User:Pastor Theo/Archive 1

Welcome to WP:MILHIST!
 Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can [ watchlist it] if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including WPMILHIST Announcements there.
 * Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, article logistics, and other tasks.
 * We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
 * We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
 * If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts and copy-editing alerts.
 * The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  02:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Here, these links may help you too...
If you have any more questions, feel free to ask away! — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  02:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

tb


&mdash;La Pianista  (T•C) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Articles for deletion/Holy Hell (film)
Hi, thanks for your good faith input on this article. Please note that just because some editor put WP brackets around names and they refer to an erroneous namesake, that doesn't mean an article should be DELETED. It should, in fact, be cleaned up. Don't you think? Some of that has been done. Please look at the article again (it is in stub form after all) and I urge you to reconsider your vote on the Articles for deletion/Holy Hell (film) page. Why so fast to delete? Why not help improve, instead? Thank you... Geĸrίtzl (talk) 01:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I will take a second look at the article. Pastor Theo (talk) 14:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Big Tom, Bronx
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Big Tom, Bronx, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Non-notable topic. After 4 years, it's still a stub, and a poorly written one at that.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * That is fine with me. I didn't write the article. I only discovered it last night. Pastor Theo (talk) 14:05, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tea Talks with CEOs
Dear Pastor Theo. Our event that you said "Non-notable student activity." had been listed in 4 different newspapers of Turkey in January 29, 2009. And if you search it with its turkish name it makes 2 pages of results in different news portals. "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy." is a shame for such an unprecedented student acitivity in Turkey. Please remove that consideration in the shortest term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Acakdeniz (talk • contribs) 21:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Please see our school's official website where the announcement had been published http://www.sabanciuniv.edu.tr/tr/?haberduyuru/goster.php?no=27001

And for the reliability by a third source please see http://www.zaman.com.tr/haber.do?haberno=809290 http://www.dunya.com/haber.asp?id=35218&cDate= http://www.porttakal.com/haber-ogrenciler-ceo-larla-bulusacak-225686.html

Please remove your deletion consideration in the shortest term


 * I am sorry if the nomination of the article upset you. However, I do not believe the article meets Wikipedia editorial standards. I see that you've stated your case in the deletion discussion, so let's see what our fellow editors have to say. Pastor Theo (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bill Etten and the Heritage Band
I do NOT feel this article should be deleted, as in fact it meets TWO of the criterion for the inclusion of musical acts. This group received non-trivial press coverage in the form of a newspaper article, as cited and referenced at the bottom of the page. I have a physical copy of this newspaper article, and can personally attest to its existence. Also, this group has a song included on a compilation album (criterion #10), which is also referenced within the article. As such, I feel this article should not be deleted. Tdgbp (talk) 03:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I would invite you to add this information to the ongoing discussion regarding the article. Pastor Theo (talk) 03:19, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: You're invited!
Join us the evenings of Friday February 6 and Saturday February 7 around Wikipedia Loves Art! museum photography events at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Brooklyn Museum.

There will also be a special business meeting on Saturday dedicated to discussing Wikimedia New York City issues with guests from the Wikimedia Foundation.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Pope John Paul II
Hello Pastor Theo,

I have recently been working on the Pope John Paul II article in order to improve it and try to raise it to ‘Good Article’ and eventually ‘Featured Article’ status. The article is currently at Peer Review, so I though I would invite you to take a look. Any help would be much appreciated.

Kind Regards     02:38, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Pastor Theo, I've left you a response on my talkpage.     02:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Thank you for the trust you placed in me by supporting my RfA (which passed and, apparently, I am now an admin!). I will do my best to continue to act in a way that is consistent with the policies of wikipedia as well with our common desire to build and perfect this repository of human knowledge; and can only hope that you never feel that your trust was misplaced. Thanks again! --Regent's Park (Rose Garden) 23:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I too would like to thank you for your support in my RfA. Your thoughts and imput are very much appreciated, and I look forward to working with you in the future! Blessings, Sephiroth storm (talk) 09:28, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Hamnet Shakespeare
There's some discussion at WT:AFD about the closure of this AfD. Cheers. lifebaka++ 15:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Charles Davi
Why is this page being targeted for deletion? It meets the requirements of notability. "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published[3] secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent,[4] and independent of the subject.[5]"| —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.139.154 (talk) 02:04, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Children's Heart Foundation
Hello. I am currently in the process of creating a page for the Children's Heart Founation. As it is my first page, it is taking me a little while to document my sources properly and create the correct format. I am very confident that when I am finished with the page it will simply be a factual resource for researching a notable charity. Much like the Wikipedia pages of JDRF and March of Dimes.

Thanks, Pease42 (talk) 00:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Pease42

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)
The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

RFC
I changed the proposal to RFC on a merger here: Talk:Bahá'ís Under the Provisions of the Covenant. Please comment, as it is kind of a mess right now. Cuñado ☼ -  Talk  02:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. No articles link to this page. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Problem solved I linked the article in question to two other articles and removed the Orphan Tag. Thank you. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:BessieColemanStamp.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BessieColemanStamp.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Problem solved I added the correct rationale to the file. Thank you. Pastor Theo (talk) 02:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Philately WikiProject
Welcome to the Philately WikiProject. Hopefully you have a good time, start many new articles and can contribute lots to the existing ones as we need that. If you have any questions, just ask. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your warm welcome. Pastor Theo (talk) 05:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use images in a list
Hi, I appreciate your efforts to illustrate List of people on stamps of the United States, but I don't think that there is sufficient reason to include fair-use images. The basic rule for fair use is there needs to be some sort of critical commentary (broadly defined), and usage for decorative purposes alone isn't sufficient. The way I interpret it in practice is that if your associated text doesn't have anything to say about the stamp image, such as design elements, interesting details, etc, then it's not a fair use. Decorative use is especially hard to justify for US stamps, since there are so many hundreds of public domain images available instead. Stan (talk) 06:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am fairly new to this, so I apologize if I made an error. However, the six contemporary images I uploaded (which are all publicity photos from the USPS) were brought in solely to provide an illustrative presentation of contemporary commemorative stamp designs. The article would lack balance if I relied solely on public domain (pre-1978) stamp issues. I updated the file descriptions of the six stamps in question to explain this.  If you need to discuss this, I will be online again later this evening.  Thanks! Pastor Theo (talk) 12:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Perley G. Nutting
Hey Pastor! Looks like we are working on fixing the same article, I will let you have at it for a while so we don't get into any edit conflicts (I am about done for the day anyway), best of luck. By the way, I see you were adding some categories, have you considered HotCat it's pretty useful? I saw you at the Michael Q. Schmidt AfD, saw you were pretty new, welcome to Wikipedia! Have fun.--kelapstick (talk) 00:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice work on the expansion Pastor, interesting fellow, one of (if not the first) neon sign (I would add a question mark my I have a bilingual keyboard and for some reason question marks are coming up as É). Anyway, interesting and keep up the good work! --kelapstick (talk) 16:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Connecticut Meetup: You are invited!
The 2nd Connecticute Meetup will take place on April 18th, 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please state whether or not you can attend on the meetup page. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) because your name was on the invite list. 16:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

AFD
Please reply to what I have posted - Articles for deletion/Danny Gokey. Dalejenkins | 01:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

SO VERY NEUTRAL
Hey "PASTOR" Theo - thanks for the "neutral third party" that deleted our article - that was really neutral of you and your group. What a great reputation "people" like you bring to the Wiki project.Bogueart (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! Peter Symonds ( talk ) 14:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback may be removed at any time.


 * Thank you, Mr. Symonds. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 14:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Theo, belated post holiday thanks for your support and especially for wishing me Good Luck in my RFA, which seems to have worked as it passed by an embarrassingly wide margin. There's a full glitzy Oscar style version of my acceptance speech here.  Were Spiel Chequers  17:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)
The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Many mansions
Thanks-- there aren't that many occasions where a word of scripture isn't appropriate, and the I like to quote it when I can. Back in the first century, of course, Jesus was talking to a crowd that (to put it in Wikipedia terms) measured a person's "notability" by the size of the house a person lived in, and letting them know that everyone was eligible for a mansion. It's interesting to read people's opinions about what they consider to be important. AfD is a good thing, but I like to think that it's a bunch of us nobodies deciding whether someone is a nobody. Best wishes. Mandsford (talk) 21:00, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
I'd like to thank you for your kind words of encouragement. I decided though upon seeing how my fourth RfA was going that now might be a good time to call it a day. However, I have decided to reverse the retire idea, and am now on a wikibreak. As much as editing Wikipedia is great, there are other more important things in my life that I feel need my attention more, and so Wikipedia will no longer be getting so much of my attention. People like you though are one in a million, and I thank you once more for voting in my RfA and sending me that message. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 03:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Faith in Place rewritten
Hi, this article has been rewritten, if you could please revisit Articles for deletion/Faith in Place to see if your concerns have been addressed. If not I would be happy to address any outstanding issues. Thank you! -- Banj e b oi   10:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Stamp images again
I noticed you uploaded a whole bunch of PD stamp images. Are you aware of commons:Category:Stamps of the United States? We have several hundred there already, it would be excellent to move yours there. (and note naming schemes, so they fit in Commons' overall collection of thousands of stamp images) Stan (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing that out, Stan. I am still relatively new to this, so I appreciate your patience. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 22:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you. :) I'm particularly bad at article writing. Much appreciated.  Syn  ergy 01:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm no Maya Angelou myself, but I always liked that poem. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Re Articles for deletion/Faith in Place
Just a note that an article whose AfD you commented in is now the topic of a Deletion for Review discussion. Deor (talk) 02:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. I will take a look at it right now. Pastor Theo (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...
...for your kind words. We'll see how things go in a few months. Ya know, my humor ain't so gentle all the time. I get a fair chunk of my sense of humor from my parents, who could be sarcastic but never, ever vulgar. So I try never to say anything my own parents would have severely disapproved of. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for moving "Sextius niger". I must have been half asleep when I created the page. N p holmes (talk) 13:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!
On behalf of the Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 15:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your comments and continued support on my talk page. I look forward to working with you more soon. Ikip (talk) 12:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the smile! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 02:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:55, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history Coordinator Elections
As a member of the WikiProject who is running for coordinator it is so go great to see people getting involved. It seems that some people truly do care about the future of the WikiProject. Keep Up the Good work. Have A Great Day! Lord R. T. Oliver  The Olive Branch 01:07, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Cookies

 * Thank you very much! Pastor Theo (talk) 10:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Bubble tea!


 - down  load  |   sign!  has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!


 * Why, thank you! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 02:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)
The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Tintagel Parish Church
Thank you for working on the article: it has changed again and wonder about the image. I do not know how to use the ones at WikiCommons yet.Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 04:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I took care of it for you. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Very grateful: it looks good (I'm am moving and copyin images in the WikiPedia itself but the WP Commons ones need something more.Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 03:08, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I am very glad to help. Stay in touch! Pastor Theo (talk) 13:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD
Thanks for your participation at AfD! Just a quick note: several of your relists (I'm not sure if you're doing them manually, or with a script) haven't been commented out of the March 30 log. This isn't a big deal, but it leaves some extra work for other editors to complete. Could you please keep an eye on this? Thanks, – Juliancolton  | Talk 06:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Will do. My apologies for giving you extra work! Pastor Theo (talk) 12:31, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Forrabury and Minster
Something has gone wrong here which puzzles me: I thought a block of images would be lower down the page rather than interfering with the main text. Please look into it if you can. I think I shall be taking a good break from editing till after Easter unless it is an exceptional problem.Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 13:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed it -- the info box needs to be placed at the top of the text in order to have correct placement in the upper right hand corner of the page. Thanks! Pastor Theo (talk) 23:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Diligence

 * Thank you for the praise! I am highly appreciative of your kind words. Pastor Theo (talk) 10:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 04:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello! I had planned to use the image for an article I created, but I opted to use another image instead. I have no problems with having the image removed. Thanks! Pastor Theo (talk) 00:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Happy Easter!
On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 07:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Font color
Hi, I just noticed that when you relisted a couple AfDs, your signature is including  without the corresponding closing tag. As a result, all succeeding text in the discussion is grey. See here Articles for deletion/Rural Industrial Development Authority and here Articles for deletion/Bus Terminuses in Hong Kong. This is even more obvious and problematic at the end of the general log here Articles for deletion/Log/2009 April 13. Sarilox (talk) 03:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That is curious. I will look into that.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Pastor Theo (talk) 10:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

sig
I think your sig is broken. It's changing the font color of all text after your sig occurs. 70.29.213.241 (talk) 06:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it has been brought to my attention. I see the problem and I will correct it.  Thank you for alerting me to this. Pastor Theo (talk) 10:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Father Dalton
Hey Pastor Theo, I just wanted to thank you for your assistance on the Michael Dalton article... I wrote it and had to leave... when I came back, you had fixed up a number of problems/issues, so thanks.--- I'm Spartacus!  NO! I'm Spartacus! 15:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! It was a very interesting article. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Depending on why you liked it, you might enjoy my three latest articles Warren Ost, A Christian Ministry in the National Parks and Christmas in August (Yellowstone).--- I'm Spartacus!  NO! I'm Spartacus! 06:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Very nice! Thank you, again. Pastor Theo (talk) 10:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Charis School
Candidate for rescue? 222.127.207.35 (talk) 12:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll sit this one out, but thank you for thinking of me. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

"Jewish Church"
Am I right to understand from your comment at the AFD that you're not familiar with such a term? Check out my comment; it should clarify the issue for you. Nyttend (talk) 16:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I happen to be very familiar with the phrase. My comment was meant only to acknowledge Biruitorul's surprise at seeing this 19th century phrase in a 21st century setting. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, good...it's much better when a pastor knows this kind of thing, whether or not he agrees with it :-) Nyttend (talk) 02:54, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I wouldn't be much of a pastor if I wasn't aware of these things! Thanks for thinking of me! Pastor Theo (talk) 10:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Photo
I see that you have added a banner to Golden Boy (song). Do you think you would be able to get a photo of the single cover to help improve the article's quality? --Sky Attacker (talk) 02:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I will try to locate a photo. Pastor Theo (talk) 10:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --Sky Attacker (talk) 01:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 01:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Ashley Naylor

