Nice work. It's a good page. I've put a call on 'Pages Needing Attention' for contributors from other places. I've removed the duplicated stuff from Talk. I assume that's OK - you can always revert. You may want to add something to television comedy --bodnotbod 19:49, May 1, 2004 (UTC)
Help, please: Madrid Metro Image
If you have time, could you do me the favour of moving my map of the Madrid metro from Wikipedia:Featured pictures candidates to Wikipedia:Featured pictures? It's currently languising in "Decision time" even though it has the requisite 4 votes in favour and 14 days' waiting time. I don't want to do it myself as it would look iffy for me to put my own picture into Featured Pictures. Thanks! - Montréalais 19:15, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
- Okay. I think I've taken care of that. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 22:51, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
Thank you for you're note. However, I searched for the individual - did not find one and formatted some Britannica as well as including image etc. I later found this other article also from Britannica and turned it into a redirect. I did not remove mine as it had, I feel, better formatting and paragraphing as well as the image mark up. --OldakQuill 19:02, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
About that Ted Weems Article
Dear I, You are right, perhaps I was too hasty. I have been trying to deal with a large number of pages in need of rapid deletion today (I am home with the flu). You know how it is, once you have the hammer out everything starts to look like a nail. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea magna culpa....[[PaulinSaudi 18:59, 12 May 2004 (UTC)]]
A population of 30 million really does seem too high; perhaps the other bloke's 22 is closer to the truth. Check out the state pages -- Mexico (state) and Mexican Federal District -- which have the 2000 census figures on them (and bear in mind there's a fair chunk of EdoMex that isn't part of the metro area). I suppose we could go to the INEGI stats page and dig out numbers for those municipalities that are part of the conurbation but, failing that, my guess would be in the region of 18 - 20 million. –Hajor 16:22, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
- Cool. I was wondering. However I've read that some consider the official census figures for the city as too low. Perhaps we should find a couple of good sources, and if they differ, quote them both. -- Infrogmation 16:31, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
INEGI figs now on the Talk page. What I see as far more difficult is getting a reliable source for the census's margin of error: even so, a jump from 18m to 30m (12 million people slipped through the gaps?) seems terribly unlikely. Vaguely related matters: could you take a look at Talk:Chihuahua and confirm my reading of the situation (or not, as your understanding of the rules tells you). Tnx. –Hajor
Hi. I am wondering if the Media:BigPinkHeart.jpg is in public domain or used based on fair use. Do you have any information regarding when the copyrightholder(s) has died? Or is it a work belonging to a corporation?
The image is quite nice, but currently listed as potential copyright violation at Japanese wikipedia. We consider both US and Japananese copyright laws, and the latter has different protection period and different provision about fair use-like secondary use. If you could let me know, I would appreaciate a lot. (I'll check back this page, so you can answer on this page unless you prefer otherwise.) Thanks! Tomos 18:33, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
- It is from before 1923, so it would be considered Public Domain in the USA. I don't know about other places. I will add the PD-US notice to the image page. -- Infrogmation 18:41, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. :). Tomos 12:58, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
You have exceptional nerve and are very rude. I do not want to cause trouble and I have a great many edits. Any further insubordination and I shall complain. Email firstname.lastname@example.org to discuss it.--Wikipolice 14:48, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
- Rudeness was not my intent. On your talk page I gave you what intended as serious advice, based on my experience here. As you no doubt noticed, I am far from the only one who thinks that taking the user name "Wikipolicie" is quite inappropriate-- and I'm sure some folks here would label that as "exceptional nerve" and "very rude". It seems to cause trouble; some folks think it suggests that you wish to assume you have some control or authority beyond that of other recently arrived users. I notice you've already applied to have that username changed-- good for you. I have some more advice-- which you may of course follow or ignore, but please consider that it is based much more experience here than you have, so please consider the possibilty that it may be based on something other than rudeness. The advice is to not edit more here under the "Wikipolice" name. Now I've had my say. I hope in the future, once you have your new user name we can work together cordially building Wikipedia. -- Infrogmation 15:54, 16 May 2004 (UTC)~
Emergency, Mayday, Wiki Wiki
Mayday! Dear Infrogmation, the WikiRepublic is in danger! Wikipolice make their coup d'êtat! Please add your voice and come help John here wiki wiki. He is subject to a campaign of character assasination. Thank you ! - Yours, - irismeister 17:25, 2004 May 19 (UTC)
Creative Commons petition
I have a draft of a petition on my user page I would like you to look over. I'm not entirely sure this doesn't violate policy, so I would appreciate any input (or edits!) you might have before I make a complete ass of myself.Crazyeddie 20:38, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I just looked at User talk:Chachob, and noticed that your boilerplate welcome pointed people to the Village pump. Would you mind changing it to point them to Wikipedia:Help desk? It's where we're sending new users' "How do I...?" questions these days--cuts down on the pump's load considerably, and gives the new users a quicker, better answer. Thanks very much, Meelar 22:52, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
Thank you for the info you posted on my talk page. I've found it useful and am learning how to write good wikipedia articles. What a fascinating site. I'm still fairly new to much of this. But thanks for the nice welcome. Pyramidal 03:35, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd just discovered that, too. It was the "G." that threw me off, I think; I searched Wikipedia, and couldn't find an article on Ingersoll, and he wasn't in the Biography listings, so I went ahead and put a basic file together. Then I happened to be searching a little more thorroughly (for something else, no less), and the "Robert G. Ingersoll" article popped up. D'oh! That should teach me to tread a little more carefully here at Wikipedia before I get too eager to contribute.
