My issue with the phrase "on the edge" in the History of Greenland page is that it really has no point of reference. On the edge of what? I'm having a hard time navigating through all this editing, so I'm not sure if this is where one is supposed to place a comment. Guernseykid 04:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, They are the same person. King-of-no-pants 03:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Insane Clown Posse is originally from Wayne, Michigan. this is why I have changed the page because at their concerts they refer to themselves as Michigan not one of its members is from the city of Detroit except for Esham who recently left the group and Twistid is from Rochester Hills, Michigan. Mitchellandness1 08:23, 8 Feburary 2006 (UTC)
You recently edited the Richard Smalley page, revising the statement about his Christianity. You directed the reader to his "personal statement" in Wikiquote. I went to Wikiquote and did not find an article on Smalley. I created one, but did not have a source for his "personal statement". I'd appreciate learning from you where I can find his personal statement (or alternatively, if you would add it to the Wikiquote article.) Thanks. 70.122.87.59 02:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Which quote were you going to add? Do you have a more specific statement on Christianity? 70.122.87.59 17:22, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Man, you sure could have fooled me. Rchamberlain 21:28, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Rmhermen: As a representative of Frederik Meijer Gardens and Sculpture Park and author of the document in question, I am authorized to publish said document. I have posted the information under the name Greedo. Following Wikipedia guidelines, I have included the following copyright statement on the document's "talk page."
I respectfully ask that you remove the copyright violation immediately. And in the future please contact me through the organization's Media Page with further questions regarding the information stated on this page.
I appreciate your understanding.
Brian Burch Frederik Meijer Gardens and Sculpture Park
Copyright (c) 2005 Frederik Meijer Gardens and Sculpture Park. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "GNU Free Documentation License".
Rmhermen: Please realize that PR material, such as information in press releases is intended to be reused.
Some of the images in this article are probably yours because they are tagged as GFDL and uploaded by you. Anyhow there're no informations on sources, f.e. if these images are your own and as a follow the licenses of these images are incomplete. Some of them are now on Commons and without these informations they have to be deleted. --Saperaud 04:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Please look at the picture of the lighthouse: [1], which can be reached from [2]. The reference to being near Marathon Key is in error, as the city of Marathon occupies Key Vaca and Boot Key. It is a reef lighthouse, and while parts of the reef are exposed at low tide, there's no way you can call it an island. -- Dalbury(Talk) 04:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
I was wondering about your insistance on the USGS name - there are a number of names for many lighthouses, and this light is known by several. See [3] and [4] and [5], as well as Sombrero Key Light, Near Marathon Key, Florida. Is there any reason for keeping the USGS name, when Dalbury is using for his reference the USCG? As the Coast Guard actually has more to do with lighthouses, I would consider them a higher authority. See Sombrero Key Light on the USCG site. There has not been a Key at that location since the mid 1800s. KillerChihuahua?!? 04:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
hey Rmhermen -- it was idiocy on my part. See "Disambigged links" on my Talk page. Sorry! bikeable (talk) 05:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for backing me up on that. I hadn't noticed the response or would have responded in a similar way. WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 19:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if you could answer my question? I saw you edited recently. Khoda Hafez -- Tompsci 00:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I found that information in various sources, some of which were on the Web. But the information was all true and factually accurate. Two things you should know:
--First off: it is NOT in any way a copyright violation to repeat basic facts that were published elsewhere. I can, for example, say that Detroit is in Michigan even if someone else put that in a book somewhere.
--Second, the sources I used want (such as the Detroit Regional Chamber) want that kind information to be distributed... that's why they put it out in press releases and on Web pages aimed at the media. That's kind of the nature of press releases and similar kinds of PR.
As for the need for the section... well, some of us think interesting tidbits that reveal the unique character of a community are slighly more interesting than dry statistics. Beyond that, Detroit gets a bad rap from lots of people -- including those who post misinformation in this article on Wiki. I wanted to show that Detroit is a proud city with good things to offer -- something to counter the one-dimensional picture painted elsewhere. Please put back the section I wrote.
Based on some of the "editing" that I have seen in this article in the past... I think there is another agenda here. It is, apparently, OK to wrongly state that criminal gangs "Can be seen patrolling the streets" of Detroit. But is is not allowed to correctly state that Campus Martius Park was named one of the best public squares in the nation and to link to the site where that is stated?
I had to delete the gang comment at least twice because someone who didn’t even bother to check that put it back in. But, I guess if it fits the stereotype of what a predominately African American city is like, then there is no reason to check, right? It's only positive facts that have to be deleted immediately. Sad.
Also, please check again the rules related to using press release material. Press releases are created in order to encourage people to re-publish what is in them. That is well within the bounds of "fair use." Plus, that issue only applied to a part of what I submitted. Yet you just deleted all of it. Again... I see an agenda here
And again... I implore you to look into the essential nature of what a press release is and what it is used for. The whole point is the encourage the information to be redistributed. When they are sent out via e-mail, they often contain bullet points in unformatted text to facilitate cutting and pasting.
Also: if you look at "Houston, New York City, Chicago, Dallas (as well as London, Paris, Tokyo, and Beijing)," I doubt you will see the kind of racist and untrue statements that have been allowed in the article about Detroit.
In any event, I have re-submitted that stuff to make the changes you suggested. And I deleted a bullet point that I thought repeated stuff in the food section.
I think this article needs an editor without such a blatant bias against Detroit. I jumped through your hoops and did what you asked. But you still could not overcome your resistance to pointing out the positive aspects of a largely African-American city. Cities with different demographics have different rules.
This bot tagged an image I uploaded and someone later deleted it. However no one ever inform me. Or bothering to read the fact that it was a U.S. image from 1910 - 13 years before even the possibility of an active copyright. I have some images I have had to cchange license tags on three times because Wikipedia keeps changing its standards. It is very frustrating and deleting them without even informing the uploader is even worse. Rmhermen 23:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Why did you delete my addition to this article? It seems to me that the fact the company was founded by Henry A. Wallace (one of the most influential members of the Roosevelt administration, and, hence, one of the most prominent New Deal supporters in the 1930s and 1940s) is one of the most fascinating things about the company. The original article hadn't even mentioned that Wallace had been FDR's second vice president, or that he had run for president in 1948 on the Progressive Party ticket. I think Wallace's involvement with the company is one of the things that makes Pioneer interesting. I did not infringe on any copyrights in my article revision, as everything was written in my own words, and all the information I included is considered general knowledge. It can be verified in a number of sources, including Culver & Hyde's 2000 biography, American Dreamer: A Life of Henry A. Wallace.
Hi, Can you explain the rationale behind the moving of Jelly (food) to Jelly, and the moving of the old Jelly page to Jelly (disambiguation)? The jelly page in itself needs split into jello and jam-jelly, as they are two different things, so what do you think should be done in *that* situation?
It doesn't make sense at all.
Fourohfour 15:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your question. No, it's not really a new standard. It was added to the MOS a little over a year ago. I brought it up on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (titles)#Italicize names of spacecraft? and a couple other editors I'd seen working on spacecraft articles. Based on recommendations from Chicago, a NASA style guide, and a couple other sources, after consultation with them I added a spacecraft example to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles). Even more so than for titles of movies or books, they're inconsistently italicized on Wikipedia, although you'll usually see them italicized in featured articles or on the Main Page and such (I just did it for New Horizons, so that doesn't count). The reason I just did that one is that I was using WP:AWB to take all the articles that link to Apollo 11 and italicize its name in those articles. The process is semi-automated; there isn't an easy way to scan each article to see if any other spacecraft names are mentioned elsewhere in the article. I figured I'd get around to doing the other spacecraft later, but it probably makes sense for me to manually go through that article and italicize them—I'm sorry, I should have done that in the first place. Do you have any objections? — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not aware of a Barony of Raby created before the seventeenth century. It was a subsidiary title of the Earls of Strafford from 1640, and also a subsidiary title of the Dukes of Cleveland (1833 creation). Hope this helps, Mackensen (talk) 01:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I know that the list of 3 letter words has suvived AFD over a year ago, but man I want that page gone. I'm thinking of trying again- as someone who has edited the page, what do you think? Lotusduck 16:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
If it disobeys guidelines and is original research, then it does obvious harm, in encouraging everyone into making wikipedia their own personal scrabble guide, no? Lotusduck 16:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
But in what way is it notable? Lotusduck 01:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
You've added a merge tag to Rush Limbaugh. When are you starting the discussion? patsw 04:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with the editing...I am new to this.
The tag was suggested by User:Tomos at the time when there was no mention of 1923 therein. See User_talk:Ghirlandajo/Winter_2005 for the context. Today, I changed the tag to {art}. As the image doesn't illustrate any article at all, feel free to delete it.
Parenthetically, it is amazing how willing people are to delete images uploaded in good faith. On the other hand, I've been campaigning for months for the deletion of some obvious copyvios, such as Image:Slavs.jpg, Image:Wawka2.jpg, Image:Warszawa2.jpg, Image:Wawka.jpg - all to no purpose. They were moved to Commons and here the matter ended! --Ghirla | talk 11:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC) === The Coptic bust === I shot the image, and own those rights. The iconic origin of the cross by Christians is widely recognized as starting with the "ankh" or "cruz ansata" in late 3rd century Egypt. 3dnatureguy 00:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't know who made the image. It was at the Florida State Archives just listed as "an old etching".--Cuchullain 21:37, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I looked at the map and I can't really tell "Marijampole" and "Kaunas" apart. But that's just me. Color blindness can take many forms, it's probably impossible to create a color palette that is perfect for everyone. Using primary colors always helps. Using different brightness or even patterns (in addition to different color) also helps. If you want to learn more I suggest this link, and other great pages linked in the External links section of Color blindness.
I appreciate you effort. -- nyenyec ☎ 22:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your work in cleaning up the output of the prolific editor, RJBurkhart. I tried gently nudging, asked other editors to nudge as well, but apparently our efforts were insufficient. Some folks, however well-intentioned, don't "get" Wikipedia or the norms of the project. Cheers, -Will Beback 23:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I live near the border in Downtown Detroit. And I can get just about all those canadian channels, like Global(ch. 22), CTV(ch. 42), A-channel(16), Citytv(ch. 31). even a french version of CBC(ch. 54) and Korean channel(ch. 68) too! And I can also catch Ohio channels like NBC 24 etc. Marquita188 23:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Please correct this template defect since place seems to displace people perspectives
Standard | |
---|---|
"Jumboized" group Ashtabula class | |
"Jumboized" group Mispillion class | |
Converted to escort carriers Sangamon class | |
RJBurkhart 00:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
So, template should link to article Cimarron class oiler
RJBurkhart 11:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
The Cimarron class oiler article is ambiguously named, since there have been two different classes of oilers named Cimarron. The first was the class described in the template, and the second started with the AO-177 in the 1970s. Please revert those changes, or at least place the 1939 vintage class and newer class into separate articles and templates. --RandomWalk 03:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
| |
when it is added. Apparently, according to RJBurkhart, the old oilers are not "fleet replenishment" vessels. Rmhermen 03:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
When you are using the no license tags on images, please include all the parameters like ((no license|month=January|day=26|year=2006)). Otherwise, the images are just thrown into Category:Images with unknown copyright status as of unknown date 2006 instead of by exact date. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm a long time photo journalist and have thousands of images . I am perfectly willing to contribute them to commons under GFDL (self) and try to mark them as such.3dnatureguy 03:32, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
On 26-Jan, you blanked Soft serve. Blanking pages is generally considered a bad idea. I've reverted it to the previous version. If you believe the redirect should be deleted, please follow the deletion procedures. Or perhaps a better option, would be to create a stub. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 14:50, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I disagree with Wikipedia administrator Rmhermen's remark that the comment that Lane K. Akiona is a non-notable church official. Where exactly in the Wikipedia policy is the term "non-notable" defined? He is a vicar forane in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Honolulu. Until the phrase "non-notable" is clearly defined, I respectfully submit that your request for speedy deletion of this article is arbitrary and capricious. Aloysius Patacsil 18:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your message. I'm new to this project but am very intrigued. I wrote both each of those myself, and copied and pasted them directly from papers I had written that were on my computer. They are my own work... am I okay in doing this? Thanks. Also, that picture of the St Peter Cathedral was my own.
Hi, Rmhermen, you voted oppose on the requests for rollback privileges consensus poll, suggesting that people who would like rollback should just become admins instead - that being an admin is "no big deal". While I think that in an "ideal" Wikipedia, this would indeed be the case, I believe that over time standards for becoming an administrator have clearly risen. This is apparent by looking at the RFA system throughout Wikipedia's existence - intially, all one had to do to become an admin was just ask nicely, now we have a complicated procedure. A recent proposal on the RFA talk page for requiring at least 30 minimum support votes and a significant number of existing contributions was given some serious consideration. There is frequent talk of "bad admins slipping through the RFA net", and while you may not agree with that philosophy of adminship it is undeniable that the standards have risen.
Because of this, candidates who pass are already very experienced with Wikipedia. While this in itself is no bad thing, it means that for the month or so before they become admins they are not being given the tools an admin has which would help them to improve Wikipedia, by removing vandalism and performing administrative tasks such as moving pages. The qualities which make a good administrator are not determined by length of stay on Wikipedia or number of friends you have, but by personality and character. Time at Wikipedia only gives familiarity with the way things are done here. However, being at Wikipedia for an extra month doesn't grant any special insight into the ability to determine which edits are vandalism and which are not. This is why I believe that we should hand out rollback to contributors who are clearly here to improve Wikipedia but won't pass the RFA procedure because of their percieved lack of familiarity with policy by some Wikipedians. I think that adminship should be no big deal, like you, however I see just two ways to make sure Wikipedians can quickly and efficiently remove vandalism - either by all those who believe adminship should be no big deal involving themselves much more in RFA, or by supporting this proposal and giving out rollback to good contributors who have not yet been here long enough to become admins. We have to remember that our ultimate aim here is to produce an encyclopedia, and we should balance the idealism of "adminship should be no big deal" with the pragmatism of granting rollback to our best non-admin contributors. I would be very grateful if you would reconsider your viewpoint on this issue. Thanks, Talrias (t | e | c) 13:55, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know, but I think I'm gonna have to support User:24.23.39.36 on this one. Space Cadet 22:43, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Try Googling "Willenberg Kultur". Space Cadet 01:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Please explain what you find so objectionable about my edits to Soft drink. Ewlyahoocom 09:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
I removed your speedy deletion tag from this article and Lillian Entwistle. Talk:Rachel Entwistle claims it's a story being covered on a number of news agencies, so I sent it to AfD instead (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Entwistle). Regards, howcheng {chat} 19:42, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
You removed an image from Jacobite Rising without comment. Any reason for this? Was it on purpose? --Craig Stuntz 21:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
You removed my addition, the Trans-Iranian Railway, from the article Transcontinental railroad with the comment that it was "not a single railroad". You are not correct, it was a single and distinct railroad with even a notable history. It connected Bandar Imam at the Persian Gulf with Bandar Torkaman at the the Caspian Sea. It is also transcontinental, as the map will show you. Ekem 11:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Please do not make pages without content. Pages like the state park ones without content (only templates) will be deleted. If you intend to expand these please do so soon. Also you are using the wrong naming convention - they should all be named as "Name State Park" and only as "Name State Park (Pennsylvania)" only if there is a conflict. "Name, Pennsylvania" is used for populated places. Rmhermen 17:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
You asked me to expand upon the comment I made concerning the removal of Scandinavian fishermen in the later part of the twentieth century from Isle Royale. My comment is based on the autobiographical account of life on Isle Royale by Howard Sivertson, called "Once Upon an Isle," unfortunately, I did not remember the exact year in which the majority of families were removed, but I do recall that the National Park Service gave dispensation to families that owned their homes (most of the fishermen were squatters) to continue to reside as long as they lived, so long as they used the right every year. So theoretically, it is possible that some fishermen remained long into the latter part of this century. Anyway, my sources also tell me that the NPS didn't take control of Isle Royale until August of 1946. That said, I will edit my comments to make them agree with the ambiguity of my memory. Jrt989 23:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
"The park was finally formally dedicated 15 years after the original legislation calling for its creation on August 27, 1946. " www.nyx.net/~sjhoward/Isle_Royale/history.html -- Whatever the case, it doesn't matter because I didn't include this in my changes and what edits I did make I changed so that they agree with earlier comments. Jrt989 15:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
[6]. I don't know what this "dedication" was. Rmhermen 15:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Re: Algonquin Park, I thought the units issue was resolved. See: Template talk:Infobox protected area. Am I mistaken? bobblewik 23:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi there, as you already helped at the Dresden bombing article, would you please take a look at the same question at the related article? Philip Baird Shearer asked for a "third opinion" and got one from a user who got really angry with me when I saw the point of someone who said that it might not be a good idea to have an article about the Iraq war dominated by three guys from the US military. (By the way, I had great fun at Algonquin Park, saw a moose and racoons.) Get-back-world-respect 23:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Rmhermen, I see that you are the creator of the Nain Rouge article. I must say that having lived my entire life in Detroit, I have never once heard of this creature, and no one I have have spoken to has either. I have asked an urban historian about its existence and he could not confirm that this "Nain Rouge" was ever a substantial rumor in these parts. The one website on the page looks pretty sketchy as well.
In any event, the article gives me that "unique theory on the internet" feeling; nothing personal, of course. If there is some sort of misunderstanding, I beg your forgiveness, but I'll start the AfD in motion in a few days unless we can work something out. Isopropyl 06:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
We could really use some third party moderation for the discussion we're having on the hostel discussion page ([8]) if you have any insight or thoughts to add on the subject... -- User:orrd
Excuse me!
I am the webmaster for Altadenatowncouncil.org. I wrote the article and included the photos from my web site creation on that site.
My name is Mike Manning and I have long been a member of Altadena Town Council, and the webmaster of record.
Is there some other protocol I need to follow?
Magi Media 13:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Magi Media
I have since resubmitted my my article on Altadena and have footnoted it. This seems awkward, but is it sufficient to identify the copyright, which is mine? By the way, any edit I put in about Altadena is original. Even the Altadena Historical Society defers to me in matters of community history. Magi Media 14:36, 17 February 2006 (UTC)Magi Media
Hi,
You had asked why on the country pages the entries are formatted the way they are. It's the way that we've been doing them since I started working on the Olympics pages a couple of months ago. I'm just using the same format. Sue Anne 17:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
You may wish to voice any concerns on a category vote involving protected areas here:[9].--MONGO 04:32, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Spot on. Fowler agrees with you as well. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
Mind you, I'd be cautious with using Google polls as your authority with spelling and grammar these days. A Google poll would suggest that "it's" is both a possessive and an abbreviation (when it's only the latter). A Google poll would suggest that "can not" means the same thing as "cannot", which is certainly not true. A Google poll would probably tell you that the verb "effect" means the same thing as "affect", which is certainly not true. Lots of other examples. Cheers JackofOz 01:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to say that I might have been a little too harsh on some comments. Let me explain & elaborate. I make comments only wishing to make the lists better. I don't want to fail any list, and in fact I like your list very much. I just don't like what's around it because it does not "Exemplify Wikipedia's very best work"... because it can be better! :)
Also, I find an argument "but other lists don't do it" rather strange. Featured content standards are increasing and you have to match that up. Also, I am a strong believer in pushing things forward and not maintaining status qou. Just because someone did a lousy job and got away with it does not mean that you should not do better. I hope you see & understand my position. Renata 14:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
At least change the topic into Fruit Wine, because country wine is a term nobody uses, the correct wine industry term is fruit wine. Also "Vin du pays" is not a translation, anyone who speaks French, will tell you this:
vin du pays = wine of the land of, eg vin du pays Nantais = Wine from the Region of Nantes
what the author might have meant is "vin de pays", but again this is not fruit wine: this is an official category of French wines above the level of vin de table comprising about one quarter of the wine produced in France. Wines bearing this designation should be of higher quality than vin de table wines, and should demonstrate a certain amount of regional character.
see http://www.answers.com/topic/vin-de-pays
same for the German Landwein http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutscher_Landwein
I just did a quick check of Vicksburg National Military Park, Touro Synagogue, and Yellowstone National Park, and it seems to be displaying fine. Neither the map image nor the template has been changed recently. Perhaps there was a temporary systems bug? — Eoghanacht talk 14:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 27% for major edits and 33% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.)
This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 19:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, frankly speaking I have no idea what a dill pickle is. In fact dill is commonly added to all marinates in Poland, just as garlic or onions, which might mean that it's the same cucumber. However, the only ogórkowa I know is made from either salted or soured cucumbers rather than pickles as such (no vinegar used whatsoever, just water, salt and spices). There is a chance though that for the Americans it's all the same and that they call the sour cucumbers pickles as well... Halibutt 17:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
For some of the eponyms there just isn't any information available. But other than that there's no real reason. We could have red links in there, but it'd be difficult if not impossible to build a page for them. (Many are former Soviet scientists and engineers who worked within the secrecy of that nation's space program.) — RJH 17:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Rmhermen, you may not remember me, but I have had the opportunity to work with you in the past. I would like your opinion on how to proceed with User:70.50.53.43 and the user's actions at Sabre (fencing) (see the talk page). The user repeatedly removes the link to List of American sabre fencers with no explanation other than "vandalism" and a diatribe at his/her talk page. I suspect that this user edits in good (albeit somehwat misguided) faith, although he/she will not listen to reasoning nor be coaxed into discussion. Your help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Isopropyl 19:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for Image:Socalareacodes.png. It's awesome. Will swap it in in a bit. Thanks. jengod 19:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
It shows the combined ranges of all lynxes (Canadian lynx, North American lynx/bobcat, Eurasian lynx, and Iberian lynx). It was made for Wikibooks:Wikijunior Big Cats, and doing one with the species differentiated has been on my to do list since then. — Laura Scudder ☎ 00:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I have added your suggestion to the list and from what I can see, from 1066, there have been 6 kings and queens without consorts... Sotakeit 14:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
You're too much of a dunce. You make yourself look stupid, every time you edit. Also, please stop blindly reverting my edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.242.106 (talk • contribs)
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.
If you are refering to Family Law or S.V. Shereshevskii, note that I did not violate 3RR at any time and I have discussed this on several talk pages. The user is not inclined to discussion. Rmhermen 17:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I asked you a question before on the Space Missions portal page and you were helpful. Could I ask you another? Another user has told me linking to {dab} pages is bad style, I thought that was the point of the those pages. Should {dab} links only go one way, from the {dab} to the content? This might be a case of UK style versus US style, in that case I think I'll let it go. I can't find a style guide that says one way or another yet, I thought I would ask you.
Reason I ask is I thought I should tag acronyms in space articles that aren't really obvious to a casual observer to a {dab} page. Thanks for you time. Rob
whyd u delete The article i did on Jamie Stewart, the teacher?Aeom Mai
I'm afraid that I'd agree with the others about California Road. It's a notable topic, and his material seems to at least be relevant. I'll put it on my watchlist and keep an eye out for "bio-geography" jargon. -Will Beback 02:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi!
[Older Version] and
New Version
Compare, its changes nothing except appearance. Tutmosis 19:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Why take out the sentences I wrote trying to indicate an essential point about Mackinac, viz. its peaceful summer vacation family atmosphere? Maybe there's a better way to put it, but I think the point deserves emphasis in the article.
As for snowmobiles "in the winter", what other time of year would anybody try to use them?
Credmond . . . credmond@uwaterloo.ca
I think an encyclopedia article about a tourist destination should give as clear a picture as possible of what it is about the place that tourists come for, and I don't think this article, without the sentences that I drafted and you deleted, does a good enough job of that. -- Credmond
Sorry, I didn't realize that "we" were entitled to contribute to this part of Wikipedia but not "me". I agree, the "chaotic" atmosphere and horrendous prices are also valid insights into Mackinac, and I see no reason why such points can't find a place in the article. -- Credmond
It must be a flatbread. Cheers! deeptrivia (talk) 04:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I've never archived a Talk page. It seems you mistook my comment for the edit made by Bookofsecrets (talk · contribs) . Wadoli Itse 14:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
I gave the information on the source of the picture in the edit summary. It isn't copyrighted.
This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:Kungur Ice Cave.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the ((GFDL-self)) tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 22:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
My point is that it shouldn't redirect from Catholic Church to Roman Catholic Church. That is simply incorrect from a Catholic perspective. The "Roman" Catholic Church is the Latin Rite, not the whole Church.
But, in any event, you said that while the Catholicism to Catholicity move may be workable, the RCC to CC one is not. But then why did you vote "oppose" to the Catholicism to Catholicity move? --Hyphen5 00:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I seen that you had posted a comment to the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Conversions. Check out the Israel article to see what got that debate started; look for my name in the history tab. I also see that you too are from the mitten...Hell yea—I like ya even more now. Regards. MJCdetroit 02:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
from what i understand, the proper Image use policy is merely to tag them per the particular situation, as uploading every model/copyright/use release would be a gross abuse of the storage capacity and bandwidth .
if i'm mistaken, please cite your source.
it's pretty obvious that the image is copywritten and a link is given in the image's description if you or anyone else would like to contact the owner directly to inquire about use. if you don't trust the link, google the name imprinted in the watermark and see if they match up.
incidentally, here's a copy of an email from the owner...but maybe i just typed it up right now just throw you off.
--- william mcallen wrote on Fri, 2 Sep 2005 18:33:31 -0400: > As long as I can put my watermark on the photos I don't have a problem. See example attached. Bill
Seasee 06:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I again seek your sage advice. For merging the articles exergonic and the corresponding exergonic reaction, as well as endergonic, exothermic, and endothermic (and their respective reactions), I have been labeled a vandal by Sadi Carnot at eight different talk pages (see here and here, ther rest are the same). The user has reverted all eight of the pages using the minor edit (m) tag.
This upsets me very much, as I consider the comments made at the individual talk pages to be personal attacks. Prior to Sadi Carnot's reverts, we have had no prior contact, and there have been no posts regarding the issue to my talk page. Bear in mind I was being bold as well as acting in good faith, and as a result have been branded a vandal. I have asked MONGO about what I should do, and he has told me to go back and put ((merge)) on the articles with explanations. I have reason to believe that these will be removed.
I am unsure how to best proceed at this junction. I question my ability to properly respond to Sadi Carnot in a civil manner, as it would very easy to go off. Should I go through and place a response at each of the eight aforementioned articles? It troubles me that there are now a series of pages which call me a vandal. The user has a history of blanking his or her talk page. Before I proceed with anything, I would like a third party's opinion to ensure I am not acting out of line.
I value your advice very much and will do my best to follow it. Thank you. Isopropyl 23:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I realized I never responded to your note about the use of hectares, it was in response to something Bobblewik did. Because hectares are not "official", I do not plan to use them myself -- but I do so without prejudice to others using them, or even changing units in articles I contribute to. It is not particularly important to me, as metric units are a matter of a moving decimal. — Eoghanacht talk 23:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I actually don't know. I based the statement on the Tahquamenon Falls article which I believe is based on information from a state web site. In terms of height, there are surely taller waterfalls. And the way it was worded, it also seemed to imply a seasonality -- that the increased waterflow in the spring what makes it the largest in terms of waterflow -- rather than it's height or width. [10] doesn't even list the falls. I don't know of any reputable source that makes an unqualified claim of it being the 2nd largest. older ≠ wiser 16:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Some of the motorboat-accessible campsites have fire rings and/or grills. [11] [12]
Your point being what - I was (differently making I must admit) making the similar point but in the opposite dirrection to my redecisor editor. Un andstand the difference and do not enter such edit wars I just didn't have the time to make the long version of the aguements as you did. I don't disagree with you but seeing someone with no other contribution to make thought much as you did, just didn't respond the same, sorry if I caused offence. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 14:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC) You changed learned to learnt with an edit summary of "This is more correct." This is not true and too abrupt. Rmhermen 15:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
about the Albert Kahn References section. I used to call these events "Further reading" then someone went and changed then all "Reference" and I thought "okay" and went with that - thinking of the terms as meaning references to AK, or whatever. rather then just for the article. Also I have been trying to catalog my library and have been posting titles on wikipedia as what I thought was just another resource to be found here. But I have no problem removing them either. Carptrash 17:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Who is the authur of the 'Hurontario Street' picture supposed to contact exactly to give permission? Provide address. Thanks.
I invite you to take a look at Christianity Knowledge Base and join our project!
Thanks!!! 70.30.57.80 06:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
This article doesn't need a list of notable farmers. But if it is going to have one, it shouldn't just be a list of US Presidents who happened to own farms, should it? I explained my position on the talkpage, why did you revert it without explaining yours? Kevlar67 10:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I write only to let you know that, consistent with WP:PROD, the creator of the article supra removed the prod tag; I likely will support deletion at AfD but haven't yet anything to adduce toward deletion (cf., tagging the article from cleanup, wikification, and context identification), so I'm not altogether comfortable nominating the article for deletion (and, in any case, I hate to swoop in on someone else's prod), but I thought perhaps you might want to AfD the page. Joe 05:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
For your input on the List of archaeological periods (North America) page this adds significant information and formating to what I was able to produce. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 08:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rmhermen,
I was wondering why you undid my change to the William page without explanation. Most pages pertaining to a personal name have a section of famous people who had that first name.
Neelix 16:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I was to lazy to summarize the conversation. I also have another question, don't know if you'd know the anwser
I noticed that in wikihtml, when we edit, formating has extra space, for example, when we edit a comment, there's a space between the $Subject/headline:$ & the content of the message. Another example is $== Extra Space ==$ is also the same as $==Extra Space==$. Does this make comments larging in size as bytewise? Even if not, it could create confusion. So I guess Mediawiki needs to be tweaked/the devlopers\the codes needs a little editing?
Please leave one if you'd like more clarification on this issue. You could also contact me iooiioioo@hotmail.com [since they haven't instituted the option to delete your account, made their own licence, or the GNUL hasn't changed yet, I haven't signed up].
thanks
24.70.95.203 20:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't ignore double returns though. However these extra spaces take up very little space bytewise compared to the text on the entire page. Rmhermen 23:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate your listing the NASA source. The usage of the word "circumlunar" in that source is, despite it being NASA, erroneous nontheless. Circumlunar does mean "around the moon," you are absolutely correct in that; however, it is not used synonymously with "Lunar Orbit."
Instead, this term strictly denotes going around only once, in a Figure 8 trajectory, completely encircling the moon, without achieving orbital injection and capture by the moon.
The following link is not NASA, but is a reputable source that uses the term "circumlunar" in the same sense as it is commonly used in practically all other reputable sources, including NASA itself (where consistent): http://www.astronautix.com/craftfam/manlunar.htm
That said, however, please note that debating the definition of "circumlunar" is beside the point: Since you do not prefer the term, I'll gladly concede as use the same phrase used elsewhere in the timeline, "flyby and return," which is unambiguous.
However the term "circumlunar" is used in your source, the objective historical fact is that Apollo 8 and Apollo 10 achieved Lunar Orbital Injection, and at no time ever flew a free-return trajectory, never flew a Figure 8 pseudo-orbital geometry, and Apollo 13 was the first mission to "accomplish" this (albeit due to a failed landing mission), but a noteworthy first nontheless. Any implication or insinuation to the contrary is, with all due respect to the NASA document, false. One need only examine the detailed NASA, NSSDC, or Encyclopedia Astronautica articles detailing the facts of those missions.
I appreciate your thoughtful contribution, and will gladly discuss any disagreement you have toward my recent edit.
--Supersexyspacemonkey 02:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi I'm interested in talking about the differences :) Just to make sure, you're a Christian right? Anyways, I go to Koorong and stuff and Word and I have never heard of the word 'Contemporary Christian music'. like i have, but that refers to old stuff by stuff that my dad listens to *gulps*
Stuff that I listen to like Bethany Dillon, Joy Williams, KJ52 I would never classify as CCM because that terms sounds so like old school! Christian pop is so in, and CCM is so out! What do you think? I would be interseted to discuss bout this.
Btw how do you talk so that every time i reply it indents? thanks :) Candice Candice Coppins 15:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rmhermen! You deleted Apple computer pranks without giving a reason. There was an AfD underway for it that will need closing, but I'm unable to provide the reason for deletion in order to do so. Can you let me know your reasoning? Thanks ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 21:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I think Akilattirattu Ammanai with more than 15000 lines is the longest ballad form of literary works in the world. Does you have any objections? Please respond in my talk page - Vaikunda Raja 00:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello there. You have proposed the article Ricky Ricotta's Mighty Robot Astro Activity Book Of Fun for deletion without providing a reason why in the ((prod)) template. You may be interested to know that you can add your reasoning like that: ((prod|Add reason for deletion here)). This will make your reasoning show up in the article's deletion notice. It will also aid other users in considering your suggestion on the Proposed Deletions log. See also: How to propose deletion of an article. Sandstein 14:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
"Pitch your tent 100 yards uphill from the area where you're cooking and storing food, if possible." Do you really walk 100 yards to cook food? I've never seen anyone go to that extreme. I think that's a bit overdoing it. Most of the page you ref is fine, but this one's overdoing it. This ref also seems focused on places like Yellowstone and Yosemite. Bears in most of the rest of the country are much more timid. Perhaps the paragraph article should reflect that. Rlevse 18:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rmhermen--- yes, I was a tad verbose, but I guess you utterly, totally, and completely misunderstood the sense of my proposal; the page will indeed accommodate all so-called Briticisms, no matter if they are used in Australia or elsewhere; read Boothman's comment, and think it over! Thanks, --JackLumber 19:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC) I replied. --JackLumber 20:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)