User talk:Brian0918/Archive 02

Great Lakes Storm of 1913
Now that's an interesting question: Does the timer start when the article is created, or when it is moved into the main article space? Since moving a page doesn't restart the edit history... the first version is labeled "Revision as of 03:31, 3 Feb 2005" (UTC)... you might want to move it back anyway so it doesn't expire. :) And I'm not an expert, but it looks like you have the wrong image tag on the two maps (they're gov't pics not yours, right?), and none on the newspaper image (see Image use policy). But outstanding work on the references. 68.81.231.127 14:27, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, but you used, which includes "I, the creator". :) I think you want  . I don't think the front page print is public domain (it's not from a company that has been out of business for 50 years), but a fair use claim could be made though a rationale should be documented per Image copyright tags. 68.81.231.127 15:54, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I didn't notice you added modifications. In that case, I'd put on both tags myself... as I understand it, since it's a derived work both the original piece and your modifications have to be released into the public domain to make it truly PD (you can't do it, yourself). You can always check over at one of the image talk pages, though; I might be missing something subtle. 68.81.231.127 17:10, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It's up! 68.81.231.127 14:16, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The image of the newspaper front page is public domain as are all works published in the U.S. before 1923. I have changed the image tag on that page. Rmhermen 22:42, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Great work on the article. I have some familiarity with this storm but learned a lot. Pmeisel 23:39, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

DYK
Oh, and thanks for letting everyone know their articles were featured on DYK. Here's a cookie:

(Though ionization chamber isn't mine :) 68.81.231.127 16:06, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Lol :) 68.81.231.127 16:17, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism
See User:RdSmith4.

James F. (talk) 16:33, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Cosmotheism is mentioned in the Article
Cosmotheism is mentioned in this article therefore a link to cosmotheism in the external links section is in order Dnagod 15:18, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Not anymore :) brian0918  &#153;  16:35, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Cosmotheism wasn't created 5 years ago, it was conceived of almost 30 to 40 years ago. Cosmotheism says that God is the final product of human self-directed evolution and thus is a valid link in the God Section of wikipedia.


 * You'd put a 40-year-old religion created by a nazi who influenced Timothy McVeigh, alongside millennia-old religions believed by millions/billions? The religion doesn't even have its own article.  -- brian0918  &#153;  17:47, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Cosmotheism, had its own section (article), but people felt to diminish it by merging it with Dr. Pierce. This is unfortunate as this religion has thousands of members who follow it fanatically and its own web site, discussion forum and dedicated members. So what this really is an issue of is that the founder was racist and you don't like that. Because you make it a point to call him a nazi who influenced Tim McVey, that alone speaks for itself to your bias.


 * Historically, it's the tamest of the religions, although its history is pretty short, but its nowhere near the magnitude of popularity of the other religions, and wikipedia is not an advertisement. I know you'd like to categorize me -- it makes life easier.  Go right ahead.  -- brian0918  &#153;  19:02, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

ACW naval
Wow, you're quick!

This ACW page is really a mess due to its constant editing by numerous authors. Too bad.

big_hal 18:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

dnagod
You might be interested in the VfD going on for Jewish ethnocentrism, a topic he seems quite interested in. You'll find the discussion, and vote, at Votes for deletion/Jewish ethnocentrism. Jayjg (talk) 19:35, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * The only thing that can be done is to ensure strict enforcement of Wikipedia policy. Since I don't believe he will be able to actually follow Wikipedia policy, this should help deal with the inevitable POVing he will be attempting. Jayjg (talk)  03:20, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm sorely tempted to up it up for VfD. As of now, it's a long POV essay/advertisement. Jayjg (talk)  03:32, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * In fact, I did put it up for VfD. Jayjg (talk) 04:15, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Storm images
I have no idea, though using the Commons is always a great idea. Creating an image gallery (like gallery of Book of Kells pages) gives more control, but clumps of images that aren't directly associated with an article are sometimes depreciated. Might be worth digging around or asking... my knowledge of images is fairly shallow. 68.81.231.127 20:00, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, you don't need to leave me a message on my talk page if it's part of an current discussion. I'll probably see it (unless it's been a week or so :) 68.81.231.127 20:06, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

COTW Template
Some articles have placed the COTW template on the article. That is why I thought you placed them on the article page. -- AllyUnion (talk) 00:06, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Otelia B. Mahone
Thanks for the leads on Otelia B. Mahone. I have been working rather intensely on William Mahone and his railroads since my visist to the Library of Virginia last week. I have several good books checked out. Vaoverland 07:54, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

Adding Civil War Battle
I would like to add an entry on the Battle of Spanish Fort. I was going to base it on your source for the Battle of Fort Blakely, but when I went to edit your article (to see the source), all I saw was the Sources section. How do I see the full source? I could enter the template values in manually but, I would want to get all the right hypelinks and all that. This will be my first contribution. Any help?


 * Thanks for the help. I got the article started.  I'll try to add some details to both Battles of Spanish Fort and Fort Blakely some time in the future.  Please take a look at the Battle of Spanish Fort and make sure I did it right.  Thanks!

List of dead
dont publisize your list too much, mine is being deleted under the rule "Wikipedia is not a memorial". I am compiling a list of the dead from the General Slocum fire.

Civil War battles
That'll be easy. I don't create any Civil War battles. But thanks for the offer. Geoff/Gsl 02:32, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Okaaay.....

This page is wanting
See barnstar above.

Admin nomination
I am honored by your offer. I would embrace those responsibilities, and I believe I could a good job. Aside from vandalism, which almost always seems to come from mysterious IP addresses, I try to be very respectful and nurturing of the work of other editors. I would be cautious in exercising the additional power. I am retired from having a business with a peak of 200 employees, so I am not into power games. I have been enjoying working with you also, and appreciate your accuracy, focus, and the battleboxes. Thanks. Mark in Richmond Vaoverland 06:05, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

double posting
I am having an Internet connection problem that causes me to save stuff twice sometimes. SBTC (Sorry 'bout that, chief). Vaoverland 06:39, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

Your Sig Line
I was surprised to realize that your unusual user page and the red lk (not what most of us call a "redlk"!) to it, actually appeals to my own contrarianism, despite some initial misgivings. But would you consider creating more of a clear separation of your talk-link, so it is less overshadowed by the vestigial user-lk? Needs different color IMO, and perhaps could also profit from some kind of bracketing chars (not paren, i think, since they'd suggest the circle around the TM, defeating the purpose raising its prominence) and/or a short nick ("b918"?) for the user page. (I'm deferring detailed consideration of your admin nom, but so far i'm expecting & hoping it succeeds.) Tnx for your attn. --Jerzy (t) 16:13, 2005 Feb 27 (UTC)

Oh, how abt a blank between the two lks, so the underline between them is broken. I just tried that, above, with my own, and i'm going to take my own advice by adding that in my prefs. [blush] --Jerzy(t) 16:18, 2005 Feb 27 (UTC)

COTW failures
Hey there. I've noticed you removed Copyright Act of 1976 from WP:COTW and archived it - thanks for that. One small request: could you make sure you remove the tag from the article's talk page on future removals? Just a minor tidying up problem that a few people forget about - just thought I'd let you know if you weren't aware of it. Cheers, violet/riga (t) 21:24, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I was one of those few :)

admin vaoverland
Again, I am flattered. Thanks, again. On my user talk page are some good comments from User:Niteowlneils about what admin duties entail. My school bus yellow article hit the Did You Know section of today's main page. Is your work limited to Civil War related items? We could use your skills over in railroads, where I have noticed the names of many civil war leaders from both sides have also surfaced. Maybe you have some interest? To whet your appetite, I could point your to some familiar names (if you're are not already aware). Also, have your read To The Gates of Richmond by Stephen Sears? A really good book about Geo. McClellan and the Peninsula Campaign. Mark Vaoverland 01:03, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Re: superherobox
np SoM

In recognition...
In recognition of your persistent dedication to the community on Wikipedia_talk:Barnstars_on_Wikipedia, I hereby award you with the The Barnstar of Diligence – ClockworkSoul 21:01, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Woohoo! Thanks :) brian0918&#153; 21:06, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * And thanks for the thanks! – ClockworkSoul 21:50, 28

Feb 2005 (UTC)

Admin
I gave my support and why. I know you like the colors, but I would lose the red for your talk link, since it seems offensive to some. I would like another color better as well. Good luck, let me know if I can be of further support. Mark in Richmond. 23:24, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Pioneer Zephyr
I would appreciate if you could take a quick look at this FAC. If you agree, we could use a support vote for it. The other writer has doen some great stuff on railroads. We're not getting objections, just not enough support. Thanks. Vaoverland 05:19, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

DYK Candidate
Could you look at my new article Sears Catalog Homes? Freshly created, I think it would be a good one for DYK and some images would help as well. I am still tweaking it, but its ready for some help from you, if you're wiling. Not too far from the Great Lakes, either. . Mark in Richmond. Vaoverland 12:01, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Sears Catalog Homes
I left an update on my talk page since two of you are helping with it. The pics look good. 115 was a very popular model, among many choices on the linked page. the color one might also fit well for WP. 3 or 4 images wouldn't be unreasoanble, since the message was variety, 447 models in all!! I see your admin is moving nicely, gotta get some sleep, check back later. ZZZZZZ in richmond, mark........... (gone) 14:58, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Sears Catalog Homes
Sears used the brand naming "Modern Homes". It occurs to me that this choice of wording (over house) was chosen because home tends to denote an occupied house/ However, I don't know if that differentiation was applicable then as it seems to be now. If the plural/singular issue is appropriate, then Sears Catalog Home would be best, since that is what the communities which have them and the books and publications seem to call them these days. So, I would support Sears Catalog Home as an alternate naming convention. Vaoverland 19:55, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Support for Admin
I gave you my support. Sorry that I haven’t been adding more civil war battle articles it was just that school got rather busy for a couple of weeks. I am going to start editing more now that school has died down. bakuzjw (aka 578) 21:29, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As I was editing Battle of Chalk Bluff I thought that it might be interesting to have a Union Victories and Confederate Victories Categories, it might be an interesting idea to play with. bakuzjw (aka 578) 21:58, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I like that idea. So, there would be a "Category:Union victories during the American Civil War", and "Category:Confederate victories during the American Civil War", or something like that, but what would you call the battles where nobody won? Could it just be "Category:Inconclusive battles of the American Civil War"?? Lemme know, and I'll get to work on it once I'm done with other stuff. --brian0918™ 22:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Yeah that sounds good to me. (Perhaps even battles lost, although that might be a tad redundent). Good luck for Admin btw, i hope (and you should) win.bakuzjw (aka 578) 22:18, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Two things:

 * 1) I gave you my support for adminship. You're good to have on a team, that's for sure.
 * 2) I introduced your "category barnstar" thing on Barnstar and award proposals. Drop by and let me know if I got it right?

Cheers, and good luck! – ClockworkSoul 06:35, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Two more things
1. thanks for getting Sears Catalog Home into DYK.

2. please take a look at Talk:Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. I have written this new article and a blurb for DYK consideration on the talk page. This is a good one. The Beltway Sniper Attacks perps were indigent and one just got a safe harbor from the death penalty by the March 1, 2005 Supreme Court ruling. What about the victims? No hope that either will pay even 1 cent of the hospital and funeral bills. The Brady Center went after the outrageously negligent gun shop (my opinion, but the settlement speaks to this effect) and the gun manufacturer and won a victory and some money for the families. Having run a bus company, I have usually sat on the defense side of our civil tort system, but here is an example of where it worked in a fair manner (IMHO).

Thanks. Vaoverland 11:04, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)

support
thanks for your reply. I have no doubt you are a very valuable member of the community, and will do much good with your admin powers. My concern was not with "BAN THIS USER", or the "police", comments, which were both funny and justified, considering the context. I was more concerned that your
 * "dealing with vandalism and finding solutions in revert wars."

would in time, out of justified frustration, lead to ending disputes with the zweihänder. If this should happen, or if you are tempted to throw your weight as an admin around in disputes to which you are a party (it is tempting), I will humbly remind you of this conversation. Seeing the enthusiastic support you receive from editors whom I value very highly, I also feel I am in no position to lecture you, and I do hope my comments do not seem condescending. best regards, you have my support, dab (&#5839;) 10:07, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)