User talk:Every1blowz

Welcome!
Hello, Every1blowz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions; I hope you like it here and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:


 * If you haven't already, drop by the new user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages with  so others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Our policies, guidelines, and simplified ruleset
 * How to edit a page and write a great article
 * The Wikipedia tutorial and picture tutorial
 * The handy Manual of Style
 * And finally, remember to be bold in updating pages!

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian. Although we all make mistakes, please keep in mind what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

-- Sango  123  03:04, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Image:Fer-de-lance (common lancehead).jpg
I noticed you uploaded this image without license tags. Please verify that it is compatible with the GFDL. Thank you. Guettarda 02:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Leukocytes
Hello, I just noticed that you moved White blood cell to Leukocyte. Personally, I don't have any strong opinion about the title of the article, and I could live with either. But there are two problems with the way you moved the article: You may want to check out Help:Moving a page. For now, I have undone your move; maybe we should first discuss the proper article title in Talk:White blood cell. Cheers, AxelBoldt 18:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * you used the cut-and-paste method, which means that the history of the article has not been moved over to Leukocyte and is still at White blood cell. We have a move feature which moves the complete history over; this only works if no destination article exists, so the destination has to be deleted first. It's a bit more work, but the results are a lot nicer since the article's history is all kept in one place. The GFDL license we use requires us to honor all contributors, so this is kind of important.
 * There are now lots of double redirects, e.g. the article "leucocyte" redirecting to "white blood cell" which redirects to "leukocyte". The software cannot deal with these, so all of them have to fixed manually.

Beckjord
You probably know about this already, but if not, see Requests_for_arbitration/Beckjord/Proposed_decision. Efforts to get Beckjord to edit like a grown-up have failed so far; it appears it won't be a problem much longer. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Fer-de-lance (common lancehead).jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Fer-de-lance (common lancehead).jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:41, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

People not admins
should not act like admins.

bozo

Find yourself a life Beckjord. --Every1blowz 19:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest you roll back any future changes you notice from him without attempting any dialog. Per Arbcom, he is banned for a year. 3RR is not applicable to such reverts, either. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

RE.:Pixes of Bigfoot
Go to the archived pages of the bigfoot page, and/or do a Google Search:Bigfoot Pixes to get one or more pixes of the creature. I've seen some pixes of this thing on links I've asked about long ago. Cheers. :) Martial Law 02:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I've seen some on the links that you should find interesting. Martial Law 02:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Image5.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Image5.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL-self to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 19:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Snakebite morbidity map
Hi! I came across your map today. It looks very nice, but there are a few significant mistakes that I'd like to point out. First of all, you (or the WHO) forgot Sri Lanka, where a number of notorious species are responsible for many fatalities every year. The same goes for the Taiwan, the Philippines and Hainan island (off the coast of southern China), which all have many deadly species. There's the UK, which has 1 venomous species, Vipera berus, which is also the only venomous snake in Scandinavia (an area colored brown). Japan even has a number of venomous species (6-7?), one of which is a deadly colubrid. In the South Pacific, most of the shores around the islands there are inhabited by sea snakes, most of which are potentially deadly. Finally, Chili and the larger Caribbean islands do have terrestrial snakes, but I don't think any of them are venomous. --Jwinius 14:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello. I just stopped by to say thank you for pointing out the mistakes in my map. I'll fix those ASAP. The WHO map I used as reference may be found here (PDF file). As you can see, it isn't very accurate (Sri Lanka, etc. have been left out). I don't know much about snakes, so when WHO says there's no land snakes in Chile I tend to believe them. Anyway, the WHO document, released in 1998 (should be accurate enough), has individual statistics which I can use to create a more accurate map.


 * I'm still not sure what to do with Chile; should I color it in? Also, I was aware of sea snakes, but the WHO map had no information on this I just left it out. What do you suggest I do? I can put it in the map but I'll need statistics on this and I'm not sure where I can find this sort of info. --Every1blowz 19:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised what the WHO is providing faulty, or at least incomplete data? It's not your fault. On the the contrary: I want to thank you for providing the nice map! I'll try to give you a little advice. Finally, if you want to be really precise, perhaps it would be better to state that this map concerns the "Global distribution of terrestrial snakebite morbidity", so as not to include morbidity related to sea snakes. That should do it. If you have any more questions, you know where to find me! --Jwinius 21:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Leave out the "No terrestrial snakes" zone and lables. The map is about snakebit morbidity, so we don't want to claim a complete absence of snakes, when we're only concerned with the venomous species. This fixes the problem with Chili right away, as there are no venomous species there.
 * Sri Lanka, Taiwan, the Philippines and Hainan island: color those black like the nearby mainland.
 * Japan: color that the same shade of brown as the Korean Peninsula.
 * UK: color that the same shade of brown as the Netherlands and Gemany, since they have the same snakes (note: Ireland remains green, since there are no snakes there at all).
 * Sicily: brown like the rest of Italy.
 * Cyprus: brown like Turkey and Syria.
 * That little island off the north coast of Brazil? I don't know if that's really an island, but if it is I can't imagine it being anything else except black.


 * Hello again. I updated the map with your suggestions and uploaded it. You can find it in the current snakebite article (might have to clear your cookies). Please tell me if I missed anything. --Every1blowz 23:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

There's two more things I can think of. One is that Denmark should be the same color as Germany below it. The reason is the same as for the UK: Vipera berus occurs there.

The second concerns the accuracy of the data. The truth is that there have been very few if any recorded deaths due to snake bite in Denmark or the UK during the past 100 years. However, the same can be said for a number of other regions in north-western Europe, such as the Benelux, (northern) Germany, Poland, and Scandinavia, where V. berus is also the only venomous species. Yet, those countries are all colored brown. I suspect that this is because the WHO data is first based on the regions where venomous species occur, and thereafter with the total number of snakebite related deaths per 100,000 people within those regions. That's fine with me, but then they (we) should be more consistent: either color all the areas brown where venomous species occur, or color green all the individual countries (or regions within them for big countries) for which it is known there there is less than 1 death per (something like) 10 million people per year. I figure that, for us, the former method is the easier way out (for now), but it would be more accurate if we could color in the map according to the latter method (way, way more work, so forget it). --Jwinius 17:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Images to Commons, please
Hi,

I just saw your wonderful spider picture. Could you please upload this and any other images you contribute to Wikipedia Commons so that they can easily be used on other Wikipedias? (See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Spider) Thanks. P0M 15:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Clownfish image
Thanks for notifying me about the clowfish image being too small. It's a bit late but I uploaded a 1600x1200 pixel version. Janderk 09:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Commons
Hi,

Achaearanea tepidariorum (every1blowz).jpg is a nice picture. Would you please upload it to Wikipedia commons so everyone could see it? Thanks.

P0M 03:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC)