User talk:Spangineer/archive09

This is an archive. Do not post responses here; rather, copy the section to the current talk page and comment there.

This archive page includes discussions that occurred approximately between the dates 2006-10-05 and 2006-12-16.

Archives: 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20

FAC review

Hi Spangineer - I request you to please check out Kazi Nazrul Islam (FAC) and Dhaka (FAC). We need your criticism and advice. Thanks, Rama's arrow 12:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Spangineer - many thanks for the review! I've addressed (I think) all your points. Please have another look. Cheers, Rama's arrow 22:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again - I've reorganised and copyedited (with Shmitra's help) through all sections [1] Please have a look - thanks for your great review! Rama's arrow 02:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since I am still learning as I go...

I have an another admin question for you. SEGA (talk · contribs), who also edits as 68.112.25.197 (talk · contribs), has uploaded several images of questionable source(understatement!). The images have been tagged by other users for their dubious claims of fair use. However the uploader, who has a long history of "bucking wiki-policy"...mostly WP:CIVIL, keeps rv'ing the images to remove any tags and then re-inserting them back into the articles he intended them for. I tried a 1 time rv on a couple of articles but to no avail. I am not one to edit war over this. Should the pics be PUI'd and the users antics reported? Just wondering. Cheers and take care! Anger22 03:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gas metal arc welding revert

Hi Span,
I seen that you reverted one of my edits (Gas metal arc welding) for product placement. I rewrote the passage without naming any specific product. I was trying incorporate a reference with the passage so that readers would not think that I was making it up or pulling in out of leftfield. Although it looks as if it came off as more of a cheap ad. Regards, —MJCdetroit 20:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beaver Stadium image

I'm not really sure what category it would fit under, but it does appear every year on the Beaver Stadium Parking & Information Guide [2], which is technically a magazine, no? BroadSt Bully 00:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ER

Hi Spangineer - I request that when u have time, please have a look at Wikipedia:Editor review/Rama's Arrow 2. I need your criticism and advice. Thanks Rama's arrow 15:01, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spider Baby

Hi

New here so I'm curious as to why something I contributed got cut. On the Spider Baby entry I added info on the musical version that was produced in 2004. That info is gone. Why is this not noteworthy enough. Just so you know I'm not mad. I just thought it was a new wrinkle in the history of Spider Baby. Boffotaco 00:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need admin assistance

Problems with a persistent user(and his IP sock) who continues to replace fair use images with his own improperly tagged uploads. I've attempted to provide some words of advice(directing the user to WP:FU and so on) But to no avail. Perhaps some admin persuasion may deter any further article disruption.(or maybe not) The user is Soheil b (talk · contribs) and his IP 85.133.165.177 (talk · contribs). Thanks and take care! Anger22 02:20, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Both user's "haunts" are on my watchlist. The recent user is new. SEGA and his IP sock have quite a long history. I can almost guarantee I will be seeing them again. Cheers! Anger22 03:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible sock has appeared Septic Tank (talk · contribs) seems to have the same kind of edit habits of SEGA and has restored some of that user's incorrectly sourced images back into the articles they were removed from. If you have the time to investigate that would be appreciated. Thanks and take care! Anger22 19:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More on the SEGA/Septic Tank/68.112.25.197 issue. Tonight 68.112.25.197 (talk · contribs) went on an image vandalism spree that was very deep. Not only was he removing tags, deleting over legitime edits to rv back to his own versions of certain articles...etc. His edit summaries included several personal attacks including racial/ethnic slurs directed against one particular user. Can this guy be given a seat on the sidelines for awhile??? He is becoming a painful thorn in the Wiki-side. Cheers. Anger22 05:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In case you're keeping track. The user, today in the form of Septic Tank (talk · contribs) has returned from their block and is back to the same image vandalism that got them blocked the other day. Cheers! Anger22 15:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Manual of style concerning dates

Hello Spangineer,

Um, could you take a look at the policy page on citing dates:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wp:mos#Dates

and then reply with why you think it's worth linking to the year or date of the Surprise Symphony? I doubt that anyone following such links would learn anything of use.

Yours sincerely, Opus33 19:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Too bad there's no date-formatting tag that doesn't add an unwanted link. Yours truly, Opus33 00:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cimento.Org

He's back! [3][4][5]. I've reverted all three edits and warned him again. Argyriou 05:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thnank you

Thank you for leaving the link. 70.106.141.162 12:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Copyedit Requested

Hi there, I've currently got an article up on FAC here, although it's been requested that it gets a brief final copyedit from someone unfamiliar with the text and I was wondering if you could possibly take a look at it. I saw your contributions to other FAC's and you appear to be an active and very qualified copyeditor. I would really appreciate anything you could contribute but don't worry if you can't. YDAM TALK 19:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Gustav (2002)

Reads perfectly fine to me. Would it be better to say "that was associated with"? – Ch acor 15:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[6] – Ch acor 15:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dammit, I hate my keyboard. Thanks for catching the missing letter. – Ch acor 15:43, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for copyedit

Hi! This is regarding the article West Bengal which is in FAC at present. A copyedit of the article has been suggested, from someone who is unfamiliar with the text. May I request you to kindly have a look at the article and make/suggest changes? Thanks a lot. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! It's absolutely fine. FAC is not the end of improvement for an article, right? Your suggestions at any point of time will be most helpful.Thanks a lot. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 06:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be able to help?

I am new to the site and was creating a page - B-Girlz.

I was trying to make it as similar as possible to the page for Lady Bunny and I'm afraid I haven't been overly successful. I got a message about it looking like an ad. Can you give me some suggestions on how to correct this? I will follow any info you can give - and greatly appreciate the help —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djwgilroy (talk • contribs) .

I can find articles written about them - but not a great deal - one is on the homepage of their site - it leads to an article as follows: [7]. I removed all "commentary" or "descriptives" about them but am not sure what else would do the trick. Thank you so much for the help :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djwgilroy (talk • contribs) .

Thank u so much for your help!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djwgilroy (talk • contribs) .

Has it been a month already?

I know, I know....I said give me a month. But after a month...and many prods/pushes from many editors/admins who's opinions I respect(you being one of them)...I really just don't know that I'm ready for an RfA right now. I am still, for the most part, a single purpose contributor here.(closing in on 15000 edits at it too) And, if I may blow my own horn, I am very very good at what I do. Yes, the toolbox would certainly help my efforts when it comes to V patrol. But I don't need the banhammer. I can almost guarantee anyone I post at AiV won't be brushed over.(although a few whimpy admins have managed to tick me off with their forgiving kindness) The recognition for the contributions I do here is very flattering and I really appreciate that you feel I would be a good candidate. But, for the short term anyways, I am OK with where I am. Again thanks, cheers and take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 02:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I have your attention. Could you use your powers of admin persuasion for me? I tried to correct an "incorrect correction" made by Lcnj (talk · contribs) on the Black Sabbath article. This article, like every other article about a UK based subject, is supposed to be written in UK English where the band name is understood to be plural as opposed to the U.S. where bands names are singular.(see Pink Floyd, Genesis, Led Zeppelin etc.. for examples). This user has rv'd to the incorrect "is" 3 times and is starting to caplock HOLLER is his edit summaries. It's not worth my time, or the edit war. This user is new and inexperienced. My AGF is that he can be counselled on proper editing and how not to NPA and BITE in his edit summaries. But not by me as I don't think he will follow any of my help desk suggestions. If you can spare the time could you use your powers of Admin persuasion to direct him down the 'community' path and away from the path of 'uncivilty'? Thanks, cheers and take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 16:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update. User:Mattarata attempted a mediation with Lcnj (talk · contribs). The result was a personal attack left on Mattarata's talk page. Plus an accusation of sockpuppetry left in the Black Sabbath edit summary box. Not sure where that came from??? Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 22:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image

I am simply arguing with the fact that you are trying to say that we are not aloud to replace the image when wikipolicy cleary states that we are aloud to edit as we please regardless if we make mistakes or not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Violinist1 (talk • contribs) .

Banksia integrifolia ndashes

Thanks for the copyedit. The dashes were unicode ndashes; how come you changed them to HTML codes? Hesperian 06:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no advice at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dashes). I do my dashes in unicode personally, but I'm not really fussed how other people do them. One thing is for certain: some time in the next 24 hours an AWB user with "unicodify entire article" checked will turn up and convert them all back to unicode. Hesperian 06:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :-) Hesperian 06:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Logical quoting

Logical quoting is actually very simple once you understand it. All you have to do is include the punctuation within the quotes if it's part of the quotation, otherwise put the puctuation outside the quote. Logical enough, huh? So...
George writes that it "gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range."
...is correct if George's original sentence ended on the word range (or if it's fairly safe to assume it did). In this example, you're basically quoting a sentence, rather than a word or phrase. If you're just quoting a word or phrase, for example:
George believes that wildlife conservation is the "right thing to do".
The puctuation belongs outside the quotes. Hope that makes sense. Kaldari 07:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia system of punctuating quotations, what is known as "logical quoting", is, as Kaldari points out, actually very simple once you understand it and it doesn't really take much to understand it. As noted above, a punctuation mark goes within the inverted commas if and only if it is part of what you're quoting. As far as I'm aware this is the style used everywhere except in the US (and maybe Canada).

As for your example, was there a fullstop right after the word "range" in George's original sentence? If so, then the said fullstop can correctly be placed within the inverted commas according to the rules of logical quoting. However, as you note "gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range" is not a full sentence but a sentence fragment. Since it's only a fragment, as I understand the rule, the fullstop can be left outside as with Kaldari's "George believes that wildlife conservation is the 'right thing to do'." Let's assume that what George actually wrote was the following.

My dear friends, sad times have befallen us. The progress of evil science continues filling this world wuth falsehood. Let me give you an example from evil biology. The finch, as I'm sure you are aware, was created by Zeus already complete in all its different variations however the evil book written by Mr Tarwyn gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range. This is an evil lie. I call on all mankind to close your ears to this demonic rubbish.

Suppose you want to quote a whole sentence. You might then write the following.

George writes "The finch, as I'm sure you are aware, was created by Zeus already complete in all its different variations however the evil book written by Mr Tarwyn gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range."

In this case you'd normally put the fullstop inside: it's a full sentence you're quoting & the fullstop is part of that sentence. Now, seeing as you only really want to quote a fragment of the sentence you have two options. You could choose to include his fullstop within the inverted commas as follows.

George writes that it "gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range."

Alternatively you could choose not to include his fullstop and finish the sentence off with one of your own as follows.

George writes that it "gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range".

Now, let's assume that what George had written was something quite different. Let's suppose he wrote the following.

Now, I'm sure you've all heard the nonsense spouted by the Zeus-freaks. They claim that Mr Tarwyn's book gives the impression that it is actively speciating to fill the many ecological niches through its range when nothing could be further from the truth. The speciation refered to by Tarwyn is, of course, passive. This makes all the difference.

In this case you have no option. You cannot correctly put the fullstop within the inverted commas after the word "range" because there is none there in the original quotation.

So, this is, as I understand it (and I think it understand it correctly – it is, after all, only logical), the basic rule of logical quotation. I hope Kaldari & I have cleared things up for you. If you're still unsure, please don't hesitate to ask for further explanation. Jimp 06:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Post on Salsa (Dance)

Spangineer,

This post is regarding Salsa (dance) and the link for video of salsa basic dance step. I left a specific message regarding this link in the discussion for external links. The link I added is a video of salsa basic. The site does not charge for the video of salsa basic, the instruction that is provided on the video is from world champion dancers, and it is not used to promote or sell anything. It is to educate people about salsa. It is not region specific, and actually very beneficial. There are plenty of links on wikipedia to youtube, and other video sources. This is the same. Please respond to me, or in the tread for the salsa (dance) discussion. Thanks. --Bootovr 07:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

Thanks!
Thanks for your input on my (nearly recent) Request for adminship, which regretfully achived no consensus, with votes of 68/28/2. I am grateful for the input received, both positive and in opposition, and I'd like to thank you for your participation.
Georgewilliamherbert 05:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stonehenge

Hello You said that you didn't find the height of the stones. Don't they vary? I had an essay and I looked it up, but I didn't find any. I just wrote that the height varies... Abby

Inline citations

Don't know if you have FL Removal in your watch list. You may be interested in Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of French monarchs. Colin°^Talk 16:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words

Thanks Spangineer, I'm glad to be here and help. If you see any articles that could benefit from my materials engineering knowledge, drop me a line. Iepeulas 04:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2005 United States Grand Prix FAC

I have addressed your comment but deleted the Sam Posey bit because it's hard to cite. Can I now rely on you support? Kingjamie 19:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted Varsha quote but last two sentences of "Toyota tyre failures" are already cited and I have cited the race report at the end of the section Kingjamie 17:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have cited the first pargraph of "Toyota tyre failures" Kingjamie 18:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Photo Matching Service

Hi there,

I'm contacting you because you listed yourself at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. You might be interested in a new wikiproject page that lists photographers and articles that need photos by location. The page is located at Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service or WP:PMS GabrielF 00:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

My edits were not vadalism for the sadr City bombings, because all I did was change the death toll to the correct death toll, which is 215, and oviously you changed it back to the incorrect death toll of 138, and I was the one who started this article. So maybe you should analysis the situation a little more carefully before making false judgements. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Little Spike (talk • contribs).

Military brat (U.S. subculture)

Greetings, you were refered to me as a good copy editor. I was hoping that you could assist me with an article that I have up for FAC. The biggest concern that I am seeing is that it "needs to be copyedited." This is my biggest weakness. Will watch your page and the brat talkpage for a resposne.Balloonman 19:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Serial Experiments Lain

Hi! It may look like I'm stalking Balloonman, but I happened to stumble upon the list of top editors he was given when I was miself in dire need for the same exact reasons. Would you mind taking a minute to review Serial Experiments Lain? If not I'll understand, but if so you'd have my eternal (well, very long-lasting) gratitude.--82.151.87.22 12:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On December 8, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jahangir Razmi, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Howdy Spangineer. Thanks for delivering this interesting article about the author of a most striking photograph. Keep up the great work, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Errr.....ahem....It's just arrived.....sorry... Blnguyen (bananabucket) 23:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hobart

Check out www.welding.org it's the site for Hobart institute of welding technology (HIWT). They could be used as a resource or possibly mentioned in the HISTORY of welding. And a excellent book to read for all and recent weld tech. would be Modern Welding Technology edition 5. Thats the most recent I believe. The author is Howard B. Cary , former American Welding Society president, the publisher is Prentice Hall. I thought this info could be useful to you. And i have to comment on your article about welding , great job could use more info on different processes of welding. And about saftey issues if all equipment is used and used properly welding is safe and not unheathly. But burns are in the job title. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.223.49.135 (talk) 19:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for your comments! I'll look into what HIWT has to offer, but I'd prefer to use print sources rather than online ones. I agree with you regarding Modern Welding Technology; it's a fantastic reference. In fact, perhaps the majority of the welding information on Wikipedia comes from that book (it's a major source in articles like Welding, GMAW, SMAW, and GTAW). As for additional coverage of the different processes, check out each method's individual article. We try to keep articles to a reasonable length (30-40kb), so that means we often just have to summarize the topic. And with something as broad as welding, that's necessary. So some of the articles on individual processes have more information—besides the ones above, see laser beam welding, electrogas welding, electron beam welding, etc. If you'd like to help out, feel free to sign up for an account! --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 20:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Backing tape

You asked for a citation, so here: backing tape - they are a provider of these products. I didn't want to give them free advertising in the article, though... Greetings, --Janke | Talk 15:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Category:Date of birth missing

Good evening. Per the discussion about privacy concerns expressed at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of birthdays, date of birth should generally not be added to the biographies of living non-public or semi-public figures. So far, that policy has been interpreted fairly strictly with a pretty high bar being set for the definition of "public figures" who are assumed to have given up their rights to privacy.

By the same token, we should not be adding Category:Date of birth missing to articles unless we have made the case that the person meets the "public figures" threshold. Otherwise, we're just baiting new users into adding content even though the community has already said that we shouldn't include that particular data point. Category:Year of birth missing is okay but the exact date is often not. Thanks for your help. Rossami (talk) 22:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 22:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of guest stars on The Simpsons

This FLC has been kicking around a while. Got self-promoted last night but reverted back. User:Rune.welsh is one of the oppose contributions so may feel reluctant about deciding its fate (as do I). User:ALoan is on holiday. I see you've been involved with FL a while so perhaps you can impartially judge? Thanks, Colin°^Talk 12:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How did this fail? It's got a 6-2 approve vote. I addressed every concern excpet for the need of an official source. It's not my fault that there isn't one, and it's absolute BS that all of my hard work in formatting and updating the article is not going to be recognized just because of something as trivial as a lack of an official source when there very clearly isn't one. I sent messages to BOTH Rune Walsh and that other guy, asking what they wanted and neither replied. -- Scorpion 15:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help but wonder if people don't read what I say. IMDB is an acceptable source. SNPP is an acceptable source. There is no official list, but the guests are listed in the episode pages. And just for those who want a complete list, I included a list from a fan page. The list is fully sourced and I don't see why people are going so nuts because there is no official list. It should be the actual article that matters, not how official its sources are. -- Scorpion 18:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean you want a citation after every single episode name? None of the FA episode lists have citations after every title. And if verifiability is extremely important, why can't a fan site be used as a citation? It's accurate. The one guy was suggesting that I cite a book, even though it isn't even complete, why should sources that are books or slightly more official be considered the best? Even official sources can be inaccurate, and if a fan page (which I used to make the list) is the most accurate, why can't it be cited? -- Scorpion 18:36, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only way I can address the objections is if Fox suddenly came out with a complete list, otherwise, people are just going to continue to say the sources used aren't good enough. -- Scorpion 21:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]