User talk:Dlyons493/Archive03 1st of April 2006 to 31st of May 2006

Karen Cashman
Yes, there's almost certainly a case for a longer block. Let's let this one expire but I'll put a note on the page stating the next time a block is warranted, it should probably be an indefinite block. --Yamla 18:42, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:KarenCahman.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:KarenCahman.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 21:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Copied from my talk page. --Sherool (talk) 22:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, I took this from which says NOTE: These pictures have been displayed for the development of our program. You may download them onto your computer. Please use them respectfully. I felt that covered wikipedia use - what do you think?   Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  21:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, no, I'm afraid that doesn't quite cover it. Personal use (like downloading to your computer) is pretty much allowed for anything. What we need for Wikipedia is explicit permission from them to release the image under GFDL or some other compatable free license. If we don't have any such permission (not merely "permission to use") the only way to use the image wold be to claim fair use, read Fair use for details and our critereas for using fair use. Either way the image need a copyright tag if it is not to be deleted. --Sherool (talk) 22:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Minor Farscape characters
Just copy/pasting it into Farscape is sloppy. The world isn't going to end by having the articles around until someone does a proper merge. Kotepho 22:25, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isn't an encyclopedia though. Even if it says it is trying to be that doesn't make it one.  I don't think the material is worth its own article, but surely List of Farscape characters or somesuch is not abhorrent.  Kotepho 22:43, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Facty
Even if it was the real definition it would still belong in wiktionary (which does not have a definition for it). I noted that M-W has a def. for it too on the talk page. Kotepho 22:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

As for nn or not, I think Colbert and his words have gotten enough media attention for it to be notable. Kotepho 23:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think M-W would use his definition (at least, not yet) but it seems notable enough to me. The only part of wiktionary's inclusion policy it does not seem to meet is the year long usage. Kotepho 23:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Engaged?
Good for her! Where is she from? Hopefully, they won't live there -things are not that well there. I bet it is better wherever it is she now lives. I decided to leave this message here instead of the other wiki -no need for the guys there to find personal details of yours (that community being smaller - people tend to be a bit more curious). And you? Where do you live? I spend my time between Asia (mostly Thailand where I spent most of the last 5 years) and Venezuela (where I spend most of 2005). In 2006 so far I have shared it 50 - 50 between each. Cheers. Anagnorisis 00:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

List of Poets
Hi, I think that categories are generally more useful than lists. The two arguments for lists are that annotations can be added and that red links may encourage article creation. When the list doesn't have annotations that's the first raison d'etre gone. But if it's a long-standing and maintained list and the poet is clearly notable enough to warrant an article, then maybe it's best to leave the red link rather than deleting it. I wouldn't just unlink it. Dlyons493 Talk 14:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

WayneRay 14:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)WayneRay Thanks for the reply, my concern was that first timers were lazy and thought they had to only put their name on a list and not create an article. As I have had only one responcse to my dead link cleanups, I will leave them and cease continuing the cleanups and see what comments come in of=ver time. In the other area of expertise = botony and horticulture, I feel the same, if there is no article then there should be no link. I am endeavouring to add articles and photos from my extensive botanical collection to enhance wiki entries.

Iloveadama
Iloveadama has been blocked indefinitely. --Yamla 20:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

FYROM or Republic of Macedonia
After extensive edit warring, article protection, and the statement of the extended version supporting side regarding both the name of the article, and the intro paragraph, a poll has been placed. The brief version supporting side is to keep the name of the article AND the intro paragraph free of the UN name (FYROM). Keep in mind that you can select more than one of the options (8! to the moment) that may suit you. Please participate in the vote and ask other editors you know to do so too. N i k o S il v e r   (T) @ (C) 15:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Kusma's RfA
Hello, Dlyons493! Thank you for your support in my recent successful request for adminship. If you ever have problems that you could use my assistance with or see me doing stupid things with my new buttons, don't hesitate to contact me. Happy editing, Kusma (??) 02:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

TDD/Danube
perhaps, but i haven't really found anything to indicate it in the lore itself. it seems to be a fairly recent, apparently neopagan interpretation. if it can't be cited with examples from the extant lore, it should probably be removed. Whateley23 14:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

JSDC
Ok. Less drunk, using less obscure jokes, i am back :-)

Verifiability: It is verifiable. It's existance is an undeniable fact. I have, added a link to the Sourceforge project aswell. In doing this, the article reached the seldom encountered state of super-verifiable. :-)

Notability: A more tricky subject and maybe not an obviuos one, granted. But. After reading through the policy i'd like to say that:


 * It is not an obscure topic. These components can be useful in practically all webpages. I am actually baffled that, in the midst of these AJAX-hyped days, there isn't already a huge open source project on this subject. There are small attempts, yes, but these are nowhere near JSDC in providing the functionality it does. And even less that it will do.
 * It might not be known to many now, but that shouldn't automatically disqualify a subject. How, then, would information spread?
 * I has a catchy abbreviation. Not as catchy as AJAX but more so than WYSIWYG.

Of course i am not taking it personal. How could i? We haven't even met :-)

Thank you
Oule, Ave, and Hello. I would like to thank you for voting to keep the Aleksandra Wasowicz article. I really appreciate it. Again, thank you. - Deucalionite May 3, 2006 12:20 P.M. EST

Joze Abram
Re yr summary question, the way to find the answer is via JA's What-links-here. If i read it correctly, it was speedy-nom-ed, transfered to an AfD, and then speedied after all. Rattle the bars on my talk page if you want to know more abt the revision history of the deleted bio, which would probably give at least one more name than can be found in the AfD and the logs. --Jerzy•t 01:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

BetacommandBot
I think I have adressed you issues  Betacommand 23:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Heytesbury street
Thanks for your note. Your additions have greatly improved the article, and I'm now supporting keeping it. I'm curious to know why Coombe Hospital is described as "famous".... if it is, a stub might be in order. TheMadBaron 20:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I went inexplicably lame a few years ago, and after months of doctors, specialists, blood tests, x-rays, anti-inflammatories, and even a walking stick, someone told me about a physiotherapist in Heytesbury Street. I was walking normally within a few weeks. :-) AnnH  ?  21:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Though I get only about 1650 Google hits, your edits have improved the article very much. I have changed my opinion to keep but no longer delete the srticle.--Jusjih 12:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * As opposed to keep, but also delete the article? :-) fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 20:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on Heytesbury street. It's improved the article no end! Well done. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 20:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Zeugma
Hi. Thanks for note. Surely what makes it a zeugma is not that "dropping" is used in different ways but that "pearls" and "vermin" are unlikely bedfellows? I got the information from a book entitled "How to Write, Think and Speak correctly" ed C.E.M.Joad, Odhams Press, Long Acre, London, no date but probably 1920s or 30s. He says: "Zeugma" is like anti-climax in that it is a device used purposely for stressing the comic. It lends itself well to conscious humour, but has a danger for the inexperienced writer who is frequently trapped into its unconscious use. It consists of harnessing together unlikely yoke-fellows", and then quotes the Macaulay phrase. He also gives another example to show how poor use of a zeugma becomes bathos: "What with happiness and onions she could scarcely see for tears". One of our family stories illustrates a zeugma, but is too personal to quote in the article.  It concerns my auntie who, aged 10, had just been out with her mother to buy her first pair of suspenders (stockings)(this was 1942).  Her sister, my mother, 11 years older, announced her engagement that day.  That evening my auntie exclaimed as she was going up to bed: "Fancy me with suspenders and a brother-in-law!" Hikitsurisan 07:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC) ==== Hi again and thanks.  I've placed my reply on the Zeugma talk page. Hikitsurisan 20:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

db-repost?
Have a look at David Pittman. It popped up on my watchlist upon creation, leading me to the conclusion that's it's a repost. I checked the deletion log for it and found that it must have been a redirect to Articles for deletion/Michael John Ainsworth. The article doesn't look at first glance like a candidate for deletion, and since you were the nominator of the AFD, I thought you'd be in a much better position to verify whether it is a repost under the alternate name, just a coincidence in name, or whether something else is going on (I'm not even sure how it got on my watchlist since I did not vote in the afd). --Fuhghettaboutit 04:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I was puzzled too--why would such a different name be a redirect to that article? and since it made my watchlist and was just created, it had to be previously deleted. Oh well. Sometimes mysterious things happen with the software although I'm imagining it is something like this: I placed a speedy tag on David Pittman, probably a db-empty because I would never nominate the current article's text for deletion. Mailer diablo then deleted Michael John Ainsworth followed by David Pittman but made an error in attribution with a copy and paste function. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit 08:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Rundernet
Thanks for everything. Was going to nominate it myself, but I don't know enough about IRCs to make such a decision. Thanks a lot man! Arbiteroftruth 08:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)