User talk:Elred

Wikipedia Contributors Needed
Elred, We are hosting a program about Wikipedia at the Texas Tech University Library. We'd like you to participate if you're still in the Lubbock area. My email address is kimberly dot vardeman at ttu dot edu if you are interested and/or would like more details. Thanks in advance. 129.118.14.176 (talk) 19:54, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

UTA images
Elred, I just wanted to say thanks to you for cleaning up all the logo's on the UT-Arlington page. It looks much better and we are now one step closer to getting to featured article status. Tee Owe 04:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but I have no digital or scan-worthy pics and unfortunately, I live in the Houston area now. I am a 4 year BSIE graduate from UTA and my second masters (information systems) is also from there, and my sister graduated from there too. I think UTA is a nice school with some pretty good programs. My goal is to get UTA's article to featured article quality; your contributions are again appreciated.

By the way, please remember to sugn the discussion pages with the four tildes. Tee Owe 05:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Images
Hello, Elred. I noticed you've uploaded a few images, and I had a few questions about them. (You can respond by editing my talk page and leaving a message there.) First, you uploaded what seemed to be two nearly identical images of the Texas Tech University logo (Image:Ttusticker.gif and Image:Ttusticker2.gif). However, they appear to be duplicates of Image:Texas tech university modern logo.gif, which had already been uploaded. Regarding those two images, you've tagged them as public domain; however, because the image is of a logo of an institution, they cannot be tagged for public domain - instead, they should be tagged with univ-logo, which the current logo is already. The other two images you uploaded (Image:Seal2.jpg and Image:TTUSeal.jpg) appear to be identical to each other. In addition, they appear to be either copied from a website or cropped from the image I uploaded yesterday - I cannot tell because of the small resolution of the images, but they have some striking similarities. If the images were copied from a website, then they cannot be tagged as public domain unless the site specifically says so (and you must provide the source, if this is the case); if the images were cropped from my picture, you should specify that on the image description page for licensing reasons, etc. For now, until these questions are cleared up, I'm going to go ahead and remove all the images from use from any articles (specifically Texas Tech University), given that the logo has already been uploaded and that we have another free image of the front already. I've also changed the licensing for the two university logos; once you respond, I will go ahead and delete them as duplicates of Image:Texas tech university modern logo.gif. Please clear up these questions regarding all four of the images. For more information, please see Image copyright tags. Thank you for your understanding. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 21:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response, Elred! As a side note, you can sign all of your posts on user talk pages and discussion pages with four tildes ( ~ ) or press the signature icon ([[Image:Signature icon.png]]) on the toolbar directly above the text field when editing; this will automatically insert your username, a link to your userpage, and the current time and date in UTC. Now, regarding the logo: while it may not be an official school logo, I still think it classifies as such. Public domain is generally reserved for works you have created on your own, including the original design. Thus, although I'm not entirely sure of the classification of that logo, I do think it needs to be tagged with the appropriate fair-use tag. Now, since you uploaded two versions of this logo, I'm assuming that you would prefer Image:Ttusticker2.gif to be used in the article? If that is the case, then I will go ahead and delete the other two logos, being repetitive of that one. Our fair use policy only allows those images to remain if they are being currently used in an article, so once Image:Ttusticker2.gif is placed in the article, the other two must be deleted. (I can always undelete them if necessary.)


 * Now, to clarify with regards to Image:TTUSeal.jpg and Image:Seal2.jpg: were those two images derived from my original work? I don't mind (in fact, I wanted people to edit the image and improve it, seeing as I didn't take a level image) at all, but it's needed for licensing purposes and as a courtesy to the uploader/taker of the original picture. By all means please improve my pictures, but just let me know if it is or isn't derived from my upload, and I can tag the picture accordingly. (By the way, if it is, would you mind uploading a higher resolution? It's a bit small right now. You can upload over the current image, and the previous version will still remain in the history.) The two images also appear to be identical; let me know which one/name you prefer and I can delete the other one.


