User talk:Bruvensky

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
No, the plot follows the book. See my thoughts on the discussion page. Czolgolz (talk) 20:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination for English conjugation tables
Since you have edited the article or its talk page, I'd like to let you know that the article English conjugation tables has been nominated for deletion at Articles for deletion/English conjugation tables. Duoduoduo (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

How do I get involved?

How do I contact the people involved in the process? bruvensky (talk) 16:00, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * If you want to comment about whether the article should be deleted or not, please visit the page noted above, Articles for deletion/English conjugation tables. You might want to read WP:DISCUSSAFD as well. —DoRD (talk) 16:47, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

How do I send a message to someone?
I got a message from someone, and I want to respond to them. Do I just type something on their talk page? bruvensky (talk) 18:31, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's all you need to do. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I want to see the conjugation tables undeleted. All the people who wanted deletion did nothing for the table. They only wanted to have some power to say no. It seems that the decision to delete it was based on the number of people who were against it, and not on the merits of arguments.

As for the tables themselves, yes they are cumbersome and need improvement, but I have helped many people from all over the world with their English by bringing them to the page and explaining things to them.


 * Individual administrators are not going to be in a good position to undelete an article deleted through a community discussion process (e.g., AfD). If you feel that the deletion discussion was not based on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and was incorrectly closed by the closing administrator, you can ask them to reconsider (I think it was User:Cirt ), and if that isn't successful, your final route for appeal is WP:DRV.  Best regards, --j⚛e deckertalk 06:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Copyrights
I want to make a new page and use copyrighted material. I am in the process of getting permission. Once I get it, how do I note the permission on the page? Can you tell me a couple pages that do a good job of noting the permission. Also I want to make the page for now with just a description of the material that I want to use. This is because the publisher of the material has a form with fields for the url and date of the web page. Does this seem alright to you? bruvensky (talk) 07:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I just found out about the volunteer response team. I don't understand why I need to involve other people if I get the permission.bruvensky (talk) 07:39, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This has to be done correctly, because Wikipedia's license terms require more than just permission to reproduce: they allow any reader to copy, modify and re-use material for any purpose including commercial, and it is essential that the actual copyright holder understands that and agrees. The volunteer response team is involved because we have be sure that the person giving consent has the authority to do that. It is not enough for you, an anonymous Wikipedia account, to say "It's all right, I have been given permission."


 * See Copyrights, especially the section "Using copyrighted work from others", and Requesting copyright permission. JohnCD (talk) 09:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I have read the pages about using copyrighted material. As far as I can see, all I am supposed to do is send a request that explains that anyone can copy, modify and re-use material. Is this correct, or is there more to it? And what about the Volunteer Response Team?bruvensky (talk) 16:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That's the simple version. The complicated version is whoever owns the copyright (the photographer most cases) should send an e-mail such as this one to the appropriate email address. That is the proof the Volunteer Response Team needs to be sure of it's availability under an appropriate free license. ~ Charmlet -talk- 16:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Well mine is going to be a little more complicated. I am making my request to Bantam Books, a division of Random House. They have a form that I have to fill out and mail in. Then they will mail their response. In this case, what do I do?


 * Fill out their form, and mention to them that they need to send the email here to the appropriate email, not to you. ~ Charmlet -talk- 18:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

When they send the email, then how will I know about it?


 * The image will be uploaded. You can also request they email you back (the publisher) when they send it. ~ Charmlet -talk- 19:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

This is getting more complicated. The material I am looking to get is some text. For it to be uploaded by someone else, then I would have to give it to them ahead of time. Who would that be? Instead of this process, how about when they send their permission, then I enter the text into the page, so that it is formatted correctly, and so it is placed in the page where it makes the most sense? bruvensky (talk) 20:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Bantam Books should attach the exact text that they are releasing to the email, or provide a URL to it if it's hosted elsewhere. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Revisions
I got a notification that someone reversed my edit on the Sam Fuller page, but I don't know how to go back and see what was done.
 * Go to the page and click "View history" at the top. That shows you the edit history of the page, one line for each revision. Help:Page history explains it in detail. At the left of each line it says "(cur|prev)". Clicking on "prev" give you a "diff" that shows what changes were made by that entry.


 * If your edit has been reverted, read WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle for an explanation of how Wikipedia works. In brief, if you think a change would improve the encyclopedia, be BOLD and make it; but if it is then reverted, do not just repeat it, which could lead to an edit war, but discuss it on the article talk page and try to reach WP:Consensus with other users. If consensus cannot be reached, there are procedures for WP:Dispute resolution. JohnCD (talk) 10:49, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Use Preview button
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Gashole, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. --Frze > talk  08:43, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit summary needed
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary with every edit. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history.

The edit summary appears in:
 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list and
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Frze > talk  06:29, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Gashole

 * @Bruvensky: Take a look at your edits and the result:
 * Bold text==References== Fuel Economy of the Gas Engine by D. R. Blackmore and A. Thomas
 * Cite error: There are tags on this page, but the references will not show without a (see the help page).
 * ✅ > --Frze > talk   06:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Please sign your contributions on talk pages
with  --~  Thanks --Frze > talk  08:14, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Answer
You wrote: " There is nothing wrong with showing people things, but I feel that you are telling me what to do. "
 * I told you to use preview button, give an edit summary and sign your contributions on talk pages, no more. Everey wikipedian does it. This is wikistandard. --<tt>Frze</tt> <tt>> talk </tt>  08:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I told you to use preview button, give an edit summary and sign your contributions on talk pages, no more. Everey wikipedian does it. This is wikistandard. --<tt>Frze</tt> <tt>> talk </tt>  08:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

GasHole subheading
Hi, Bruvensky. Thank you for all your contributions to en.Wikipedia!

I have been reading the article GasHole, and I propose to revert one of your changes. As you made it in 2014, I decided to transcribe that discussion here as a courtesy, in case GasHole is no longer on your watchlist. Here is what I said:

"This page needs lots of help, and I would not discourage you from working on it. I concur on your point about water-injection, which actually CAN improve efficiency, but, as you state, is not about using water as fuel. "That said, I have to take issue with 'plot'. The word plot is usually used in fiction, or in stories based on fact, but written in story form. 'Synopsis' is the more correct term for a concise summary of the facts presented and the points made in a documentary. Unless I see a cogent argument here [on the Discussion page] against, I intend to change the subhead back to 'Synopsis.' "But, please, edit on! Continue to be bold. Fight the good fight! There is much to do, and all available hands are needed on deck. "For the harvest is great, and the workers are few." Rags (talk) 01:31, 22 March 2016 (UTC)"

I hope you can see my point. No one else seems concerned about this page, so I thought I'd put it directly to you. Thank you for your consideration. Rags (talk) 03:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)