Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:29, 24 May 2006

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Misplaced Pages:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

• Archive 1 (September 2 2005 to November 7 2005)
• Archive 2 (November 7 2005 to January 8 2006)
• Archive 3 (January 10 2006 to March 10 2006)
• Archive 4 (March 11 2006 to May 1 2006)

A landslide victory for The JPS (aka RFA thanks)

Hey, Jkelly, thank you so much for your vote and comments in my RfA, which passed with an overwhelming consensus of 95/2/2. I was very surprised and flattered that the community has entrusted me with these lovely new toys. I ripped open the box and started playing with them as soon as I got them, and I've already had the pleasure of deleting random nonsense/attacks/copyvios tonight. If I ever do anything wrong, or can help in some way, please feel free to drop me a line on my talk page, and I will do my best to correct my mistake, or whatever... Now, to that bottle of wine waiting for me... The JPS 22:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Unreasonable blocking by Jonathunder

Hi, I am sorry for bothering you, but can you please look here and comment on the matter? Thanks. FunkyFly 03:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The FYROM blog (again)

Well, I agree with you, as I have already agreed in that page before, again and again and again... I think the problem lies in what people tend to define as article improvement. For me, for example, (as for many other users, not necessarily Greek, like here and here), the ultimate article improvement for this particular article, would be to have a fairly elaborate analysis of the naming dispute. Hence, the name of the article itself, is a huge article improvement issue. The funny comments about your name (here and here), aim to illustrate that being a Republic does not necessarily require others to be forced to call you exactly as you demand! I find it very humorous and very improving. Ofcourse, you can disagree on my (and the others') priorities considering improvement, but you must admit that it is a very amusing parallel... NikoSilver  08:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify; I'm not actually grumpy about it. Jkelly 20:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I knew you wouldn't be J. Your humor is evident. Did it make you think though?  NikoSilver  20:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, let's see. I don't think FWKAT would be automatically adminned. In fact, I think that when FWKAT discussed applying for EU admin membership, I would make it widely known that I would vote "Strong oppose -- username, also other issues.", and some other editors would think I was being completely unreasonable, while others would say "Well, Jkelly has been a trusted admin for a while now, and we should probably be careful here." Jkelly 22:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm... You mean that you'd just oppose because he dared mess with your name -OR- would you oppose to FWKAT applying for adminship as FWKAT, rather than as "Republic of Jkelly"? I really am puzzled, but then again, maybe it was intentional... NikoSilver  22:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Wicca / Emberverse series

I thought mentioning the series in the section on WICCA IN POPULAR FICTION would be appropriate - the Wiccan religion and those who practce it are a major theme of the novel -Paullaw

Exodus 17 1/2

It's at 22:17 in the link given in the article. I could believe that different Bible translations give slightly different verse numberings, though. FreplySpang (talk) 22:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, well, you know those English kings, can't turn your back on them.... :-) Cheers, FreplySpang (talk) 22:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Last reply

In the series of my last contributions, I post my reply to your text on my user page. In case you wish to reply to me you are welcome to send me an e-mail of post a comment on my blog.

You may feel that I behave strangely. It is obvious since you don't know now more than one-and-half year struggle on cs: during which I was desysopped as a bureacrat. If you are interested in problems of small wikies, then you can read m:Requests for comments/Cswiki issues, m:Meta:Babel#Czech Misplaced Pages in disarray and before it will deleted as well.

In my view conflicts with some cs: editors are unsolveable. They or me should leave cs:, there is no place for both the parties. These conflict was often transmissed to Meta and now to en:. This is unhappy because both Meta and en: has nothing to do with cs:. But I am sorry that both Meta editors and Board of Directors did nothing to improve the situation, they just washed their hands like Pontius Pilate. Their choice but I cannot participate at the project where my rights are overlooked. I am fully decided, it is not a question of one conflict here.

"You can still edit your User talk page even while blocked." ??? Is that technically possible? I never heard about it.

I hate translating, I find it very boring work. And my English is not perfect as well.

