User talk:Emarsee/Archive 3

Loblaw and Real Canadian Superstore articles
Thanks for your help in reverting changes to these articles. I requested page protection for both, but got turned down. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 16:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for getting the protection in. (Of course, I can just predict what's going to happen; next week the store will change all the signs to the new logo! - just kidding, I hope) :) --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 09:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Just thought you might want to know..
89.5 - KHNC, Seattle, WA in your list points to a different one in Johnstown, CO. OlEnglish (talk) 02:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I keep on getting the H and the N mixed up, but it's not that much of a problem. Thanks. :)

Vancouver
A note regarding the issue of census for Vancouver that may interest you has been made at Talk:Vancouver. Mkdw talk 17:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Criticism section of Gateway Program article
The wikipedia guidelines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criticism_sections) state that it is preferable to move statements from the general criticism section to the relevant section. The guidelines state : "While sometimes appropriate, this structure is not optimal, as relegating all criticisms to one section usually results in an unbalanced presentation. When present, such sections should be considered a temporary solution until the article is restructured to integrate criticism into each relevant section. It may then be desirable to have a "General criticisms" section near the end of the article, for those points which did not neatly fit anywhere else."

The edits I made clearly are meant to follow the Wikipedia guidelines. Why are you changing them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.83.221 (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

BC's Top Employers
Discussion awaiting a reply from you at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:BC%27s_Top_Employers Devenish1850 (talk) 04:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Recent Change...
Sorry about that. I was actually trying to add info to the link and ended up erasing it by mistake. I know that you folks - as well as the site in question - keep a pretty good eye on that stuff, so I figured that I'd let you replace it in the format that you felt best served the info.

Again, my apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.178.140 (talk) 20:27, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Star Ray TV
Star Ray TV's call-sign originates from its website, as shown on http://srtv.ca/crtc/reply05.htm RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 14:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Royal Roads University Wikipedia Entry
Hi Emarsee,

We agree that Wikipedia entries should not be promotional. Could we say that Royal Roads University targets students who are working professionals, instead of saying that it's Canada's public university for working professionals? Also, we would link this statement to the current Royal Roads website instead of what is currently linked: Royal Roads Military College which has not existed for 14 years.

Thanks

i have corrected the issues on the tru page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bart cummins (talk • contribs) 06:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Socking?
Please tell me this a joke...I'd think my 15,000 edits and openess to everybody would tell them I'm not a sock of anybody, I just wear them :).  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I responded to the claims on the SSP page...guess now all I can do is wait. Thanks for giving me the heads up.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The nominator has apologized to me and I accepted their apology for their accusation. I can move on now :).  Nate  • ( chatter ) 01:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Removal of excessive fair use
Hi, it's been a little while; are you planning on discussing anything related to this? It's poor tact (and a bit disingenuous) to rollback all of someone's edits before even trying to talk with them about the problem you have, and then say you don't want to edit war over it. I don't see any valid reason for your reverts, and will reinstate my original edits if I don't here from you. Dominic·t 02:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You doubt CBC's reporting of Stats Canada as a source? Stats Canada's ranking is by Census Metropolitan Area (CMA), so Surrey and Richmond are part of the Vancouver CMA. I'm undoing your revision. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Circuitsinthesea (talk • contribs) 02:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Chchnews.svg)
Thanks for uploading File:Chchnews.svg. 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) 05:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I was accused of vandalism?
Hello,

You have accused me of vandalism without citing which edit I made that fell in this category. I assure you, I would not vandalize a page and find this accusation unnecessary. If I made an error in an edit, I think it would have been more constructive for you to simply correct me.

Jlogee (talk) 04:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Family Jr.
Excuse me, but you don't have to be so rude. I can't find a youtube link but if you have a day off or something, watch during the times Family Jr. or as you like to call it "Playhouse Disney" comes on, and you'll see during the time before another show starts, that the "Family Jr." logo will appear. What happens in this logo sequence is a red ball, a blue square, and a yellow triangle spin top all go around the room splashing their colours everywhere like paint, then they come together, then the "Family Jr." logo appears. I have only happened to notice that it is now called Family Jr. because I have been babysitting recently, since I am not in school for the time being(I am finished school). Kagome 77 (talk) 13:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok
That's ok, I understand now. I've had to deal with similar things in articles I usually edit. Just wondering, what part of Canada are you from? I'm from Newfoundland. Kagome 77 (talk) 14:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

