude (talk) 23:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Most of the open proxies are blocked by the "ProcseeBot". However, there are still a few open but the reliability is less than 5%. South Bay (talk) 00:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

San Diego Task force discussion

I namechecked you in my latest (lengthy) response to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#San Diego task force thread. Can you look it over make sure I'm not misrepresenting your opinion. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I read it last night before I went to sleep and I don't remember being upset, so I guess it is fine. :-) I was over-exaggerating just a little when I said the project was "essentially dead", my mistake. I guess I was just trying to embellish my point that we shouldn't divide up such a small group of editors willing to work on similar articles. Thanks for the heads up that you dropped my name, though. Killiondude (talk) 18:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for the kind message on my talk page. It is always nice to have one's contributions recognised by fellow contributors. – ukexpat (talk) 15:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:HMS Britannia (1904) sinking on 9 November 1918.jpg

I received your message about this jpg file. As the file data clearly says the image is from 1918 and, being a Royal Navy image over 70 years old (91 years old to be exact), is in the public domain per the license attached to the image (unless you really think that a 120-year-old somewhere will come forward and say "I took it in 1918 and own the copyright.") The image was scanned from a hard-copy book published in the 1980s, in which the source for it is not given, another clue that it is in the public domain as their is no information regarding a copyright holder. I could enter the publication information for thye book if you would like, but that still will provide no image copyright information because none is in the book and it seems irrelevant. I don't really understand why Wikipedia would delete an image under these circumstances. I am open to any ideas you might have for ascertaining the copyright holder of this 91-year-old unattributed image and requesting permission for its use, but that strikes me as a wild goose chase. Per the license tag, it also appears to be completely unnecessary. Can suspend deletion for the time being while you or someone else at Wikipedia advises me on this? Previous contacts I have had with Wikipedia photo montiors have resulted in them saying that the images are fine as they are and do not need to be deleted. Mdnavman (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2009 (UTC)mdnavman

I was just aiming for the source of the photo (the book title and perhaps author). Every file on Wikipedia has to have a source so others can verify it's existence and/or double check facts about it. In the cases where people create the files themselves, it's a bit trickier to verify that they did create it themselves, but luckily we don't have to delve into that discussion for this case. The book title and author should clear that up. I've scanned in photos from books before, doing that since the photographer is unclear and it's definitely old enough to be in the public domain. Killiondude (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I will take care of that right away. Mdnavman (talk) 20:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)mdnavman

thank's, and I have som Questions

I'll remeber to previw... But I have some qestins,

  • What do you think of my idea?? [4]
  • Is this something Wikipedia wants? (you understand that this is imortant to me and to increas the possible benefits of the idea by 100times, I need a answer as soon as possible.)
  • What can or should I do?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmdahl (talk • contribs) 01:05, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Empty category

I've restored Category:Article Incubator candidate for articlespace. As it's used by a WikiProject, it'd have been better for you to have checked with me (as I created the category) or at WT:Article Incubator before tagging it for deletion. I've added the emptycat template now. Fences&Windows 22:30, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't remember tagging that one (but I see that I did). It shouldn't, however, be expected that one checks with each category creator before tagging them as being empty. Killiondude (talk) 23:08, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Donald B. McIntyre (not Daniel ;-)

Hi! Thanks very much for the advice. I think I am almost ready to take the plunge now but I have been gathering all the info on Donald before I start... I'd really appreciate any help in future. Thanks again. Colin CPN (talk) 13:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Aha! My apologies. I knew I was going to spell something wrong. I guess it was the wrong first name! Feel free to ask me anything you'd like, and I'll try to help. Killiondude (talk) 17:34, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

File:'View from the Dunes with Beach and Piers, Domburg', oil and pencil on cardboard painting by Mondrian, 1909, Museum of Modern Art, (New York City).jpg

Hello. Just a heads up to say I undeleted this file that you'd deleted earlier in case you're ever wondering why it has reappeared. Unfortunately Mondriaan's works painted in the Netherlands don't enter the public domain there until 1 January 2015, so Commons will delete them. Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Killiondude (talk) 01:50, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

MfD

You closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Krappie/lyrics as delete, but you didn't delete the pages. Joe Chill (talk) 05:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Cleaned this up. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks MZ. I'm having internet problems at where I'm staying, it was working okay until I closed (or tried to close) that MFD, then I couldn't even open up my contribs to see if the edit went through. Long story short, I wasn't able to get back on until now. My apologies. Killiondude (talk) 08:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

Merry Christmas!


The Thing Merry Christmas is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:User:TTTSNB/Merry_Christmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The Thing Merry Christmas 00:46, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Claudia Christian

Gotta' tell ya' something about your edit to Claudia Christian because I think it's hilarious. I highly disagree with this edit and won't revert it: This is a 0RR. My objection is purely on aesthetic grounds, and therefor personal, not in the scope of "editorship". I think the other picture is better because it presents the subject in a more natural setting.

But man I've got my finger hovering over the "undo" button. I think you may have challenged me to figure out a justified way to get the other image in the article (one comes to mind, just not sure I have the motivation to research and cite it properly). —Aladdin Sane (talk) 18:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if my edit offended you, that wasn't my intention. If you want to include the previously used image in the article, I wouldn't mind personally. However, I think it would be nice to have the professional image in the infobox. It makes the "first glance" of the article look more encyclopedic, in my opinion. Additionally, when I changed the image out, I was trying to keep in mind what Ms. Christian would probably like to see in her article. I know we don't have to cater to people's wants for their articles, but out of common courtesy I thought she would appreciate a picture at the top that captured her at a better angle, so to speak. But I do see your point about having a picture that looks more natural. I'm not too partial either way, but I would like to see the professional photo used in some part of the article. I helped the photographer get that image situated on Commons (I was asked for help on my talk page there). Killiondude (talk) 19:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
No, I'm just bobblehead laughing at myself for having an opinion. I caught the conversation on Commons and it all looks fine. Here's the thing though: In the Wikipedia article I can see a way to add a researched sentence or paragraph about her "fan con" appearances and add the other image in the appropriate section under that justification; however in the Commons page I worked on only one image is allowed per reference, largely due to page loading performance and the argument "redundant editor is being redundant" to add more than one image per reference (I had to carve out two "meta" sections in order to avoid doing this to the page). If Ms. Christian ever does express a preference for one image or the other I would consider it highly relevant to that page. —Aladdin Sane (talk) 21:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Left you hanging there

I removed my comment from the HJ Mitchell RFA talk page, leaving yours rather hanging in response to nothing, for which I apologize. Your comment and his actions make me realize that someone is spinning out of control, and I needed to not contribute any more. Thanks for posting. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'm kind of observant (or at least, I consider myself to be), and don't make comments like that very often. But I felt maybe this was a case where one was needed. I hope by "not contribute any more" you are just referring to that RFA. Killiondude (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that RfA is screaming, "Back off!" I think HJ Mitchell needs much better judgment, but the process itself is harsh, and I don't like to contribute to that aspect. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

I am sorry

I am sorry for whatever I did to you. Please don't keep asking for me to be banned. I served a ban already. I have not done anything wrong since then. I don't want to be banned.Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 14:08, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

My archive page

Why in God's name did you delete my archive page when I had been told that if I fixed the page it would not be deleted? I didn't have time to save any of the stuff that was in there and was not a problem...now I have no record of any of what I may need for future reference. Besides all of that - there was nothing wrong with the content. It was just archivable stuff. Shouldn't you have at least let me know it was going to be deleted before you did it? As far as I knew, I complied with what was stated could be done. No one communicated one way or the other what the decision had been or even if there was one. --SkagitRiverQueen 16:30, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I was just following what the consensus was at the MFD. If you feel that my decision was in error, feel free to take it to deletion review. Thanks. Killiondude (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for User talk:SkagitRiverQueen/Archive 1

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User talk:SkagitRiverQueen/Archive 1. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. SkagitRiverQueen 05:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Killiondude (talk) 06:02, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Title, Entitled

Dear Killiondude,

Usage depends upon the CREDIBLE source cited. Wikipedia has not established itself as a credible source in my view on anything because of so many flaws that include improper grammar, misspellings, inaccuracies, and scientific, cultural, religious and/or political biases, etc., which I keep a file of examples on.

I didn't read your reference because anything Wikipedia says should first be looked at skeptically, for the reasons noted and for which I have shining examples. For me, there is no debate on title and entitled, but for Wikipedia as with so much with Wikipedia, well.......

Of course, you can find so-called credible sources that will back up your archaic point.

Debate the verb/adjective myopia all you want, but I'll tell you where there is no debate: the real world.

If an experienced, credible and capable editor sees you writing entitled in reference to a book title, you will NOT get the job. I say this as a longtime editor who has turned down job candidates on this fact alone because it shows me they do not have a proper grasp of current English.

Do you know the difference between more than and over? a lot and alot? afterward and afterwards? a historical epoch and an historical epoch? etc. Of course, those are all debatable as well! Have fun.

GlennTSimmons (talk) 17:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Lack of fair use rational

Hiya,

you tagged a number of audio files I uploaded a while back for deletion as they 'don't have a fair use rational' However, glancing over the files they all seem to me to have a suitable rational. Can you just clarify what the issue is, if I am mistaken I will happily fix the issue.

Cheers,

Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign) 20:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi! It looks like Leonard^Bloom (talk · contribs) added the rationale soon after I added "missing rationale" template. :-) Killiondude (talk) 21:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

Danke

Thanks for this. That's what I get for reverting, warning, and then going out for the evening! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

How dare you go out! :-) You're welcome. Killiondude (talk) 17:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vinsfan368/^^

Does Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vinsfan368/^^ apply also to the links provided by Black Falcon (talk · contribs), or should I start a new MfD for them? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted all of them except for User:Vinsfan368/?. Thanks for the prod. Killiondude (talk) 00:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for deleting them! Cunard (talk) 00:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

My bad!

Sorry about this would-be !vote, I had searched from Google looking for any more of the user's self promotion that needed to be extirpated and ran across that without realizing it hadn't been transcluded.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 06:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries. It happens to a lot of people. :-) Killiondude (talk) 06:57, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Antony110389

Hello, you recently blocked Antony110389. I am not contesting the block but could you please delete any information on its user-page and talk page. Thank you.66.71.9.157 (talk) 18:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but could you also erase the same information on Antony1103. I would appreciate it, Thank You!66.71.9.157 (talk) 18:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. Killiondude (talk) 18:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

The Hotel Ambos-Mundos

Nice job on writing that article on the hotel. I've made a few modifications. Incidentally, I also have Ernest Hemingway on my watchlist, and I've seen lots of improvements to the article! :-) Mr. Harris, tomorrow I'm going to try to add some verifiable references to the article and try to nominate it for a DYK, of which you would be credited for initially starting the page. It's a bit past the nomination due date (within 5 days of creation), but we might be able to squeeze it in. Just needs some reference work. Killiondude (talk) 09:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but most of the credit is due to the writer of the Spanish article on the Hotel on wiki.es, which I simply ran trough babelfish (using my own poor Spanish to clean up further), and then touched up with a few added details from own visit to it (which visit basically only served to give me confidence to do the job). I have some tourist photos of my own of the place, which I should eventually be able to add in a few days, when I locate them. Ditto for the outside of El Floridita.

BTW, if you have Hemingway on you list, would you mind adding your opinions to the great The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber debate (see the TALK page) SBHarris 20:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

Cent wording

hi I appreciate your re-wording for neutrality however the key component lost is that all will be prodded with the current proposal. -- Banjeboi 09:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Your wording was misleading in that not all of them will be prodded at once. Killiondude (talk) 17:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Re, warning,

See this. Thanks.— Dædαlus Contribs 01:38, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I know you're watching this, 77, KD warned you to stop commenting about me, and you went ahead and did it again anyway.— Dædαlus Contribs 03:12, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I really don't have the energy to help defuse the situation between you two. I'm sorry, but you'll have to seek mediation somewhere else. Killiondude (talk) 06:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent edits

I have noticed you been adding warnings to user talk pages for no reason at all. Perhaps it was purposely orchestrated. In either case I ask you stop. Thanks! South Bay (talk) 04:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

What? Killiondude (talk) 06:12, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

Right question, wrong person

Don't ask me. I merely uploaded the files under appropriate license and with specific permission from the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Later other guys decided to change the license. So ask them why they chose such a license, not me. BTW, the Ministry allowed Wikipedia to use all the files from www.ww2.pl as we please, provided "the graphics are not used contrary to basic aims of Polish foreign policy", which is a vague term denoting "don't upload pics of holocaust victims from our site defaced with a swastika", other than that the pics were PD. //Halibutt 12:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Well if you have the email from the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, you might forward that to permissions-en@wikimedia.org so an OTRS volunteer can take a look at it. I think the reason that other people later came in and changed the licensing, is because there was no permission verified through the OTRS system, and they probably still wanted to to keep the images on Wikipedia. Killiondude (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

File:2001Montage3rd.jpg

A fair use rationale is now provided. Since this file was a modification of a modification (as reflected in the title), fair use got dropped somewhere along the way.--WickerGuy (talk) 15:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for getting that done! :-) Killiondude (talk) 17:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Witch hunt?

