User talk:Kaldari/Archive 5

Continuing unilateral reverts by User:Thebainer
Hey Kaldari, we're still having some difficulty with Thebainer on the AACS_encryption_key_controversy page. After his unilateral edits were reverted by various users, he has proceeded to place the page on full protect to prevent his vandalism from getting reverted again, and has declined to answer repeated efforts by many users to discuss the issue with him (as evidenced by his talk page). Could you lift the protection so we can fix the issue? Perhaps an AF/I is also in order, although I unfortunately don't have the time to pursue one myself right now. Konekoniku 09:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

AACS Arbitration
I have initiated an arbitration request due to User:Thebainer's unilateral decision making and full-protection of AACS encryption key controversy. I am notifying you as you as User:Konekoniku informed me that you were a party involved in this dispute. You can find the arbitration request here - Requests_for_arbitration. --Rodzilla (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Elvis Presley
Hi, I've noticed your comments on the Elvis Presley article and your work pertaining to biographys. I would like to make the Elvis article 'good' and then 'featured' in quality. Could you help in that direction - especially in regards to format, length reduction, summary of material, sentence structure, any material needing cutting, any material needing coverage - in whatever area you can help us out. If you know of any good editors who specialize in these particular areas, let me know. Thanks. --Northmeister 14:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism
I noticed that you commented a while ago on HanzoHattori's talk page that he would be blocked if he continued to plagiarize material. It appears he did not heed that warning as he has been repeatedly trying to insert a chunk of text from a copyrighted source into the Anna Politkovskaya article (his edit here; original article here; the text starts, "When terrorists held an auditorium hostage..."). Just thought you might want to know. -- Hux 10:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response to this on my talk page. I've posted an answer there to the question you asked. -- Hux 20:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Blocking HanzoHattori
Dear Kaldari, may I note that User:HanzoHattori had already deleted himself the allegedly plagiarized material, as obvious from this diff, for example: . He deleted it before your intervention. All of that was result of disruptive editing by several users, and I believe just an accident. Could you please reconsider your decision or ask for a third opinion?Biophys 18:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

That was a mistake!
Sorry, I did not check this carefully. 'It was actually User:Hux who violated copyright and then made false statement to you. See the diff:.

The text of User:Hux was:

When terrorists held an auditorium hostage during the Nov. 2002 production of Nord-Ost, she spoke to the hostage takers and made their demands public. In Sept. 2004, terrorist in the Beslan school siege had also demanded her presence.

The text of the original was:

"When terrorists held an auditorium hostage during the Nov. 2002 production of Nord-Ost, she spoke to the hostage takers and made their demands public. In Sept. 2004, terrorist in the Beslan school siege had also demanded her presence.

It was completely identical to the original!

The text of HanzoHattori:

When terrorists held an auditorium hostage during the Nord-Ost crisis, she spoke to the hostages and their captors, and made the demands public. In September 2004, terrorists in the Beslan school siege had also demanded her presence.

As can see from the diff, he changed a number of words (he did not know about this copyright violation and considered the previous version prepared by Hux as legitimate); so he basically removed this copyright violation.

Could you please correct the error, and I believe that User:Hux must be warned or blocked for copyright violation and falsely reporting Hanzo. Thank you.Biophys


 * Thank you very much for correcting this! But I have one question. It was obvious from comparison of the initial diff with original article (at least for user Hux!) that Hanzo did not violate copyright. But Hux intentionally falsely reported him. Is not such behavior a violation of WP:CIV or something else? Certainly, this disrupted work of Hanzo.Biophys 21:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Just to make things clear, I never inserted the text in question! (Biophys appears to be interpreting the diffs incorrectly.) I originally removed that text in this edit, noting in the comments that it was copyrighted. HanzoHattori then reinserted it here. I then removed it once more, again noting that it is copyrighted. Now, it should be noted that the text in question was originally added by Vlad federov (something I didn't realize until Kaldari pointed it out), however that doesn't change the fact that HanzoHattori still added it back in after it was removed as copyrighted text (and clearly noted as such in the edit comment). That being the case, I think that my allegation is sound, and I also think that Vlad federov should be similarly held to account.-- Hux 21:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I still see no evidence of Hanzo inserting copyrighted material. The diff you are complaining about is Hanzo inserting one sentence that is paraphrased (albeit slightly) from a copyrighted article. The text Vlad federov originally inserted was two sentences copied verbatim. I see no justification for further action here. Kaldari 21:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record, HanzoHattori's edit inserted the following text:
 * "When terrorists held an auditorium hostage during [the] Nord-Ost crisis, she spoke to the hostages and their captors, and made the demands public."
 * Meanwhile, the text from the original source reads:
 * "When terrorists held an auditorium hostage during the Nov. 2002 production of Nord-Ost, she spoke to the hostage takers and made their demands public."
 * I confess that I did not spot the slight difference in phrasing, but even so, it seems a little too close for comfort. However, if the two are considered different enough to avoid any risk to Wikipedia then of course it should not be considered a copyright violation and I withdraw my allegation and apologize for jumping the gun. I hope it is understood that I only brought this up out of concern for the site's well-being, since such violations are very serious; I wish to make clear that I meant no ill will towards any particular editor. -- Hux 21:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Achtung copypasta
I didn't goddamn add A SINGLE WORD from Arutunyan, EVER. With my FIRST edit (and the one I was banned for) I actually REMOVED most of this, three paragraphs out of four (with the comment of "another telling example of pov writing (based on one, single, biased article)" - referring to the idiocy of "Another telling example was Politkovskaya's recent allegations", which I was yes, removing too), and this one paragraph I left I JUST MOVED from below.

From the original paragraph (which, again, was ALREADY right there in the article), in addition of REMOVING first also the part of "Hence, Politkovskaya was primarily viewed as an activist rather than reporter.", I JUST MOVED THE REST UP IN THE ARTICLE where I thought it would be in context. This is all in the VERY EDIT YOU LINKED FIRST with this oh-so-smart caption of "insertion of copyrighted text".

And to keep the story short. In THIS edit, I let the following paragraph to REMAIN (I didn't know about Vlad's copypasta - why should I? am i supposed to be omni-knowing for some reason?) and just MOVED IT so it won't to what I thought would be proper context:

When terrorists held an auditorium hostage during the Nov. 2002 production of Nord-Ost, she spoke to the hostage takers and made their demands public. In Sept. 2004, terrorist in the Beslan school siege had also demanded her presence.

But what I "inserted"? Nothing. 0 (zero) words copy/pasted. Null. I didn't even SEE the damn article, and I didn't even any warning sign this text was a big no-no neither, mostly because THERE WAS NO SUCH SIGN WHATOSEVER. And the actual insertion was:

And this is what I actually DELETED in the same "examplary" edit:

According to journalist Anna Arutunyan, 'During a reporting trip in 2001, Politkovskaya was detained by military officials in the Chechen village of Hotuni.' When she was released, Politkovskaya wrote: "I have seen with my own eyes this filtration camp: these are in fact same holes - zidanes, which the resistance forces have, where people are put with the help of ropes and are then traded out of for ransom. There is a strict reservation, in which people must exist, or more like die..." 'directly accusing General Baranov, then commander of the Chechen federal troops, of these crimes. The publication was followed by a criminal investigation based on the allegations, but a delegation of official human rights envoys was unable to find any such pits. At a later press conference in Moscow, Politikovskaya admitted that she had never actually seen the pits herself, but that witnesses related seeing them to her. In another account she had said the ransoms was $150, while in another - $500'.

Another telling example was Politkovskaya's recent allegations that special forces were preparing an "escape" for jailed oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky, in the course of which he was to be killed. Her source was a retired KGB officer who had served time in the camps. While the article was published in Novaya Gazeta this spring, these allegations went nowhere.

Hence, Politkovskaya was primarily viewed as an activist rather than reporter.

Against this backdrop, it would seem that despite a brave and sincere commitment to unravelling corruption and atrocities wherever possible, Politkovskaya's priorities as a journalist focused more on accusing and less on reporting.

This many times the ammount I left, with the ammount I "inserting" being NULL. And I deleted this only because I knew all of this was simply either stupid or just plain false. Right now, some of this is RESTORED (all was restored by Vlad again, but this remain) - but before I was banned, I REMOVED most ONCE AGAIN, and de-POVed the rest too. 

In short, I was banning for "inserting" something I was mostly removing(!), repeatedly, and the for remaining little rest just and only moving around, re-wording, correcting, and adding content. Both the Hux's accusation and mod's actions were simply either dumb as hell or badly-intented (or both). --HanzoHattori 16:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I accept your explanation and consider the matter closed. Kaldari 16:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: ArbCom case involving Zeq and Zero0000
That's not what I said, though:"No evidence that this is necessary; he seems to have kept in line with his existing probation since last August."(emphasis mine). I do not doubt that he has been blocked; but the fact that he appears to have edited from August 2006 to April 2007 without being blocked suggests—to me, at least—that he has learned to moderate his behavior. Kirill Lokshin 17:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Bitonto flag.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Bitonto flag.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Al Gore III
Your edits, and subsequent protected, of the article Al Gore III amount to nothing short of censorship. I do not know your personal politics, but one can only assume that you are a partisan and wish to keep unfavorable things off of Wikipedia. The youngest Gore is hardly notable for anything other than his run-ins with the law. &mdash; Steven Andrew Miller (talk) 11:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Concur, though I make no claims about Kaldari's motivations or politics. This action is in line with neither the spirit nor the letter of Wikipedia policy. Robert K S 12:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have brought up whether this was appropriate or not at Administrators%27_noticeboard, and asked for the article to be unlocked by another admin, if you wish to weigh in on this. --Thespian 12:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Kaldari, thank you for your message to my talk page on this issue. Allow me to suggest that the action taken by you and by User:Nick seems to be a misinterpretation of Wikipedia policy. I will not guess at its motivations, but it constitutes a whitewashing that any editor or administrator should find troubling. I challenge the notion that five short paragraphs—less than half and closer to one-third of the full size of the article—constitutes in any way "undue weight" or that it represents a negative bias. On the contrary, removing the material, which is notable, attributed, and well-sourced, is what constitutes bias. I feel that since I have been threatened with being blocked and since my comments to an administrator's talk page have been repeatedly removed over this issue, this issue should go to aribtration, or whatever high level of administrative attention is the next appropriate step. Robert K S 15:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Basically, I would like to be assured that I will be able to discuss changes to the article, and make such changes, without either the article or me being threatened with being locked. Robert K S 16:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Al Gore III has put himself in the spotlight, no one elese. His gas-guzzeling ways is enough for discussion.--Getaway 15:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand your desire to make the article good and to follow the rules of Wikipedia, but you have taken it too far by putting on a "pre-emptive" lock on editing. Please reconsider your rash decision.--Getaway 18:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Ricochet_cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ricochet_cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 02:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Afri-cola_1968.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Afri-cola_1968.jpg. I notice the image 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. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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 non-free media 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. MER-C 10:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Mary Wollstonecraft featured topic
I was wondering if you would like to work with me on a "Mary Wollstonecraft" featured topic. I was envisioning Mary Wollstonecraft as the "lead article" (already FA, as you know) and the following articles constituting the topic:
 * Vindication of the Rights of Woman (already FA)
 * Original Stories from Real Life (already FA)
 * Maria: or, The Wrongs of Woman (B - significant work has been done - a poor reviewer would pass it for GA)
 * Mary: A Fiction (start - I'm beginning)
 * Vindication of the Rights of Men (needs to be done)
 * Thoughts on the Education of Daughters (needs to be done)
 * Letters Written in Sweden, Norway and Denmark (needs to be done)

I am very committed to this project. I have all of the research and can give you a good list of books and articles. It would just be nice to have some help. Even if you don't want to do any research, but just want to help with the writing, that would be of great assistance, too. If you know anyone else that might be interested as well, please let me know. Awadewit | talk  06:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have finished almost all of the research and draft writing I am going to do for Maria: or, The Wrongs of Woman. I just need one more book, but that one will not significantly alter the article. I will get perhaps a sentence or two from it. The article now needs attention at the organizational and prose levels. I think that the organization is acceptable, but it was quite difficult to divide the discussion of the themes into subsections as they are all so intertwined, so perhaps there is a better scheme. I will be looking at the article off and on for the next few weeks. I need distance from the prose, I think. Awadewit | talk  11:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have finished the research on Mary: A Fiction (at least, what I think I need). I am now going to work on prose and organization. I'm not sure about the organization of this page; I'm thinking that it could be improved. Awadewit | talk  09:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thoughts on the Education of Daughters is now up; I rated it a "B". :) Awadewit | talk  10:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have decided to make a Chronology of Mary Wollstonecraft. Let me know what you think. Awadewit | talk  01:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to city links
Please stop changing links to cities from City, State to City, State. That practice was deprecated years ago and the consensus is to use links of the form City, State for American cities. Please see Naming_conventions_%28city_names%29 and WikiProject_Cities for more info. There are lengthy discussions on the topic that I can dig up if you need. Thanks! Kaldari 23:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have reviewed Naming conventions (settlements) and the wikiproject. They have nothing to say about links, only article naming. I would be interested in any discussions you have links to. Rich Farmbrough, 10:17 15 July 2007 (GMT).

21 July 2007=== ==

Please come and weigh in on the speedy deletion of The Ward Churchill Misconduct Issues article. It is a coatrack and User Getaway and his cronies are winning at the moment. It is a clear BLP violation and an attack article. Albion moonlight 10:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I have been accused of personal attacks by User:Lurker
For commenting about the coatrack aspects of the Al Gore III article. Please feel invited to comment or provide feedback. If you decide not to participate, thanks anyway. BusterD 23:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Getaway
I gave a warning to this user about what I considered an uncivil attack on another user. He responded with multiple tirades and further incivility. I noticed that you had tried to reason with him in the past and that he has a long history of warnings about incivility and blocks for violating 3RR. He doesn't believe he has done anything wrong. Do you think an RFC is appropriate?--Dcooper 21:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, he's still at it. Anyone other than User:Getaway who edits the Sean Hannity page gets reverted, usually with a nastygram for an edit summary. I've tried to engage him to work towards a collaborative edit and consensus, but he rejected that out of hand and his sole means of communication is now through petty sniping in edit summaries. This particular individual apparently has a long, unbroken history of taking a proprietary interest in particular pages and guarding his POV-pushing. It's time someone had a serious talk with him and if that fails, that he be given a time-out. I'm not sure if you are still interested in rehabilitating him, but if you could respond I'd know which direction to go for next steps. Thanks in advance! Ossified 02:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The RFC is not appropriate because you have not provided an example of where I did something wrong other than disagree with your edits. Just because you make an edit does not mean that it will stay forever.  Everyone has the right to edit your work.  That is what you agree to here.  There are other forums for you to work on if you do not like this particular aspect of Wikipedia.  Other people are going to edit your work.  It violates Wikipedia for you to sit on an article, such as Sean Hannity and constantly attempt to put negative material in the article against Hannity just because you do not like the person who is the subject of the article.  I pointed out that I thought your edits are POV pushing.  However, you do not like that comment.  But, at the same time, you believe that it is ok for you to call my edits "POV-pushing".  Why, deal Ossified, is it ok for you to call my work "POV-pushing" but I can't point out that I find your work to be biased?  That's all that I have stated over and over again.--Getaway 10:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Let the above serve as Exhibit A that Keetoowah/Getaway is long overdue for an RfC. --Eleemosynary 00:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:smackbot/bot request
Hi, 3 edits per Minute, is 1 edit per 20 seconds.

That is 20x slower than 1 edit per second

Also, if you have a problem with Rich/SmackBot, have you brought it up with him and or the community?

There are well over 100,000 biography articles, i know as i've helped out with mass talk page tagging runs for them. He has requested to to stubs, ok which, will reduce the amount to an extent...

I dont see a problem with the task - "Add DEFAULTSORT to people stubs, where there is an unambiguous sort key given to existing categories."

So it will only edit if it has the sort key already given.

If he isnt doing this, you should really properly report it

Reedy Boy 14:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Birth and death templates
Further to your note, the templates provide
 * A standard format
 * Birth date and age and {death date and age} provide the age
 * return the date, hidden by CSS, in the ISO 8601 format needed by hCard microformats.
 * Allow other improvements in the future if required. (For example when the mark-up for date formatting changes, or for adding date related categories.)

Less than 1/3 of the articles I am checking do not have the templates fully in place.

Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 09:01 29 August 2007 (GMT).

Wikimania in Atlanta!
Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 09:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm aware you live in Tennessee; I'm just sending out the templates to out-of-state people who are active on Wikipedia and would probably be interested in the bid. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 09:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Time cover image
See Image talk:TimeKinsey1953.jpg‎ for the email I received about the copyright. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 19:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Crocidura
It's a long article though, with a lot of information in the list, despite the sentance count. Still you can have the stub tag back if you like - here. Rich Farmbrough, 23:19 12 September 2007 (GMT).

Wollstonecraft featured topic
Your comments would be much appreciated at this discussion regarding the Mary Wollstonecraft featured topic. Thanks. Awadewit | talk  07:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Grey
I'm getting lost on the Wikipedia talk:Article message boxes page. Can you show me what the grey you mentioned looks like? I'm looking for ways in which the discussion notices can stand out from the cleanup requests. - jc37 21:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

DMCA expired
Perhaps you already saw this:. I've done this in response: While it's not the prettiest picture on Wikipedia, it's still nice to see it up again. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

VRM FAC
The AE/BE debate has arisen at the FAC for A Vindication of the Rights of Men. If you have a moment, perhaps you could comment, since you are the other maintainer of the MW page? Thanks. Awadewit | talk  15:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I hope I'm not intruding, but insofar as you supported the notion of not blocking an FA based on AmEng/BrEng variations, I wonder if you'd care to comment on the FAC for Chinua Achebe? The VRM brouhaha appears to be starting again. Thanks in advance for your thoughts. – Scartol  ·  Talk  16:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Mary Wollstonecraft
I am sending this to everyone who participated about six months ago in the discussion about the appropriate English variant to use for the Mary Wollstonecraft article.

You may wish to read a similar discussion, taking place over a Mary Wollstonecraft pamphlet, A Vindication of the Rights of Men, currently a featured article candidate.

The FAC discussion is here: Featured article candidates/A Vindication of the Rights of Men

The applicable part of the article's talk page is here: Talk:A Vindication of the Rights of Men

-- R OGER D AVIES  TALK 19:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Newsletter 5
To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 15:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC).

Common names
Hi Kaldari,

Thanks for your help with categorization of mammal articles.

I noticed you moved a few marmot species to capitalized versions of their spelling. Please note that there is neither a consensus in the wikipedia community nor in the scientific community as to whether common names of mammals should be capitalized. I personally don't care and these pages can move back and forth all they want as long as it's done properly. Specifically, please check and fix the double redirects that are generated. At this points it's really a matter of personal opinion as we've hashed it out over and over and not made progress. I can almost guarantee that in a few months someone will move it back. --Aranae 21:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Gennaro Rubino
Hi, I'd never heard of this guy before today. I teach in Hertfordshire in the UK and one of my students was telling me all about him, and that she was descended from him through her grandmother, who was a Rubino. As the girl is a teenager, her grandmother must have been born sometime after his release from prison. I've set her to find some family records that may throw more light on the matter. Jack1956 21:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Have the family contacted you? I have a date of death of March 14 1918 in Louvain prison in Belgium, which, if correct, would mean that he actually served his life sentence. Therefore if their claim of descent is true it must have been when he was in the UK before his arrest and subsequent trial. Jack1956 13:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, will pass the info on. I'll ask if they have any photos or documents. Jack1956 21:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. She doesn't really know very much about his background. Her Nan was called Rubino before her marriage, and she reckons there's some documents in Italian somewhere, but that's as far as her knowledge goes.She would be interested in the booklet you found, however. Perhaps you could scan it in and email it to me and I'll print it off for her. Thanks. Jack1956 (talk) 22:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I will do. She's only 14 and is a bit wary of emailing strangers. But I have let her know of your interest in Rubino and I will remind her again. I've asked her to chat to her Nan for any info she might recollect. Cheers. Jack1956 (talk) 08:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

flags on EG
oh good lord, i hadn't seen the flags on Emma's article. holy cow. tx for removal. --lquilter 20:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Zeq
Hello. I agree with your block of that user as a matter of Arbcom enforcement, but as I explained on his talk page, I also think the block serves no preventative purpose any more. Would you agree to unblock him? Sandstein 18:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for unblocking me.
Good night. Since you are intersted in the good of the project why don't come and edit hard articles like the Palestinian exodus ? it is in need of good NPOV editors. Zeq 21:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Naruto manga chapters FT nom
Hello. I've added a reply to your comments at the above FT nom, and would appreciate a response. Regards, Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 01:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Tugboat diagram
I re-worked the fonts for the captions on the tugboat image here. Are they are rendering correctly now? Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 22:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Licensing for Locator Maps

 * Copied from my Commons talk page

Hi Ruhrfisch, I'm writing to ask if you would consider licensing your locator maps as public domain rather than GFDL/cc-by-sa. There are several reasons this would be preferable. First of all, there is a convention of making generic unlabeled maps ("locator maps") public domain in Wikipedia as it ensures there are no re-licensing issues with subsequent uses and modifications of those maps. Secondly, it is unlikely that your modifications of the census bureau's map constitute enough "creative effort" to justify any relicensing (as you merely cropped the images and adjusted the colors). Thus it would be debatable whether or not your images are in fact public domain already in spite of the license notices. Thirdly, many of the images that your locator maps are replacing are public domain and there is some debate about whether it is preferable to switch to a "less free" image. Thanks for taking the time to consider this. Cheers. Kaldari 00:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I have several questions (you can reply on my Wikipedia or Commons talk page, as you prefer). Which locator maps specifically do you mean, the 49 states? (User:VerruckteDan beat me to Delware) Would just GFDL be free enough? Can you point me to this convention as a policy or guideline here or on Commons? I based my current licensing on User:Ram-Man's maps (see Image:Map of Delaware County, Pennsylvania No Text.png as one example). They are quite similar to mine in source and effort. Could you please point me to the debate? Can you also give examples of the maps mine are replacing? I made the maps as they were consistent in style and followed the model of Image:US Locator Blank.svg stylistically.
 * I have not decided what to do regarding your request. I will say that the only reward I get with these maps (besides satisfaction) is attribution, which you are asking me to give up. Despite what comes across as a dismissal of my contributions, I have spent a lot of time and effort on these maps. If the maps are replacing others, then they must be perceived as better or more useful by the editors choosing to use them, so maybe my contributions are worth something. Finally, if GFDL is good enough for all my other contributions on Wikipedia, why isn't it good enough for the maps I've made? Thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * On rereading this I see that despite my best efforts not to, I still sounded a bit (OK a lot) cranky. Sorry. I really would like the information I asked about to help me decide what to do about licensing. Thanks for your interest, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, take however much time you need. I have gotten involved in an FAC I did not anticipate (an editor nominated an article that was not quite ready and then has done nothing towards answering the FAC requests so far, sigh), so I am busier than planned. Thanks for replying, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 23:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Emma Goldman
I was urged by to have a go at Ms. Goldman, now that I'm done with Harriet Tubman. I'm intrigued, but improving an article about such an important anarchist for the sake of profit? =) Seems wrong somehow. What if I did it and then asked you to make the payment to the East Timor Action Network instead? – Scartol  ·  Talk  15:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, direct payment would be best. I like the idea of seeing EG as an FA, so I'll do it. But I'll need some time to breathe and take care of other stuff. Hopefully I'll get moving before the end of November. Cheers! – Scartol  ·  Talk  16:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The peer review suggested a complete reorganization of the article, which I would tend to agree with. The question is, how do you organize an article about someone as complex as Goldman? If I could do it with Balzac and Chinua Achebe, I can do it with Goldman. (Can you tell I've got a bit of an ego on me?) – Scartol  ·  Talk  17:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer on the primary source docs. I may take you up on it. Cheers. – Scartol  •  Tok  18:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Nashville-Davidson County:
"You do realize that the boundary of the city of Nashville and the boundary of Davidson County are the same right?"
 * The article itself only mentions that they have a consolidated government, not that they have the same boundaries. Anyway, the pushpin map is the one that is preferred for city articles, as far as I can see. For one thing, it offers the capability of being automagically enhanced later and having those enhancements apply universally, instead of using simple image based maps. -- Otto 20:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

DIY conversion kit
I know you're busy but I've done a sortable list of common words requiring transmogrification into other English spelling variants. It covers about 80% of the variants I've encountered so far. The idea is to de-mystify EngVar conversion, as I'm sure fear of the unknown is the root cause of many disputes. It's here. Could you please take a look and add, delete or comment? Many thanks,-- R OGER D AVIES  talk 20:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

The Deserted Village
Oh grant me your wisdom regarding this debate over The Deserted Village. I really don't understand. I have asked for speedy deletes like this before and received them, so I don't know why this one was denied. Now I am embroiled in this ridiculous debate. Any advice or assistance you could offer would be appreciated. I don't often venture into these processes and am unfamiliar with them. Thanks. Awadewit | talk  02:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Global warming
Why would you unprotect a page being fully-protected due to a content dispute, when only only a handful (<5) actually agreed to any change? ~ UBeR (talk) 21:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Anne Frank tree image
I have emailed the owner of asking for their photo to be used on Wikipedia. I will let you know of any replies I get. Gruntbrat (talk) 06:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I did get a reply, but the photographer expressed doubts that is the specific tree you are looking for. Gruntbrat (talk) 08:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Still a newbie
I'm trying to figure out the ArbCom elections. I was wondering what you know about those. What can you tell me about ArbCom and its doings? I've read some lengthy litigation reports, but the whole process still seems a bit mysterious to me. What qualities do you think are essential for an ArbCom member? What do they really do? Any insight you could offer on these questions would be much appreciated. I have an anonymous email address linked from my userpage, if you would prefer to respond using that. Thanks. Awadewit | talk  08:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Charles Peirce article
At this point I've brought in the stuff from the other articles mentioned in the "Works" section. Hence these separate Wiki articles are ripe for deletion:
 * "On a New List of Categories"
 * "Logic of Relatives (1870)"
 * "Logic of Relatives (1883)"
 * "Logic of Relatives (1897)"

Somebody can always create such articles again if they plan to expand them.

As for "Kaina Stoicheia", I hope I'll get to it soon. The Tetrast (talk) 20:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. And now I've taken care of "Kaina Stoicheia," so its separate Wiki article can go, too. What I found was that it contained mostly text from Peirce's article, anyway all available at the Arisbe link. The Tetrast (talk) 21:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Update: I've found a "Logic of Relatives" Logic of relatives article that can also be deleted now. The Tetrast (talk) 21:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Areas for Tennessee cities and towns
The area data are a nice addition, but what was your source for the area data? (Not only do we need a citation, but we need a date. Some of these places have grown through annexation since the 2000 census.) --Orlady (talk) 03:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Donation in a good cause?
Maria and I were wondering if you would be willing to donate $5 or $10 towards a Cervantes pot. We recently discovered that the Spanish wikipedia has FAs on a number of British and American writers and texts, but we have none on any Spanish-language writers or texts. So, we thought maybe a push at the reward board would do the trick. See our discussion here. Awadewit | talk  20:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Feminists everywhere
Elizabeth Cady Stanton is up for FAC - just in case you missed it in the 100-or-so nominations. :) I thought you might like to comment. Awadewit | talk  13:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Keeping tabs on the Country article
I seem to have adopted this article, since country music and dance are interests of mine. Can you recommend an easy to use bot that would help me in keeping those unwanted links out of the article? Steve Pastor (talk) 19:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC) I sure wouldn't mind having another pair of eyes. This article is now being edited frequently, and it is a bit overwhelming to have to check every last edit that is made, many of which are barely relevant. Thanks for any help. Steve Pastor (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

The most dangerous woman in America
Well, I've finished the major part of the rewrite. Now comes the peer review, and then the FAC. Onward! – Scartol  •  Tok  21:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I know it doesn't add much, but I kinda liked the royal purple thing. It ties in with the Nietzsche/aristocracy of the spirit comment, and I think it also fits with her "beautiful, radiant things" sentiment. But of course given the length of the article, I won't filibuster. (Also note that I replied on the warrant question.) Cheers. – Scartol  •  Tok  00:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd like to thank you for encouraging me to take on Ms. Goldman, and for your help in making it an FA. Huzzah to the whole team! – Scartol  •  Tok  23:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, a donation to ETAN would be lovely. Send it attention to John Miller and give him a rundown of why you're sending it; he'll get a kick out of it. Cheers and thanks again. – Scartol  •  Tok  04:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The WP:Biography proposal
Hey, Kaldari - I took your advice. What do you think of this: "Please bear in mind that, in some cultures, people do not have surnames of any kind (such as in Javanese cultures) or are not addressed in formal writing by their surnames (such as in Icelandic and Vietnamese cultures); in those cases address the subject according to the naming conventions of his or her culture" ? WhisperToMe (talk) 02:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Sent you an e-mail. Miranda 15:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

GFDL issues
Hi, I noticed that a while back you merged some articles and then deleted the originals. Per the GFDL that doesn't work and they need to be left as redirects. Relevant examples are Logic of relatives, Logic of Relatives (1870), On a New List of Categories, Logic of Relatives (1883). It is also acceptable to copy and paste the list of contributors as was done at Justin Berry. However, this needs to be resolved. (there may be other examples but these are the first ones that came to my attention, presumably any others will be more Awbrey cruft). JoshuaZ (talk) 18:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Country "spam"
Just a note to let you know that I left that link there because the page represented by the link has a bunch of absolutely free mp3 files with very old music that is rarely heard. Yes, the larger site is commerical, but I think overall, it provides valuable content that can't be easily found elsewhere. Steve Pastor (talk) 22:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mayor Bill Purcell.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mayor Bill Purcell.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess this got lost
I posted the following on 29 December. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for the donation! – Scartol  •  Tok  22:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, a donation to ETAN would be lovely. Send it attention to John Miller and if you have a minute, give him a rundown of why you're sending it; he'll get a kick out of it. Cheers and thanks again. – Scartol  •  Tok  04:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Here's to a new year! I wanted to thank you for your dedicated work on Wikipedia - I know that you do a lot that is thankless and not nearly as exciting as editing articles (such as mentoring newbies). I hope that this year is full of glorious article-writing for you, for we sorely need your talents! Awadewit | talk  08:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Introduction to Evolution
Your commentary on the Introduction to Evolution featured article attempt is actively being discussed on Talk:Introduction to evolution. It would be most appreciated if you would be kind enough to contribute to the dialog there. It may be that your concerns have been addressed. If not, then further guidance would be appreciated. The page should be well organized; if you go to the bottom and scroll up you should be able to locate your specific concern which I took the liberty of copying/pasting to this page. Many thanks for following up on the discussion.--Random Replicator (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

A Nashville mini-meet
Thought I'd drop you a line about User:LaraLove/Bathrobe Cabal/Meetup, since it'll be in Nashville. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 22:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Vampire is now featured!
No, your comments weren't taken personally. :) Thank you for the barnstar - it's appreciated. Hope to see you around here again sometime. Cheers, Spawn Man (talk) 06:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

goldman/falk
Hi Kaldari -- early in the Emma Goldman FA process you noted that you had some of the EG books at hand; I just posted on Talk:EG that we don't distinguish the volumes in the Falk refs. Can you fix that? Sorry to burden you but I don't have access at the moment. --Lquilter (talk) 18:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the cake. It's been a pleasure working with you in recent months. Cheers! – Scartol  •  Tok  13:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Your change at Template:Citation
Hello Kaldari. Your edits to the Citation template are being discussed at Template talk:Citation, in the section Glitch in Citation template treatment of accessdate= field. I'd be interested in hearing your opinion. Cheers, Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

semi-protection at Jane Austen
I wonder what you think about the case for semi-protection at Jane Austen. Vandalism seems to be on the rise there and seems to pop up right after the semi-protection is lifted. Advice would be welcome. Awadewit | talk  21:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:externalvideo
The example is OK. Well done. Wandalstouring (talk) 17:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks better if the proper citation with the date of retrieval is used. Having dates in the article disturbs our casual readers. Wandalstouring (talk) 18:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't since we use a sourced description that is referenced, not the link itself. That has been very good for external images, however, I see your point.Wandalstouring (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Teenidols.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Teenidols.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia 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 non-free media 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)