User talk:Jemiller226/Archive/Dec2006

Welcome!
Hi Jemiller226, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

""

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

""

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 19:34, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Substubs or stubs
Hi Justin - you wrote:
 * I've noticed that just about every one-line stub I dump into sub-stub, you move back....I was under the impression that extremely short stubs by definition are sub-stubs, and should be labelled as such--especially if you're not going to bother categorizing the stub when you revert its status like that. Care to explain...?

Quite simple really - Category:Substubs is slowly being emptied (it's down from 3000 stubs a week ago to about 900 now). I'm checking through about 100-150 of them per day, and others are also sifting. The vast majority are being categorised where they can be found by editors more easily (in one of the stub subcategories), or being merged, or vfd'd, or moved to wiktionary. There are bound to be a handful which don't quite fit into any of the currently existing categories, and they are going back into the main stub category for now. It is only a handful, though - I'd say about 5% of the ones I deal with go back there, if that. Grutness|hello? 05:36, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * is it better for me to toss a really short stub into sub-stub, or is it better for me to just leave it uncategorized in stub?

If they look like they could grow into reasonable articles and you can find a suitable specialist stub category for them, I'd do that. Others, feel free to move them to substub (as long as they're not ones that have just been moved from there!). Some of them are probably ones which are candidates for deletion or moving to wiktionary, and it's still easier to find them via substub. Don't be surprised if one or two of them turn up in category: Stub again, though! Grutness|hello? 06:07, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Boiserie
Hi, Regarding your edit today at Boiserie do you really think it is an architectural stub, to my way of thinking its more carpentry, interior design or something like that. Giano | talk 21:20, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't know about carpentry, but it could definitely be interior design. With stub sorting, sometimes it's a very imprecise art.  =) --Jemiller226 04:59, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Arheimar
Jemiller, either you suggest that Arheimar be listed for deletion, or you expand the article. AFAIK, the article can not be expanded beyond stub status. There is a reason for the notstub to exist.--Wiglaf 21:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I didn't check your user page, so I wasn't aware of your large contributions to articles on historic subjects.  I've just seen a small rash of completely unnecessary reversions and edits lately on stubs that I've sorted, and I assumed that yours was really no different, especially since you didn't mention anything about it on the article's talk page, and you left the edit summary blank.  I can't claim any amount of knowledge in this area, though a Google search for Arheimar found sites that make a connection to Kiev, which might be an interesting thing to explore--again, if I had any expertise in this field.  At any rate, I'm not going to nominate it for deletion, but I'm not going to expand it, either.  I'll only make a fool of myself, since I'm just a little stub sorter. =) --Jemiller226 21:13, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * It's OK. You're doing good work. I added a line about Arheimar possibly being a precursor of Kiev on the Kiev article, and it is funny how fast Wikipedia information spreads on the Internet :).--Wiglaf 21:21, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * You know, I really wish there was a way around this situation, though. I have a feeling that if you took the stub tags off, some enterprising soul would see how short the entry is and either VfD it (which I don't believe it deserves) or reinstate the stub tag(s) again, which puts us back at square one. --Jemiller226 04:25, 6 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, whenever there's a category such as stub, there is bound to be cases where the use of it is questionable. I'll add this (<)!-- Please note that although this article is short it is not a stub since it covers the topic in question fully..blalbalbla... see (defenition of stub)--(>), but without parentheses. And, I will expand the article a little with quotes where the name appears. I think it deserves it :).--Wiglaf 13:59, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Puccini
Thanks for the reply, there are quite a few of us called after him you know! Giano | talk 21:12, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Musos
Jemiller226, if you put the category link as follows: on your user page, then you will appear (correctly in my opinion) under J and not under U, where you are at the moment. I didn't change your user page myself as you have a notice on there asking me not to. Brequinda 12:40, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. I thought that's how I had it, but it seems fine now, so I'm not going to argue with success! --Jemiller226 04:28, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Transposing instrument
The article on Transposing instrument has grown enormously since I looked at it last. The list of instruments is new to me; last time I saw it (and when I created the redirect) there was just a handful of examples. I've added a note describing the C-unison group as "nontransposing instruments". I don't see any purpose in a separate article, but I don't feel all that strongly about it. &mdash;Wahoofive (talk) 23:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Marcusknight.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Marcusknight.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 07:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

No redirect
This - 2006_Auckland_waterfront_vs._Eden_Park_debate - is an event which deserves a page, just like this - 2006 Melbourne teenage DVD controversy. --SilvaStorm
 * I honestly don't see where this can go, but I'll give it a chance. --Jemiller226 07:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * FFS, why can't you just leave the article alone? --SilvaStorm
 * For the same reason that nobody can leave any of your other articles alone. --Jemiller226 07:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)