User talk:Cast/Archive 4

Cybergoth
Thanks very much for your help with the cybergoth move, and the redirects and talk page merge issues. I really appreciate it. Aryder779 (talk) 15:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

January 2009
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Oo7565 (talk) 00:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the notice of concern regarding the recent flurry of Cybergoth reverts and counter-reverts. Rest assured that my only intention behind my actions was to promote and encourage discussion regarding the recent move of the article from Cyber (subculture) to Cybergoth. During my reverts I attempted to communicate with the opposing editor that the activity we were engaged in was disruptive and warned said editor that they were breaching the Third revert rule. In the process, I inadvertently breached it myself. Since that brief period of reversion warring, the duel has died and I assume a genuine discussion regarding the future of the article can continue. --Cast (talk) 01:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * thanks and your welcome i was just giveing you a heads up about the 3rr ruleOo7565 (talk) 01:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Cyberpunk album page
I just wanted to thank you for creating such an in-depth article on Billy Idol's Cyberpunk album. I wanted to learn more about the album's production and release and was just expecting a stub article, but instead I got a well-written and and detailed description! Great work! Are you a fan of the album? Weatherman90 (talk) 02:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your gratitude and interest in subject. I put a fair amount of effort into that article, and it's nice to see it appreciated by others. I am not really a great fan of the album, nor of Billy Idol in general. In fact, having listened to it, I find myself disliking most of its content and agreeing with some of the negative criticism charged against certain tracks. That said, I am also rather sympathetic to what I've come to believe was Idol's genuine interest to propagate what he believed to be a vital emerging subculture of the early 90s, and am almost kinda disappointed that his futurist predictions regarding a "cyberpunk-punk" music movement didn't take place. It certainly would have been interesting to see it develop beyond his enthusiasm into a full blown music sub-genre. I discovered the album some months ago by chance, while following links on wikipedia from the cyberpunk article. Ignoring the topic at the time, I eventually stumbled upon a pirated copy of the Cyberpunk: Shock to The System documentary on YouTube and my interest was peaked. In a matter of days I tracked down about 90% of the cited sources I used for the article, and then having no one to discuss my findings with, I proceeded to write the majority of the article over another couple of days. It was largely fleshed out in less than a week, but I eventually lost interest and haven't pushed it to FA status. I believe it would be nearly ready for FA nomination if I were to include more information derived from The Souls of Cyberfolk: Posthumanism as Vernacular Theory. Unfortunately, what little of that book I have read has convinced me that the subject is rather long, and will take a fair amount of study on my part to properly integrate those parts related to the Cyberpunk album into the article. Once I do though, the work will be as complete as I can make it. If you are interested in learning more about the subject, do follow the citations. The article can only detail the dry facts, and much of the "flavor" of the original interviews with Idol is not conveyed as accurately as it could be. --Cast (talk) 03:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Anarchism: Related Portals
Hey Cast, thanks for your expansion of this section. Looks great! Nathan McKnight -- Aelffin (talk) 19:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Alexander Berkman
Thanks. I'm glad that our Task Force has another GA. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 05:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

A message to Cast
The AI/IAF/AFI has renewed interest in wikipedia. I hope that ochlarchists like Zazaban and Skomorokh can be more matter of fact this time! The AI is certainly not a "hoax/spam/non-notable; worth keeping an eye on for quality control", see my arguments below. AI/IAF/AFI is significantly the largest anarchist organization in the world. This is based on reliable, independent third party sources, and I hope thus that my scientifical contributions will not be deleted.
 * If adding true and easily verifiable information to the IFA-IAF-Wiki-page, that is clearly misleading and biased, is vandalism, you have a wrong interpretation of the concept vandalism. My additions isare100% according to the Wikipedia principle of verification. If I am blocked it is real vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.202.78.10 (talk) 03:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Labor / Worker's Rights project
I recently drafted a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Wikiproject_Workers_Rights_.26_Labor. proposal for a Worker's Rights & Labor Issues WikiProject] ... I thought you might be interested, since you are working on the Anarchism project ...

Cheers! Jrtayloriv (talk) 05:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Alan Grant interview
Not sure if you have it but there was a big three-part interview with Alan Grant in the Judge Dredd Megazine. I happen to only have 1 part and I don't think it is much use to the Anarky articles (but I will dig it out and check) but I thought I'd flag that there are probably some bits in those that could be useful (it is a pretty wide-ranging interview touching on everything - not just a 2000AD-centric view). I'm going to contact a friend who does interviews for the Megazine and see if he can fill in any I don't have that he has done, but those are by David Bishop, so it isn't immediately useful but it might be it makes others available (or those back issues should be easy enough to find on eBay or a good comic store, or even the 2000 AD back issues area if it is still working).

Anyway just thought I'd flag this. Keep up the good work. (Emperor (talk) 20:25, 16 March 2009 (UTC))


 * Thank you very much for that information. I had been informed of this some months ago while getting Anarky through the FAC nomination process, and had forgotten. Unfortunately, I have not accessed these interviews in the past, and tend to rely on online sources, due to the ease with which I can find them. As you can imagine, I have exhausted all online sources for Alan Grant interviews, and so indeed, the only interviews and Anarky related commentary I would not be aware of would be those included in publications during the late '90s, at the peak of the characters media exposure, and those minor comments made by Grant and Breygole for printed or video-recorded interviews. If it is at all possible that you could discover any that exist, please don't hesitate to pitch your knowledge into the article, or in my direction. Again, thank you. --Cast (talk) 21:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Will do (I had a look at the issue I had but it was more Judgement in Gotham and the end of his work at DC, as well as more recent work). Interestingly what I forgot was that the Megazine is available online at Clickwheel but you still have to pay for access. (Emperor (talk) 00:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC))


 * This might be useful - goes into the background on Anarky and although I don't think it adds anything new it might give a slightly different angle on things. (Emperor (talk) 19:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC))


 * Thank you again for your suggestion. I actually have found this interview before, and though I agree that it does not contribute much in the way of new details, it does confirm information only alluded to previously. For example, Grant specifies that Breyfogle had no hand in the creation of Anarky beyond illustrating Grant's script. It would not be until the Anarky series that Breyfogle would begin contributing to the character's development. However, I do not wish to use this interview for any citations, as I was challenged on the use of blogs during Anarky's FAC nomination process, and I just want to avoid any challenges it might bring. Further, the interviewer states that this interview is part of the research for a larger book, so with any luck, some of this predominantly Anarky and socio-political oriented interview will be carried over into the published work; assuming it is ever published, of course. --Cast (talk) 06:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Blogs aren't verbotten, as the author is a comic scholar and it is an interview it is fine to use. (Emperor (talk) 15:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC))

Orphaned non-free media (File:The Heimin Shimbun (1903).jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:The Heimin Shimbun (1903).jpg. 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) 05:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've stuck a speculative PD-US-1923-abroad on this, so it should be safe from the copyright wolves for now. Skomorokh  09:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

June's selected article
Ciao, Cast. I've been looking around for an article to select for the anarchism portal in June and The Last of the Masters is one of the more tightly-written candidates. If you think it an appropriate selection, do you think you would have time to write the profile during the week? I think with a little more leeway in terms of WP:V than the article would allow, a case could be made for a sufficiently anarchism-centric piece. Regards,  Skomorokh   00:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your interest in the article. I believe I may just be able to hash out a suitable summary, using previous examples as a basis. I'll use the currently re-directed June space to begin putting one together. On another note, I recognize that we need more high quality articles before we can implement an automated article selection system, but haven't we settled below our original desire to only focus GA and FA material? I recall that we wanted to please a reviewing editor during an FP nomination process, but I've since realized that there are featured portals which showcase non-FA or GA articles. I'm going to slap together an automated selected article page in my sandbox, and we shall see what we have to work with then. Adding all previously selected articles since December '07, the month the ATF was created, we now have about eighteen articles which can be immediately included on it. --Cast (talk) 02:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The piece is great, thanks Cast. The problem with showcasing only GA/FA articles is that we have used up all the appropriate ones and new ones are not coming quick enough – only two in 2009. I'd rather have a decent article every month than having the showcased article changed a few times a year. Another issue is that aside from the (problematic) news module, the selected article is the only non-recycled content in the portal.


