User talk:Jatkins/Archive 05

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Timeline

 * Thank you very much for the barnstar - my first :-). Quite a lot of the events are from the JFK Library WH Diary, and others are just major events I could think of. I based the article's format on the Timeline of the Presidency of Barack Obama article you created. Thanks again. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 17:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Edison and the Electric Chair
Re your edit here: this is kind of a separate topic than the dog-electrocutions, isn't it? I mean, it's related (the Electric Chair was, if I remember clearly, also used by Edison as an example of the supposed horrors of AC), but the segue from the anecdote about the dogs to this seems kind of abrupt to me. Thoughts?

(I'm not saying it shouldn't be there, I think it should - just that it might be better written, and I can't quite figure out how.) Mark Shaw (talk) 20:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've tried to reword the statement to this:

Edison's success in promoting DC current as less lethal led to AC current being used in the electric chair adopted by New York in 1890 as a supposedly humane execution method. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 20:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I might add "also" after the word "lethal" - and someone's probably going to want a cite. But otherwise I do think that's better. Cheers! Mark Shaw (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added a bit more information and a ref from About.com. Here it is in its entirety:

Edison's success in promoting DC current as less lethal also led to AC current being used in the electric chair adopted by New York in 1889 as a supposedly humane execution method; because Westinghouse was angered by the decision, he funded Eighth Amendment-based appeals for inmates set to die in the electric chair, ultimately resulting in Edison providing the generators which powered early electrocutions and testifying successfully on behalf of the state that electrocution was a painless method of execution.

I apologize for posting my reply on your talk page instead of using the Talkback template. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 21:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * This looks very good - quite a lot more extensive and informative than before. (Oh, and not to worry about the Talkback thing.) Cheers! Mark Shaw (talk) 22:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:33, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

STS 132 video highlights
Thank you very much for posting important milestone videos of the STS-132 mission. Also could you please post the NASA mission highlights package for each of the Flight Days as well? 137.132.250.9 (talk) 09:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'll add them to the article page as I upload them. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 17:31, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Can Tweeter images such as the ones in Soichi Noguchi's page can be added to Wikipedia? i.e., are there any copyright violations? 152.226.7.202 (talk) 00:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I presume so, provided they're NASA images, which are in the public domain as works of the federal government. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 13:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

ITN for Falcon 9 Flight 1
Thanks for your work on the article - Dumelow (talk) 08:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 11:08, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
This is a followup to the discussion you participated in on Talk:Dragon Spacecraft Qualification Unit  G  W … 13:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

2010
Thanks for fixing my typo. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 14:59, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

false warning
you have issued me a false warning in which you claimed i edited ur userpage, but i edited your user talk page. and explain how my edit constitutes vandalism --Fgtyhuj (talk) 13:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Your message was unfounded, and violates WP:AGF, WP:USERPAGES, and WP:HARASS. Please keep to Wikipedia policy in the future. Thank you. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 13:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Block log:

19:57, June 28, 2010 Jpgordon (talk | contribs) blocked Fgtyhuj (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts)
 * Entire contribution history:

14:36, June 28, 2010 (diff | hist) User talk:Jatkins ‎ (→false warning: new section) 14:31, June 28, 2010 (diff | hist) User talk:Jatkins ‎ (→false edit summary: new section) 14:29, June 28, 2010 (diff | hist) User talk:Jatkins ‎ (→warning: new section)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Capital Punishment in the USA, Revision as of 11:05, 31 October 2009
Hi, Regarding the statement that extra-judicial killings took place in Alaska. Does this need citation? More detail? In any event, I, personally, would like to know more. Regards 82.3.132.114 (talk) 22:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry I didn't add it then (I should have done; I couldn't easily remember the source and had to go searching). I've added a ref from a University of Alaska Anchorage web page - History of the Death Penalty in Alaska from 2001 which explains that "Alaska as a state has never had a death penalty. However, in Alaska's territorial days, eight men were executed under civil authority between 1900 and 1957. Other persons in Alaska were executed extrajudicially in the late 19th century under so-called "miner's laws." There is currently no easily available information on executions that may have taken place under military authority in Alaska". --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 01:22, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Harrison Schmitt POV
The article on Harrison Schmitt, as well as numerous verifiable sources, establish that he doesn't believe in global warming as a scientific theory or consensus. Moreover, a recent poll in the United States shows that over 72% of Americans don't believe in either natural or anthropogenic global warming. That puts Mr. Schmitt in the mainstream and those who believe in global warming in the far-out conspiracy theorist fringe, or woefully uninformed about current events or hard science. Your recent edit was clearly designed to ridicule the subject of the article, injecting your views in place of those of Dr. Schmitt. I have, therefore, removed the material. Please do not attempt to re-insert it.&mdash;QuicksilverT @ 02:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Public polling does not, and never correctly has determined scientific consensus, and it adds no support to your argument. That being said, you provide no evidence for your statistic, and I therefore have no reason to believe it.


 * For what it's worth, a Gallup poll from March of this year (after the Climategate debacle) shows clearly that more Americans believe climate change is mostly caused by humans than that it is not [March 11, 2010, The Gallup Organization: "Americans Divided on Causes of Global Warming", "[D]o you believe increases in the Earth's temperature over the last century are due more to -- the effects of pollution from human activities [50%] (or) natural changes in the environment that are not due to human activities [46%]". Americans clearly view the threat as exaggerated, which is shown on the same link, but more still attribute it to human activities.


 * Climate change may or may not be anthropogenic, but the overwhelming majority of scientific consensus agrees that it is anthropogenic. The article I linked to is titled List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming. I did not name that article nor was involved with its creation; if you have a problem with that take it up with those who did.


 * Further, the correction I made was removing the phrase global warming hoax, which is absurdly in violation of the requirement of a neutral point of view. Imagine if one of the Moon landing hoax clowns came along and put in the article's lead, "Harrison Schmitt...was a participant in the Apollo 17 hoax mission". Do you think that would remain in the article long? It would not and should not. Likewise, it was right to remove the statement global warming hoax. Anyway, your revert has been reverted itself, and not by me.


 * --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 13:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Science is not conducted by "consensus"; evidently you missed that in school, if you ever took a class in physics or chemistry. Check those consensus statistics again, and you'll find that most of the "scientists" who believe in global warming have no training or credentials in the fields of climatology, meteorology or geology, and may not even have adequate training in the physical sciences.  Relying on "scientific consensus" in Wikipedia regarding global warming, or any other subject, is useless and is pushing a POV by definition.  Calling global warming a hoax in the Harrison Schmitt article may be blunt, but is consistent with Dr. Schmitt's views on the subject.  The way you worded it is clearly not consistent with his views; it stands out in garish contrast to the rest of the tone of the article.&mdash;QuicksilverT @ 19:32, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It certainly is not determined by consensus, which is precisely what you claimed with the fictional statistic you provided. The overwhelming weight of peer-reviewed international scientific consensus that supports the theory of anthropogenic climate change does not make it correct, but it does mean that Dr. Schmitt is in the minority, not "in the mainstream". Claiming simultaneously that the phrase "global warming hoax" is consistent with the NPOV policy but pointing out Dr. Schmitt's opinions diverge from international consensus is not is a losing argument. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 19:54, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion invitation
I believe that you proposed a merge of the article alt.space into the NewSpace article, sometime in June 2010. I have started a discussion of the merge proposal on the Talk:NewSpace page; please leave comments there if you are interested in the subject. Cheers. N2e (talk) 00:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've replied at the NewSpace talk page. Thanks for reminding me to leave a rationale. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 17:46, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing so. I will plan to get involved in that merge discussion, and comment on the substance of the proposal, sometime in the next week.  Then, if someone will drive the discussion to closure, we might just get a consensus on the matter.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:48, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Burt Rutan
Hi! You haven't heard from me before, and I'm not wedded to any aspect of the topic, but I noticed there are several outdated details in the article, such as "As of June, 2005". Now, I know many people contributed to the article, and you may not be able to fix these little niggles, but your name seemed as good as any to pick on. If you know someone better suited to the task, perhaps you could pass on the suggestion to them? Thanks :)  Melba1 (talk) 02:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. :) Melba1 (talk) 03:41, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Spaceflight portals
Hello! As an member editor of one or more of the Spaceflight, Human spaceflight, Unmanned spaceflight, Timeline of spaceflight or Space colonisation WikiProjects, I'd like to draw to your attention a proposal I have made with regards to the future of the spaceflight-related portals, which can be found at Portal talk:Spaceflight. I'd very much appreciate any suggestions or feedback you'd be able to offer! Many thanks,

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Human spaceflight at 08:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC).

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Human spaceflight activity
Hello there! As part of an effort to determine how many active editors are present in the spaceflight-related WikiProjects, I have made some changes to the list of members of WikiProject Human spaceflight. If you still consider yourself to be an active editor in this project, I would be grateful if you would please edit the list so that your name is not struck out - thus a clearer idea of the critical mass of editors can be determined. Many thanks in advance!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Human spaceflight at 19:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC).

WikiProject Spaceflight activity
Hello there! As part of an effort to determine how many active editors are present in the spaceflight-related WikiProjects, changes have been made to the list of members of WikiProject Spaceflight. If you still consider yourself to be an active editor in this project, it would be appreciated if you would please edit the list so that your name is not struck out - thus a clearer idea of the number of active editors can be determined. Many thanks in advance!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 17:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC).

WikiProject Spaceflight reboot
Hello there! As you may or may not be aware, a recent discussion on the future of the Space-related WikiProjects has concluded, leading to the abolition of WP:SPACE and leading to a major reorganisation of WP:SPACEFLIGHT. It would be much appreciated if you would like to participate in the various ongoing discussions at the reorganisation page and the WikiProject Spaceflight talk page. If you are a member of one of WP:SPACEFLIGHT's child projects but not WP:SPACEFLIGHT itself, it would also be very useful if you could please add your name to the member list here. Many thanks!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 00:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC).

The Downlink: Issue 0

 * You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 16:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC).

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:New York Times front page, September 29, 2010.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:New York Times front page, September 29, 2010.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Astuishin (talk) 02:41, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi


 * Your fair use rationale is that you want to have an image of the new york times front page. There is a public domain image available so the Nyt 1914 front page is sufficient to depict the front page and his roughly similar. Im not sure what British copyright laws are, but per wp:Non-free content if a replaceable image exist then there is no need to use a copyrighted one. Astuishin  (talk) 19:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


 * In the UK, copyright expires 70 years after the death of the publisher, so there are a huge number of public domain covers for The London Times, yet we continue to use a fair use rationale for a front page from earlier this year, because the intent is to show a modern front page. The WWI front page is relevant to the World War I article, but not so much to The New York Times article, because it is neither a typical nor modern day representative front page, which is what is appropriate for an infobox image of a newspaper. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 19:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Alright then fair use ought to be reevaluated for the London Times too. I noticed cover pages of several American newspapers are copyrighted even though public domain images exist, that should be changed too. The front pages of the New York Times circa 1914 and 2010 are roughly similar and replaceable. The 1914 cover adequately depicts the front page of the Nyt. Im not sure what you mean by modern since presumably from a historical perspective the modern era begins during the industrial revolution. Its true that the 2010 image is more recent, however there is ample precedent of buildings, persons, and works of art being depicted by older images, because those images are in public domain. Per wp:Non-free content; if a free image exist to depict something it should be used over a copyrighted one.  Astuishin  (talk) 01:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay. I've changed the infobox image back to the WWI one. As for the other newspapers, a lot have existed for long enough that their earlier front pages will now be in the public domain. --Jatkins (talk - contribs) 17:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * okay great Astuishin  (talk) 05:53, 23 December 2010 (UTC)