User talk:Dragons flight/Archive 2

Stats
Hi, just wanted to thank you for all the great data analysis. I know that no matter how much data you collect, someone's always going to complain that there's not enough data, or that you didn't analyze right, but I still think the data that's there, is fascinating, so thank you. :) I give occasional talks on Wikipedia, and if it's okay with you, I'd like to use some of your charts in my slides?  And yes, I know I don't have to ask, but I'm asking anyway.  :) --Elonka 18:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Go ahead, of course. Dragons flight 19:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :) Shall I list them as "Dragons flight"?  Or would you like your real name on them? --Elonka 20:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * My real name, as is included on the image description pages. Dragons flight 20:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Will do, thanks. :) --Elonka 20:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

question re: Image:Sunspot Numbers.png
Regarding Image:Sunspot Numbers.png, could you add a note on the image page about the difference between red and blue datapoints and what the line represents? Thanks. Thatcher131 19:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your statistics. You deserve this text smiley emoticon! :) &mdash;ScouterSig 16:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry about that, I came to the article through a section link and the "The factual accuracy of this article is disputed." tag on it made me think it was in article space rather than userspace. You might want to check if the bots you refer to run on admin accounts or not, if they are merely bots run by admins and the bots do not have admin privileges, then it would be a bit misleading to call these "adminbots". Tim Vickers 18:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * They are bots running on admin accounts to perform unsupervised admin actions. So yes, adminbots.  Dragons flight 18:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * What admin actions does betacommand bot, for example, perform? Article deletion, blocking users? All I can find in its documentation is that it tags pages with a template. Tim Vickers 19:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * In previous incarnations, he used automated tools for blocking and deletion. He was subsequently desysoped by Arbcom.  Dragons flight 20:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, hence why the bot isn't listed. I see. Tim Vickers 20:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA/NFC
I don't mind removing it (but wonder what your motives are in asking me to do so—is it undesirable to attract criticism to an RfA?). Have you come back to WP just to ask me this? (It says "not active" above). I thought it was unacceptable to edit out what one has written at a talk page. Not keen on striking through. Tony  (talk)  04:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Done: now, can you do something for me? WP:MOSHEAD is due for removal, since its content has been taken on by MOS. The merger tag is many weeks old. There is tacit acceptance of the move at MOS talk (Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style) and one unsubstantiated complaint a while ago at MOSHEAD talk, with no further response since the information was merged into MOS. Can you delete? Tony  (talk)  04:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

PS I wasn't trying to "influence the outcome"—that's clear from my text in both places. Tony  (talk)  04:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks for nothing. Next time you ask a favour of me, I'll do the opposite. Tony  (talk)  02:47, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't understand how MOS is maintained well enough to know what is the appropriate thing to do there. Though it probably should be converted to a redirect to the new content location rather than deleted (i.e. redirects are cheap and people may search for or remember the old title).  If you are sure about the merge, you can create the redirect yourself.  Dragons flight 02:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act
I removed that section from the intro for two reasons: first, it's redundant with the text further in the article, which is almost identical. Second, this is nowhere near the end of the legal wrangling. I'd lay good money the government will push this all the way up to the Supreme Court, so until something final happens, these decisions aren't intro material. If the government drops its case, then it'd be worth saying right in the intro. -- Kesh 18:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Greenhouse Effect.svg
''' The width of the Greenhouse Gases coloring was converted incorrectly, and hence is wrong. Dragons flight 03:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC) '''

Okay I've changed it now, but bear in mind, I'm only trying to help and i am (as are a lot of people) not as knowledgable in this field as you. > Rugby471 talk &#9876; 14:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Wikipe-tan-ad.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Wikipe-tan-ad.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 09:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom
Dragons flight, I had no idea on earth that such a question would be inappropriete. I also think that Raul is fully qualified. I'm sorry for the harm it caused.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 04:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK. I must not be good at detecting sarcasm.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 04:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * On an unrelated matter, congrats on your PHD on physics!--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 04:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

congrats
not sure how recent it was, but either way CONGRATS on PhD!  Matthew  Yeager  08:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)