 * Finally, I encourage you to take more pictures! There's a lot of topics that still need illustration. You may be interested in uploading those pictures to Wikimedia Commons, our sister project and repository of free images. All Commons pictures must be free (i.e. no fair use logos), and they are automatically accessible to all Wikimedia Foundation projects, including this English Wikipedia. See the Commons page for more information.


 * Thanks again, and please don't hesitate to let me know if I can answer any more questions. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 21:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your contributions again, Elred! I've now deleted all of the duplicate logo and seal images - let me know if you need them undeleted for any reason. Everything seems to be in shape now, though I encourage you once more to look at uploading your photos to Wikimedia Commons. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 15:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Texas Tech
Hi Elred, I noticed you added scarlet to the section headings of the Texas Tech article. It does look nice and fits the theme, but unfortunately the Manual of Style discourages it. It would reduce the consistency with other articles that use plain black for their section headings. Another thing, take note of the capitalization rule. Only the first letter of a heading should be capitalized, unless the subsequent words are proper nouns. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. By the way - congrats on owning us in both sports this year. I guess the rivalry will get bitter next year, right? -- Blue a g 9  (Talk | contribs) 06:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Response
Eldred,

As an "informed" graduate student, I would expect you to understand continuity and clarity. If I cannot edit the TTU page without it being construed at vandalism, I would hope and trust in you to clean up the page and it's respective sections to a higher standard.

Several sections/things have caught my eye most blatantly.

The readability in the "athletics" section is very poor; it jumps from sport to sport randomly and returns to others at its own convenience (Basketball is mentioned at the beginning and then left until the very end). You might mention football as well, the boys in black been making some strides in recent years.

"Facilities" needs to mention more of the research capability of the university as a whole. Mentioning numerous athletic facilities is helpful, but it does not give a well rounded image of the institution. The new research building is not even mentioned.

The flow of the page seems slightly out of order. I would suggest looking at another well designed major institutions page EX. the University of Michigan, for a general impression.

Best.


 * You may have valid contributions to make mate, but I think you need to learn about wikipedia etiquette a little bit before you attempt bold edits. Once again, you left an anonymous message on my talk page just as you made all of your edits anonymously.  If you want people to give you any credibility you need to create a user name and stick to it.  That way you'll earn some credibility.  I'd be happy to have you contribute to the betterment of the page that I've worked on, but I don't like to see anonymous IP address editors coming in and having reversion battles with the people who have worked on that page from its inception.  Can you not understand that?  Make note, I wasn't even the one who reverted your edits.  I was just attempting to explain to you why your edits were dismissed as vandalism.


 * I didn't notice you contributing any substantial information to the page (like the research capability you mention.) You simply deleted and re-ordered information that was posted by others. Eventually I hope to have a comprehensive page on par with the best (michigan might be an example.)  However, if you were to compare the current state of the TTU page to what is was six months ago, you'd see how dramatic the change has been.  That change has come, in large part, due to the combined efforts of about four people (myself included.)  If you want to help we'd be glad to have you, but cut the antagonistic nonsense and go into the discussion page and we'll all work together.


 * ...and where is the "informed" quote coming from? Is it just mere smart-assery?--Elred 03:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

No smartassery/antagonism present. I have connections to Tech and want the best for it even if I cannot aid directly. "Informed" has a relative connotation. As a grad student you should have writing skills of above average competency and should thus be in a good position to promote the page. There are however those who attend post-grad in the absence of other options for the pursuit of the piece of paper, nothing more. They, I am skeptical of and hence, "informed." I have faith you are the former. Again, best. (intentionally anonymous)

