User talk:2012Olympian/Archives/2009/January

Date formats
Re: your American-centric comment on Manual of Style (dates and numbers)/Proposal on international date format. Are you aware that the US Government standard for dates has been dmy for several years now? Next time you take a trip and travel back into the US, take a look at the lower right corner of the Customs Declaration Form where you write the date ... in month/day/year format. Happy editing. Truthanado (talk) 15:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Portal selected articles
Hi. When creating Portal selected articles, like Portal:College football/Selected article/January, 2009, please summarize the article rather than copying the whole thing. Generally, any article is going to have a reasonably well-written lead, so you can just copy that (making sure to strip out references, maintenance tags, and other things that don't belong in portals), but copying the entire article makes the portal look awful. --B (talk) 19:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:MichiganHelmet.gif)
You've uploaded File:MichiganHelmet.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:NotreDameHelmet.gif)
You've uploaded File:NotreDameHelmet.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 19:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:PennStHelmet.gif)
You've uploaded File:PennStHelmet.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 02:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:RayGuyAwardLogo.jpg)
You've uploaded File:RayGuyAwardLogo.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Draft page
One thing you should know--traditionally, the section on determining the draft order is deleted in its entirety after the Super Bowl. Thus, by leaving them in the section that will remain, it saves work later on. Samer (talk) 05:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW--I didn't intend to delete them altogether; I thought (incorrectly) that they were just duplicates. Samer (talk) 05:27, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

One other point: the description of the Pacman Jones trade in the article is correct, and should be left more-or-less as is. Samer (talk) 15:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Do you have official confirmation that the potential first-rounder for Shockey is in 2009? I've actually seen it both ways, and haven't seen any official confirmation (e.g., from NFL.com or the Saints or Giants themselves). Samer (talk) 03:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * That isn't what I asked for. All the link you showed me says is that he was traded for a 2009 2 and a 5. It doesn't say that if the Saints give the Jets their 2009 2 the Giants get the Saints' 2009 1. Samer (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * That article also says that the Giants would get a first-rounder, not specifically the 2009 first-rounder. (For the record, a 2010 first-rounder would be more logical than a 2009 first-rounder, because in NFL circles a pick deferred a year should go up one round; for example, the Pats gave up a 3 in 2008 to get a 2 in 2009.) Samer (talk) 20:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The ONLY picks that are definitively determined as of today are the picks earlier than the Chargers' in round 1, and the picks for teams with sub-.500 records in rounds 2 and 3. Wait (at most) two weeks, and things will be much, much clearer. Samer (talk) 15:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Automobile Logo
Hi. Thank you for your contributions, but please don't make changes to the Automotbile Infobox without discussing it first. We're trying to keep it to a minimum, which is why your changes have been reverted.--Flash176 (talk) 06:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

A summary of the Date Linking RFCs and proposals
User:Dabomb87/Summary of the Date Linking RFCs—I would like your opinion, especially on the draft of proposed guidelines on linking chronological items. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:CleDawg.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:CleDawg.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

New straw poll
You are a user who responded to Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — talk 23:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 —  talk 00:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Saw your comment. I think you may have missed this section. I think a large percentage of our logos are mislabeled as copyrighted logos when, in fact, they are trademarks. That makes all the difference in the world and we can use them in connection to the articles in question. Every single school has some sort of noncopyrightable logo (if one exists that doesn't meet this standard, I haven't found it). I think I could get your support if we talk about it a little. — BQZip01 —  talk 06:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The Yale logo that exists is indeed a copyrightable image (the image of the bulldog is a unique artistic entity), BUT that does not mean that other Yale logos aren't available and are simply trademarked. Examples: Yale, Harvard. Realize a copyright will eventually run out but a trademark is forever, but the express purpose of a trademark is to associate a known symbol with an entity, whereas a copyrighted symbol is designed to generate profits. In short, if we just use trademarked images, we'll be fine and we stay out of WP:NFCC. — BQZip01 —  talk 08:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

2008 All-Pro team
Look, the other All-Pro teams are just as legit as the AP. Don't revert without a discussion, okay? Also, just reprinting the AP all-pro team may be a COPYVIO.Bigmaninthebox (talk) 22:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

"Do not copy text from other websites without a GFDL-compatible license. It will be deleted." This is a note, by copying the AP content without a license you may be a COPYVIO, with other All-pro teams this is an encyclopedic article, not just a 100% copy of the AP team.Bigmaninthebox (talk) 22:40, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * No, the article is 2008 All-Pro team, not "Associated Press 2008 All-Pro Team". If you want to start a new one and it is not a COPYVIO, then fine. But Wikis policy is open editing so you don't own the articel. But don't start an edit war please.Bigmaninthebox (talk) 23:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Why did you take your warning off? Anyway, let's cool off and discuss. As noted on my talk page, your edits today were simply reverts. I did revert, but my edits today are within the scope of WIKI and done in good faith. The edits I did are WP:VERIFIABLE and encyclopedic. So, if you have a real objection, other that format, let's hear it. I don't want to edit war. I am sure you do not either.Bigmaninthebox (talk) 02:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Because I saw it and there is no requirement for it to be kept, and my intention is not to edit war. Let me repeat. My intention is not to edit war.  I do not want that information removed from the articles.  I would just prefer it not to be crammed into the same table as the AP team, I think it would be much better to have three (if that's how many there are) separate tables, one for each team. I think the articles are improved for your additions.  Good job.-- 2008 Olym pian chit chat 02:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Yale Logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Yale Logo.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums
With your "understand what you're up against" tirade, you completely crossed the line. Turning discussions into some kind of battle between the evil supporters of non-free content policies and the valiant editors is completely inappropriate. No doubt I'm one of your "evil" NFCC admins, but you'll also note that I've written two featured articles on albums, and a third on a musician. Thankfully, it doesn't matter who people are here, it only matters how valid their arguments are- the discussion between editors regarding the use of additional album covers is valid, your ranting is not. If you are not willing to join in the discussion without mudslinging, please do not join in at all. J Milburn (talk) 18:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I removed the section because you were trolling- it is not beneficial to the discussion, and is not even directly related to it. If you want to have "a discussion between two editors", as you put it, do so on your talk page. J Milburn (talk) 21:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

12-step fellowship
Hello Bruce. I left you a response to your polite message you had left me. Sorry to be months in responding - busy here running a nation. Wow that scarpy dude that "writes" recovery pages is a real piece of work. Even with a little direction from admin he still finds a way to "get his way". There is no page explaining 12-step fellowship. Of course scaprie linked the fellowship link to program. This is what the admin and 3 days of email train with scarpy dude was about. He can't understand that he does not understand what a 12 step fellowship is -- and is not. He is just gonna be correct -- even if he is wrong. It's almost laughable. If you could do me a favor. I started to write about what a 12-step fellowship is, and is not. It is at: user:petermixt. Could you read it over and tell me what you think - or edit it? PeterMixt 17:11, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Small apology
Sorry for being unnecessarily difficult right now. Don't know if being tired is an excuse, but I'm thinking that's probably it. :\ You are of course right. I removed a somewhat uncivil comment by me as well, though I still think the spirit of the comment that we should use the BRD-cycle still applies. Even so - if I was you, I'd probably have done the same seeing "that other guy" didn't know what he was talking about ;) -- aktsu (t / c) 07:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you so much for the barn star. Since joining wiki I never thought that'd I receive one. Thank you very much for the award :) JayJ47 (talk) 11:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

GTA character list
Reverting a string of edits without comment, especially when one of the edits has proved to be a controversial issue, is really not good practice. You're effectively accusing everyone whose edits you have reverted of vandalism. Your edits regarding non-free content have again crossed the line. I advise you are more careful in future. J Milburn (talk) 16:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, how insightful and helpful. You're really not helping here. J Milburn (talk) 17:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Third Opinion
Hi, I see you're listed as a third opinion wikipedian and I'd like to have your opinion on a pretty conetnious article, the Dunmanway Massacre, which involved the deaths of aup to 14 people in April 1922 in Ireland. I don't want to colour your judgment before you read the piece with further comments, so I'll just say, that I favour this version and another user favours this one. Debate is here Talk:Dunmanway Massacre. Not tremendously civil on either side I regret to say, but I feel certain users have not been engaging with the issues in good faith. Regards Jdorney (talk) 15:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

EXCELLENT suggestion!
I think I'll start that page! Wanna help? — BQZip01 — talk 05:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The easiest way seems to be to go to the University page and type something like "trademark logo". That usually finds 'em. — BQZip01 —  talk 05:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course you may want to check the school pages first. They may already have an uploaded image. — BQZip01 —  talk 05:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's the page I'll be working from: User:BQZip01/FBS_Trademarked_logos — BQZip01 —  talk 05:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the additions! — BQZip01 —  talk 19:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. I'll help where I can, but my family finally moves up here with me and I have my first ride in a B-52 next week...I'm busy! Hopefully I'll be able to help here and there. — BQZip01 —  talk 18:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

2008 All pro
i just thought they werent necessary i mean whats the point but if you to put them back you can i wont erase them    DCsniper207 (talk) 02:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

what i didnt get was why put the people on the 2nd team in the 1st team column also but its cool if you say its from a reliable source  DCsniper207 (talk) 02:56, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

oh i thout it was all AP and i didnt look at the talk page i never do for some reason DCsniper207 (talk) 03:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

where u the one that recommended i change my user name    DCsniper207 (talk) 01:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)