Here's hoping I don't make the mistake again. :)
Why did you move the aerial view drawing in the Pensacola, Florida article? Just curious.
Your other change was unnecessary; "the first European town" makes someone think of a town in Europe, not Florida. St. Augustine markets itself as "the Nation's first city". As such, I've changed it back. Please don't change it again. It'll start an edit war, which would be annoying.
- Thanks for asking. I moved down the illustration so that it appears in the otherwise blank space opposite the table of contents box, though whether this looks better may depend on browser and screen size used. The other points I just addressed at "Talk:Pensacola, Florida"; I am trying to be precise and accurate. "The Nation's first city" may be a good tourism slogan, but could easily be disputed (eg, when did Pensacola reach the status of a "city" rather than a settlement? What about older Native American towns/cities like Taos?). Reword the article if you like, but please try to understand the points I am trying to make and do not make the article less precise in the process. Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 05:06, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for replying. I understand your concerns. The picture placement is quite acceptable. I'm also quite fine with your rewording of the European settlement bit. It makes much more sense now. Sorry for being so blunt, about starting an edit war and such, it's just that I've come into contact with several people on WP who are unfortunately rigid and unwilling to compromise, and so I'm kind-of apprehensive sometimes. Thanks again. blankfaze | •• 05:17, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Hi Infrogmation, thanks for the welcome; the page I had created was meant to be a sub-heading elsewhere, and it was a mistake. Maximus Rex deleted it, but he has included the content in his deletion log, and I would like the content there removed; I would also like the title not to appear in my Talk page history - is there any way to do these? Please reply by email, thanks. Simonides 17:38, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Hi frog. I hosted your website for a while, at http://www.ironfire.org/ Remember?
Glad to see you are addicted to wiki too... aren't we all. What do you think about this business with trolls?
- Hi, welcome. I certainly remember and liked that hosting.
- There are "trolls" and vandals as one would get in any open internet community, but the bulk of the community here keeps improving things faster than damage is done, and fortunately reverting to pre-troll edits is easy. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 18:23, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your message about not creating empty pages. Now I've uploaded the Earth's mantle article, and since English is not my mother-tongue, I would welcome it very much if you proof-read it. --danh 23:23, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I don’t see how the Hitler painting was a copyright violation since it was one of the official propaganda items in Nazi Germany. The color photo is far more problematic. The Hitler photo that is displayed now was taken by Walter Frentz, Hitler's personal photographer and is copyright, his son, who works for a major german media company is famous for going after people who use it as you can see here. This image looks like a bad scan from Hitlers Berghof 1928-1945 in color book * --GeneralPatton 22:22, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Hi. I am not familiar with the copyright status of the various images myself. I deleted some items that had been on Wikipedia:Copyright problems for well over a week with no challenges, as per the procedure here. -- Infrogmation 03:36, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Hi, You are correct. I meant to add the info to a User page not an article. Thanks for correcting it. Regards, Rusty 21:49, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I can see you moved Stevie Wonder from the category American musicians to United States musicians. Why do they coexist and what's the difference between American and United States musicians, if there is any? --Marcus2 10:28, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- I think that "United States musicians" is more in line with Wikipedia naming conventions. Discussion at Category talk:American musicians. -- Infrogmation 04:10, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- There are a few photos of mine I care about, I think I've specified GNUFDL with them, but my Tegucigalpa pic isn't in that category. It is just a cheap snapshot I put up there in absence of anything better at present. I'd be happy to put it under the GNU Free Documentation License, or make it public domain, whichever would be easier for you. -- Infrogmation 19:46, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
"Don't put "Under construction" messages at non-existant articles. That's considered pointless and a waste of everyone's time. Leave the link blank until you're ready to put an article there. -- Infrogmation 18:08, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)"
- The article in question was a Double Redirect to a Non-Existent Page and is part of a much larger project to document Awards and decorations of the United States military and Military badges of the United States. It was not pointless or a waste of time. It was a space holder until I have time to write the article. -User:Husnock
