User talk:BigNate37/Archive 7

Requests for arbitration/Protecting children's privacy
This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

The community is encouraged to continue working to achieve an acceptable formulation of Protecting children's privacy, or an alternative, which addresses problems presented by disruptive users, while avoiding the creation of a hostile atmosphere for children who are editing in good faith. Users who disrupt Wikipedia by posing as children, projecting a provocative persona, and disclosing personal information may be banned on a case by case basis. Users who appear to be children editing in good faith who disclose identifying personal information may be appropriately counseled. Deletion and oversight may be used in appropriate cases to remove the information.

For the Arbitration committee. Arbitration Committee Clerk, FloNight 17:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

image portrait/landscape problem
Thanks a million!

best wishes, Robinh 14:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Your last to Dirty Sanchez
Just so you know, the last thing you reverted on Dirty Sanchez ("See also Diego Sanchez", I believe it was) is not actually a disambiguation. It's vandalism. See Diego's page & history for a LONG fight against vandalism on it. It's just recently spilled over to Dirty Sanchez. Gogo vandals. Tuckdogg 13:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I guess as long as Diego is actually known as Diego "Dirty" Sanchez, it's okay to treat this as a good-faith edit, but looking at Diego's article he's not actually nicknamed that. I'll try and fix my changes to Dirty Sanchez (disambiguation) and Diego "Dirty" Sánchez (which is listed under G3 and G7 now).  Big Nate 37 (T) 15:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, not a real nickname. Diego's a rather unpopular fighter, mainly because he's just cocky as all hell and it really puts some people off. They hate him, constantly cheer for him to get beaten to a bloody pulp, and brag about how his next opponent is going to mop the floor with him and expose Diego. Then he wins (he's currently undefeated), which just pisses them off even more. Hence all the vandalism. Tuckdogg 13:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I'll know to watch for it in the future, since I seem to have adopted the Dirty Sanchez article—not too many eyes catch vandalism on that page.  Big Nate 37 (T) 13:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Those images
Deleted. We have quite enough South Park images already, and they're not fair use. ( Radiant ) 16:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Show/hide
I've answered on the help desk. - Mgm|(talk) 21:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks buddy
Thanks for pointing that out, I just changed it today and I guess I forgot. Thanks again keep up your great work. &mdash; Seadog_MS  22:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the help with my userboxes. John Reaves 00:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. There are some really obscure parts of the wiki and its markup language.  Big Nate 37 (T) 00:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Is there a way for the boxes to be side-by-side with the text and templates I have?John Reaves 00:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to do it in wiki markup, but I think I could do it in regular HTML. Let me see what I can do.  Big Nate 37 (T) 00:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I couldn't make the individual sections two boxes wide in a way that wasn't ugly. The boxes are not all the same size/shape as eachother, and putting them in a table forces their own borders to take on the table's border size which further reduces the visual appeal. This was the best I could do; feel free to revert.  Big Nate 37 (T) 01:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I meant side-by-side with the text and templates at the top of the page, i.e. parallel to each other --similar to your userpage. If that's not possible, I like the way it is except for the public domain box's format. John Reaves 01:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * How's that? I changed the markup to make it one long box (instead of four stacked atop eachother) using the Userboxbreak template. I also put them all into a subpage I created for you, User:John Reaves/Userboxes, which I then transcluded (but not substituted!) onto your userpage.  Big Nate 37 (T) 01:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That's perfect-just what I wanted. Thanks again. John Reaves 02:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Per that link

 * Per :

Never said it was a vote. I'm just trying to make a less messy version for people who don't want to wade through all those rebuttals and such. Just H 03:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for dropping me a note about it here. I've replied at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/The Game (game) (6th nomination). For what it's worth, while I do disagree with what you're doing, I don't doubt that your intentions are good.  Big Nate 37 (T) 04:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Anti-administrator
Instead of your change, why not check the talkpage first? I think I found a better solution. Anchoress 21:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've replied at Template talk:User wikipedia/Non-Administrator.  Big Nate 37 (T) 21:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Re Hotel Saskatchewan photograph
At this point, anything would go, Hotel Saskatchewan is one of the very few grand railway hotels without a picture on wiki. A full exterior view would be great. Thanks. --Qyd 18:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)