BC's Top Employers
Hi Emarsee, I haven't heard back from you on the Talk page for this article regarding the tag you've added -- it's been a month now. Before undoing your revision, I was hoping to hear which parts of the article lack a neutral POV. I notice some similar complaints on your Talk page that you are making significant edits and changes using Twinkle, without opening a discussion on the Talk pages. It makes it difficult for other editors to understand which parts of an article need fixing. Devenish1850 (talk) 18:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Chek06news6.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Chek06news6.png. 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) 05:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Bctvchek.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Bctvchek.png. 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) 05:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Chek690.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Chek690.png. 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) 05:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cheknews.svg)
Thanks for uploading File:Cheknews.svg. 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) 05:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Abbotsford skyline
Actually, there aren't many towers at all in Abbotsford, and only one in the "old downtown" at Essendene/South Fraser Way and McCallum - and that's the one for sure. There are some others at the other end of South Fraser Way, and some smaller towers. But if downtown Abbotsford has a skyline, well, that is it. Not that your amended caption is wrong. More "true" of the Skyline as such would be a view along the strip mall on South Fraser Way, or overlooking the Essendene area, with Mount Baker looming in the background; that is really Abbotsford's skyline....Skookum1 (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:20060225.2345.goes12.x.ir1km.90LINVEST.25kts-NAmb-290S-360W.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:20060225.2345.goes12.x.ir1km.90LINVEST.25kts-NAmb-290S-360W.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Thefashionchannel.svg)
Thanks for uploading File:Thefashionchannel.svg. 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) 05:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle
I have, but my computer froze up for some reason when I've tried using it. :( Kagome 77 (talk) 12:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Napoleon Emperor of France
I have set up a redirect to the already established napoleon article, this removed your speedy deletion template, I hope this is OK Christopher Pritchard (talk) 19:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Categories
helpmeI'm wondering how you get italics to appear in categories like here Category:Channel_9_TV_stations_in_Canada. Is it also possible to change the name that appears in the categories as well. Thanks. єmarsee •  Speak up!  06:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * When you wikilink to a category, you should place a colon in front of it (I just edited your request to fix it) so it doesn't add the current page to the category. To change how an article is sorted in categories I think you use the template:defaultsort thing. If that doesn't answer your question then add the "helpme" template again. Killiondude (talk) 07:46, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The italics appear when an entry in a category is not a full page but just a redirect, for instance WNPI-TV's entry looks like:

[[:Category: Channel 18 TV stations in the United States]]
 * 1) REDIRECT [[WPBS-TV]]

(channel 18 just redirects to channel 16) and would therefore appear italicised on the Channel 18 category page (WNPI 18 rebroadcasts NY flagship WPBS 16 into Ottawa). This much is done automatically; I don't know of any other means to force italicisation of a category entry. And defaultsort? I think that only affects where a page is listed within a category, but does not change the displayed name or text formatting. For instance, if an article on Tina Fey were tagged as the category page entry for the article would still display her name as "Tina Fey" but the listing would appear in the 'F' section within that category - useful mostly for biographies filed by surname. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 17:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The only way to change how a title appears in the category is to place that category on a redirect from the alternate title instead of on the main article. For instance, Category:CBC Radio One programs is on the redirect at Radio Free Vestibule, rather than the target article The Vestibules, in order for that category to display the "Radio Free Vestibule" title. If you were to put that category onto the real article instead, there would be no way to make the category display any title other than "The Vestibules" no matter what you did with it. The same action of placing the category on the redirect also causes that title to display italicized; there's no other way to make that happen. Bearcat (talk) 23:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

TV stations
Just so you know, there's not really a lot of point in changing the reference to a city in a TV station's article so that it's pointing to a redirect to the same article instead of directly to the city's article. In new writing, you're certainly free to use shortcuts like Yorkton, SK instead of typing out the whole word "Saskatchewan", if that makes things easier and saves time for you — but if the article's already pointing to Yorkton, Saskatchewan, there's no value in changing the existing link to the SK redirect instead. Bearcat (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Defunct TV stations
It wasn't actually you that made the changes I was talking about WRT putting the rebroadcaster's call sign and information into the infoboxes; it was User:New World Man.

CFLA-TV should probably be considered defunct in the strict sense, but what makes that one a bit unusual is that while most of the others dropped their old call signs and became CBLT-6 or CBKT-4 or whatever, CFLA kept the same call sign. So technically the station never stopped broadcasting in the sense that CKNC-TV or CJFB-TV did; it just changed where its programming was coming from.

I'm going to have to look into the CBSET-1 thing a bit more closely; while its current presentation seems not right to me, I'm not sure what would be the best way to handle it. Bearcat (talk) 00:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Dorothy Peacock Elementary School
An article that you have been involved in editing, Dorothy Peacock Elementary School, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Dorothy Peacock Elementary School. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Rockfang (talk) 19:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Skowhegan, Maine
Stop reverting the edit for the Skowhegan,Maine nickname I live outside of Skowhegan and people in the town and people in close by towns also call Skowhegan Skow-Town please learn the local languages before you edit things you do not know about, thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.254.99.43 (talk) 00:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Netscape
hey. please tell me where do you have this data/releasedates from?  mabdul 0=* 07:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

deleting quotes on Gateway Program page
once again you deleted a quote on this page without contributing to the discussion. There has been discussion about this issue and a consensus reached. Why are you ignoring the work of others and refusing to particpate in the discussion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by B5baxter (talk • contribs) 21:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

vandalism
My edit is not vandalism. You did not read my first edit summary. Cluebot reverted me. I did leave edit summary. Fordline (talk) 19:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Frequent Reverts
Emarsee, I want to add my concerns to the others expressed above that you are deleting and reverting too many changes without contributing to the discussion. I appreciate that you might think something is obvious or should be done another way, but you need to explain your changes so that others can decide to agree or disagree with you. I'm sure you must have some good reasons for many of your revisions and edits; you just need to explain them so that others don't mistake you for a vandal. Devenish1850 (talk) 22:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

kawkawa lake article vandalism
hi i do not have an account and for some reason cannot edit out the vandalism on the kawkawa lake article relating to human hunting - gives me an error....

noticed that you did some cleanup on the linked hope bc article and was wondering if you have the ability to delete the !@#!@#! that has been put on the kawkawa lake article and if, when you have a minute, you could delete the vandalism

thx --- thanks for helping revert the vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.17.145.61 (talk) 01:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cfjcnews.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Cfjcnews.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) 05:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

CKCK TV Edits
I made those edits because they are inaccurate and since I work at CKCK tv I have direct knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctvbryce (talk • contribs) 23:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Pacific Central Station
Please do NOT revert an article without first reading the edit summary or checking the post you put on my user page, which you state in your own user page that you would do. --69.123.112.18 (talk) 00:31, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

A-Channel logo
Hey Emarsee, just a quick note about the A-Channel logo edits to avoid any kind of edit war thing, I explained it in my reverts, but the logo didn't always have the "A" in black, most of the time it did, but that's only because most of the time they presented it against a black background. The black was not technically apart of the actual logo itself. So since it's not an actual part of the logo, then this is the better one to use. I can't think of a Canadian channel example of this but it's the same thing as AnimeCentral situation. musimax. (talk) 22:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

CKCK Changes
It all depends how you read that database. The height you enter is the EHAAT (estimated height above average terrain) the height I enter is the actual tower height.

