User talk:RedWolf/2009 Archive

Archives: 2021 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

Mountain

Hi. I trust you are happy with the request on Template talk:Mountain? Martin 14:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of {{infobox Mountain}} vs. {{Geobox/type/mountain}}

.. occurring at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains. You're welcome to join in the discussion. Thanks! hike395 (talk) 03:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I have posted my initial comments. RedWolf (talk) 04:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alpine categories

Hi RedWolf. On 25 December 2008 you made some festive changes to the category listings of some Alpine mountains, removing the cat Mountains of the Alps from some (eg Signalkuppe‎, Zumsteinspitze‎ and Grenzgipfel‎). But the Matterhorn, for example, remains in the Mountains of the Alps cat and the Pennine Alps cat, as I believe it should (as do many many others). I can't understand your rationale for this as your changes are limited to a few peaks. Surely all of them should be changed, or none (and I'd say none – your man on the Clapham omnibus would expect to find the Grenzgipfel in Mountains of the Alps, given that it is a mountain in the Alps). Before I revert your changes – on the basis that the category Mountains of the Alps should contain all of the mountains of the Alps (as it says on the tin), not just some – I'd be interested as to what you think. (Good work on the Everest expedition pages, incidentally.) Best wishes, Ericoides (talk) 11:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Well, if every mountain in the Alps is put into that one category, the category will become excessively large. I was thinking that instead, all mountains should be listed in its appropriate mountain range category and then the range category would be in the Mountains of the Alps category. However, then there is already Mountain ranges of the Alps. So, I backed off with my initial plans as I wasn't sure how to best proceed at that point. Perhaps it might be best to start a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains to gain consensus to how to solve this organizational issue. RedWolf (talk) 16:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re your recent change to Aiguille Blanche de Peuterey it seems that you have decided to remove it from the Mountains of Italy Cat without this discussion having yet taken place. I really don't see the point of what you are doing, nor do I understand why you think the cat could be "excessively large"! Shall we have this discussion before these categories become totally useless with some mountains in and some out? The point being that you would have to have prior knowledge that the Aiguille was in the Aosta valley before being able to find it there, which is quite a specialist bit of info. I for one would like it to be in Cat Mtns of Italy. Why can't it be in both the Aosta cat and the Mtns of Italy cat? Regards, Ericoides (talk) 09:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per categories convention, I removed it from the parent category (Mountains of Italy) when I put it into the child category. Why should Mountains of Italy be an exception to this? Mountains of Canada or Mountains of the United States would be extremely huge by now if we didn't remove articles from the parent cats. RedWolf (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough; excuse my ignorance of the convention. Ericoides (talk) 19:40, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should it still be in cat Mtns of the Alps then? Ericoides (talk) 19:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This goes back to my original problem I had when I did the first few. While there's an argument to be made for putting all the mountains of the Alps into the category, this category would become very large over time. I don't know really how many mountains there are in the Alps but I would guess it would in the the several thousand at least. In a similiar vein we could put all the mountains in the Rocky Mountains into a category but it gets just as unwieldy as well as Mountains of the Alps would. I think this probably should be put up on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains for some sort of consensus. RedWolf (talk) 03:24, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a discussion on this there as suggested. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 11:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No content in Category:Dab-Class Mountain articles

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Dab-Class Mountain articles, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Dab-Class Mountain articles has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Dab-Class Mountain articles, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem as it was replaced by another category. RedWolf (talk) 01:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Bryan Adams Reckless.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Bryan Adams Reckless.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. JaGa^talk 02:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was being used until replaced by an identical non-free image for no apparent reason. RedWolf (talk) 05:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Scrambles in the Canadian Rockies

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Scrambles in the Canadian Rockies, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

promotional article for non-notable book, almost no library holdings

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. DGG (talk) 03:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maple Mountain

Coincidence I suppose that I was just pulling out my pictures from the summit and you've now created a dab page consisting solely of redlinks. Does your change promote our purpose for redlinks, to encourage people to create new articles? If so, by what means? Rather, it seems to me to add an unnecessary step in accessing the only Maple Mountain article on en:wiki.