I'm really getting annoyed with folk like you who seem to grasp at any excuse to delete files I upload onto Wikipedia. Fair Use of the items I upload are because these medals and the like are of historical interest and the option was listed. Nothing more. If you have a problem with that, then why don't you delete eveything of mine off?!!! User:Expatkiwi 16:30, 28 January 2010 (CST)

There is no conspiracy against you. Perhaps you could just add a fair use rationale. Killiondude (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit warring on Los Angeles metropolitan area

Hi, User:House1090 and User:SoCal L.A. appear to be edit warring at Los Angeles metropolitan area, and possibly across multiple related articles. Since you're familiar with the situation I was hoping you could take a look at the situation and see if you feel any protections/blocks are in order with minimal drama. I've also pinged adminUser:Alison as she's familiar with this as well, and leave the stock uw-3rr notices at the two users involved. Thanks in advance. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

  1. [5] User:SoCal L.A. increases size of panorama and greater LA map
  2. [6] User:House1090 moves Long Beach image to left
  3. [7] User:SoCal L.A. reverts(1st) User:House1090's image change back to right align
  4. [8] User:House1090 reverts(1st) User:SoCal L.A. back to left align
  5. [9] User:House1090 reduces image size of panorama and greater LA map (1st of this revert)
  6. [10] User:House1090 removes IE locations from Urban areas of the region, citing User talk:Alanraywiki#LA metropolitan area article
  7. [11] User:SoCal L.A. reverts (2nd) the Long Beach image alignment back to right
  8. [12] User:House1090 removes Hemet from Urban area list
  9. [13] User:SoCal L.A. reverts (1st) image size of panorama/greater la map
  10. [14], [15] User:SoCal L.A. reverts Hemet, other IE removal from Urban areas
  11. [16] User:House1090 reverts (2nd) to smaller panorama/greater la map
  12. [17] User:SoCal L.A. reverts (2nd) to larger panorama/greater la map
And now House1090 and Amerique over at San Bernardino Valley, which has already ended up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Amerique. -Optigan13 (talk) 06:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for summarizing for me. Hah. I left a note on the ANI thread. Hopefully we can get some sort of binding resolution. Killiondude (talk) 06:37, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

Notable Roseville Residents

Boxxy is definitely a notable resident of Roseville. Also click this Boxxy and look at the sources. More than 10 million people saw her vids on Youtube. (Yes there are a LOT more people that know Boxxy than people that know Lincoln Brewster) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.182.150.52 (talk) 18:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I basically got tired of having IPs edit war to keep it in. Because you took the time to link it, I took a look and put it in the Roseville article. I'm pretty sure that a music artist who has sold several albums (and has their own article, rather than 1 line on a "list" page) is more notable than an internet meme person. In any case you got what you wanted. Killiondude (talk) 19:17, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Non Free Images in your User Space

Hey there Killiondude, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some images that I found on User:Killiondude/Flickr images on Commons. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page. See a log of images removed today here, shutoff the bot here and report errors here. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 02:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess I should watchlist my subpages. Killiondude (talk) 06:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry about that... It is a part of a cleanup and images would in any case be deleted in a few days. --MGA73 (talk) 18:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
No worries. I'm sure it's not that big of a deal to have fair use images in the userspace for just a few days or whatever. It's a part of the clean up that is needed! Killiondude (talk) 18:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

Hello Dude - can you unprotect bigfoot?

Bigfoot (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) Request for unprotection Has been protected for over 6 months already. 99.150.255.75 (talk) 04:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC) 99.150.255.75 (talk) 04:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I personally would rather not. From the looks of the protection log, it was protected for a long time before, then unprotected to "test the waters" so to speak, then re-protected. Is there a specific edit you want done? Killiondude (talk) 05:06, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
No "specific" edits - just the usual bigfoot type edits like other editors (Pauli133, Kgrad, Timpi, the bot, Clovis, McGeddon, Yankee, etc) are making. You know now it is. 99.150.255.75 (talk) 05:24, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I thought that you had protected it last - I don't know how to check that kind of thing. If you didn't protect it, can you point me to the one who did - some page told me to ask the protector to unprotect it - I thought it was you. You know how that is. 99.150.255.75 (talk) 05:26, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I went to Bigfoot - page history and searched for "prot" and saw your edit. That's how it is. 99.150.255.75 (talk) 05:47, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Killiondude/Archive_6&oldid=1148814083"