As far a output power the 100kw may refer to the power level when mutliplied by the gain of the antenna array, the transmitter itself is only capeable of 50kw. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctvbryce (talk • contribs) 18:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

RCSS article (again)
Believe it or not, the editor who was giving us problems a few months ago over the logo at the RCSS article, is back, demanding the opposite of what he demanded last time! He now wants us to say the new logo (generic type for both Superstore and Loblaws Superstore) is not used for Loblaws Superstore advertising, because it is not used on their flyers. Last time, he was arguing that the logo used on the website should be the determining factor. I checked, and the website is still using the generic logo for Loblaws Superstores in Ontario. Feeling like I'm about to beat my head against a wall again, I will try to discuss it with him, and no assistance is required yet, but please keep a watch on the article, Real Canadian Superstore, and the user, User talk:99.224.112.64. Thanks. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 20:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it's the same person, isn't it? (A-Channel and RCSS edits) --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 23:02, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

BC Highway 7
Just curious, where did you find the info on the BC 7 designation being removed from the Vancouver-Coquitlam section? I couldn't find it on the ministry's site.

Also thought it'd be good to include a description of the downloaded alignment perhaps as part of a "history" section. - Hinto (talk) 23:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, wasn't looking hard enough then. Thanks. - Hinto (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Rename
The page is named as the bridge is named. Structurae names it "Ironworkers Memorial Second Narrows Crossing". Just put it back. - Denimadept (talk) 02:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. - Denimadept (talk) 02:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver route map
Hi. Could you please adjust File:BChighway99.svg by adding Highway 7A (Barnet-hastings Street) and Highway 7-in-full to the map. It looks downright odd without it, especially since un-numbered routes are shown, including the as-yet unopened Golden Ears Bridge.Skookum1 (talk) 22:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ditto Kingsway/King George/99A. Yes, I know it'll look cluttered; but so's Vancouver's road system....Skookum1 (talk) 22:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

CBAFT-TV
I know that usually, Channel 6 broadcasts on FM Radio 87.7, but that is not the only frequency that can be used by Television Stations, I have listened to my MP3 Player, and on the Japan FM Radio dial, which is found below the North American FM dial, I could hear channel 11 crystal clear on FM 81.7 MHz. That is why I mentioned it in the article. I don't know if anyone knows of this but I know for certain it is the right frequency, and channel that I am hearing.

Low Power FM
Do you use Short Wave Radio or something?? Also, this is not a radio station, radio stations always interfere with other frequencies. But as for this, this is a TV station which I can hear on the Radio, and it might not be legally broadcasting on it, but I know it is. Usually TV stations don't interfere with Radio Waves unless they are broadcasting on Channel 6, in which it would broadcast on 87.7 FM on the the standard Radios. CBAFT can be heard on the very low FM Dial, which is the Japanese Radio Dial. Anyway, I just thought I would put that in that Article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan Williams (talk • contribs) 17:42, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

[[CBAFT-TV
I live in Saint John and everytime I seek through through the radio dial on my MP3 player it picks up the frequency 81.7 FM and I know it is CBAFT cuz It goes in sink with Channel 11, and probably, you are right, I live close to Fredericton and I probably am getting CBAFT-TV-1 in Fredericton, but seeing as stations like CJON broadcast on radio 87.7, which is reserved for Channel 6, is Channel 5 always heard on 81.7? if so, shouldn't that be in the system, becuz 87.7 always is, even if it is not meant to be on there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan Williams (talk • contribs) 18:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Hey, I did know the Basic FM Band thing, but not the other stuff, so thank you, I learned something, anyway, question...

Are you a offical Wikipedia Rep? if you are, I was just wondering if I could get a higher position on Wikipedia, possibly for Radio Pages and Radio Related Pages, cuz I have been involved with radio for a couple years now, and I would love to be able to help people with the articles and stuff like that, is there anyway to get a good profile on here or anything?? --Nathan Williams (talk) 18:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

BC Highway 7
Hey man, I read the highway 7 article and concluded that it in fact is actually entirely and completely all wrong. There is not two portions lougheed highway. The entire article is so wrong in fact, it's har to know where to start. Firstly there are not two segments as the article claims, the entire Lougheed is continuous. It does not being near schoolhouse street. Whomever wrote that has obviously never driven the lougheed highway as the lougheed carries on all the way to Boundary, where it turns into Broadway, which as far as I know is STILL a part of Highway 7 which terminates at Granville ST. I am reverting the article to a version from WAY earlier because at least those versions have the correct pieces of the highway and don't suggest that the highway is not continuous because I am very very 100% positively sure that in fact the Lougheed is continuous.

Just thought you should know seeing as you edited the page not too long ago. TotallyTempo (talk) 03:57, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

MOT
Hey man, thanks for the response. Good job in general on making the highways map for Vancouver. But I'm still convinced that in fact Highway 7 is continuous, and does not "break" as it were. Lougheed is concurrent for the duration of highway 7, east of Broadway. This webpage merely points out where the province is responsible for highways. If you look at the notes on the bottom of the page it says "Some portions of contiguous highway are under municipal jurisdiction" And this is the case with the Lougheed/ Highway 7. The part that goes beyond the overpasses at the Cape Horn and winds around Riverview hospital is still apart of highway 7 despite the fact that the provincial government does not exercise jurisdiction over it. Indeed, a parallel would be highways the pass through federal parks. The Provincial government does not have jurisdiction over these sections of the highway, however it does not mean that the highway itself doesn't continue.

cheers Hope BC is good to you by the way, it was to me,...Ontario effing sucks. TotallyTempo (talk) 00:29, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

This TV
I've been trying to contribute to the This TV page with little success. I've been told that adding an already existing logo to a station affiliate is not allowed. If there is an issue with me trying to keep this particular page current, inform me how to rectify it rather than threaten me. We're all on the same mission and adults, let's be civil and act as such.

Ronald Skonie RESKONIE@aol.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by RESKONIE (talk • contribs) 23:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't appear that Emarsee is online at the moment and I was the one that templated you, not Emarsee. If you have concerns, bring them to your or mine talk page. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 23:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I am online, but just found this message a few minutes ago. I told you kindly to stop putting the low quality JPEG image, and instead put up the PNG. You didn't respond, and I replied with a much more stern message. If you have any problems with either Homer or I, please let us know. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  00:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a heads up, I started an ANI post about RESKONIE's image abuse prior to his posting here. If you would like to respond on the ANI post, located here, please feel free. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 00:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I already responded. Thanks for letting me know anyways. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  00:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Iota_9
At first I took your "good will" edits with respect. but after seeing your edits of late without consultations or respect, I no longer consider your edits in good will, but willfully disrespectful. Although I started the article I realize it's subject for editing, but editing for the better, not for the worse. If you wipe out entire sections, how is this improving the article. After you finished butchering the article, it looked like crap. Please stick to your radio's & TV expertise. As this article involes my alma mater. I also coach there. Members of my family have gone there. I have more insite on this subject then you do. it's frustrating to put so much work into something you love, only to have someone go and tear it down without an iota of thought. I've also noticed that you seem to edit other peoples articles with similar disrespect. Smarten up!!! The fact that you think you're editing in goodwill doesn't mean you are. Your point of view might not be other peoples point of view. Your edit of my article is not my point of view. Iota 9 (talk) 00:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I guess you posted before I posted on my talk...
 * Reposted for your benefit - I don't want to get into an editing war either. But right now I am upset that you have removed big chucks of information without good reasons. Let me see if I understand you... If I'm a police officer, I shouldn't write articles on crime?? Or if I'm an architect, I shouln't write or edit aticles on buildings. Why?? because it conflicts??? What better way to get expert opinion then to deal with people that are involved with the subject. Is that your best argument... Iota 9 (talk) 06:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Iota 9 (talk) 06:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, that's better... Current record - Matt Sullivan (2000) - 209.4 Kg - It's a 100 gram balsa bridge, due to it's design was able to hold 209.4 Kilo Grams. Well to some one who isn't interested in bridges it may be useless information. But to engineers, that's impressive. And this is coming from a high school. The school is teaching these kids to be engineers. Why have articles on [Usain Bolt] or [Donovan Bailey]? To some, who don't care for sports, it's useless information. For others, they write entire articles on the subject. Next argument...Iota 9 (talk) 07:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Have removed 'Current record - Matt Sullivan (2000) - 209.4 Kg'... was only able to find one other school in the same city, with students records.Iota 9 (talk) 06:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Joytv10.svg
File:Joytv10.svg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Joytv10.svg. 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) 01:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Joytv11.svg is now available as Commons:File:Joytv11.svg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Joytvlogo.svg is now available as Commons:File:Joytvlogo.svg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Knowledgelogo.svg is now available as Commons:File:Knowledgelogo.svg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Knowledgenetwork.png is now available as Commons:File:Knowledgenetwork.png. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Knowledgenetwork.svg is now available as Commons:File:Knowledgenetwork.svg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

173.81.182.46
The anon user is back at it tonight, though with only 3 edits so far. I would like to know what you think should be done with the user as you have reverted in the past. Should I bring this to AIV (even though the edits are two hours old) or bring it to another board? -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 02:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Not Retarded Userbox
Just letting you know that the userbox "this user is not retarded, no matter what anyone says" has been deleted and you may want to remove the template. Subverted (talk • contribs) 08:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

CHHR
Emarsee,

Can you tell me where you found evidence that CHHR-FM is 30% owned by Vista? neil[dot]barratt[at]gmail[dot]com (sorry - i can't remember my wikipedia login right now)

THANKS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.61.2 (talk) 19:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Re B'way...."well, actually....."
just saw your edit comment re Kitsilano, and yes true enough in the city of Vancouver there is no such thing as a Broadway Avenue or Broadway Street. BUT its old continuation in Burnaby, which runs in fits and starts from Brentwood right out to North Road, is "Broadway Avenue", I think...maybe Broadway Street, but definitely B'Way Street or Avenue.....no biggie. It's generally a block north of Lougheed and winds up in the top end of the Lake City Industrial Park, and another chunk of it forms the connector between Gaglardi Way and Como Lake Road....Skookum1 (talk) 23:02, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver in WP:FAR
nominated Vancouver 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.  Aaroncrick (Tassie Boy talk) 10:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Discovervancouver.com
I have read the postings in favour and not in favour of having dv added to wiki, As you can see from the posting content that there a few of the older original dv forum, that are causing trouble to this very day, the posts speak for themselves, I dont think dv should be banned from wiki based on the foul/hateful postings of distraught past members, who are still trying to get the forum run they're way Watcherondv (talk) 15:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

WCIU This TV Chicago
With respect to WCIU's Wikipedia page, should it also include This Chicago as it is a This TV affiliate and is noted as such on the WCIU website([http://www.wciu.com/ WCIU website)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RESKONIE (talk • contribs) 18:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Architects of Landmarks in Metro Vancouver
Dear M.R.C.

There are buildings described as landmarks in Metro Vancouver in Wikipedia. Most of these building have the architect listed because this is important information. Review it for yourself and you will see that the 2 essential pieces of information is when it was built and who designed it. Otherwise what other information do you consider paramount to the design of a building that is admired and recognized by the public? Buildings do not just happen, they start as amorphous concepts which through the sheer will of the architect are pushed and pulled into their final built forms. It may take 10 years for a major building to come to fruition and involve hundreds of pages of drawings backed up by models and renderings.

If one saw a painting of the Mona Lisa, it would be important information that this was painted by Leonardo Da Vinci. If one heard the Ode to Joy it would be important to know that this was composed by Beethoven. If one read Harry Potter it would be important to know that this was authored by J.K. Rowling.

Architecture is a source of interest to many people although obviously not to you. If you go into any bookstore there will be a substantial architecture section. People travel to cities all around the world to view the architecture. There are even books on Vancouver architecture because it is of interset to people. Many architects have even become public icons such as Frank Llyod Wright, I.M. Pei, Frank Gehry, Arthur Erickson, Moshe Safdie or even president Thomas Jeffersen.

All I am saying is to have some empathy. You have your own interest set which appears to radio stations. I believe a more common public interest is architecture and by your edits, you are denying the public of essential information. There is a wikipedia article for Canada Place that reads " The white sails of the building has made it a prominent landmark for the city, as well as drawing comparisons to the Sydney Opera House in Sydney, Australia and the Denver International Airport in Denver, Colorado." When I visit the Denver Wiki page it states that the building was initially designed by Perez Architects and was completed by Fentress Bradburn Architects. Of course the Sydney Opera house is an architectural masterpiece admired by the entire world and it was designed as a result of Jorn Utzon winning an architectural design competition. So my point is, here in Vancouver is a building being compared to one of the world's greatest architectural masterpieces and you in your wisdom think that the architect of the building is irrelevant.

We obviously do not see eye to eye. Perhaps you could involve an admistrator to resolve this issue.

Thanks Tonsilitis (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the olive branch. I will try the info box as per your suggestion. I would like to eventually add the architects of all the landmarks in Vancouver.

Thanks,Tonsilitis (talk) 05:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

This is the battle that never ends...
Our old friend you-know-who tried earlier this afternoon to move A (TV system) to "A" Channel Television Network System, and then to A (Television Network System) when I reverted move #1. I've managed to rope him into proposing a move at Talk:A (TV system) for discussion instead of imposing it arbitrarily, but could obviously use the help keeping an eye on this. Bearcat (talk) 01:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna keep an eye on this. Thanks. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  01:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver article needs help
Did you know that Vancouver may lose FA status? The article was listed for FAR on June 18 but there wasn't much response. It has since been listed as a Featured Article Removal Candidate. I am contacting you because you are one of the top ten editors of the article by number of edits. Would you be willing to work on improving the article? If so, you may wish to comment on the review page and join the discussion on the talk page here. Sunray (talk) 08:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Reguarding Wikipedia Page: John Oliver Secondary School
Hello user Emarsee, I am an IT administrator of John Oliver Secondary School and was reviewing changes to the schools wiki page. It turns out that you (Emarsee) removed the code of conduct and mission statement anchors. I would like to know what affiliation with John Oliver Secondary School or the Vancouver School District. I would appreciate a breif typed message explaining why you made these modifications. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strandcentury (talk • contribs) 11:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Date of Movie Central's logo change.
Hello, I was wondering if you could provide the date as to when the logo change of Movie Central took place and put it in as a caption to the picture of the former logo on the page. Thank you. --OOODDD (talk) 02:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Montages of logos
Re: ; image montages are not "one" image. They are the number of images that comprise the montage, in this case 7 images. There's no need to place every logo the network uses on the article unless there's significant secondary sources pointing to the notability of those logos, such that there would reasonably be significant discussion of the logos. That's not the case here. Further, the image itself was a woefully inadequate source of "Bell TV channels.pdf". I've tagged the image as missing source and orphaned. Please do not restore the image. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 19:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Use of rollback privileges
Would you please care to explain why you decided to abuse your rollback privileges in undoing my edits today? Rollback is to be used for blatantly unproductive edits (i.e., vandalism). I have never conducted any vandalism on this project. My edits were in good faith, in line with policy and guidelines, and your use of the tool to undo them is abuse. I would ask you to provide a detailed rationale as to how my edits constituted vandalism, and since I conducted so much vandalism why I wasn't reported for vandalism. If you can't provide an adequate rationale as to how my edits were vandalism, I will ask for your rollback privileges to be suspended. Or failing that, you can undo the abuse and apologize for your actions. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 03:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Notifying you; Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Legality of fair use vs. use on Wikipedia
Emarsee, I want to address the particular issue of legal fair use vs. use on Wikipedia with you. You stated at "as far as I know, Mike Goodwin has stated that using logos on articles constitute as fair use". The response to this has been stated multiple times in multiple places. Nevertheless, I want to get this point crystal clear.

Using something under fair use on Wikipedia doesn't make it acceptable on Wikipedia just because it's legal to use. Quoting our policy on this at WP:NFCC, "using more narrowly defined criteria than apply under United States fair use law". Our fair use policy is deliberately more restrictive than fair use law. It being legal to use is just one step to being acceptable here. Some of the additional steps relate to fair use law (for example, prior publication) but not all of them.

Just because Mike Godwin says it's legal doesn't make it acceptable. It only makes it legal. Mike Godwin is the legal counsel for the Wikimedia Foundation. He does not set policy on local projects, and has no more significant role than any other editor in determining the appropriateness of non-free content usage beyond his legal counsel role for the Foundation.

In short, legal does not mean acceptable. It is just __one__ of many criteria towards being acceptable. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

CHRO on Youtube
How would i put it on the article

that they have expanded to the Internet on youtube —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.112.64 (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: TVYVR
I *may* eventually get around to doing that, but I wouldn't hold my breath. If I was to re-upload them, I'd actually want to re-capture them at a higher resolution, but I'm half the country away from my tapes, and I'm not in a hurry to replace my wonky capture card, so that's why I've been putting it off. Thanks for the interest though. - Hinto (talk) 02:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Canada Line.svg
The only problem I have about this image, is that you inserted "Broadway-City Hall" as a transfer station. What I thought was considered a transfer station is a station where you can change from a line to another. Bridgeport, I believe, is counted as one because it can "transfer" to either YVR or Richmond Centre-Brighouse, but Broadway doesn't go to any other line except for the Canada Line. What are your thoughts on this? --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]]  06:48, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought that was the reason why you put that as a transfer station, though I still believe it is incorrect. If you look at DavidArthur's SkyTrain map, you will see that he did not put either Lougheed or Broadway as a transfer station, just so you know... --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]]  21:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Global original black.svg)
Thanks for uploading File:Global original black.svg. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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) 08:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Globalnews.svg)
Thanks for uploading File:Globalnews.svg. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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) 08:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Teletoon1.PNG
I have redelted the logo, as it was previously deleted as per a files for deletion discussion. What the historical logo looks like is not of any real importance to either article, and it is being used rather decoratively. For more information, see the non-free content criteria. J Milburn (talk) 19:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Port Mann Bridge: neutrality tag
Hi Emarsee,

I see you've reverted my removal of the neutrality tag on the section of this article concerning opposition to twinning the Port Mann. I should explain my reasoning. The tag has been in place since February, at which time another editor (Rwerner) specifically objected to the use of the term "very controversial". Subsequent edits saw the removal of that subjective description, thus resolving the original dispute. No objections appear to have been raised to the remaining material, which is limited to describing the groups opposed to the project, and their reasoning. Vortigern (talk) 20:09, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Was it along the same lines of reasoning that you removed the disputed NPOV tags from the New Democratic Party of British Columbia article? I of course assume good faith in that you know what you're doing, however in the future it would help if you could please leave an edit summary such as "Dispute resolved" to let other editors know your reasoning behind removing tags, especially one having to do with neutrality. (Sorry for butting in Emarsee :) -- &oelig; &trade; 20:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Similar reasoning, yes. In that instance, no specific reason was even given on the discussion page for the POV tag, which had been in place for nine months. Still, in future I'll make sure to give reasons for removing such tags. Vortigern (talk) 21:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Carry on. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  00:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:CTV News Channel.png)
 Thanks for uploading File:CTV News Channel.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 11:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Bolding
thanks for letting me know. GWST11 (talk) 03:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem.

Orphaned non-free image (File:Wfntv.svg)
 Thanks for uploading File:Wfntv.svg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 06:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

David Thompson Secondary School
You sir have been systematically and categorically discriminatory towards the David Thompson Secondary School article. Please explain why such particular attention to that one article? It conforms to the standards set by other secondary school articles. --24.85.138.182 (talk) 03:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Can't wait to see what's going to happen when Eric Hamber is checked out, He or She is going to wipe the whole page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.181.7.180 (talk) 09:50, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Non-free logos
Hello. Thank you for trying to save the logos from the television station pages. However, simply interspersing them through the rest of the article doesn't really justify their use. Non-free media must achieve something than simple words cannot. Can you find a reliable source discussing the change in branding, or something, which directly relates to a specific logo? The JPS talk to me  17:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Most logo changes happen when the networks have a rebranding and they can be found on the Canadian Communication Foundations. Other than that, I don't believe there are a lot of sources out there, besides Youtube videos. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  17:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You have not added critical commentary. You've merely thrown the images in where there is a lot of text. The images are at the moment purely decorative. I'm not going to revert again today because of the 3RR. Without sources and genuine critical commentary you cannot use the logos. The JPS talk to me  18:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe I have added critical commentary. If you don't see what I've did as critical commentary then nothing I do will ever please you enough for the logos to stay on. As I mentioned before, sources for logo changes are usually from the CCF, but they are very vague. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  18:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The yellow 'A' logo shows promise, but the other two in that rather messy section are problematic. I don't see the critical commentary that justifies using these non-free media. Critical commentary isn't a currency -- a 'History' section doesn't buy you an image. You need to justify every image. The JPS talk to me  18:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I can add some more commentary to these logos, but it's going to take a lot of time. I have a question regarding wordmark logos. Are they still considered NFC when they only contain words and simple shapes? See this as an example. As far as I understand, they are in public domain. Correct me if I'm wrong. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  18:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

CIVI
But on CTVglobemedia's website, they reffer to the station as 'A' Vancouver Island, so that's why I've changed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.75.211 (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Why??
Hey man long time no talk. With regards to the Lougheed, and the thing being split and not part of Highway 7, I have figured out a solution. Basically, what we could do is make an article for the "Lougheed Highway" and then have a section that says "Highway 7" and say "this part and this other part past Ottawa Street are provincial Highway 7, while the rest of the route was decomissioned in 200??" What do you think about that?? I now see that you are right about highway 7 being divided, but the lougheed is still a major arterial route, and deserves it's own article. I think BC Highway 7 should redirect to the subsection of the Lougheed Highway article entitled "Highway 7"

Thoughts comments??

With regard to User:Rettetast what a fool. WHy would you remove all the images of highway markers, in an article about Highways. His actions have no context, what makes it worse is it's an admin. TotallyTempo (talk) 01:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

British Columbia Highway 15
If British Columbia Highway 1A is not a provincial highway, then why is it in the BC roads template under provincial highways out of curiosity? --Admrboltz (talk) 04:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * My mistake. Google once again seems to be out of date. Its been 6 years since I've been up that way, and almost every time I would cut over to Highway 99 via 8 Avenue. I have undid your change from Blaine to Seattle, as this is no where near Seattle. And thanks for clarifying the Metro Vancouver item as well. --Admrboltz (talk) 04:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. I don't use Google Maps as a reliable source of maps. I rely on a Canadian map company called MapArt for all my map-related sources. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  04:18, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * (both times I've tried to comment I EC :p) Before I get into a 3RR situation - the "city" column is not the destination of the route, it is the city the interchange happens in, which is Blaine. The destination is listed in the jct template, not the city column. Blaine can be removed from the Jct template however. --Admrboltz (talk) 04:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh *@&(... I didn't see I put that into the city column. My mistake, I apologize if I caused any troubles. I meant to put Seattle into the jct template. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  04:21, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it. I still need to clean up the article and cite the BC portion of it, but I figured instead of trying to expand WA 543 anymore, I could tackle a combined article. --Admrboltz (talk) 04:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Hey, check out what I got on my talk page: "The WP:NFCC is a Wikipedia policy, and must be followed. I have reverted your edits on British Columbia Highway 7 as you are still failing criterion 8 and do not have fair use rationale listed for these images. If you want to dispute the copyrighted status of these route markers, then talk to WP:MCQ. Thank you.

Isn't that special. Other highway articles use signs for marking highways, I fail to see how BC is any differentI'ma deal with this tomorrow probably around 6 pm EST or so, after I return from work. TotallyTempo (talk) 04:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * On this point, since I left this message - the US route shields and state route shields are all public domain as US government work. The BC traffic signs from what I understand are still copyrighted items, and per their copyright notice template were refused to be published as a free item. --Admrboltz (talk) 04:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I have asked uninvolved people their opinion on this matter at Media_copyright_questions. Thank you --Admrboltz (talk) 04:29, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

2007 Canada broadcast TV realignment
You should seriously have read the article before you removed that. Apparently all relevant update were NOT done a long time ago unless 2007 lasted until 2009- that would make it the longest year in history! --208.38.59.163 (talk) 23:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Chch1986.png
Thanks for uploading File:Chch1986.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.

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 16:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 16:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Ontvlogo.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ontvlogo.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Chch1986.png)
 Thanks for uploading File:Chch1986.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 20:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Logos needing "sourced commentary"
To be honest, I don't know what they mean when they say "sourced commentary". I have really given up on trying to figure that one out. Me and another user (an admin) have locked horns on this image removal and this "sourced commentary" thing. Please ask your favorite admin what they think it means, they will probably have a better idea than I would. Sorry I couldn't help more :S. Take Care... NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 21:09, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * J Milburn did not remove File:CHCH1990s.png from the CHCH-TV article, The GateKeeper07 removed it in this edit. Powergate92   Talk  23:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also File:Ontvlogo.png is not in typeface so it is not public domain see WP:Public domain for info about that. Powergate92   Talk  23:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If the logo is public domain, let J Milburn know that so he can readd it. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 23:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Logo
(Edit) No, it's a duplication. No point in having this image when there's such a similar one in the lead. Revert it if you want, but I don't see the point. Black Kite 23:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Marking text logos as PD
Thankyou. Much as you probably see me as some evil logo-removing bastard, as long as the images are tagged properly I haven't got a problem. There's probably a lot more images on TV station articles that fit the text-only bill as well. Black Kite 01:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

CHCH-TV
There are new comments on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

File:BChighway15.svg
Is there any way you can expand this map slightly to include the WA 543 section? --Admrboltz (talk) 19:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah a marker for the border would be nice. --Admrboltz (talk) 22:32, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Admrboltz (talk) 01:23, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:PunchMuch
Hey, sorry for the long response, I've been away from the comp for awhile. But yeah, sure the logo for PunchMuch is fine. musimax. (talk) 20:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Powergate92  Talk  04:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

YTV (TV channel)
Stop removing my mentions that the logo and promo style was changed. If you *watch* YTV, you'll notice that the logo is quite changed, with the YTV letters completely white, and the background little bit modified. Also the promo font and style is changed. You don't have to *remove* stuff. tablo (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Logo really changed. Although the website's logo hasn't changed, the logo on TV clearly changed. I will soon come up with a screenshot if so. tablo (talk) 00:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Chch1986.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chch1986.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --(ESkog)(Talk) 02:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