Hello, please take a look at one of the other state categories, such as Category:New York, to see how we've been handling state municipalities and counties. Each municipality is categorized under "Cities of..." or "Towns of..." as well as under their parent counties, which are in turn categorized under "[state] counties". Any places that don't fit into these categories can either be placed within the county categories, or under "[state] geography." As for unincorporated communities, the larger cities have "[city] neighborhoods" categories, which are in turn listed under Category:Neighborhoods of the U.S.. Thanks! Postdlf 20:06, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help. -- Infrogmation 20:50, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Why did you delete Stege? Set it as s Stub if you want, but don't delete it! There are lots of stubs that are that short, and are not deleted. Se Special:Shortpages. do you think all of them should be deleted? Den fjättrade ankan 01:43, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- If you wish to expand on the "Stege is a city in Denmark." That seems to be below the minimal stub quotent. Someone else tagged it with the quick delete reccomendation, and I had to agree. Lots of the smaller articles in Special:Shortpages will indeed be deleted, as if you look many consist of things like copyright violation notices pending. There are occasionally good reasons for articles under 50 or so bites, but more often they contain no info not to be found in the article that links there, even significantly less. Anyway, if you want me to undelete Stege I will, but I think it would help if the article had at least a little bit more content. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 02:00, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I notice you reverted a table to old style markup on this page. Is there an problem with the new style? I didn't notice a difference in how it displayed. Rmhermen 16:05, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)
- I reverted 3 edits back to undo the loss of the photo and the addition of a spamed link. I was then planing to redo the more recent markup edit, but I didn't see any difference in how it was displayed either, so I didn't bother. I have no objection to the markup being either way if anyone else has a preference. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 16:15, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Whenever you see a brief, apt quote at the head of a Wikipedia article, an attention-grabbing phrase that sums up some aspect of what is to follow, it's called an epigraph. It works like a chord opening a Haydn symphony: an attention-getter. Sometimes a succinct epigraph is a stylish way to start an article, unless it becomes overused. Very little chance of that, apparently. Do you always remove any epigraph you see, and create a lead-footed category Quotes for bald lists of quotes? As recently in Ashley Montague? How pedestrian. Read the entry epigraph. You might even try one yourself. And when you say "Loose the smart quotes" do you mean lose, as in "Lose the vulgarisms, Infrogmation?" Why will you not permit an epigraph to a biography? It's not forbidden by a Wikipediarule, is it? Wetman 06:00, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Hi. I'm quite familiar with epigraphs, and have used them myself in some of my music writing. I have no objection to them per-se, moving it to the "Quotes" section was done while I was doing other edits which I hope you will acknoledge made your fine article on Ashley Montagu in some ways even better. I sometimes like such quirky touches, but others at Wikipedia have impressed on me their opinion of the importance of formating, and I do think there's something to be said for the practice of having an introductary sentence or paragraph at the begining of each article. I suppose its a matter of taste as to whether the result is "pedestrian" or "encyclopedic". You are quite correct in pointing out my error in typing "loose" where I should have typed "lose". I fear I sometimes have a problem with not noticing when I do something like that. Perhaps its similar to your not noticing your adding a superfluous "e" at the end of Montagu's name. One of the positive aspect of Wikipedia is how such things tend to get noticed and corrected. Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 15:24, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your infrogmation :) I too have been contributing quite a bit (not like beaurocrats of the system for I hate bureaucracy and red-tapism!) I never liked my name being displayed anywhere - in a truly open world, we cannot claim anything as 'mine' (my POV!). But I also know that the world is far from being ideal! I did feel that having a name has some advantages and so here I am, with an identity. And all of a sudden I am surprised at the so many 'enlightened ones' trying to educate me. I wonder if this is an exhibition of their sense of supremacy or is it a blind arrongance/ignorance or is this a real noble deed! Just like everybody else, I too consider all my fellow humans as idiots :)
For beaurocrats like you my humble request to you would be to abolish the closed-mindedness that exists among a considerable proportion of the 'self-styled' kings, princes, queens and princesses in this so-called open encyclopedia! Forgive me if any of the above statements offend you. I really don't mean them that way. And if your message was a real noble deed, thanks from the bottom of my heart. Regards. --Drbalaji md 00:09, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips! I especially appreciate the Manual of Style. I never could find it, and another user who kept changing my formatting on another article never did respond. Thanks again! LD L.D. Bear 05:42, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I have some doubts about placing LaSalle in this category, if it's really defunct firms. Although the LaSalle brand name is gone, General Motors is still very much alive. If it's intended as a list of former marques, we could add many more, like Oldsmobile and Eagle. But I don't think that's the purpose of the page. RivGuySC 21:47, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Okay. Remove it from that category if you think it's not appropriate. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 21:49, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Hi, Infrogmation, I tried my hand at writing good captions for the Saxophone article, though I don't think I did justice to your Image:CatSax.jpg. Would you happen to know more about the picture - were it was taken, who is pictured, what she was playing, etc. that might be useful in the caption? If you have a minute, might you add some description to the image description page? Many thanks! -- ke4roh 12:59, Jul 12, 2004 (UTC)
Whoops! Thanks for catching my mistake on this article. I totally forgot to check the history - I'd been listing that user's articles for speedy deletion and didn't notice that he'd tampered with an existing article. All his other contribs had been new pages full of crap. Thanks for reverting before someone deleted the article! - Ocon | Talk 05:04, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I took care of the move. You might wish to check "What links here" and change the pages that link to the redirect to link directly to the article. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 16:45, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Totally agree with you. The pictures need articles. I will work through the list tomorrow again and create stubs for the images without text. Please be patient, and thanks for the comment -- Chris 73 | Talk 15:59, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Went to create articles today after work, but somebody beat me to it. I added only some more content, and there is a reasonable stub now. -- Chris 73 | Talk 14:21, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Huastec vs. Huaxtec
Huastec is fine, too. This is a similar situation as that of Tezcoco vs. Texcoco vs. Tetzcoco. The original Nahuatl for this term very probably had 'x' (the English 'sh' sound) rather than 's'... BUT that term itself might already suffer from malinterpretation, because the Teenek people (as the 'Huastecs' call themselves, compare with Mayan's analogous winik) were referred to as Cuexteca by the Aztecs. 'Cuex' in this term comes from 'Cuey'+'Teca' as the /y/ always devoices and palatalizes in that context. 'Cuey' is related to "turn around"... and the story says that the Huastecs did indeed 'turned around' (from Izapa, perhaps?) and returned to where they had already came, Pánuco. A portion of their population did remain at or near Izapa: the Chicomulcetecos. So, perhaps, 'Huaxtec' << 'Cuextec' ... this phonological process would certainly not be rare ('cu' -> 'hu' and /a/ -> /e/ adjacent to a palatalization). IF 'Huaxtec' is indeed a correct appelation, then a possible etymology is from 'Huax'+'Tecatl', where 'Huax' is analogous to the 'Huax' in Huaxyacac (Oaxaca). Thanks for the welcome you gave me and your notes. I see that we have some interests in common. It has turned out to be a real pleasure (addictive) to be able to contribute to the Wikipedia. --User:Danakil 01:36GMT-6
- It's good to have another knowledgable contributor about Mesoamerican subjects here. "Huastec" seems the more common spelling in English (checking google shows 2,900 hits for that spelling v/s 698 for "Huaxtec"). The Wikipedia:Manual of Style reccomends having articles at the more common name or spelling, with less used ones as redirects unless there is some specific reason to do otherwise. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 14:47, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
As I was recategorizing Category:Painters I noticed we are working somewhat on cross-purposes. I use Category:American painters and you Category:United States painters. Could we agree on one or the other? I do think that the resulting one should be a subcategory of Category:American people and that Category:Painters should be removed from the affected individual artists. Could you agree? Pethan 15:17, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. Thanks. -- Infrogmation 21:55, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
You changed the entry about Ryan Stiles to state that he is a "United States actor" instead of "American actor". I believe this should be reverted back to "American" or "North American", as he works in and has lived in Canada as well (his parents were Canadian). To my knowledge he still does stand-up in Vancouver from time-to-time.
- Fine by me. -- Infrogmation 03:10, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Hi, just thought I'd point out that you and I share two things. 1. We both live(d) in New Orleans (Tulane U.). 2. We both had our user pages blanked by User:184.108.40.206. Other folks reverted my page. I took the liberty of reverting yours. Geogre 13:44, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks. -- Infrogmation 20:35, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Ok. Restored. -- Infrogmation 04:38, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I understand the motivation behind changing "American" to "United States" in this article: "American" can refer to anywhere in the Americas, and for the U.S. to claim the title alone is a bit strange, if not arrogant. But: however strange or arrogant it may be, (1) English-speakers understand that "American" means "of or pertaining to the United States of America," and (2) using "United States" as an adjective is cacophonous and awkward, since there's no English equivalent to, say, the Spanish estadounidense. I hope I don't sound captious. I say all of this in earnest. Perhaps I've missed something, or perhaps the Wikipedian standard is to use "United States" instead of "American"—tell me where I've gone wrong. Hydrotaphia 01:04, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Hi. I don't see you've done anything "wrong". The nationality of biography subjects is usually mentioned towards the start of the article. I was doing a few quick spot edits to articles in process of the category naming adjustment, and I think on the Stevens article changed the unlinked term "American" into a link to "United States". If you prefer "American" in the text, the form "[[United States|American]]" is fine. I was mostly concerned about the category; if I changed anything stylistic you don't like feel free to change it back. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 01:19, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Cool. Thanks! Hydrotaphia 06:45, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Since pages for television stations are usually allowed on Wikipedia, I looked up the proper call letters for the station (WFXT) and redirected the Fox 25 article to there instead. Just so ya know. Bearcat 05:41, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Good. I suspected that "Fox 25" might not have been a unique name. -- Infrogmation 05:44, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
New B-Movie Bandit template
I went ahead and took your excellent suggestion to heart and came up with [[template:bmoviebandit1]]. Take a look-see. - Lucky 6.9 08:15, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Hoo boy, did I open a can of worms. There are only about four hours left on the admin nomination, and if it fails, I'd like to talk to you about active ways of putting the B-Movie Bandit to bed once and for all. - Lucky 6.9 19:24, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Just got your message. Thanks again, and believe me I appreciate your initial idea. If I don't get the adminship, I'd still like to work to end the problem as I said. - Lucky 6.9 20:55, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you. Some of us should try putting our heads together about the "B-Movie Bandit" pest. I'll post some thoughts on your user talk page soon. -- Infrogmation 21:00, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- It's a nice feeling to have community support on this. Here's my response from my talk page, and thanks again.
Add to that list whacked-out verb tenses, a repeat of the title in the edit summary, no wikis and no real content. In the case of actors, the content is nothing more than the name of the show(s) and the years they appeared in it: Joe Smith is an actor who appears in Soap Opera from 1966 to 1977. Or, John Jones is an actor who appears in such movies as The Movie Name and The Other Movie. If the listing is for a movie, the content isn't much different: The 1988 thriller Really Thrilling Movie stars Joe Smith, John Jones, Mary Cooper and Jane Walker. Such is the kind of content we're cleaning up. Great idea about a discussion page. - Lucky 6.9 02:31, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Frog, you rock! That talk page is the greatest idea since the proverbial sliced bread. - Lucky 6.9 22:12, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks. I assume you are talking about User:B-Movie Bandit and User talk:B-Movie Bandit. Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 22:17, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Ah, you assume correctly. I understand Jimbo Wales himself is about to weigh in on this nincompoop. - Lucky 6.9 20:44, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
i recently posted the "Curtis Kearns" Article. I live in albany, Ohio. And i was updating a little of the local political news, and i thought i would make a page for him. I know the guy Personally, and he has been toying with the idea of running in the future. Hes a local political activist, founder of a local Young Democrats of Ohio Chapter, stuff like that.
- If you can't show the person is of some note and encyclopedic interest, the deletion request someone made for the article will probably go through. It looks rather like a vanity article, which is not within the purpose of Wikipedia. -- Infrogmation 04:12, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Grammy year pages
Hi, we seem to be working at cross-purposes. I removed all the header formatting from the couple of Grammy year pages that had them, to make the format consistent throughout the years. I see you've just added them to Grammy Awards of 1991. Looks like we need to come up with a standard strategy :)
I dislike using headers in these articles because the sections are so small - a line across the page every few awards looks messy to me. The table of contents also seems more of a problem than an asset to me, such a long box for such little benefit.