 * Hi Theo, hope you don't mind, but I've declined this deletion request as Ashley may well meet WP:BAND as a member of Even. Peace  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  12:48, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I was looking through it and pipelinking some of the mistakes (i.e. The Grapes is a pub in London as well as both an American and an Australian band), although it looks like he is mainly known for playing in Even, he has done some other things with other notable groups/people, which as per WP:BAND makes him suitable for a stand alone article, although some refs would be nice.--kelapstick (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, both, for taking the time to visit with me today. That is the beauty of this system -- multiple sets of eyes keeping track of requests and data, thus minimizing the chance of error. I appreciate your input and your friendly words. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Your very welcome, BTW, there's a thread at WT:RFA which would really benefit from the views of CSD taggers such as yourself.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  16:39, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for inviting me to participate in the conversation. I left a brief message.  I appreciate your looking out for me. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 20:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Ahmed Abu Alasrar attacks
Not sure where the attacks are. Not the best English, but it seems to praise the subject. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  01:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC) WOW. Nevermind. He just snuck that in at the bottom. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  01:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As I stated in the edit summary, the article claimed the athlete in redacted blp That was in the final paragraph of the article. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:20, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * > Then I went back through the dif's. That last bit was vandalism added by an anon. But I deleted anyway as I felt it was A7. You gotta watch out for vandals ruining otherwise good faith articles. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  01:22, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Had a thought. You might want to hide the BLP concern that is now in your talk page. No point in deleting it there and repeating it here. Now I'm off to see if I can block the anon.   Dloh  cierekim  01:27, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, you warned the article creator for creating an attack page. The defamation was added by the anon, whom I've warned. I have taken the liberty of removing the incorrect warning as well as the BLP concern here. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  01:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You're a good man, Dlohcierekim. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 01:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Kudos
Good work catching this one.--chaser - t 05:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! Pastor Theo (talk) 10:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Damn
I was just checking you out for a potential nom and realized that you've only been here for 3 months... don't be surprised if I don't come back in a few months with a nom... in the mean time, looking at your history, I have to ask are you one of these?--- I'm Spartacus!  NO! I'm Spartacus! 16:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, Spartacus. My dad was in the USAF during the Korean War and my mom was a civilian employee of the Department of Defense, but I am not one of these. Pastor Theo (talk) 17:01, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I was wondering when I saw the places that you had lived...--- I'm Spartacus!  NO! I'm Spartacus! 19:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

HyperOffice entry
hi pastor,

i just restored the HyperOffice entry, and it was flagged almost immediately by you as an article which has an advertisment tone. i got a couple of editors to look at it before i posted it live - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pankajunk - and they seemed to think it was ok.

i have consulted the following wiki entries before drawing up my article, and have tried to keep the same tone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebEx, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box.net, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoho, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbra

what part of the entry reads like an advertisment? please guide me so that i can make changes accordingly.

Pankajunk (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello! I might recommend editing or even cutting the products section -- that reads like an advertisement. It would also help if you provided proper referencing to the statements made about the company's history, growth and success.  Sentences such as this -- "The companies' vision was to displace Lotus Notes as the preferred collaboration application and to provide a low-cost (or free) alternative to smaller companies" -- may look spammy without references attached to them, as per WP:RS requirements.  Please be aware that I am not calling for the article's deletion -- I believe it has value, but it requires further editing so it is aligned with Wikipedia's editorial standards.  Thank you! Pastor Theo (talk) 14:06, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment
Hey there. Just a comment on your RfA note (and I hope I'm not told to 'give it a rest') - "If your schedule will not enable you to participate a higher level of activity, it may not be fair to Wikipedia to have an admin who will show up only very occasionally." This was a (in my opinion) misconception that seemed to die out a few years ago but shows up now and again. The problem with your argument is that there is no limit to the number of administrators Wikipedia has, no cost or upkeep for the tools, and as the cliche goes, "the tools don't rust". There is no income generated/expense ratio that needs to be kept on the >1 side, like as with an employee at a company. Therefore, there is nothing inherently unfair in granting adminship to someone who edits less than the average admin. Even if they use the tools only once or twice for the betterment of Wikipedia, there has been a net positive effect.

