User talk:Mareino/Archive 2

Thanks to those who've made me a better Wikipedian[edit]

Please leave a message at the bottom[edit]

Med-peds[edit]

Interesting one. It looks like the author, User:rpatten, created the article, decided it was wrongly capitalized, blanked it and re-created it at Med-Peds. Then another user nominated it for speedy deletion, and, as it was blank, I deleted it. Normally when you delete a blank article, the confirmation page lets you see what it was before blanking, but nothing came up in this case (maybe because it was quite a long article), so I didn't notice that there had actually been something there - careless of me. That's about it, really. Deb 20:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From User:rpatten[edit]

Yes, I'm a total n00b and deleted the article because it was wrongly capitalized. What should I have done. Thank you. Wikipedia rules.

tfd[edit]

Sure! It's actually one out of many: Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/userbox_templates_concerning_beliefs_and_convictions. Actually I was not the one who listed it, I feel strongly against deleting it. But the person who listed those templates didn't care to add a tfd-tag to them. So I did, because I thought it was fair for people who used those templates to know about it. Larix 15:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the article for p....... b... The article is already liste in major encyclopedias and whos who guides STOP YOUR SPAM

Dick Cheney[edit]

Well, it was pretty funny, and could even be OK on April 1. Still, even if he were a Wikipedian, the link should have been to his user page, not to the article namespace :)

Speaking of barnstars, anyone around here can award whatever s/he wants to anyone else, if a good enough reason arises. Not that I am soliciting an award from you (a watchlist patrol is a duty expected of an admin—it's definitely not something barnstar-worthy), but I think you'd like to know that for future occasions if you see someone going above and beyond one's duties.

All in all take care, and please do not attempt such jokes in future—I know a few people who would be giving you a lecture about "inappropriate behavior" right about now :) Cheers,—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 21:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsborg[edit]

Seeing how quickly you edited, it appears that you Watch the article. Are you from Lindsborg? My family is moving there once the school year concludes in May. --Shultz 19:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well. I wish I could meet the locals on here. And too bad I can only visit the new home once in a while, as I'm a college student in Manhattan, approximately 88 miles away, according to Google Earth's driving directions. (If straight through, I don't know how far, but considerably less). Where do you come from, btw? --Shultz 19:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry...[edit]

Sorry, it was completely accidental.

Demonym[edit]

I've responded to you on my talk page - Adam Mathias 18:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From User:Ddufek[edit]

No Wikibot here ... I'm a real live human. Thanks for the compliment...

talk page comments[edit]

Hi. I understand your apparent wish for us to be nicerl; even agree with it; and so I accept your action, however, generally it's not considered polite or correct to remove people's comments from talk pages. Please give me a note on my talk page with an explanation if doing such things in future. Thanks, Mozzerati 20:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, apperently a silent edit clash or something. I put a comment on BillDrew's user page (creating it), saying that we don't welcome copyright material and had a successful save, but after some time I only saw your comment??? The history doesn't show anything, so I guess you never saw my comment. I will check edit histories more carefully in future. Mozzerati 06:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gaia on Planet hab[edit]

Hi Mareino. I'm wondering if the Gaia section at the end of Geochemistry arrives a little out of nowhere and also whether devoting that much space to one work is justified when we don't do that otherwise (except in the footnotes with Rare Earth.) Not that the topic doesn't deserve mention (and I know that Grinspoon arrived at a similar hypothesis) but do you think rather than a para it could be cut to one or two sentences? If you want to leave it long you can see what's been done with the footnotes section. If something felt like too much of an editorialization or a tangent it got moved there. Cheers, Marskell 18:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Done. Thanks for creating the "General reading" section, btw. --M @r ē ino 18:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It flows better under "Other considerations" and the shortened version reads well. After the main page "dust" has settled the sectioning may need revisiting in general but this seems an appropriate spot at the moment. Thx, Marskell 22:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yinz[edit]

I added {{not verified}} to Yinz and less than an hour later 7 sources appeared. Now that is a wiki at work!! :) —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-25 05:34Z

hi[edit]

Shadin 14:00, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lazy Sunday[edit]

True, it's related to Chronicles of Narnia. But I don't believe it's related to the 2005 album Music Inspired by the Chronicles of Narnia. It's a parody or joke based on the movie, and the story, not the album. I think a "see also" link would be appropriate on the movie's page, but Lazy Sunday has nothing to do with the album. DrKC9N 14:47, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi, thanks for the barnstar - and a science one at that! That's an honour I really never expected on Wikipedia! :-) Lukas ^(T.|@) 17:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Template?[edit]

I saw your note on Talk:AfD about a new template for unencyclopedic material, but it's a red link. No template? Maybe you misspelled the link?
— Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib) [ 22:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC) ][reply]

HaHaHaHaH!!![edit]

I have to say, the WWIN comment about Communism was the most hilarious thing to come out of that vandal, even better then the sockpuppet photograph of him! 68.39.174.238 02:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability[edit]

It says right on the Cecil Adams page, "he" is a column written by "The Chicago Reader". In other words, the validity of Cecil Adams is not as a scholar, but as a journalist. Newspapers are valid citations on Wiki.--M @r ē ino 22:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newspapers are not reliable. "Cecil Adams" is not a journalist. And "Cecil's" columns are in alternative newspapers. --JimmyT 22:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dianetics[edit]

What brought you to that article? You should consider the article is under mediation. --JimmyT 22:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey[edit]

Thanks for citing a source! Unfortunately, IMDb is a rather unreliable source of information as it relies on contributions from its own users, and as a result it is often inaccurate (for example, they previously listed Carey's middle name as "Angela" when she doesn't have a middle name). I was wondering if you could find a more reliable source for the information you added? Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 20:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response to your message[edit]

I agree and that is why I wanted to quit. I didn't like what was happenning with the Dianetics and other Scientology articles and some of the other editors seem to be very mean with their reverts and enforcing what they think they know even though they are wrong and I don't have the time or want to make the time to go through all the process of mediation etc. Thanks for your message and kind words. ARC (Affinity, Reality, and Communication) --JimmyT 07:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your messages[edit]

Cut it out. You know this isn't vandalism, so stop trying to pretend it is. Physchim62 (talk) 04:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. Please read the explanation that I put on your talk page.--M @r ē ino 04:07, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated, out-of-the-blue question[edit]

I happened upon your user page (in the usual way people happen upon things on Wikipedia), and while reading it I noticed that you are for green energy and public transit but against recycling. I'm curious to hear your reasoning on the matter. -SCEhard T 23:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

--M @r ē ino 05:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well while I wouldn't call myself against recycling, I agree that it could be made much more efficient than it currently is. However, if all the trash was sorted offsite and the recyclables removed, wouldn't almost all of the paper end up contaminated by food waste anyway? I would like to get a look at whether most current recycling programs are losing money, breaking even, or making money. -SCEhard T 15:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very good point. I need to read more about Processed Engineered Fuels and decide whether this is a possible solution to the paper contamination problem, or whether it would just lead to those contaminants being burned and turned into air pollution.--M @r ē ino 16:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OvenFresh barnstar[edit]

Ummm... You do realize that his edit just contains the variables CURRENTDAY, CURRENTMONTH, etc... right? It changes every day. It just displays the current date.... — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-03-2 03:39

I've been tricked!--M @r ē ino 03:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International Baccalaureate[edit]

The school board members in the distict actually said that the program was "anti-american" and "anti-christian". I am sitting next to a witness of the statements. So I am going to make a compromise and put both. Please do not change it again!

Thanks, Daniel.

Ali Bahrani[edit]

You know what I like? Even when we're threatening people with blocks for unpleasant and persistent vandalism, we all still say "please" :-)

Cheers mate. Tonywalton | Talk 21:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is offensive —Preceding unsigned comment added by Biofireball (talk • contribs)

Alternate history[edit]

I like making that stuff up CoolKatt number 99999 23:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sports cards[edit]

Hi,

Sports cards aren't fair use when used to illustrate an article about the player. See Wikipedia:Fair use#Counterexamples. It's fair use to illustrate an article about the card itself, but of course 99.99999% of sports cards are non-notable and there shouldn't be a Wikipedia article on them. Thanks - Tempshill 19:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pittsburgh crime stats[edit]

Sorry for the misunderstanding about the stats (my initial revert from "low" to "high"). I made a bad assumption that the anon user was trying to do sneaky vandalism (also, my parents in Pgh frequently complain about crime in the news, so at first glance "high" seemed more likely than "low.") Thanks for the correction. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 21:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar Award[edit]

		The Original Barnstar
		In appreciation for your hard work in multiple areas, especially Pittsburgh and its related topics. ClarkBHM 13:24, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Waldron[edit]

The only thing I removed from the Jeremy Waldron article was the word "prestigious," which is non-neutral. I moved the sentence about Waldron's going to NYU next year to the end of the paragraph so that it was in chronological order. It was still very much in the article. I also added a fact tag about Waldron's specialization, hoping to have a reference listed. I'm going to remove "prestigious" again, and reinsert the fact tag; if you would like to keep next year's plans at the top of the paragraph instead of at the bottom, I'm not going to fight over the matter, though, again, I think that, stylistically, it comes better at the bottom. If you have a source stating that Waldron is a normative legal positivist, that'd be great to add to the article. In the future, please strive to assume good faith. Truly, JDoorj a m Talk 02:58, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Source added. And please reread my comments; I did not assume bad faith. --M@rēino 03:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for letting me know—JDoorjam Talk 03:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - That barn star totally cracks me up. In full disclosure, when I looked at my own edits, I immediately thought to myself, "yes, why did I remove that perfectly good material?" before seeing that I'd moved it down a paragraph. I hope I wasn't too "iron-fisted," as the description of the sickle-and-hammer barnstar says. See you around the Wiki, JDoorj a m Talk 00:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boomen[edit]

hi -- I considered redirecting Boomen as well, but I don't see any evidence that the word is actually used that way -- all the hits I saw with a quick google for "boomen bogeyman" involved the dutch name Boomen. and if it's a made-up word, redirecting it just validates it, and WP shouldn't be validating things that aren't true. I would like to revert and tag it for deletion as a neologism, but I wanted to check with you first. ok? bikeable (talk) 22:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- I'm going to do that. ordinarily I'd agree, but I don't want to let a total neologism slip through. best, bikeable (talk) 00:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Irvis.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Irvis.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. A dmrb♉ltz (T | C) 21:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did provide (c) info; it was removed by another user. --M @r ē ino 22:18, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! Fixed. A dmrb♉ltz (T | C) 22:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

You must have the wrong person, because I did not vandalize anything. In fact, I returned that article back to its previous state before somebody had changed it for the worse. Thank You.

-Nobody is hacking my account. I went on that article and reverted the first paragraph back. However, I did not notice those other areas of incorrect information and thus did not change them. I did not add that material and removed that link becuase it did nto work. You can check my history, I in fact, watch over diff. hip-hop sites as I have edited several of them.--Mastagags 18:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]