So what do you think? I think the current format (on all years other than 1991) works well. And, whatever we decide, I'd like to make sure all years are the same. Regards -- sannse (talk) 09:49, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I find having section is useful when I wish to make some spot edits. However as occasional spot edits are about all I expect to do on the Grammy pages, I'll defer to those who work with those pages more closely. Further discussionon your talk page. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 14:53, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for undoing my revert (I think)
Hmm, I thought procedure was for a candidate to indicate that they were to withdraw, and then someone else should remove the discussion. (This in case irregularities occurred or so). In this case there's certainly been irregularities and strangeness that should be followed up sometime, so thinking along those lines, I reverted.
I could be entirely wrong on this, hmm, I'll reread procedures.
Have a nice evening! Kim Bruning 21:22, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- No big deal, I think. You just need to know any nominee is free to withdraw their name from consideration if they wish. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 21:33, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
P.S.: I'll reread 'em too, in case something significant changed since last time I read them.... Hey, I've been here so long I can recall the days before the voting procedure... one day I was just bitten by a radioactive spider, and woke up with admin powers... :-) -- Infrog
Could you explain to me why you blocked User:Shquid for an isolated incident of vandalism, thus causing my IP to be autoblocked? You are not supposed to block for single incidents of vandalism, but for recurring vandals. —
Mr. Grinch 33451 (Talk)21:01, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Shquid's vandalism was unusually dramatic, and I think my blocking him quite appropriate. I'm sorry if a good user got unintentially got autoblocked at the same time. (Such problems seem to only happen as far as I know only on occasion with certain isps; especially AOL I think?) Are you able to access Wikipedia ok now? -- Infrogmation 21:12, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Dog cart photos
Hey there; you uploaded the dog cart photos Image:DogChar1.jpg and Image:DogChar2.jpg and noted that you took them, but didn't give licensing info (e.g., release to public domain or GFDL) and we'll need that in case we want to use the photos. Would you be so kind--? Thanks. Elf | Talk 00:23, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Oh my! I'd forgotten all about uploading those. That was no doubt part of the batch of photos I uploaded to illustrate the New Orleans Mardi Gras articles. I'll add GFDL notice to them. Thank you! How did you find those? -- Infrogmation 01:48, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding info. I'm trying to assemble a list of free-distr/GFDL images related to dogs in the repository someone started at Wikipedia:List of images/Nature/Animals/Dogs so, in addition to working my way through all the breed articles with photos, I'm doing image searches that contain the word "dog", "pup", stuff like that. The work never ends! :-) Elf | Talk 04:22, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
'programming language' classifier
Hi, Infrogmation. I need to ask your help as sysop regarding a matter that involves the naming of programming language articles. You may recall our conversation not too long ago about 'Tampico' and whether or it should be moved to 'Tampico, Tamaulipas' and so on for the rest of cities in Mexico (somebody did just that yesterday, by the way). Well, regarding programming languages, the current Wikipedia policy is very scantily defined in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (languages) (where it seems to have been created in the beginning with natural langs in mind) and this has resulted in a significant disparity in the naming of the hundreds of prog lang articles: some of them are called LanguageName, others LanguageName programming language, others LanguageName but have a redirect to it from LanguageName programming language, yet still others LanguageName programming language but have a redirect from LanguageName... the situation has aroused debate for a while now, and recently it seems that there is consensus in that, at the very least, the topic should be carefully debated and a strong convention should then be clearly spelled out and encouraged as guideline (see Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(languages)).
A week ago, in the middle of a very large categorization effort on my part (see Category:Programming languages) I, foolishly although well-intentioned, began to move some LanguageName pages to LanguageName programming language, making sure that I fixed any resulting double redirects and that I created LanguageName shortcuts for those articles missing them. Sure enough, some controversy was brought up by User:Stan_Shebs but always within a very reasonable debating environment. I agreed with Stan to leave things as they were until all interested parties reached a consensus. That was fine for all of us involved.
Well, the problem I need to ask your help with is that as of yesterday, User:TakuyaMurata suddendly and without any warning (it is to be noted that Stan and others involved before always brought up the subject for clarification first) began to move the LanguageName programming language articles back to LanguageName. I noticed that and placed a comment on his talk page (please see User:Danakil#'programming language' classifier as he cut it from his page and later pasted it into mine) but got no response. I then placed another comment asking why he had just erased my comment from his talk page, upon which he pasted my original comment into my page, but nevertheless my second question was removed for good. He argued about 'convention' and proceed to revert all my changes, but then he went further and began to change those articles originally named LanguageName programming language to LanguageName. I pointed that out, saying to him that reverting my changes was OK but that he should leave the rest of the articles as they were, at least while the debate about the convention went on and until a consensus was reached. I reverted the changed article (Algol programming language) to its original state. He then behaved in a most peculiar manner and changed it again. At that point, I reverted again and asked him to please stop (see User talk:TakuyaMurata#ALGOL programming language).He seemed to agree and the matter was left at that point. However, a couple of hours ago, I began to notice a large number of name changes to prog lang articles... he was at it again, not only with the Algol article, but with a whole suit of other prog lang articles...(I have reverted them to their original status). And this is where I ask for your help to please help us stop him from making any further name changes until a consensus is reached among the parties involved. Furthermore, User:TakuyaMurata's name changes are done in a very naïve manner without any regard to double redirects and, much worse, by doubly-moving back and forth, he has created a mess with the corresponding talk pages, such as the one for ALGOL programming language which is now split in two. As an aside, User:TakuyaMurata's command of the English language leaves a few things to be desired, and his occassionally heavily-POV articles have aroused controversy in the past (as with Asian Cup 2004, for example).
Thanks for reading this and in advance for any help you can provide us to avoid seeing this issue complicated even more. —danakil 05:41, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I just spotted this on here. I have to say that this is very typical behaviour from Taku. There were endless problems on talk:Inheritance (object-oriented programming).
Hi, thanks for taking interest in my Don Chevrier article. I heard Don for the first time announce a badminton game during the 2004 Olympic Games on NBC. He completely sucked me into a game I knew nothing about (except that it was supposed to be "cheesy"). His Olympic coverage of table tennis likewise drew me in. His bio can be found here. It looks like this guy has enchanted more people than just me, so I figured he deserved an entry. I couldn't find another bio that wasn't (potentially) copyrighted, and I'm not much of an author, so I figured I'd prompt others to write about him. As I learn more about this, to me, incredible man; I'll contribute more, but I just figured I'd get the fire started. Vik Reykja 08:24, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- As you started a substub, I suspected you knew a bit more. I expanded the Don Chevrier based on what you say here and a couple of facts from that weblink-- we can't copy copyrighted text, but we can use facts found there in our own words. -- Infrogmation 14:38, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- This is not the first time I've seen people more eager to spend energy arguing to move a page than to lend a hand to fixing the links. Hm, think it might help if I threatened to move the page back again? :-) Ah well, -- Infrogmation 02:28, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for helping to keep the backlog down to a manageable size. For a time I thought I was the only one doing this, and it took up quite a large chunk of the time I can devote to Wikipedia. (Still does, because I insist on checking and verifying all these claims.) And despite my efforts, the backlog actually grew in the first two weeks of August until you came along! So, thanks a lot. Lupo 08:23, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) (P.S.: Image:Pomare IV.bmp was listed (by me), but apparently it slipped through. Still has the copyvio notice, though. Could you remove it, please? I don't like being prosecutor, judge, and executioner in one person :-), which is why I don't touch anything I reported.) Lupo
- Done. -- Infrogmation
- I think these are all done now. I'm afraid I've been a bit inconsistent regarding links like "[[analogue disc record|disc record]]": originally I changed them to say "[[gramophone record]]", but then realised this doesn't always make sense, so for later ones I used "[[gramophone record|disc record]]". Hopefully this isn't too much of a problem... — Kate | Talk 05:55, 2004 Aug 28 (UTC)
- Many thanks. There are a few articles where specifically saying something like "disc record" helps (mostly when it needs distinguishing from cylinder records) but in most case I'm sure either way is fine. I think I've already taken care of at least the great majority of articles where such distinction was appropriate. Thanks again for your work in taking care of a flock of links! Yay! Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 06:03, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thank you for your welcome message
Thank you very much for your welcome. I already enjoy very much being a wikipedian in the Spanish version, where I'm more confident with my grammar, spelling and syntax feelings. But this enormous English wikipedia is a huge temptation, so I sometimes spoil something here. Please let me know if I spoil too much! Vivero 11:05, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)