User talk:Thadson

Question for administrator - Inconsistencies in page linking

{{admin help}} I disagree with the linking of Attila directly to Attila the Hun. Attila is first and foremost a first name. There are many famous Attilas that could be mentioned (and are mentioned in wikipedia), and Attila "the name" deserves a full page by itself. I was told that an average (and uneducated person) wouldn't be able to find Attila the Hun if Attila was not directly linked there. (This sound by itself a pretty tunnel visioned opinion that not just tolerates, but actually promotes uneducation and dumbness.)

Following the same thought process, the linking of Alexander should be directed to Alexander the Great because "he is the most known Alexander..."

Attila the Hun is "Attila the Hun", and NOT "Attila". That Attila the Hun is the most important interpretation of Attila is somewhat debatable and very subjective.

In the case of Alexander, I could argue that "Alexander the Great" was the most important "Alexander", and most people would want to look for him when looking for Alexander, so it should be linked similarly as Attila is right now.

Instead the problem is solved rather elegantly right there in the first paragraph. I believe Attila should be linked similarly to the linking of Alexander to Alexander "the name" and not directly to Attila the Hun.

I do not subscribe to the notion that because some people are uneducated and may have difficulty finding a particular article, Wikipedia should be dumb-ed down to their level.

I also think that correct words that are not typos and have their own meaning (like atilla) should be linked to their own pages instead of a similar word that we think the user was "maybe" looking for. Then the page could be properly marked with "if you were looking for .... disambiguation"...

So why Attila and Alexander are linked differently, and what would be a unifying or rather a standardizing soulution? --Thadson (talk) 18:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Thadson. You need to focus on the relevant policies and considerations, which as a new user you're probably unaware of: Wikipedia:Article titles in general and specifically its subsection policy on common names, and from the wider disambiguation policy, the primary topic policy section. The underlying issue to focus on is maximizing reader's ease in finding the topic they expect to find when searching for a topic. When a person types Attila into the search engine are they looking for the name Atilla or Attila the Hun, and is it true most of the time as to which is being looked for? In order to find out we have some tests we can apply, such as how often people look at one page or the other, how often reliable sources use one and not the other such that it's likely people searching will also be looking for one and not the other.

If the majority of people typing in Attila are looking for Attila the Hun then Attila should link to the page in him. If the majority of people typing in Attila are looking for it as a name then Attila should link to the page on the name (currently at Attila (name)). And if it's a wash, its split between other uses of Attila, then the main title "Attila" should be a disambiguation page. The current situation is that implicitly Attila the Hun is considered the primary topic for Atilla, and all other people who type just Atilla and end up at the article on him who were looking for something else will have to access it through the hatnote at the article that links to Attila (disambiguation).

Okay, that's the playing field; so is Attila the Hun the primary topic? I think it's fairly clear he is. I base this on looking at article traffic statistics as one metric: the disambiguation page had 8,608 page views in the past 90 days; the article on the name had 1,243 views and by contrast, Attila the Hun had 51,066 views, and taking a survey of reliable sources on the other: A search of Google books for just Attila shows 3,180,000 results, while a search of Attila excluding Hun or Huns shows the results diminish to 1,840,000, thus indicating that at a least 1,340,000 of the results overall are for Attila the Hun. I then looked at the remaining results and see they are all over the map and many of them are actually still referring to Attila the Hun even if they don't use "Hun" so the search excluder didn't pick them up, and none I see are about the name.

A question you didn't ask here but you might have is what is the process for requesting a change in title? What you do is follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:49, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit. Could you provide similar statistics for Alexander vs. Alexander the Great. I would think this topic would be in a similar situation that you just explained about Attila, and if so, then shouldn't Alexander be linked to Alexander the great instead of Alexander the name? Thadson (talk) 12:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Your request is not, strictly speaking, a concern that requires admin attention. Page view statistics are accessable in the header of the article's revision history. You may leave a talkback notice (see Template:Talkback) on User:Fuhghettaboutit's talk page if you desire their reply. Alexander is a common name used in English where Atilla is not. That is one possible explanation. The venue for that discussion is WP:MOSNAME or the article talk page. Regards Tiderolls 21:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Hungarian playing cards

Can you please provide information on the source of the Hungarian playing cards in your photo? We need to know the copyright on the cards, not just how you licence the photo. See Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Huncards.jpg. Thanks, -- Infrogmation 16:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rodolfo2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rodolfo2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Magyar huszar 1850.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Magyar huszar 1850.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Atilla26m.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Atilla26m.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 14:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

I saw from your userpage you're looking for a user to adopt you; I'm currently looking for adoptees, so if you're interested drop me a line on my talk page :). Thanks! Ironholds 21:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Well the info isn't really hard to find. The idea is that if someone searches for attila, they will most likely mean the Hun. For those who dont there's a ""Attila" redirects here. For other uses, see Attila (disambiguation)" right at the top of the page so it's the first thing they see :). The only alternative would to have the disambiguation page as the Attila page, and I think it's felt that would cause unneccesary head-scratching for people who want to see the Hun article. And sure, any questions you have, suggestions or anything you want suggested, drop me a line. While it isn't a high priority or related to the adoption, I also do userpage and signature design if you're interested. Regards, Ironholds 22:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

That makes total sense. However it encourages people to spell the name wrong and never notice that what they spell is incorrect. If we would search for attila, which is 2 Ts and 1 L, then yes, lets link to Attila the Hun (even though I still have a small objection to that, as in my alexander exapmle) However if someone types atilla with 1T and 2 Ls, then it should properly point to the famous hussar army coat, and maybe there should be a link on top that says "If you are looking for Attila the Hun, which properly spelled with 2 Ts and 1 L, then click here." Maybe i'm just too much a perfectionist, but isn't the point of an Encyclopedia to collect and then disseminate knowledge? We would not want to list "sun" an object in the sky with "son" offspring together, right? So should we not list "attila" the name and "atilla" the cloth together. Thanks Thadson (talk) 22:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the point is that unlike son/sun, attila and atilla are kind of easy to mix up; it's not exactly a word in common usage. I understand what you're saying, and I am pretty much a perfectionist myself, but the problem is this: the encyclopedia is meant to be the sum of all human knowledge accessible to all humans; not everyone has the level of education or is in the situation (for example, dyslexia) to get it right first time round. In addition, I think there's the same reasoning as for the Attila page; people who go to atilla are more likely to be looking for the hun than the coat. Ironholds 01:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:A2EHQBuildings.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:A2EHQBuildings.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:08, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:America II Electronics Logo.gif

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:12, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tom Wood (author)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Tom Wood (author) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. reddogsix (talk) 19:44, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tom Wood (author)

The article Tom Wood (author) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable author lacking no-trivial coverage. Books appear to be Kindle and paperback versions.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. reddogsix (talk) 00:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Matthew Betley (author)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Matthew Betley (author) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.thebigthrill.org/2016/02/overwatch-by-matthew-betley. 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 or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — 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 or image 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 this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Thadson. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Thadson. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Electrostatic Discharge Association

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Electrostatic Discharge Association, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SL93 (talk) 22:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ESD Association Logo.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:41, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of America II Electronics

The article America II Electronics has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability. Orphaned for a decade.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PepperBeast (talk) 12:11, 17 November 2022 (UTC)