Non-commercial use images
Thanks for taking the time to work on the TTU article. However, the image you've uploaded from Flickr specifies that it is for non-commercial use only. This goes against the principle of a "free encyclopedia." As a result, I have removed and deleted the image. Sorry about that. If you can find a free image (PD, cc 2.5, or the like), then that would be great. Images copyrighted as cc 2.0 are not acceptable. Rklawton 19:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Good work. In hindsight, I should have just tagged the image and left you a note.  Sorry about that. Rklawton 20:38, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Library section in the Texas Tech University article
Okay, for balance, I will leave it as it is. However, it seems a bit disjointed to stick "Athletics" between "Academics" and "Libraries and museums" since the latter two pair up better and the first is extracurricular. →Wordbuilder 19:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I agree on both counts. An article that details the campus and buildings is a good idea. I figured you were talking about images when you referred to "balance". I like the right-left-right setup as well. →Wordbuilder 20:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Bobby Knight photo
Hi. While looking through basketball articles, I saw your upload of Image:Bobknight.jpg. FYI, this image is marked as "noderivs" on Commons, which makes it incompatible for use on Wikipedia. We can only use image marked as "Attribution Creative Commons" (CC-BY) or "Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons" (CC-BY-SA). I have sent a flickr mail to the flickr user asking him to modify his licensing terms. If he does not, then we will need to delete the image.

You may want to consider uploading flickr images to Commons (http://commons.wikimedia.org). Commons images automatically show through to Wikipedia and there is a special upload page you can use (http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&uselang=fromflickr) that makes it easier to know what to choose and a will automatically verify the licensing. -- B 04:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, the flickr user replied quickly to my message ... he has changed the licensing terms so it is all good now. -- B 05:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Images

 * hehe thanks --Elred 03:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * RE: http://jeffreymark.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/65009_512.jpg ←I like that. Hope you'll get permission and I'll see it show up in the article soon. →Wordbuilder 13:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing you didn't have any luck getting the owner to agree to a release. Not that we need it for the main article, but it would be nice on the upcoming traditions page. There is a Carol of Lights picture on Commons but it's not a snice. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * All this polish just makes things complicated? What happened to the good ol' days, when you could have 48 words, no citations, a typo, and a spelling error? How 'bout these blasts from the past: 1 and 2? →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Ratings
Though it's not required, a good step toward FA status is to request a peer review. This will get some editors in there telling us what we're missing or if there's something that doesn't follow the Manual of Style, etc. This way, we can get it cleaned up before we try to move on to GA or FA status. →Wordbuilder 21:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah! I see you already requested a peer review. Looks like you're on the right path. →Wordbuilder 21:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What would you think about deleting the "Facilities" section and just moving that picture of the Jones to some other place in the article? Since lists aren't desirable and all of those are a part of the template anyway, there's no reason to keep that section. For the songs, we can leave the description and link to the articles with the lyrics but delete the lyrics from the TTU article. Finally, we should move the "Athletics" section down now if we have expanded enough to make this possible while preserving the balance of the images. →Wordbuilder 14:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I was kinda planning to create a Campus section that talks about the physical location, geography, architecture, buildings of the campus and I would include the sports facilities in that. Thus the "facilities" list you are talking about was already on the chopping block.  Kill it.  Don't worry about the photo distribution so much right now, we'll move things around to fit the layout of the page once its how we want it.  ...and I have no problem with removing the song lyrics.--Elred 15:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Image resize
As I was resizing it to match the infobox I was wondering, "S'pose this displays differently on some systems?" I guess I have my answer. Feel free to revert it. Due to the difference, it will always appear just a bit off to some. I liked the old picture but understand the need for the swap. Besides the author's discomfort, the HDR thing would likely be brought up again as we head to GA and FA statuses. Just as long as we can keep the old one of the Administration Building and newer ones showing a good cross section of the campus, I'll be happy. →Wordbuilder 01:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I'll go to battle over the old admin shot.  I can replace the others myself.  I'm going to try to go up in one of the buildings and get an overhead shot of something.  I think I can get something pretty good like that.--Elred 01:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you happen to know who took the picture featured in the MSNBC article? →Wordbuilder 02:42, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No I have no idea.--Elred 15:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to 2007 Texas Tech Red Raiders football team
The write-up on the Colorado game is on its way. I reverted your edit. It was amusing, but still... →Wordbuilder 22:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I share your frustration. →Wordbuilder 17:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Angelo State University
Stu8912 added some great images to this article. I relocated some of them because they were creating white spaces but was wondering if there was a better way to arrange them. When you get a chance, can you take a look at it? Thanks! →Wordbuilder (talk) 15:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * On closer examination of the images, I think many of them may end up being tagged for deletion. →Wordbuilder (talk) 15:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Did I ever respond to this? I just noticed it and I don't feel like I've read it before.  I noticed those images and they're pretty good, I do think they should be spread around a bit though instead of two columns on the sides.  I'll mess with it a bit.--Elred (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It looks good. Also, if you can do anything with the uniforms at Texas Tech Red Raiders men's basketball, that'd be great. I can't figure out how to make them specific to the Tech uniforms. →Wordbuilder (talk) 23:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow! Way to put everyone else's uniform examples to shame. Those look great all the way down to the tiny American flags. [[Image:Csmile alt.svg|25px]] →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I can't figure out how to center that thing yet.  I had to remake the whole box because they all use a template that incorporates those cheesy generic uniforms. ...still messing with it.--Elred (talk) 02:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