This is just my two cents. You are clearly entitled to your opinion and I don't mean to say you are definitely "wrong" - I am simply expressing why I think you are wrong :-) <font color="#CC7722" face="Papyrus">Tan  &#124;  <font color="#21421E" face="Papyrus">39  20:23, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * My collection plate welcomes two cent deposits, and more. :) Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with me. Pastor Theo (talk) 20:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

VOTED!
Articles for deletion/John Green (professional wrestler). I have voted "Delete" --Sky Attacker (talk) 02:29, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello! It is nice to hear from you again. I hope all is well with you. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 02:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Headsup: a discussion wrt the possibility of renaming
"Internet homicide" has commenced at Talk:Internet_homicide.  ↜Just me, here, now … 20:48, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

You're invited...
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:15, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Chris Derrick
Hi, I decided to remove your speedy deletion nomination. In my opinion, an American Junior record is a credible claim of significance, if nothing more. <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;">decltype (talk) 12:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree with your opinion, but I would like to thank you for alerting to me your action. I am taking the article to AfD, since I believe it fails WP:BIO and WP:ATHLETE. Pastor Theo (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, I agree with declype that the Derrick article deserves to be kept. Per WP:ATHLETE, which says "People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships," Derrick deserves to stay. He has indeed competed at one of the highest amateur levels of the sport, at the IAAF World Junior Cross-Country Championships. Furthermore, his AJR in the 5k, as well as his HSR in the 5k (for a race with only high schoolers) add to his notability. As a member of the Rescue Squadron, I would have expected you to be more interested in spending time saving articles then deleting notable one. Tiger Khan (talk) 21:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello! While I do strive to save articles, I should point out that having my name listed on the Rescue Squadron list does not mean that I am automatically in favor of protecting every article that is up for deletion. As for the article in question -- as I am reading WP:ATHLETE, his AJR and HSR are not eligible for consideration. Mr. Derrick's claim to notability (by Wikipedia standards) is limited to a 15th place finish in a single race, which is too marginal by my standards (though that appears to be a minority opinion, even if one looks beyond the sockpuppets and meatpuppets who made the discussion an entertaining event). Thank you for sharing your opinion, and hopefully we will be able to work together in the near future. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Requests_for_adminship/BQZip01_4
Thank you for your support. — BQZip01 — talk 03:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. I hope this is a stress-free ride for you! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 03:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Pastor Theo, Gaia Octavia Agrippa has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! <font color="#7A60F8">Gaia Octavia Agrippa <font color="#C560F8">Talk | <font color="#6093F8">Sign 20:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 * Thank you for the lovely smile! Pastor Theo (talk) 00:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Identifying SPA accounts
Hello Pastor Theo: Even though we may have but heads a little on the Chris Derrick page, I do appreciate your honest opinions and civil discussion. However, next time when identifying SPA accounts please look at the contribution button next to the name. You falsely identified an occasional wiki editor (on an unrelated topic for that matter, making him the exact opposite of an SPA) as an SPA, note this person has made some substantial edits to nutrition pages (all be it not that many in quantity). It was probably an honest mistake because he for some reason doesn't have a user page, which if I had not run into one of his edits in the past I probably would have assumed he was an SPA myself. I reverted the edit but I just wanted to explain myself so it didn't look like I was starting an edit war. So the next time you look for SPAs note that the contribution button is really useful tool. But in general its good that you are looking out for them. I don't want a bunch of non-wiki editors to come in because they were told to do so from some other site as much as you do, so thanks for the SPA identifying effort, Im sure the admin and all of us in the wiki community appreciate greatly. Thanks again --MATThematical (talk) 02:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, and thank you for your pleasant message. I am genuinely sorry if my identification created a problem.  However, I should point out the SPA tag is designated for those who have "made few or no other edits outside this topic."  The individual in question had not been active on Wikipedia since June 2008 (where he had a mere 16 contributions during April-June 2008, mostly of a Talk Page input).  Furthermore, he was among the new wave of individuals who showed up abruptly in specific regard to the Chris Derrick debate.  However, I see that he has since become more active in other areas of Wikipedia after his initial input on the Chris Derrick discussion, and I hope he continues to contribute to a wide range of article discussions and editing.  Be well and please stay in touch. Pastor Theo (talk) 10:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point about the date on his past edits. Unfortunately though, date of edits is not mentioned in the criteria for identifying SPA accounts, see Single-purpose account. He clearly did not meet the criteria even before his new edits, but maybe the criteria should be changed, to accommodate your good point. In the future though, until that guideline is changed I would recommend not considering time of edits when identifying SPA accounts. In this situation it is kind of relevant because it might be correlated to the slew of people who came in after being referred by a particular website, but until it is put in the guidelines time of edits should probably not be considered, since SPA tagging is controversial in its own right even when it is properly employed. Its always a tough call though, so understand the tag, just giving some friendly advice for future tagging. :) MATThematical (talk) 19:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Very good, Matt! I will keep this mind!  Hey, how do you think the AfD is going to wind up? Whichever way it goes, it has been very entertaining to see so much enthusiasm for this topic.  I wonder if anyone tipped off Mr. Derrick that there is so much interest here in his running! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 00:04, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought it was going to be close. Most deletion pages I read tend to be a little less close than this one. Both sides made good points (even if it was tainted by meat puppets ;)). I thought that the AfD would finally rule keep, just because that seems to be the way it usually goes when it comes to very close calls. I think it came down to whether the combination of credible sources added up to substantial coverage, since only the less notable "internet type" sources had big articles on him. Basically the line I bolded in my comment was never addressed by the other side and I think that is why the page finally went keep. The Derrick page slightly improved as the discussion went forth (not hard since it was terribly written to begin with, and still needs a lot of work). I think that this may have been the final straw, even though article quality isn't suppose to be a factor. When the article was as bad as it originally was, its hard not to want to delete it :). If I had a chunk of time, and not just bits here and there, I would clear it and rewrite the whole thing.MATThematical (talk) 01:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It all turned out well, and I enjoyed the conversation. Thanks, again, for your wonderful input! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 01:22, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Onion (horse)

 * Sweet! My first-ever writing award! Thank you, Orlady! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 00:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Ani. } Toddst1 (talk) 07:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Todd. I commented in that ANI discussion. I appreciate the invitation to participate in the conversation. Pastor Theo (talk) 09:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Sister Maria Dominguez
Hello Pastor Theo, in regard to Sister Maria Dominguez, there isn't any reliable verifiable source to confirm that in fact there was a such a person from Puerto Rico to have been beatified. You right in that in such circumstances the name should be removed from the "List of Puerto Ricans" until proven otherwise. Thank you for pointing this out. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

The dozenth thanks on your page (or thereabouts)
You may want to consider archiving :)

I appreciate your expressions on both the Talbott deletion, the review, the AN/I post, and my talk page.

In no way, shape, or form was it a non-stressful experience. OTOH, this is not the first, nor the last time I've been involved such a situation that involves me at the center of an internet web. As I stated in my RfA nearly three years ago, I have a thick skin and can deal with such situations. I undertook the entire endeavor without request of anyone else, so I lie in the bed I've made. I appreciate your p.s. note of concern, and I wish happy editing to you. Keegan talk 04:19, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your support
On a more personal note, thank you for your kind words on my talk page and the encouragement. — BQZip01 — talk 15:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

San Jose Church

 * Mmmm, milk! This will go perfectly with the cookies I have on my home page! Thanks! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 09:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Upgrading
In response to your question, technically what FlyingToaster did was violate a proposal. WP:PLAGIARISM should have reached guideline status long ago. I promoted it today. Your assistance in improving the newly promoted guideline would be much appreciated. Best, Durova Charge! 05:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your invitation. I will look into this today. Pastor Theo (talk) 10:34, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Hello Pastor Theo. I just wanted to thank you for the kind comment you left on my talk page. It was a light to me in a very dark time, and it meant a great deal. I've always seen you as a light here on Wikipedia. Thank you,  Flying Toaster  18:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy 's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 01:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not certain what I did to deserve this, but thank you. Pastor Theo (talk) 02:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Concourse Plaza Hotel

 * Thank you! Pastor Theo (talk) 12:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sitting Ducks (film)
Thanks for expanding the article!  Lugnuts  (talk) 13:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! I remember when the film came out in 1980 -- I haven't thought about it in ages and it was a real memory lane blast to see it listed in the new articles section. Be well. Pastor Theo (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Just an FYI
Hey Theo, Somebody just approached me asking me to nominate you for admin... I definitely think you are on the right path, and would love to be one of your noms when you run. I would also have no problem nominating you right now if you area interested. That being said, you've only been here for 4.5 months... I won't lie to you, at less than six months you WILL face some "hasn't been here long enough" !votes. At one point, I would have been leading that charge. If you ran today, I suspect that you have a decent chance of passing. If you ran in a month, I would be surprised if you failed. If you run today and it failed, then you would basically have to wait 3 months before running again. If you are interested in running today or in a month let me know.--- I'm Spartacus!  NO! I'm Spartacus! 03:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Funny that you are talking about RfA -- today's sermon at my church focuses on Daniel in the lion's den! :) I am very flattered that you and others think so highly of me. Thank you for the supportive message, Spartacus -- and please pass along my thanks to the kind individual who approached you, too! Pastor Theo (talk) 11:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Speaking on behalf of the lions, I think that Spartacus's advice is sound. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 21:27, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello! I hope you are a friendly lion. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 21:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Can be friendly, but I'm not afraid to use my teeth on either friend or foe when I think it necessary either. Anyway, don't worry about me; I'm sure if you keep on as you have been you'll have little to worry about in a month or two. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:35, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Very good! Thank you, again, for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 21:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I was actually very pleased to see the willingness to wait, it just adds to your credence. There is no rush, but as the person who approached me is a person to whom I have a lot of respect, I wanted to give you the option.  Again, I think waiting until the end of June/early July is a good idea.  The one area where you might want to work on is some article building/contribution.  You have some, but it might help win over the likes of Malleus ;-)--- I'm Spartacus!  NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It could well make the difference, yes. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I am more comfortable as a copy editor than an article creator, but I will give it my best. Thank you, both, for your respective opinions! Pastor Theo (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for coming out
I would like to thank you for coming out and participating in my Request for Adminship, which closed unsuccessfully at  (48/8/6) based on my withdrawal. I withdrew because in my opinion I need to focus on problems with my content contributions before I can proceed with expanding my responsibilities. Overall I feel that the RfA has improved me as an editor and in turn some articles which in my eyes is successful. Also Pastor, I have been quasi keeping an eye on your activities since we crossed paths when we were working on Perley G. Nutting, I have been quite impressed with your contributions and would consider it a privilege to participate should our run for adminship some day. Thank you again for your support. Cheers and happy editing. --kelapstick (talk) 18:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update! I will be glad to support you if you should decide to run again. And, yes, rescuing Dr. Nutting from A7 oblivion was a lot of fun! Happy trails to you, too! :) Pastor Theo (talk) 01:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

mfd closures formatting
Hello, I see that you are using the afd headers to close mfd's. I suggest that you use the mfd headers instead which is RESULT ~ and. Thanks. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! As you can gather, I am new to MfD closings.  I appreciate your patience and advice. :) Pastor Theo (talk) 01:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Request
Hi. It's me again. Can you please help me again. This time, I would like a picture for the article of a wonderful 60s hit. Talk:Let's Go To San Francisco. May you be of assistance?-- The Legendary   Sky Attacker  07:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, I just took care of it. Thanks! Pastor Theo (talk) 10:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help.-- The Legendary   Sky Attacker  21:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD
Hi, thanks for your input regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Al_Issawi I also believe it meets criteria for rescue and should be kept as it's sourced appropriately. When will the AfD tag be removed? 1inthedesert (talk) 19:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * AfDs usually run seven days, so this should be over by the 11th. Thanks for stopping by to say Hello! Pastor Theo (talk) 20:10, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Mifter (talk) 23:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Panther Dog article
As a relatively new user to Wikipedia, I may not have mastered the markup language you have used to challenge the article "Panther Dog", but I am prepared to defend its authenticity and notability. My quote IS from the work cited, and is found on page 51. Should you wish to download the book, you can find a link at www.archive.org/details/extinctpennsylva00shoe. If you make the effort to read significant portions of the book, you ought to be struck by it's clear authenticity as a contemporaneous or near contemporaneous account of the decline and disappearance of a number of species from Pennsylvania about 120 years ago and the men responsible (with a number of photographs of the protagonists). Seen in a modern context, a great many comparisons could be made with similar situations in today's third world. However, my article is not about the wider context of this book, but a specific reference to dogs known as "panther dogs" because they were used to hunt panthers, the colloquial name for cougars. If you had, as I have, spent much of your free time over the last 40 years studying the domestic dog, you would jump with delight at any account of the way that existing breeds had been combined to produce a crossbred dog for a specific purpose. Such accounts are remarkably rare, as dog breeds are frequently developed over a period of time by a number of men who in many case are not literate. An example being the Rhodesian Ridgeback, clearly developed from guarding and hunting breeds crossed with some indigenous breed that sports the eponymous ridge, known otherwise only in a few Asian breeds. Another example is the Bullmastiff, which though indisputably developed significantly from the Mastiff and The Bulldog, can be shown to have an admixture of Bloodhound. If you examine the quotation I provided, you will see that the panther dog had substantially the same elements, with the addition of the Newfoundland. Why the addition of the Newfoundland, a dog primarily associated with water rescue, is by no means clear, but it is of scholarly interest. I could go on a long, long time, with particular reference to the Australian "pig dogs", used for a similar purpose against the introduced wild boar of Australia, and composed of a similar mix of dog varieties, but I think I have made my point that the panther dogs are of historical and sociological interest, apart from their intrinsic zoological interest. I suggest that you check this source again with more care, and in future apply even more care before you bandy about such words as "hoax". Collieuk (talk) 04:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)Collieuk
 * I have responded in the AfD discussion. If you can please provide independent sourcing in credible sources beyond the Shoemaker book (which includes a reference to an adult male riding on a dog's back -- highly unlikely), I will gladly withdraw the AfD. Thank you very much. Pastor Theo (talk) 12:57, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Rhode Island Soft Systems
I got an issue with its nomination at DYK. Please respond there.  Jolly  Ω   Janner  13:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Responded. The DYK nomination cites the New York Times as its information source, and I believe the newspaper's cred is still intact.  Thanks! Pastor Theo (talk) 13:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

File:0JohnXIIIVCstamp.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:0JohnXIIIVCstamp.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. ww2censor (talk) 04:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello again! I think we may have a disagreement here, as the image in question is from a 51-year-old stamp and it is, to the best of my knowledge, a public domain image. In any event, thank you for the work you are doing in keeping an eye out for possible image copyright problems. I am highly impressed with your diligence on this subject. Be well. Pastor Theo (talk) 11:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The above notification is done automatically when an image is nominated for deletion. I suspected that you might object but unfortunately, without any indication to the contrary, Vatican stamps follow the 70 years copyright rule per commons:Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates and I cannot find anything to confirm any shorter copyright period. In fact there does not seem to be any specific references to the Vatican anywhere on the commons. We don't need to have this particular image because there are other public domain images available as a replacement and I have provided links to some of them. That is what WP:NFCC is about. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 14:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I hope I am not being difficult, but Commons is not the Vatican postal authority and their 70-year limit on image display appears to be a made-up barrier. You are welcome to replace the image, but I would like you to provide confirmed information from the image's postal issuing authority regarding copyright status of their philatelic issues. Thank you. Pastor Theo (talk) 14:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the burden of proof is on the uploader to prove their claim and you have not done that yet. The onus is on you and not on me. You may not like it but you, of course, understand why the Wikimedia foundation takes copyright very seriously and where there is any discrepancy will err on the side of caution. So PD-old would apply to Vatican stamps and any stamp sless than 70 years old cannot be accepted. If you can actually confirm a shorter Vatican copyright we will of course get an appropriate template made and write it into the licencing pages but until then 70 years is where it stands for now. I will start a discussion on the commons to try and clarify the copyright of Vatican stamps. ww2censor (talk) 15:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

The image in question originally comes from a royalty-free site:. Clearly, the people over at WMF need to update how they classify postal images. Pastor Theo (talk) 15:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It really does not matter where you found the image but royalty free is not copyright free and the burden of proof still lies with the uploader. Clearly the original uploader to the site you link does not understand copyright because he claims copyright to that, and several other, stamp images. You know well that he cannot own the copyright for any stamp images. I don't know what you mean by "the people over at WMF need to update how they classify postal images". ww2censor (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * What I meant is that the Commons approach to the reproduction of philatelic issues is haphazard -- the overwhelming majority of countries are not cited (including the Vatican) and it is unclear whether any effort was made by the authors of these rules to seek out clarification on the reproduction of philatelic images from the countries absent from that list. This 70-year limit doesn't sit right in many cases, especially Vatican philately (the Holy See makes a lot of money on its philatelic issues and it is illogical that they would keep the imagery under a seven decades-long lock of copyright protection). You nominated the image for deletion, making a claim that I believe to be incorrect. I specifically asked for confirmation that your concern matches the Vatican postal authority's copyright policy and I have yet to receive a straightforward yes or no answer. Pastor Theo (talk) 16:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * On last time. As I already mentioned the standards we use are higher then many authorities thenselves may allow and that is what we have to go with. The commons approach is not haphazard but in may case unclear and is usually only investigated when needs must, so where a country's copyright is unclear then the strictest criteria must apply. Just look at some of the discussions where copyright is unclear at commons:Commons talk:Stamps/Public domain. This is the very reason why the burden of proof is on you to disprove, or improve, the existing criteria with verifiable evidence. Right now Poland's stamp copyright is an issue and the Vatican may well be as complex. Perhaps you would get involved in such investigations but for now I'm out of here Rev. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 17:08, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, but you are still dodging the question. I am not talking about Wikipedia standards, which appear to be riddled with holes in regard to philatelic image use. I have asked you more than once to back up your claim that this is not a public domain image, as per Vatican postal laws.  I would appreciate a simple yes or no answer with a reliable source citation confirming this. Thank you. Pastor Theo (talk) 17:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I cannot answer that specific question and I don't have to either but perhaps, if you read Italian, this may help confirm the 70 years copyright. If you want to upload Vatican stamps you have to comply with the current 70 year copyright or provide evidence that it is not correct. ww2censor (talk) 17:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what...I just sent e-mails to the Vatican postal authority and to the Vatican Philatelic Society asking about the 70 year copyright. If anyone should know the answer, it would be those groups! When I get a response, I will share it with you. Thanks...and I hope there are no ruffled feathers from this discussion! Pastor Theo (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Rhode Island Soft Systems

 * Thanks! Pastor Theo (talk) 11:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)