CKXT's Logo
I just posted my opinion in the discussion about that logo at WT:Non-free content. Powergate92  Talk  23:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Powergate92  Talk  23:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

CBC Television logo
Hi,

I noticed you uploaded the logo for CBC Television that is currently in the CBC TV articles. They have recently changed their logo (the new one just has the letters CBC underneath the CBC corporate logo, the television part is gone), any possibility you could update the file to the new logo?! I noticed it is an SVG file, I don't know how to create those so if I upload the new logo it will be in PNG format. Let me know, thanks! The GateKeeper07 (talk) 03:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * ✅. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  04:07, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thmc1 re Chinatown, Vancouver - now at 4RR
As of his latest reversion he's now at $RR reverting the same content, as he'd done the same to two previous attempts of mine to "stay the course". See User_talk:Piano_non_troppo and the preceding section, ando note warnings on User:Thmc1 re other Chinatown type pages and a similar pattern of edits/conduct. Actual definitions and stats would help (to cite although elsewhere he's deleted Britannica references because they didn't suit his taste/line....)Skookum1 (talk) 20:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Warned him for 3RR, will report him. єmarsee  •  Speak up!  21:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Chinatown, Vancouver size
Hi Emarsee, I'm glad I now have the chance to express my intentions and actions to you.

Let me first say that I am a novice at Wikipedia editing and this, in fact, is the first time I am even finding my way around to get to a Talk page. I actually requested Editorial assistance, and editor(?) "Jayron" (or is it "Jayron32"?) advised me to air my same concern on the Talk page of the "Chinatown, Vancouver" article. I proceeded to try that, but I then stumbled upon your message, which I'm glad I did, because I sincerely did not understand why my completely legitimate edit kept being reverted, or by whom, especially when I took great care every single time to actually express my rationale carefully in the Edit Summary.

Let me next convey that I am a very nice person who has absolutely no intention of engaging in an "edit war." I also only subsequently learned about this "3-revert" rule.

Let me additionally address statements made by "Skookum1" and "Piano_non_troppo". First of all "Skookum1" may possibly be begrudging at me because I was actually able to prove to him numerically that he was incorrect regarding his insistence that the SF Bay Area has a larger ethnic Chinese population than the NYC metropolitan area -in fact, NY's is larger, with over 600,000 (as compared to over 500,000 for the Greater SF Bay Area) by Census American Community Survey 2007 estimates. Regarding "Piano_non_Troppo" (editor?)'s comment, I didn't realize that a Britannica reference was held sacred even with regards to modifiying its comment as a former fact, until I saw his warning about that issue to replace the Britannica reference with an equally authoritative reference. For the record, I have NOT seen any warning fom him about a "3RR," not to say that he didn't send one - I just haven't seen one, as your message to me has been the first that I have seen in that vein. Finally, I am surprised that he would state that I have been short on statistics, because I seem to be the one quoting them more often than most others! I also firmly believe in statistical integrity myself.

All that under the bridge, let me address the actual content of my complaint, as I did to the Editorial Assistance site:

Regarding the first line in the "Chinatown, Vancouver" article: I propose that this line needs to be re-stated as, "Chinatown in Vancouver, British Columbia, is the largest Chinatown in Canada and one of the largest in North America." The allusions to the San Francisco and New York Chinatowns are absolutely inappropriate there and should be removed from that context. Such a statement as I propose contains integrity and would avoid and replace an irrelevant, numerically unsubstantiated, unreferenced, and almost certainly inaccurate phrase, including the relatively extreme superlatives. The appropriate idea to be conveyed is that Vancouver's Chinatown is indeed the largest in Canada and one of the largest in North America, rather than an imprecise comparison with other specific Chinatowns and even more significantly, a comparison BETWEEN two OTHER Chinatowns, certainly an inappropriate statement to be present in the first line of "Chinatown, Vancouver." Clearly, therefore, references to San Francisco's Chinatown as well as New York's "Chinatown" (by the way, which one in NYC? - there are multiple in the city proper alone) should be eliminated entirely from this context.

Furthermore, the phrase in question itself is clearly inaccurate, given that the Manhattan Chinatown of 2009 enumerates about 80,000 to 90,000 Chinese residents and is apparently experiencing a very recent resurgence of immigration from Fujian and Zhejiang Provinces in Mainland China, while San Francisco Chinatown's proper could have AT MOST (and unlikely) 60,000 such residents, if recent Census place/zip code estimates are an accurate indication. Additionally, it is important to note that Chinatown boundaries have further blurred in recent years as they have expanded, and there are no official Census counts for such "Chinatowns."

I have no vested interest in any of these issues, but I strongly feel that facts need to be updated when they change with time. Otherwise, editorial credibility is sacrificed.

Restating the line as I propose endows neutrality and integrity to the content of the article and strengthens it to encyclopedic quality. The line in its present form is absolutely invalid and unacceptable.

Thank you, Emarsee, and I hope to hear back from you. I'm just not completely sure at which site I would receive your message.

Respectfully yours,

Thmc1Thmc1 (talk) 02:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Ckcobbs.svg)
 Thanks for uploading File:Ckcobbs.svg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 20:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Mctvbbs.svg)
 Thanks for uploading File:Mctvbbs.svg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 20:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Mctv.svg)
 Thanks for uploading File:Mctv.svg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 20:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)