New photos
I notice you've updated some of the photos for Tech. The old ones were nice and the new ones nicer yet. Would you mind if I moved copies of the older versions to Wikimedia Commons? There they can be in galleries for viewing without having to be used in articles. The added benefit is that they can be used by folks on the non-English Wikis. →Wordbuilder (talk) 03:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I wondered about that one shot of The Masked Rider statue after I moved it. I noticed one or two beforehand that weren't yours so didn't move those. The one of the library was moved by someone else. I see now where it's credited to the place in Dallas. I'll list them for deletion from the Commons. Thanks for the heads up. →Wordbuilder (talk) 02:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Jones AT&T Stadium
Thank you so much for the new picture of the inside of The Jones! I never thought this picture did it justice. I've already moved yours to the Commons and got it up on the French Wikipedia where they had previously insisted on using the other one since it was an inside view and they didn't want just an exterior shot in the article. The other images you've added look great, too. →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:TTcc.jpg
Just a heads up that I since the one in png format makes it obsolete. If you want to keep it, let me know. →Wordbuilder (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed that image was not displaying correctly compared to its thumbnail.
 * You and I are on the same page regarding the Tech article. I was hoping we could just skip GA and jump right to FA. There's no rule against it, it has been done before, and the article is quality enough to make it. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

multiple references from the same page
I could have easily made a mistake for that to happen. Anywho, I don't know if you undid what I did, but I did notice that there were three times the "History of Tech Traditions" was used and now there are only two. Maybe you replaced one? But I'll go through and look for multiple sources and fix that. Thanks.--Almosthonest06 (talk) 19:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Images
I gather you don't like either picture of the United Spirit Arena? While I think the picture of The Jones is excellent, I really hate to double-represent football. →Wordbuilder (talk) 03:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I get where you're coming from. I don't have any basketball pictures but will see if I can find anyone who does. →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Another image question: This image is used in five different articles. Any chance you can enhance it a bit—take out the people and, moreso, the various signs of construction (orange temporary fence, pile of dirt)? Whenever you have a chance... →Wordbuilder (talk) 03:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Awesome! You are the master. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

FAC nomination
Featured article candidates/Texas Tech University →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * From the review:
 * While the article as a whole is NPOV, it also seems to be devoid of any mention of controversy. The history tends to give too much emphasis on the naming of the institution while ignoring what must have been contentious issues like racial integration, coeducation, war protests, counterculture, funding disputes with the legislature, contentious faculty departures, controversial student life policies, etc etc etc along the way.
 * I don't have a lot of time to edit today. Here are a couple of links:
 * First African-American athlete: http://www.doubletnation.com/2008/2/26/72447/9249
 * "Free-Speech Zones" controversy: http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/5002.html
 * Has Tech always been co-ed? I know they were by 1939 but I don't know at one point it first happened.
 * →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Heh, I was thinking the same thing about the School of Home Economics. Hopefully the lack of controversy at Tech won't cause some to vote against it as a featured article.
 * On another note, are you planning on entirely removing the mascot logos from the article (they're in both the infobox and the body)? On both, you reverted my addition of the FUR for "Texas Tech University". Without it, they have to come out. →Wordbuilder (talk) 19:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I added your new link back in for The Masked Rider. Wikipedia is driving me nuts today (and yesterday). I keep getting locked out of editing because the servers are trying to catch up. It should have given you an "edit conflict" warning but I think those are acting squirrely right now. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

We may need to budge on the images for the "Mascots" section. If so, we still have them in the infobox. I understand what you say about recentism. However, the same could probably be said of the band and football action photos. Even though the actual people may change—The Masket Rider, Raider Red, band members, football players—I think the idea is still being represented. I predicted that this might be troublesome. Also, the point made about inclusion on the CD version is worth considering. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The one of The Masked Rider isn't so bad. Yeah, an action shot (running onto the field performing the forbidden both guns up move would be awesome!) would be better. However, Kevin Burns really looks the part. For Raider Red, the setting could perhaps be more ideal, but I don't know that pictures of costumed mascots are ever what would be considered great. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We can go with the statue as long as no one objects to it being derivative in regards to a copyrighted sculpture. Besides, what's wrong with pairing The Hamburgular with Yosemite Sam? {;o) →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I wasn't trying to push my point on this. So, I hope it didn't come off that way. I was just concerned that this issue might hold up FA status. Plus, this will hopefully make it onto the CD and it would be bad if that section was text-only. Here is the Raider Red image. You can hold off, though, if you think we can make it without including the real-life pics. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Let's see which way it goes. I'm not sure how the CD guidelines work, but that's only secondary to to online article (do you even know anyone who owns a Wikipedia CD?). I thought that Raider Red logo looked an awful lot like the one from RRO. →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the best I can figure is that the CD-ROM's are for free distribution in poor countries that don't have the Internet. I really don't know... →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the picture of the Administration Building should have been removed. Between it and the ring picture, I think the former is more important. The images now convey the sense that Tech is about two years old (are any of them older than the one of the band?). →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You think you can find one that is free or another one to use under a fair-use claim? →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That one is nice. I wonder if it is even eligible for copyright. If not, then we're good. If so, I doubt that the guy who scanned it can release it since he only claims a relative owned the print but does say that a relative took the phot. →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If we go for fair-use, then we're in the same boat as we were with the other one. I would say that it is free (i.e. PD): For works that received their copyright before 1978, a renewal had to be filed in the work's 28th year with the Library of Congress Copyright Office for its term of protection to be extended. The need for renewal was eliminated in 1992, but works that had already entered the public domain by non-renewal did not regain copyright protection. Therefore, works published before 1964 that were not renewed are in the public domain. I find no evidence that Daniel Studios, Lubbock, even existed after 1929. →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

No kidding! I wish I could have helped out a lot more but y'all nominated it around move-in time for Tech, so I've been very busy packing up and moving in. Just let me know what else needs to be done and I'll do my best to help out more. I have much more free time now.--Almosthonest06 (talk) 20:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright well let's not give 'em anything to complain about. Aggies generally have to get their kicks somewhere other than the football field ;)--Almosthonest06 (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

They will come in and review it when they've decided that it has been posted long enough. There is no set time. I'm concerned that no one is using the word "support". We've bent over backwards to correct and/or address the concerns they've brought up. Still, they only sign off on them without actually supporting the article for FA status. As it is right now, I think the admins will relist it since there is no clear concensus. If it's relisted, we'll probably have to restart the torture. →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Co-ed
Thanks. I own the book; I just didn't have a chance to look at it earlier. I knew it had an old picture (1926) of two women in a kitchen (inside the Home Management House). So, I figured it would be a good source. Interesting fact, the area of the campus where the girl's dorms were first built was called "women's country" as late as the 1950's. →Wordbuilder (talk) 02:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

MIT
When you're done going through hell for TTU FAC, you're more than welcome to return the favor at MIT's peer review. Madcoverboy (talk) 03:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yah, I HDR'd it and several others. The alignment is off in several parts of the image as well as soft focus (owing to the lack of alignment) - I should just upload one of the originals, as you point out. Thanks for the note and please leave comments on MIT's talk about other ways to improve it - especially regarding research accomplishments. I believe it's called a "curse of plenty" :-/ Madcoverboy (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Email
Check your inbox. →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Ring image
Take a look at this. I added the FUR to the image. I also reduced the size slightly (to just under 300px). →Wordbuilder (talk) 23:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

One last issue
I think we need to take another look at the lead. It needs to briefly touch upon every main portion of the article. →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The lead looks good, even better with your small addition. I guess it didn't need as much as I thought. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Doube T logos
Do we need both of these (Image:RedRaiderlogo.png and Image:Texas-Tech-University-logo.png)? If not, which one should be deleted? Thanks! →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As long as there is a reason to keep both, I'll leave them alone unless someone else raises a concern. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Do we want this?
Image:TTcc.png →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I figured. Would you tag it with ? Doing so makes it a one-step process. If I start the process, I have to tag the image and then list it on another page and then wait days or weeks. →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Those of us in academia would never use the world "walked" lest we be thought a Philistine. "Strolled" please, I would think someone writing an article on a university would know such things. (yawn) ;)--Elred (talk) 17:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Did I miss something? →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL! I thought that might be the case. →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Any reason to keep this? Looks to be a better version on Commons. →Wordbuilder (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Image size
Regarding this edit, the "upright" tag sets a different default width for portrait images than what is used for landscape ones. Here's what WP:MOS says (emphasis added):
 * The current image markup for landscape-format and square images is (for example):
 * or for portrait-format images:
 * The pixel size parameter may be omitted; this will result in default image width of 180px (140px for portrait format), although this value can be altered in user preferences. If an image displays satisfactorily at the default size, it is recommended that no explicit size be specified. Examples of images which typically need more than the default size include lead images (see above) and detailed maps.''
 * or for portrait-format images:
 * The pixel size parameter may be omitted; this will result in default image width of 180px (140px for portrait format), although this value can be altered in user preferences. If an image displays satisfactorily at the default size, it is recommended that no explicit size be specified. Examples of images which typically need more than the default size include lead images (see above) and detailed maps.''
 * The pixel size parameter may be omitted; this will result in default image width of 180px (140px for portrait format), although this value can be altered in user preferences. If an image displays satisfactorily at the default size, it is recommended that no explicit size be specified. Examples of images which typically need more than the default size include lead images (see above) and detailed maps.''
 * The pixel size parameter may be omitted; this will result in default image width of 180px (140px for portrait format), although this value can be altered in user preferences. If an image displays satisfactorily at the default size, it is recommended that no explicit size be specified. Examples of images which typically need more than the default size include lead images (see above) and detailed maps.''

It looks exactly the same to me at default as it does with 140px specified. If it looks different to you, you might take a look at your preferences. Should probably omit the 140px as specified in the MOS. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's another issue. As text was changed and the image sizes set to default, it caused text-sandwiching in two places—between the two images in "Student life" and between the two images in "Mascots". →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, as long as it's not brought up. I would like to fix it soon after the review, though, by adding a sentence or two to each section. →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

new content
I understand. I just figured that if we were to make it a FA, then we would need the most up to date info. The stadium expansion announcement has been around for a while, I just chose to do it now for whatever reason. The info on the old expansion plans was way out of date. Thanks for cleaning it up a bit, and I'll lay off adding any further info without consent from you and WB.--Almosthonest06 (talk) 01:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Images to Commons
Noticed that you're moving some of your images to Commons. That's good since they can be added to the gallery and can be used by other Wiki projects (other languages, etc.). Just a word of warning, do not upload any images of The Masked Rider statue. The statue itself is copyrighted and Commons does not accept fair-use images. The two pages that are there have been allowed to stay but have been placed into this "no upload" category. →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Correct, if there is an image on Commons with the exact same name, it will show in the article when the one here is deleted. The format is exactly the same as if the image is stored on Wikipedia. →Wordbuilder (talk) 03:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

We did it



 * Does the cartoon of Raider Red have to face left? If not, maybe we could flip it 180 horizontally and swap its position with the other image in the "Mascots" section? I know we don't have to have the images with their associated text, but I think it makes more sense that way.
 * We can also move the Rick Husband image to the left if it would look better not stacked beneath the picture of the ring. →Wordbuilder (talk) 15:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought we could move Husband to the left since it is okay to left align an image below a section-level header (==), though not permissible below a subsection-level header (===). I hate to remove Raider Red. If you want to put the image back where it was, I have no objection since flipping it didn't work. Right now, something must be bonkers with the conversion template because this and other articles aren't displaying it properly. →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. I didn't realize that. I guess considering all the variables (e.g. accessibility), there is no way to make it perfect. →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

You have a better eye for graphics design than I do. But, I do hate stacking images or weighting down one side of the page with too many pictures. I'm going to start a traditions article within the next few days. In addition to getting rid of some articles that are too small to stand on their own (e.g., Blarney Stone (Texas Tech)), it will provide a place to move both of the images that you are taking out of the main article. I know what you mean about professional photographs. Those are really nice. A bit of bragging, but I think the TTU article puts most (all?) other university articles to shame. →Wordbuilder (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations guys, you really had to slog through it but you got it done! Madcoverboy (talk) 21:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Invitation
Wordbuilder (talk) 19:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)== Traditions == That's fine. I'm going to act like it doesn't matter until after we remove the construction template. Also, feel free to tweak the project page. The colors need to be changed. The colors for the project's userbox need help, too. →Wordbuilder (talk) 23:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * While you're improving photos, there's this one. Do you think it would look better without the communications tower? Also, not that it's noticable, but what is that brown thing about halfway down the right edge? Prairie dog? →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I like the enhanced version. I looked at the old one again; and, yeah, it's a fire hydrant... but I think there's a prairie dog peeing behind it. →
 * When you get a chance... Portal:Texas—in the Portals section. The Guns Up looks like it sits higher than the other icons on the line. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the fix. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for redoing the Cougar Paw, we needed one that matched with the rest of the big Texas universities. Brianreading (talk) 01:02, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, not to mention congrats on the FA-class status on the TTU article. Sooner or later, I guess we'll need to get there too. :P Brianreading (talk) 01:07, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Portal link
We need one on the WikiProject page. You killed the one that was there... →Wordbuilder (talk) 05:36, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. Must be the differences in displays. It looked fine on my two systems. →Wordbuilder (talk) 05:46, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looked fine. The portal template fit into the top box and it expanded to accomodate it. I never looked at it in Firefox, though. Is that what you're using? Anyway, it still looks good. We just need to find a place to put the portal template back in. Perhaps we should give it its own box? Are you going to modify the invite template to match the other ones (with the Guns Up)? →Wordbuilder (talk) 06:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There's also the main template. I think the bell tower is more elegant so perhaps we should keep it for this template and for the invitation template as well. →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:06, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

DYK
The Masked Rider, including picture, is currently on the main page in the DYK portion. →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to share the wealth. These notices are really intended for both the one who created the article and for those who expanded it; not just for the person who did the nom. I think the DYK folks are busy, though, and don't have time to post as many notices as they otherwise would. →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Ratings
Yeah, I think you're right. Sometimes I'm ambivalent on what rating to give a page, so any of them you think need to be changed, go for it. If I disagree, I'll let you know; but we'll probably be on the same page with most of them. →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Image
I've contacted that guy twice and haven't heard back. Initially, he told me that he would send the form on to Wikimedia. However, I'm wondering if he's uncomfortable with the full release. I'm going to try again, but with a different license. If he doesn't respond, we can either wait until someone noms it for deletion or one of us can do so. I like the cropped version. Wasn't too fond of those cut-in-half pom squad girls at the bottom. →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Commons
I don't know if you watch the images on commons, but one of the ones you created has been tagged as need conversion. Take a look at. Just wanted to let you know. →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Techring.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Techring.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 09:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Recent edit
Regarding this edit, thank you. I didn't know of a nice way to do that, but you took care of the problem. {:o) →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Your way worked. I think I'll use it next time. Much better than the time I wasted trying to clean up that mess. I can't wait until game time tomorrow! →Wordbuilder (talk) 00:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen this?
.