Can you reconsider your page move and dabbing? It seems superfluous at this time. Regards. Franamax (talk) 08:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just because the one in Ontario is currently the only one that has an existing article doesn't mean that the other mountains are of any less importance. RedWolf (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I assume then that they will all have articles tomorrow? Otherwise I'll consider in 12 hours the wording at WP:DAB and decide which reversions and pagemoves to make. Currently, there is one primary topic, the Maple Mountain in Ontario. You are free to place a seealso template on that article, leading to all the redlinks you wish to place - but please don't impede access to the only extant Maple Mountain article on the wiki. Franamax (talk) 08:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All hail "centre of the universe" Ontario. 08:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I live in the real centre of the universe now, Kitsilano. :) Nevertheless, no other articles on Maple Mountains currently exist, so I think your move is premature. I agree it needs to happen someday - but there need to be other articles describing notability beyond sharing the same feature name, right? Or at the least, one single other article.

Ontario is the centre of nothing, but Maple Mountain appears to be the single largest vertical rise in the province (I might have missed that at the time, I was too busy gripping the grass on the right, looking down to the left at the huge old-growth pine trees wayy down there, it was more like "middle-of-nowhere" Ontario, the kind I like :)

I think that you're coming at this from a WPP:Mountain perspective, which is fine. Except. It's not a mountain really, it's just a big hill, a leftover from the glaciers. But it's a landform of enough significance that it's attracted critical commentary (including my own OR). Your proposed dab page has not established significance, other than the sheer fact of the geographical existence of named landforms. That's not enough for primary dab'ing, though it seems to me sufficient for a seealso template.

I'd be happy with a turnaround, because I also value your other MM(x)'s. But I do think MM(O) should be the first hit when I search MM. When those other redlinks get blued up, we can look at it again. Franamax (talk) 09:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, nice work RedWolf, you've blued up two more links. I suppose now I'll have to go climb those ones too? :) I got my old pics out, but they're just trees water and sky, not usable. Thanks for answering the challenge! Regards. Franamax (talk) 12:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wiki question

Why do you keep deleting the CBS News ref to the youngest person to summit Kilmanjaro on the Kili page? It was international news and the website ref the other records is in the process of correcting its error in credit. If I need to include more data let me know but there is a 7 year-old who is being denied a major accomplishment. Google CBS Keats Kilimanjaro for the typed transcript of the second story and a still pic of of him at the summit or follow the sling link for the footage. Also the site: climbmountkilimanjaro.com whose records page is listed for many record citations has the following info on Keats http://www.climbmountkilimanjaro.com/2008/april/another-boy-reaches-the-top-of-kilimanjaro.html I expect they will update their site in the next few weeks. It was an oversight.

bbwiki1111 ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbwiki1111 (talk • contribs) 07:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No sources were provided with the link which meant it was not verifiable. Please provide sources when you add content, especially if you are editing as anonymous. I find all the young and oldest persons to climb to the top of a mountain rather dubious but others do not so I generally leave them in except if there are no sources provided. Personally I think parents who allow their young children to climb to serious altitude have questionable parenting skills. RedWolf (talk) 00:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Nokogiri (Chiba)

You did an assessment for this page, and suggested adding a picture. A picture would be nice; how do I go about that? There seem to be loads, and the external links have some, but I assume there'd be copyright issues mounting them directly on the page. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:38, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I found a picture in Commons, so I've used that. It isn't something I've done before, so I'm hoping it's OK. Moonraker12 (talk) 16:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed template update.

I'm hoping we can collaborate on project to replace Template:Infobox mountain. I have what I think is a good start. Please read User:Droll/sandbox/notes. We can talk on that page or anywhere you want. I'm thinking Hike395 might be interested as well but I will wait for your comments first. I've been sitting on it a bit since I've been busy with Template:Infobox Protected area which I rewrote and is working smoothly but needs a few little tweaks. --droll [chat] 08:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I have replied to your concerns at User:Droll/sandbox/notes. --droll [chat] 09:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh bother. I tested it in Firefox and Safari and it looks good. In IE 8 it looks really bad. Something to do with cellpadding I think. Anyway, I'll fix it and get back to you. --droll [chat] 10:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Things are looking good again. It was only a minor glitch. So please read my reply at User:Droll/sandbox/notes and check out Template:Infobox Mountain/testcases. Thanks. --droll [chat] 10:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The template

I left a message for you here. --droll [chat] 23:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed template update

I have not heard from you for some time and I was wondering if you lost interest in my attempt to update Template:Infobox Mountain.The current revision is at Template:Infobox Mountain/sandbox and test cases are at Template:Infobox Mountain/testcases. I implemented your suggestion of including a native_name field and another version of the field named alt_name. You can see examples at User:Droll/DO NOT DELETE. I also simplified the proposed documentation page by removing the alias names. I think they could cause confusion especially for first time users. The way the updated template is structured makes it easy to change colors and other details such as cell height. I will watch this page for your reply. I would like to know if you intend to oppose this update or not. I'm willing to include any changes you wish. I hope we can make some progress on this soon. --droll [chat] 09:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted a response. RedWolf (talk) 05:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More work on Infobox

I implemented the changes you suggested and left a note at User:Droll/sandbox/notes#New Stuff (2008-05-23). Look things over and tell me what you think. No hurry. --droll [chat] 04:50, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for Mountaineering and Climbing Project

Hi, my name is Jarhed and I am an amateur rock climber and mountaineer. I recently reviewed some of the articles on these subjects, and I believe that they could use the attention of interested editors such as yourself. I have proposed a new project on these topics and I am interested in your opinion. You can find the proposal here: Mountaineering and Climbing Project Proposal. Thank you for your time, and have a great day.Jarhed (talk) 21:47, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Mt_Everest_els_1991.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Mt_Everest_els_1991.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, 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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Takkakaw_Falls.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Takkakaw_Falls.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, 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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:22, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Sherbrooke_Lake.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Sherbrooke_Lake.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, 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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:34, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Dotson Ice Shelf

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ojay123 (talk) 19:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Dotson Ice Shelf

A tag has been placed on Dotson Ice Shelf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ojay123 (talk) 19:16, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Notice

Sorry about that. I added the notice by mistake because it seemed like it was copied from [1]. Later I realized that this was in fact a mirror site of Wikipedia. As of now, the deletion notice has been removed from Dotson Ice Shelf, and the message on your talk page automatically went to your user page via a tool I use.

Ojay123 (talk) 02:24, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We need your input

An article you created is up for AfD, and we need your help deciding: please join us at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Jefferson (Ohio). Abductive (reasoning) 02:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of ACSA Nothing Links here will SPEEDY

I have nominated ACSA Nothing Links here will SPEEDY, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ACSA Nothing Links here will SPEEDY. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SimonTrew (talk) 07:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair-use image

Hi, File:Springsteen Tunnel of Love.jpg is nominated for deletion. Regards Hekerui (talk) 09:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:Calogo.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Calogo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Zoo Fari 03:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver

		WikiProject Vancouver
		You have been invited to participate in Operation Schadenfreude to restore the article Vancouver back to featured article status.

- Mkdw ^talk 20:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Alex Lifeson Victor AC.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Alex Lifeson Victor AC.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:22, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A vandal broke the article's link to the image. I have restored the link so the image is no longer an orphan. RedWolf (talk) 06:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

archiving wikiproject mountain talk page

Hi, RedWolf.. you may not have noticed, but the Talk page was already archived by MiszaBot. I reverted your enlistment of the new bot. —hike395 (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, I was aware of the bot already archiving the page. The bot I added indexed the archive pages. RedWolf (talk) 21:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry: I completely misunderstood the new bot: I thought it was an archiver! I reverted my undo, everything should be OK now. Sorry again for the mixup. —hike395 (talk) 22:10, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]