User talk:Calliopejen1/Archive 2

Black Hair
Greetings... Thanks for the help on this article! I recently copyedited that article, and had to check my impulse to scrap the whole thing... what part isn't "original research" (OR). In your edit summaries you note some parts are OR. This would imply some are not. I tagged the whole thing as unsourced. Do you know which parts are and are not? If you have time and expertise, maybe you can tag everything that is not attributable, and then remove the "unsourced" tag atop the article. That would also help a lot! --Otheus 12:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Lost Password?
See Technical_FAQ on how to recover it. --Otheus 20:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

History of Alaska
I notice you made many edits to this today. It is currently at Featured article review, here. In fact, I was just about to remove it's featured status until I noticed your edits. Do you plan to work on it further? If so, tell us at the review. I notice you're a new editor—this might help you learn the ropes with referencing and so on. Cheers, Marskell 17:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

chaperon
Well it's your line, so where did you get it? Johnbod 19:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually I think it may have been implied in one of the links you had, which I will check up. Hope you don't mind the merge, btw! I think I've taken across everything not already in. Johnbod 20:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:FASH
Hi Calliopejen, I joined the WP:FASH team and just wanted to say hi! I just noticed you here (with that account problem you had) and actually I think Daniel Case is wondering where you've gone with this sudden disparition :) Do you plan on going back to this project ? I certainly hope so, cuz I've got a few things I'd like to do and eventually discuss with you over here. You'll notice I've already started assessing/modifying/improving fashion stuff. Thanks for your time.Thiste 16:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Regency
FWIW, I've set up a discussion area on the talk page so that maybe Wikidish will discuss before changing. Therefore 17:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Jordache
Advise as to your justification. The citations on the page justify the content. How are you a more reliable source? Major changes are justified and cited.

By country
Jen, I see you're creating the new categories we talked about. Shouldn't it be by nationality rather than by country though ? Thiste 23:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, my bad. I'll take a look at the brands to get it going. I was creating infoboxes for brands but well... I wish I had three hands :p Thiste 00:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Elegant Gothic Aristocrat
You've removed my db-spam tag on Elegant Gothic Aristocrat saying that it is a real fashion. If you look at the article carefully you will see that it contradicts the japanese fashion page. Here it says the "elegant gothic aristocrat" specifically refers to "a line of Aristocrat fashion-style clothing created by Japanese musician and fashion designer Mana for his store, Moi-même-Moitié."

The main Japanese fashion article describes "The style of Elegant Gothic Aristocrat is based on the concept of androgyny and often has identical outfits for both men and women. The clothing is limited to black, white and dark colors, and the main image is founded on elegance and simplicity where the clothing lines are usually simple and tight, with pants or long skirts that stand in contrast to the Lolita style. Dark, heavy makeup may be worn by both sexes." No mention of Moi-Meme-Moitie is used. moreoever the inclusion of a promotional Jpeg indicates the article is spam since fair use only allows such images when the article is ABOUT THE PRODUCT. So while Elegant Gothic Aristocrat may very well be a legitimate style of fashion. This wiki article is clearly intended to make the reader think it is a specific product of moi-meme-moitie. TheDarknessVisible 18:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

If the specific brand is THE major provider of that fashion style, a mere single sentence to that effect is more than enough. If the brand is independantly notable, it can have a seperate specific wiki article. A article about a style of clothing is not an article on the company. And some fan's opinion of the fashion is not reliable or independant. In any event, I already removed the spam like entries from the article. It is basically an article on the fashion. it contains little information, but the previous version merely went on and on about the brand name rather than the fashion style, which was why I believed it to be spam. the article is no longer spam. Someone should probably merge it, or add more actual information about the fashion style specifically and not the brand name and some rock star who created it. TheDarknessVisible 20:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Paris Fashion Week
Yeah, my bad. Actually I found it weird that there was a red link for this fashion week (the most important along with the NY one) and wanted to add an article but as I had other stuff to do I quickly created a redirect and these dates thinking I'd get back to it later. 1914 is actually the date of the first fashion show, by french designer Jeanne Paquin in Paris. Go ahead and change it if you can find the real date for Paris.Thiste 16:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Barry Lynn quote -- negative or positive
Hey -- come to the talk page and discuss. Thanks. &mdash;   &#8756; Therefore  talk  : 20:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Dame Blanche or Dames Blanches
HI Calliopejen1, Thank you for your help on the spelling today. I hope you dont mind but I really think it should remain plural so I changed it to Les Dames Blanches, per the source I was using they are the "Dames Blanches" "white women" comparable to the Dutch "witte weiven" which are white women spirits (plural). I know my spelling and grammar were poor at first, but I think I have fixed that by now. Can we keep the French as a plural? Thank you Goldenrowley 02:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * HI thank you for your reply and kindness to me. I understand some French but I am embarassed because of my initial spelling error. Can you show me the Frnech link you speak of, I would like to read it. TY !Goldenrowley 16:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits to WEGX
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Calliopejen1! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 21:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Bullfighting
Please use edit summaries, because I couldn't determine whether your edit was major cleanup or vandalism. Evilclown93 17:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

1 Fan a Day page move
When moving pages, please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. Jogers (talk) 19:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi Calliopejen, thanks for your help editing the U of M 1013 Project articles, especially Black Belt (region of Chicago). My students are learning a lot from their interaction with Wikipedians. They're starting to get the hang of this, and they seem to be enjoying themselves. "Final" revisions on their articles are due next Thursday, so please help look out for them over the next week. 1013-josh 07:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Watt
Although the anon's changes were very poorly written (i.e. not written at all, but pasted together), I did act rashly in removing them completely on OR grounds. I'd like to pull some of the sources back in, with suitable prose, when it's OK. You might want to use the tag to avoid conflicts, which are no fun for anyone involved. Gazpacho 01:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Watt again
Nice snag on that Cattlemen's Association quote Calliopejen. I have an idea but could you tell me your method? 4.246.203.78 16:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure what you're asking... can you be more specific? Calliopejen1 16:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Did you just use Google or another method to locate the source of the quote? 4.246.206.59 18:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * First I tried to search the westlaw news database, but that didn't bring up much of anything. (There was one Boston Globe article that said it had been reported by Outside Magazine, but that was it.)  So then I just tried google.  Somewhere I found that he said it in Wyoming in March, so then I tried a search for

march wyoming "the cartridge box" watt
 * From that I saw he said it to the Green River Cattlemen's Association.
 * Next, I tried

"green river" "james watt" OR "james g watt" "the cartridge box"
 * to see if there was anything else similar. Basically I just was trying things more and more specific as I could piece together details. Calliopejen1 20:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like the way I do it, but you found better references :-) (addition) I've found though that Google seems to be losing more and more of these controversial items. I use Dogpile (etc.) a bit too 4.246.206.59 20:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please warn vandals
Hello. I'm in agreement with the recent revert you made to Size 00. You may already know about them, but you might find Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. HeirloomGardener 20:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

congrats
Cheers, Debivort 01:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Coon song
Thanks for writing this article. I've had this one on my to-do list for quite some time, but I've just never gotten around to writing it. I still intend to expand the article considerably in the future, but you've done a fine job of filling a big hole on Wikipedia, and you did it with something much more well thought-out and substantial than a stub that others might have done. Thanks! — Brian ( talk ) 12:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

What a great article. Thanks for all the work you put into it. &mdash; Gaff ταλκ 00:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hola...can i get some help?
Hey calliopejen1. Listen, I'm like nearly computer illiterate, so can you help me? I would like to sign up to your WikiProject...I just can't figure out how. I went into "add your name to the list of participants" and couldn't figure out where to go from there..... Any help would be greatly appreciated. --Esmerelda Querida 06:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Calliopejen1! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page.  Daniel  07:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Fashion design and copyright update
Jen,

I finally got around to looking into the issue of fashion design and copyright to write an article about it like I promised myself I would. Wow! The Sprigman/Raustiala paper is exhaustive; then on the other side there's Susan Scafidi and Jennifer Mencken, among others. And all the case law and decisions they cite. This is going to be a pretty in-depth article; it should keep me busy for a few days (and just when I thought I could put fashion down for a while). It's going to be thick with legal citations, too.

I expect that it will also necessitate the creation of articles about no less than three Supreme Court cases (fine, I was getting back to WP:SCOTUS a bit lately anyway), Allen B. Schwartz and the Fashion Originators' Guild of America. But it has the capability to be a Good Article very quickly if done right.

I'm letting you know about this because, well, it's law and that is your field-to-be (assuming your One L year in Cambridge has not left you wishing you never see two names of companies, people or political entities separated by "v." again, or "L Rev" for the rest of your life :-)) If, when I get the actual article started and you want to help out, feel free if of course you're not too busy.

I'm also thinking about what sort of images would work. I'd like to have one of those "Steal/Splurge" spreads from Marie Claire if they still run them (they are discussed in more than one paper); maybe another image of some knock-off fashion vs. what it copies (Susan Scafidi has some on her blog) and some examples of bags (Coach, Louis Vuitton, D&G etc.) where the logo is just splashed all over the place (a way apparel makers have increasingly been protecting their brand in the absence of copyright). The first can probably survive a fair-use justification; the last I could create for free. The middle might be a little hard to claim as irreplaceable ... any thoughts? Daniel Case 18:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Mannequin pictures are OK
Side benefit of doing this research: I found the case where the Second Circuit rules that mannequins are functional items not eligible for copyright: Carol Barnhart Inc. v. Economy Cover Corp., 773 F.2nd 411, 2nd Circuit (1985). Therefore they don't have to take the statue license. Daniel Case 14:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Missing image Image:Gauchowheat.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Gauchowheat.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Gauchowheat.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Gauchowheat.jpg, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Gauchowheat.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Common names
Please note that there is neither a consensus in the wikipedia community nor in the scientific community as to whether common names of mammals should be capitalised. I personally don't care (but other editors do) and these pages can move back and forth all they want as long as it's done properly (i.e. fixing all the newly created redirects). I can almost guarantee that in a few months someone will move it back. --Aranae 05:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well done!
In the fine Wikipedia tradition, your hard work has earned you a barnstar. Keep up the great work!

Muskox
I reverted here as the way you worded it made it appear that muskox are no longer found in the area marked in red. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That's what I thought it meant from the image description... If that's not what the image description means (and you know what it does mean) can you make it clearer in the image page and also include that in the caption below the map? It's confusing to have a two-color distribution on a map that isn't explained in the caption. Calliopejen1 16:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * How does it look now, Muskox. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)