 * As for the FPO issue, the criteria only stipulate that showcased content "is preferably already featured". Looking at the most recent promotions, they all mention selecting only good and featured articles. I'd say we have 2 FA (Goldman, anarcho-capitalism) and around 10 GA articles (discounting Wilde, Batman, Somalia, Bogdan-Piteşti, perhaps others) that could be used. Judging from the recent promotions, we would need around 20, which could be done if we allowed all anarchism GAs/FAs to be used. There are two anarchism articles at GAN now, which puts us within reach of the article quota so once the anniversaries are overhauled the portal will be in pretty good shape for featured status – reviewers don't seem to be choosy about images, there are plenty of main page-approved DYKs, high-quality sourced quotes, great links to relevant pages, and a rather sharp layout. Mahalo,  Skomorokh   01:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Abramowski
Hi Cast! I uploaded to commons a of Abramowski. This image was previously uploaded to en Wikipedia by you. There are some problems with the license. Could you take a look? Wherefrom was that image? Mat86 (talk) 17:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your interest in Abramowski, but unfortunately it has been so long since I uploaded that file that I no longer remember how I came upon it. Indeed, I did not even recall uploading it until now. I'm afraid I can't be of any further help to you on the subject. I wish you the best of luck in finding the information you seek. --Cast (talk) 01:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

GA nominations—reviews are up
Yo, not sure if you've noticed, but reviewers have stepped forward for both "The Last of the Masters" (review) and Golos Truda (review). Your skills will be required if either are to pass, I'd wager. Regards,  Skomorokh   04:13, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the heads up. This has actually caught me at a rather bad time, but I'll devote some attention to both reviews as soon as possible. --Cast (talk) 05:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Most of the "Masters" points are now covered; do you think you will have time to do the reorganistion-by-theme of the Thematic analysis section?  Skomorokh   17:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Pardon this late response. I'm still up for it, and indeed am quite anxious to get started, but I'm going through a process of rereading the sources and creating a more well conceived write-up on the subject. My original prose on the subject is more bare than I'd really considered, and I'm now realizing that I'd not properly read the full context of the some of the works. I'll get to it as best I can today. --Cast (talk) 22:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Multi-portal template
Neat stuff! Cirt (talk) 07:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I imagine your responding to my recent use of this on Project Chanology. I find it useful to occasionally rummage through template categories. Never know what you'll find. --Cast (talk) 16:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Opposition to the 2001 Afghanistan War
Category:Opposition to the 2001 Afghanistan War,, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –B LACK F ALCON  (T ALK ) 00:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

A little help?
See here Zazaban (talk) 05:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Request for your opinion
Hi. Can you join this discussion in order to offer us your thoughts? It would be most appreciated. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 06:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Orbit Science Fiction no.5 (Nov-Dec 1954).jpg is almost certainly Public Domain
The copyright Registration Number for Orbit science fiction, Nov.-Dec. 1954 is B00000497234. The only content copyright renewals for B00000497234 are The Queer Critter by Gordon R. Dickson (in RE0000150828 / 1982-12-30) and The Penfield Effect by August Derleth (RE0000140477 / 1982-10-25). Note that the copyright search must use the Registration Number B00000497234 of the magazine issue to find all renewed material. The magazine name and issue won't necessarilly show everything that was renewed but renewals will always show original Registration Number (As stated by the claimant on the renewal registration.).

Sometimes a careful search will find errors or fraud in a renewal registration so I suggest finding a minimum of two works from a magazine known to have been first published in that issue and showing same initial Registration Number to verify accuracy. I haven't found an author attribution for the cover art and it is possibly not the first publication and was renewed properly though I consider that unlikely. I did find a story in this issue which was not renewed within the statutory time limits and permanently entered the public domain but is claimed in a renewal registration that states a later date of first publication which is another reason to do thorough careful searching to verify copyright status of a work. Perhaps it's just "boilerplate" but there was a statement to the effect this short lived magazine's issues were probably under copyright protection that caused me to look into how much actually is copyrighted and so far I haven't found much in any of the issues that was properly renewed. Refrigerator Heaven (talk) 22:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "Although the Hanro Corporation is defunct, the series remains copyrighted and a freely-licensed alternative could not reasonably be obtained." This was the statement that bugged me. I feel people are much too quick to assume copyright exists and make statements that have a detrimental effect on the use and concept of the public domain. I won't get on my soapbox about copyright law changes since the 1970s. Refrigerator Heaven (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for this information. I must sheepishly admit that at the time I uploaded this image, and provided what I believed to be appropriate information, I was grossly misinformed as to how copyright protection renewals are processed, and largely still am. Though my knowledge has since improved to some small degree, I am largely still too ignorant to understand how to properly research correct copyright status. The default process of the Wikipedia editing community is to assume copyright, erring on the side of "safety" to avoid legal problems. I will attempt to follow up this new information by confirming the cover art attribution. As I have in my possession a copy of Orbit Science Fiction no.5, I'll perform further background research into the other stories published in the issue. I should like to know what your particular interest in this issue stems from. Is this part of a larger process of double checking the copyright status of the works of short story publications listed on Wikipedia? I wish to know because I would like to know if you intend to further investigate the copyright status of this story. Given all of the citation you've provided, the tags affixed to the image file, File:Orbit Science Fiction no.5 (Nov-Dec 1954).jpg, can be updated with notices for its public domain status. If these should be challenged at some point, I doubt I would have the knowledge to properly back up the assertion. As stated, I will research the cover art attribution and try to improve my understanding of copyright renewal, and may attempt to defend the assertion of public domain. However, I might not be entirely successful. Your future cooperation cannot be insisted upon, but would be very helpful. Again, thank you for this information. Best regards. --Cast (talk) 05:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Checking copyright status can be very complicated and often impossible for most practical purposes. The Copyright Office has some good circulars, reference to the United States Code is sometimes necessary to check the exact wording of law, sometimes case law overrides what statutes still say though that isn't a big issue in this narrow area, there are some unofficial databases being assembled to supplement what Congress didn't mandate putting online although research has provided estimates that only a small percentage of works from 1923 to 1950 are copyright protected, .... Project Gutenberg has a good set of guidelines for researching copyright status. I'd be glad to help to the extent I can but be aware I'm not a lawyer or specialized amateur copyright status researcher. I might expand into selectively checking copyright status of works in short story publications listed in Wickipedia; primarily where I have a copy of the publication or other extremely reliable source of bibliographic information to help expand scanning and release of public domain works so the public actually has access. For the cover, I overlooked checking under the artist name or that information wasn't available when I looked at the image file info. (Oh, you've just said it wasn't available then. Too much Christmas shopping and too little sleep lately.)I possibly forgot to check under Hanro too. I'd guess the cover was a work done for hire but the artist should be searched for since known. I have Orbit No. 4 and that cover has no artist attribution. Covers and interior illustrations can be much harder to verify status of than the stories in old magazines and anthologies. I suspect you can reword to indicate it's probably in the public domain but for safety and to conform to Wickipedia policy will need to keep the license you're using now for the image file. My interest is from a combination of interests, the censorship/chilling effect of post-1960s copyright laws, science fiction and Philip K. Dick who is a top contender for my favorite author. I've checked the copyright status of this story very thoroughly but your question makes me realize I haven't added footnotes for the story publication. I have the 1981 edition of PKD: A Philip K. Dick Bibliography and a Galactic Central PKD bibliography from about 1992 (have to check the date) plus various other resources so I can do very thorough copyright and bibliographic research for him up to about that time. I have a lot of magazines with the original publications of his works also. You're welcome to information from these resources. My primary interests include fleshing out or creating articles on shorter PKD works and contributing to more general PKD articles (without overdoing this), perhaps with more emphasis on his large body of short stories and novellas which seem neglected. Fleshing out articles about some of the lesser known SF magazines, authors and related subjects is also up on my interest priorities. In these areas and many others I'd like to bring more information from print sources that are neglected because they are pre-internet. Guy Gilpatric is among some authors whose Wickipedia articles I want to expand. Odds and ends of whatever happens to be of interest to me at any given moment that I think I have something worthwhile to write about with references at hand should get some attention from me. This sounds very ambitious but I don't know how much I'll actually follow up on doing.


 * There are a few other broad areas of interest I want to supplement with overlooked information and print sources which strongly show overdependence on internet information IMO. Significant historical gaps are especially obvious signs of this and I think I have old reference books packed away which will be very useful. Time will tell. Refrigerator Heaven (talk) 22:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Last of the Masters - a few changes
Cast, I corrected the spelling of Gregg Rickman's first name which was spelled Greg and corrected the page citation from 451 to 389 after making certain the ISBNs matched though I don't recall a revised edition existing. Took me a little while to find the right page but 389 is definitely the one for this citation. 451 is the last page of To The High Castle. An "About The Author" paragraph on Rickman. I noticed because I thought the alternate MS title might be wrong and looked it up. It sounded like it could have been a title for an untitled idea for a TV series I remembered Dick wrote. (Wrote the idea that is. I don't recall if he actively tried to sell it to any TV network but it eventually got published after his death.)

I've added some footnotes to a bibliography to back up the discrepancy about date of first publication of the story in the Copyright Status section. You might want to reformat them. I wasn't sure if they should be put into the reference format you used or if they might belong in a seperate footnote section. You seem to be very knowledgeable about formatting and appearance so I left it for you to decide how they should appear. Refrigerator Heaven (talk) 01:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC)