User talk:Jstanley01

You know it's going to be a bad day when you wake up face down on the sidewalk.  ô ¿ ô

License tagging for Image:Peter Duesberg 01m.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Peter Duesberg 01m.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. 04:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * A discussion on this notice regarding the notice on the image in question is ongoing at Media copyright questions, Peter_Duesberg_01m.jpg.  ô ¿ ô  13:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, here's the exchange:


 * == Image:Peter Duesberg 01m.jpg ==


 * According to my communications with Prof. Duesberg, who owns the image in question, he would like a Creative Commons Attributions-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 license. However, the only Wikipedia tag that I've been able to find is for the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 license. ô ¿ ô  13:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia does not permit images that forbid derivatives or are licensed only for commercial use, unless they could also be used under a claim of fair use. This image obviously cannot be, so it would ne necessary for him to release it under a license that permits commercial use.  Wikipedia's goal is to be a free-content encyclopedia and that goal is incompatible with having non-free image.  If his concern is that a malicious person might take his photo and photoshop it in an unkind way, I understand that concern, but keep in mind that a well-meaning person isn't going to do that, while a malicious person is going to do whatever they want, regardless of the licence tag on the image.  Personally, I would suggest releasing it under the GFDL as I this license is potentially more annoying to someone wanting to use the image for illegitimate means.  Thank you. --BigDT 14:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info and the help. ô ¿ ô  14:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * ô ¿ ô 14:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hypertext article
I noticed your recent changes to the hypertext article. I have also recently been trying to clean this article up. Could you take a look at my recent changes and let me know what you think? I would really appreciate it. Thanks. Wrad 21:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey Wrad, sure. Let's talk about the first paragraph (as it stood before my latest edit):


 * Hypertext, in its most frequently-used form, is text on a computer which can be "clicked on" for more information on a subject. Hypertext is a relatively recent paradigm in computer user interfacing, attempting to overcome the old limitations of written text. Rather than remaining static like traditional text, hypertext will dynamically "branch or perform on request" taking the user to related subjects on demand (Nelson 1970). Thus, hypertext makes possible an organization of material through links and connections (called hyperlinks) which overcome the lack of interconnections in written or printed text.


 * In a lot of ways it's a lot smoother than this (where it stood at my previous edits):


 * Hypertext is an innovation to the paradigms of computing user interfaces that attempts to overcome the limitations of written text. Hypertext, instead of remaining static like traditional text, will dynamically "branch or perform on request" (Nelson 1970). Thus hypertext makes possible the organization of material in ways that partially overcome the linearity inherent in written text. The prefix hyper- (Modern Greek term for over or beyond) signifies the overcoming of such constraints. The most frequently discussed form of hypertext document contains automated cross-references to other documents called hyperlinks. Selecting a hyperlink causes the computer to load and display the linked document.


 * First paragraphs are important, and like this one, often problematic. One of my problems continues to be the use of the word "paradigm." The word came from, I think, philosopher of science Karl R. Popper. He used the word to describe what could be called the "mind-set" or the unspoken -- and in fact well-nigh unconcious -- beliefs that "everyone takes for granted" when doing science. And he described a "paradigm shift" as a sea change in those beliefs. For instance, Newtonian physics was a "paradigm," a way of looking at the universe that seemed to make sense; Einstein's theories of relativity caused a "paradigm shift," a new way of looking at the universe that seems to make sense.


 * This specific meaning got degraded, back during Web 1.0, when the "yay-hoo" corporate types latched onto the term for use in their bloviations about the Information Age. Yeah, I remember the "economics" of the "new paradigm" -- that, for dot-com companies, the need for profits was a thing of the past. Sheesh. Then the bubble burst. Welcome to Web 2.0.


 * Does "paradigm" have a specific technical usage in computing outside of geek-speak? If not, I think nixing the word would force genuine improvements to the article. Here's my latest edit to the first paragraph:


 * Hypertext most often refers to text on a computer that will "branch or perform on request" (Nelson 1970). Hypertext represents a relatively recent innovation to user interfacing, which overcomes some of the limitations of written text. Rather than remaining static like traditional text, hypertext makes possible a dynamic organization of information through links and connections (called hyperlinks). Hypertext can be designed to perform various tasks; for instance when a user "clicks" on it or "hovers" over it, a bubble with a word definition may appear, or a web page on a related subject may load, or a video clip may run, or an application may open.


 * Better IMHO. Nelson deserves his due in the first sentence. But it still needs work. ô ¿ ô  11:51:00 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Guns_and_butter.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Guns_and_butter.JPG, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 01:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's an obsolete handwritten chart I made for the Opportunity cost article, where it's not being used any more. ô ¿ ô  11:31:00 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Arthur_bremer.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Arthur_bremer.jpg. 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, then 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, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, 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 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 16:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 16:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Fixed link to backlog
I fixed the link to Backlog of articles needing copy-edit on your user page, by adding the missing colon at the very beginning of the link. This is necessary, otherwise the link does not appear correctly, but also your user page gets listed in the backlog category. I hope you agree that this edit is both practical and helpful. Thank you and happy editing! Robnpov (talk) 12:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Talkback
Danger (talk) 04:12, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * answered ô ¿ ô

AfD nomination of Denialism
An article that you have been involved in editing, Denialism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Unomi (talk) 06:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)


 * FWIW, I voted to keep the article on Denialism. Here's how my part of the discussion went:


 * Keep. But not because I believe that the concept has proven itself valid from an NPOV to be presented as an established "ism."


 * What exactly does "denialim" refer to? A psychological phenomenon? A sociological phenomenon? A legal phenomenon? A political phenomenon? A scientific phenomenon? And where is the evidence of its discrete phenomenological existence that has been subject to any kind of academic rigor by psychologists, sociologists, legal professors, political scientists, or regular scientists?


 * But to delete the article wholesale would be a mistake IMHCO, in that the term occurs as a pejorative in polemical discourse in defense of perceived orthodoxy by people of note such as Edwin Cameron.


 * The article on the term cult here does a fairly good job of threading this kind of needle. It begins, "Cult pejoratively refers to a religious group whose beliefs or practices could be considered strange or sinister."


 * I had this kind of treatment in mind, back when I attempted an edit or two, but at the time it seemed like I was running the risk of a revert war with editors who were true believers in the concept as an "ism." Which is the kind of thing I have exactly ZERO time for. ô ¿ ô  19:37, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree in spirit with what is being said. I'm not calling for a salting of the term denialism, banning it from wikipedia.  The article as is, is WP:SYNTH and doesn't recognize that the term denialism is an almost purely pejorative term that is being pushed by WP:TIGERS. However politically correct their words may be, their actions here and ultimate article content is that of WP:POV WP:TIGERS. --Firefly322 (talk) 21:55, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I suspect that many of the !vote keeps are just expressions of naivety. Others may just want to keep the term. And to those, what I have written may indeed seem bizarre and unfair (I don't quite see unfairness here, but I am admittedly using broad strokes in my descriptions of the situations). ( There are no doubt finer lines that can be drawn here and more careful language could be used to tease out what exactly is being argued for and against and by whom.)  Nevertheless, in this case, the article and some of its potential sources are agressively pejorative. In five-seven days of discussion (as long as an AFD is open), that fact, no matter how nobel the intentions of denying it may be, should not be lost. --Firefly322 (talk) 22:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The entire discussion can be seen here: Articles for deletion/ BTW, the article was not deleted, but it is still AWFUL. But like I said, ZERO time to fight about it. -- ô ¿ ô 01:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Armando Manzanero
Thanks for your 2009 comments at Talk:Armando Manzanero. I have now added my own $0.02. Cheers, Peter Chastain (talk) 06:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)