Featured Article review
nominated Texas Tech University for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (ESkog)(Talk) 16:23, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Texas Tech Jersey image
How did you crate the basketball jersey image for Tx Tech that is on the Tech b-ball page? I'd like to create on for Kansas State. Topgun530 (talk) 16:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Football uniform
The template for the football article now requires an image of the uniform. When you have a chance, thought you might like to put something together like you did for the basketball article. Here is an example from Ohio State. →Wordbuilder (talk) 19:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Probably be the best on Wikipedia like the basketball uniforms are. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh, just noticed you already added the image to the article. Looks great. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

On a further note, I just came across this. This will be a boon for us when we put together the campus article as every La Ventana published before 1980 without a copyright notice will be fair game. I own several dating from 1936 to 1959. →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

TTU scarlet/red
I have started a discussion on this at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Texas Tech University. Please give your thoughts. Thanks! →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:ASUMCS.jpg
File:ASUMCS.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:ASUMCS.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

sock puppet accusations
Calling long established editors possible sockpuppets, as you did with this edit is inappropriate and out of line. Also, you yet again introduced the "Logos are trademarks of Texas Tech University." wording in the bottom of the infobox with that reversion. The language does not belong there. It belong on the image description page. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha. sockpuppet may have been the wrong word.  What is it called on wikipedia when a user gathers up a little group and starts a reversion battle?  That's what you are.  Sorry about the confusion. ;)--Elred (talk) 03:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Nobody started a little group any more than you and Wordbuilder have. Please assume good faith. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Masked Rider Statue 3.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Masked Rider Statue 3.jpg, has been listed for deletion on Wikimedia Commons. Please click the link and follow the instructions to comment if you are interested in the file not being deleted. Stifle (talk) 08:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC) --Stifle (talk) 08:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Double T Logo
Hey Elred. I was curious why File:Texas-Tech-University-logo.png has a white background on it, instead of a transparent background. I ask because when the image is placed in an infobox, or other areas with a non-white background, it doesn't look quite right. I did not know if this was intentional, or an oversight, but I figured I would ask. Thanks! --Voltin (talk) 16:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Texas Tech History subsections proposal
As one of the leading contributors to Texas Tech University, I would like your opinion about adding some subsections to the history section. I've already started the discussion here. Any input would be helpful! NThomas (talk) 20:26, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Big 12 WikiProject
I'm trying to gauge the interested in created a Big 12 WikiProject and wondering who would like to be involved. There are already pages for WikiProject Big Ten and WikiProject ACC. A Big 12 project would cover the schools themselves and anything to do with conference sports including: events, rivalries, teams, seasons, championships and lore. There is already quite a bit of activity here on Wikipedia regarding the Big 12, and I think a project could help coordinate and unify our efforts. Please see WikiProject Council/Proposals/Big 12 if you are interested, and add your name to the list. Grey Wanderer (talk) 00:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Reviewer rights
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 16:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Image edit
Elred, when you get a chance, take a look at this image. It's used for Lubbock, Texas. I like the idea but hate that picture of The Jones. Would you splice in a better one? Thanks! →Wordbuilder (talk) 13:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * done--Elred (talk) 21:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Much better. Thanks. →Wordbuilder (talk) 05:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Tech on main page?
Please see the comment from at the bottom of my talk page and tell me your thoughts. Thanks! →Wordbuilder (talk) 01:30, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Efscale.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Efscale.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 20:00, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TTUsystem.png
 Thanks for uploading File:TTUsystem.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 04:45, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Texas Tech University Coat of arms.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Texas Tech University Coat of arms.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 01:50, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SMU Seal Logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:SMU Seal Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 00:56, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TTUHSC.png
Thanks for uploading File:TTUHSC.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corky 05:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:TTUbbtop.gif


The file File:TTUbbtop.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Texas Tech University Featured article review
I have nominated Texas Tech University for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. FemkeMilene (talk) 08:01, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ASUseal.png
Thanks for uploading File:ASUseal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Raiderred.png
Thanks for uploading File:Raiderred.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. funplussmart (talk) 05:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SMU Business.png
Thanks for uploading File:SMU Business.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC)