User talk:Guthrie/Archive 1

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:


 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:


 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: Lucia Bot (talk) 00:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC).

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkSoul 13:14, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Clothing and fashion stubs
We already have Template:Fashion-stub, which covers clothing and fashion articles. I don't see any need for another one. It was a good idea, though&mdash;such a good idea that someone else created it. ;) -Aranel (" Sarah  ") 15:44, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry. Guthrie 13:27, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

Dirty Weekend
You wrote: "Blackpool has erected a monument to the 'underlying tension of a dirty weekend'." in the Dirty Weekend article. Could you please substantiate this or give additional information? --Maikel 11:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Yoo-hoo! Anybody there? --Maikel 14:33, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm here; I still can't find my source. It was an AOL news story (Weird news from the wires), I think. --Guthrie 13:41, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Anyway, thanks for looking. --Maikel 13:09, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Old Toby stub sort
I debated with myself about whether to add the stub tag as US-bio-stub or bio-stub. I ended up choosing bio-stub because this person was never of the United States. Unfortunately, there's no nativeamerican-stub or the like. I'm not sure that it matters which stub category of the two possible choices it remains in. Without something else to identify it as regarding a Native American it may never get the attention it needs. At least in bio-stub it would be one of ~470 articles, whereas in US-bio-stub it is one of ~3900. --Durin 04:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * sorry. I'll revert. --Guthrie 12:26, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I wasn't trying to convince you to revert. Sorry if I wasn't clear; my fault. Mainly I just wanted to convey that stub-sorting should be considered a bit more carefully at times. Sometimes, it's very obvious what stub cat an article should be in. Sometimes, it's not so clear. This is one of the latter cases. It's a judgement call as to which category it belongs in. I'll wager that it'll get re-tagged back into US-bio-stub by somebody else. bio-stub is watched very closely. --Durin 13:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Too bad I didn't place money on that wager. Less than 24 hours later, and someone's pushed it back over to US-bio-stub! Oh well. --Durin 22:07, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:IMGP0463.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:IMGP0463.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 User talk:Carnildo/images. 15:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

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

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

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 01:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Nurse-bio-stub
Hi - it has come to our notice that you have recently created a new stub type. As it clearly states at WP:STUB, at the top of most stub categories, on the template page for new Wikiprojects and in many other places on Wikipedia, new stub types should be proposed prior to creation at WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, in order to check whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies, and whether better use could be made of a WikiProject-specific talk page template.

In the case of your new stub type, it is already covered by existing stub types, since medical biographies are split by nationality, not by actual occupation within medicine (many people have served in several different roles within the profession, so splitting it in this way is not really a good move. You stub type has been proposed for deletion at WP:SFD - feel free to make any comments there. And please, in future, propose new stub types first! Grutness...wha?  23:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Flagging edits as minor
Hello. I saw your user contributions and it seems that you mark nearly all (if not, all) of your edits as "minor". This is inappropriate for some of your edits, such as this one or this one. Minor edits are not simply small edits, but are more limited to the type of editing. Please read the help page on minor editing to see what edits truely qualify as minor and which ones should just be simply called edits. This helps other editors in looking through the history of articles and some editors do not view minor edits. If you mark all of your contributions as minor (even when they are not), it gives the false appearance to others that you may be trying to hide or disguise your more significant edits. Thanks. ju66l3r 22:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I use this because the majority of my edits are minor (Spelling and grammar corrections, simple formatting, fixing layout errors, adding links and so forth). But I will be a little more choosy in the future about what I mark as minor. Thank you. Guthrie 15:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Infrared with the Digital Rebel
From Googling, it seems that the filter factor for the Hoya R72 is quite large: that what might need a fraction of a second even at ISO 100 would require many seconds or even minutes with the R72 on. That's quite likely the case with the sample image given. If you look at that picture's Image page, you can click on "Show extended details" to see the shutter speed, aperture, etc. I'm not sure the image needs to be flipped, because if the hexagonal spot in the center can't be explained away with "the photographer didn't put a lens hood on his camera" then flippling the image would be misleading. I could be wrong, though. ShutterBugTrekker 22:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It needs to be flipped because the image is wrongly aligned. If you look at the image, you'll see that the background is a building. Also, filters don't usually cause the image to be misaligned. Guthrie 19:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BoratBox.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:BoratBox.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 21:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Go-box
I have added a "" template to the article Go-box, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Peripitus (Talk) 12:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Lynda Moulton Howe
You've categorised her as 1943 births but the article says 1942. El Ingles 17:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops. It's fixed now Guthrie 17:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

NCIS
I never said Tony and Gibbs were in relationship with each other...?--Migospia 02:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You may not have intended to say that, but it could be read that way. "both Gibbs and Tony are having commitment issues in their relationships" could be read to mean their relationships with each other. Adding that these relationships are with women clarifies that, I think. --Guthrie 12:14, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Lol see that makes sense, because of the word their and the word reltionships, re read before you make edits like that.--Migospia 23:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Categories
I notice that you've been adding birth year categories to articles then removing the uncategorised tag. Could you please leave them on unless other categories are also present? Arthur Leopold Busch, for example, shouldn't have had the tag removed as the birth year and death year don't really count. &mdash;Xezbeth 18:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I thought that one category meant that the article wasn't uncategorised anymore. --Guthrie 23:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, single categories are fine. I'm referring specifically to the birth year, death year, and living people categories, which are different enough from the rest that they shouldn't be treated the same. &mdash;Xezbeth 13:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Tema Cantante
A "" template has been added to the article Tema Cantante, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Psychonaut 01:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
I'm sorry I reverted your expansion of Playing with Matches. It's been pointed out that I am rather quick to revert, and--no offense--your edit looked, on cursory examination, like vandalism. It was partially the phrasing ("Is he from outer space or is there a more down to earth explanation involved" sounds like promotional literature), but it was mainly the lack of end punctuation. Vandals often don't punctuate. You may want to look into that.

While I thought I saw issues with your edit, if the edit was in good faith it's for you or someone who knows the episode to fix. Accordingly, I've reverted your edit back in.

Again, my apologies. Anturiaethwr (talk) 18:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Medical Instruments and Implants
Thankyou for your contribution to this page. I think you had made an inadvertent error by deleting some lines that left the image sections looking rather choppy. It is advisable to preview before saving. I have fixed it. Thankyou.sarindam7 (talk) 15:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)