So I wish you good luck and thank you for your deleting of my pages. -- Vít Zvánovec 10:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked sock

You blocked User:Intermediary - I have reverted all his edits to talk pages - is that ok? Sophia 21:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Will do - I know this is an on going problem. I just didn't want to get "done" for pretending to be an admin! Sophia 21:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Treaty_Of_Sevres

It is an original wikipedia image. I have seen this image in a book published before 1930. Treaty of Sevres dates to 1919. It may be originated from the original agreements or somewhere close... I have added colors.--OttomanReference 23:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Karma to Burn

Hello, please excuse my poor formatting/etiquette, I am quite unfamiliar with talk pages and suchlike. I am responsible for interfering with the Karma to Burn articles, would appreciate help repairing links and disambiguating. Also, it appears the band has a self-titled album which complicates matters. Would greatly appreciate any guidance. Salkádar.

RE: Wp Admin

Hello! I hope you're well; I'm on a wikibreak of sorts ... ha! But thank you for your note and request: I appreciate it! I've been similarly encouraged by others to become a Wp Administrator.

However, I respectfully decline to an RfAdmin or to become an Admin at this time. I feel that my current level of activity would not be helped or hindered by becoming an Admin. I may reconsider this at some later date (and one of the advocates I mentioned wants to nominate me later), but I'm not ambitious – or perhaps foolish? ;) – enough to pass that bar just yet.

Please let me know if you've any questions; thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 15:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Incivility vs harassment

Admins are going to indef-block and the community at large will ban users who harass Wikipedians offsite. Perhaps a policy against users who harass Wikipedians offsite is in order. What you voted for is not that. WAS 4.250 02:18, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm a little baffled by resistance to people who choose to set up websites devoted to attacking editors here, discussing at length, for instance, speculation about their home addresses or how Jewish they are. I know of no resistance to that potential policy. Again, what you voted for is not that. WAS 4.250 18:18, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

You and I are clearly reading the section differently. Yes. Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks states "Users have been banned for repeatedly engaging in personal attacks." and "Accusatory comments such as Bob is a troll, or Jane is a bad editor can be considered personal attacks if said repeatedly, in bad faith, or with sufficient venom." which makes sense in the context of a talk page where it is appropriate to "Comment on content, not on the contributor" and in general "they hurt the Misplaced Pages community". But the proposed addition seeks to ban engaging in the same behavior elsewhere where same behavior includes calling someone a troll! Misplaced Pages is not the world and humans have a variety of interests and obligations and perceptions. A reporter should feel free to write a truthful article in a newspaper without being told they commented on a person rather than content. A policy against harrassment and against someone warring against Misplaced Pages makes sense. Piggybacking this subsection onto NPA does not make make sense. The one is defending "us" against those who have chosen to be "them". The other is about maintaining a proper focus on the job at hand - writing an encyclopedia - where "Comment on content, not on the contributor" makes good sense. Conflating distinct goals is a bad idea. WAS 4.250 19:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrong image

Re: Image:Rcmp_food_5937.jpg. Oops, this isn't the image I intended to download, but one of the ones I saved in the process of looking for various suitable images. I honestly got confused as to which was the CBC one. Is there a way of replacing it with the one linked here? Fishhead64 18:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Chola dynasty FAC

Hi! I have removed two images with the copyright problems and replace one with a free image. Please have a look at Chola dynasty and leave your comments. thanks Parthi (Venu62) 00:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

History of Burnside FAC

I have provided a fair use rationale for that image in answer to your objection, do you have any other concerns in relation to the article? Thanks for commenting! michael 04:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Just wondering if you still have any qualms, you have not replied yet. michael 11:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

re:Image:Guru jazzmatazz.jpg

Best to just delete it, it's an orphaned image now, and has been replaced by a higher quality, more recent, and most importantly, free, photograph (image:Guru.jpg) --Krackpipe 12:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Help

Could you help me in the Template:Spice Girls, User:Rimmers keeps reverting the template on to a big template and I think that a small template is better, it's looks organized and not cluttered pls pls help me--2hot4u2handle 15:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT

In reply to your comment, I know for a fact that all those old post cards are in the PUBLIC DOMAIN. I grew up with those images. I know the kin of the photographers who took them. They are no copyrighted. But WIkipedians are going to do whatever they want with something they don't know about anyway, so I suppose it doesn't matter. Almost Famous 20:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not talking about the collage, I'm talking about the old post cards. The collage is a whole different thing. The tag on the collage says: "possibly." Truth be told, I'm not sure which tag to use for it. Almost Famous 21:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

The images I know for a fact are Public Domain, The collage that appears on the Long Island Page, as well as the old post cards that are posted. One is on the LI Page, the other two are on the Casco Bay Lines page. One is of the Aucocisco, Customs House Wharf, and the one on the LI page is actually of LI. No one owns the copyright to the LI one, it's original has been archived by the historical society (an organization that I am a member of.) The other two old post cards never had a copyright on them. Anyone can take them and print their own post cards if they want. The collage was released by the town, which is why it has been posted on other websites. The date on the collage is the date of the town's incorporation, not the date of any copyright. All these images can be found in my recent history. Almost Famous 21:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

When I say LI, I mean Long Island, Maine just in case. Almost Famous 21:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:House.jpg

It might be more useful to post that on User talk:GusF, as he's the one who originally uploaded the image - I just cleaned it up. — sjorford++ 08:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

protect Wiki's fair use of magazine covers

I am following the federal fair use guidelines. Someone added new restrictions on the editors from out of nowhere--not based on law or practice or anything else. Those restrictions have not been justified and cannot stand. --for example the nonsense that the article has to discuss the magazine itself rather than topic XXX which is illustrated on the cover. That has to go. I have in fact been in contact with TIME on the issue and their lawyers do not impose any such rules. Nor does anyone else. Rjensen 22:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

• On the historical issue: no problem, I just wanted to clarify that it was pretty messy. Of course the rhetoric of messiness and clarity is itself a tactic but such is life. ;-) As for the user page -- it's a silly page, but silly pages should be ignored, not deleted. I don't think it uses any more resources than a lot of other silly things we have around here, which is why I thought it was somewhat of a unnecessary comment on your part (if we really started taking stock in which pages were an "appropriate" use of resources, I'd have to scrap a number of pages in my own user space which aren't doing any real harm or good!). --Fastfission 21:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the complement, and thanks to you as well. I think we have a pretty good team of editors working on Canada to make it a great article. -- Jeff3000 02:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Physics

Thanks for making the User:Physics link Kosher with the standards. Any ideas on a picture we could use that's a little more colorful than "Phy" but still within the rules? Ryanluck 05:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

A tiny diagram of an atom sounds good to me. Ryanluck 16:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Help wording a new "Wiccan views on Divinity" section

I've just put a draft rewrite of Wicca#Wiccan views on Divinity on Talk:Wicca and I was hoping that you, as a top-notch editor with a great deal of knowledge in this area, might help with wording it; you might also know where I can find some supporting references for certain bits. I'd really like to get this section reading well; it's the heart of the article, as far as I'm concerned... Any help would be appreciated, and please consider this request more as an appreciation of your skills as an editor than a demand for your time! Many thanks, Fuzzypeg 12:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Napster

Hello The content I linked to at Napster is now free to US residents. They are also negotiating to make it free worldwide. Waldzazi 21:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

Napster

Hello JKelly I want an arbitration (not sure of the all the procedures here, but I believe this is my right) on the links of mine from Napster that you deleted and I would also like to have an advocate. I think you are being very short sighted on this and do not appreciate the full implications of what is now on the cusp of happening which is full access to any and every artists entire recorded works for free. Thats what this will lead to down the road if Napster catches on. The artists should be and are entitled to be paid so it will never be completely free and if you cant stand a few ads to make this happen, then get out of the way. I'd like an advocate because I dont want to be brow beaten by people more educated than myself on a point that I see as so obviously for the good. If someone tells me that they cant see the usefulness in a link to an artists entire recorded output, that is free to listen to with just an email and a user pass on that artists Wiki page then I would say that guy either doesnt like music or is full of s**t. Thanks Waldzazi 03:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

You could start a conversation at Misplaced Pages talk:External links, or if you really want something more formal, you can open a Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment. I don't understand what you would need an "advocate" for, but it is always good to discuss changes with as many people as possible. Jkelly 03:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC) You may want to see WP:AN#Napster_Links_.28copied_from_village_pump_news_section.29 first, before getting too optimistic about changing a lot of people's minds, however. Jkelly 03:52, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Napster

Hi JKelly I am not discouraged by one admins comments on the village pomp, but as I understand it I am entitled to arbitration and an advocate. I notice that you did not address one single point that I made in my communication to you. I think I explained why I want an advocate in my previous message to you, maybe you should actually read it this time. You wont blow me off as I believe you are trying to do now. You addressed none of my points and none of my concerns and are therefore not arguing in good faith. You may be an admin but you dont own this joint buddy, nobody does. I may not be as good as some people at debating my position but as I feel my position is so painfully obvious maybe an Admin advocate that sees my point of view may very well win any and all debates quite easily. Thanks Waldzazi 04:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

JKelly I would like to collect and paste the debates Ive had over this issue with several people recently on the Wiki, on your page here. They are spread over 2 or 3 pages so it would be helpful if they were all in one lump sum. Possibly you might actually read them then and understand my point of view. Would that be OK with you? Waldzazi 05:04, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

Re: Christianity

I know about WP:3RR and I don't think I've violated it. —Aiden 00:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

The KLF FAC

Hello again. I have news on one of the two oustanding image issues in The KLF article. We have determined that the lead image is probably not fair use, so I've nominated it for deletion. It has been replaced with Image:The KLF - Why Sheep?.jpg. Please check the fair use rationale for this one and if it's OK you have one more to strike out :) (If it's not OK, assistance would be most welcome). Thanks again for your feedback, it's a thankless task you do but a worthwhile one. --kingboyk 10:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Decided to actually log in and make a few edits. Not going to be back around very often -- a LOT of a lot of "real world" work to take care of. --FuriousFreddy 06:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Half-Life 2 FAC

Hello,

I have addressed and taken action upon your comments at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Half-Life 2. If you would be so kind as to review what I did, I would appreciate it. Thanks! Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 13:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

I will think about it. MegaloManiac 14:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Category Deletion

Please visit and weigh in!  NikoSilver  17:47, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Vlatkoto

Hi, since there's no other admins at this point look at 3RR, can you check this out? Thanks.  /FunkyFly.talk_   18:47, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reaction. Actually Vlatkoto has been uploading quite a lot of images with unknown copyright status, and what is worse is that he claims ownership for some that are clearly used from other sites. Can you take a look? This one is from here for example. Generally it is not clear what should be done about the flags of the Municipalities, some of which contain copyrighted symbols  /FunkyFly.talk_   19:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Was I too harsh?

I was just going to the talk page of Pinoyboy:-) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) to say I had blocked him indefinitely (which I had) but your rather mild warning got there before my block notice. I give warnings for IP vandalism, but not for registered users who start by vandalizing. Do you think I should unblock? AnnH ♫ 23:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've unblocked now, so we'll see. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 23:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

How's it going?

We haven't crossed paths recently. Still being "the reasonable one"? I think so. Keep up the good work! Wallie 18:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Yep. Not too controversial though. I sometimes have problems if I walk into someone's pet project as an outsider. Ouch! Managed to settle down some others, though. I would like to ask you for some advice, though. I have had an ongoing content issue that has dragged on. I went away the moment the petty insults started. (both of us). I put something on Wikiquette, but this was a waste of time. The issue is too complicated, really. My question really is. Who do you go to if there is a content disagreement that requires expert knowledge to solve it? Wallie 19:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Just had a young chap getting annoyed at something I said... he was quite right... Anyway, my problem was that the members of the Swiss Federal Council are all categorized as "Current National Leaders". There are seven of them, and each is treated in the same way as President Bush! Imagine. Switzerland has seven people in this category, and a big country like the US one. It seems silly. I believe that collectively they are in the category, but individally they are not. The other guy is the Number 1 contributor to Misplaced Pages, I think, accompanied with bots. (Found out - User: Docu and his trusty patrner, User: D6). So he will not be easy to shift (a joke). I think the category may be the problem. Any ideas? Wallie 21:03, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Might work. Hope so. Thanks. Wallie 21:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Bayt article

Hi you send me a talk page saying you cant accept bayt because it was copied of the internet site. However, look at it now someone has totally re-done it.

User:Jerry Jones/JJstroker

Since you've interacted with this individual in the past, I though you might be interested in this discussion. Jayjg 14:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)