User talk:Loodog/archive4

Karachi v.s. Economist poll
To Loodog,

Hmm, didn't know about the rule. Thanks for bringing it up. I have posted a section in Karachi's talk page, you can check it out there.

Thanks, Mik357 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mik357 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Atlanta
Thank you for your help tagging questionable statements in Atlanta. You specified on your most recent edit that: "this is NOT an exhaustive tagging". An exhaustive tagging would be appreciated, if you have the time. I would like to see Atlanta resubmitted for GA status. Your feedback is valuable, especially considering your contributions to other city articles. Thanks again, --JKeene 05:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of approved and under construction skyscapers in Downtown Phoenix
List of approved and under construction skyscapers in Downtown Phoenix, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that List of approved and under construction skyscapers in Downtown Phoenix satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/List of approved and under construction skyscapers in Downtown Phoenix and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of List of approved and under construction skyscapers in Downtown Phoenix during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kwsn  (Ni!)  23:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Popular music artists from Atlanta
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Popular music artists from Atlanta, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add db-author to the top of Popular music artists from Atlanta. Coppertwig 00:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

What does this mean?...
The residents of Billings eventually drove out the "evil satanist activists who would so swiftly force patriotic Americans into ascerbic fear"

Thanks

--Wolfdog1 (talk) 02:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

It's a reductio ad absurdum.--Loodog (talk) 02:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

DART
No problem, give a week or two and I can get it done. FoUTASportscaster (talk) 02:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

UTA TRAX
Don't worry, I do to plan to write that section eventually, I'm just not quite sure how to go about writing it, and it's not on the top of my priority list at the moment. But I will write it, as that page has the potential to be very informative and well-written, and I hope to contribute to that. bob rulz (talk) 09:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Sure
Sure thing. I'll get to it very soon. Thanks! XxTrillvillexX9 (talk) 02:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Is this worth working on
Or will it get nuked you think? TIA --Tom 16:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ha. I didn't know he had a story.  Though I'm pretty sure that article will eventually get removed as nonnotable.--Loodog (talk) 02:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

International Centers of Commerce
Hey,

I noticed that you had voted for the deletion of the International Centers of Commerce template because you felt it was an advertisement. I just want to let you know that I have changed the text so that the template does not appear like an advertisement, but rather an informational template to tell people about the top 10 centers of financial flow. The template now does not show "Mastercard Worldwide" on it, but rather says source. I hope you will change your mind and your vote on the Templates for deletion: International Centers of Commerce

Thanks, Nikkul (talk) 04:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bostonecon.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bostonecon.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the 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. A dmrb♉ltz (t • c • [ log]) 18:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)  A dmrb♉ltz (t • c • [ log]) 18:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Kardashev Scale
Hi, recently the Kardashev scale entry has gone through some major reverts, I'd like to talk about the reinstatement of the material. I've looked around and have seen that you've made some major contributions to the article and are interested in it's progress. I feel we need to talk about the reverts and reinstatement and talk about whether either are justified. Talk:Kardashev scale If you could help or add your two cents I'd really appreciate it. Thanks--Sparkygravity (talk) 01:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Familyguyskyline.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Familyguyskyline.gif. 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) 06:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Peak oil & "New urbanism"
Hi, first off, I just noticed new urbanism today. I'm wondering about the section you deleted from peak oil: is your only issue with it that it mentions new urbanism? I tried to soften the statement about that "movement", and I don't think it's a plug (though maybe it belongs in the peak oil mitigation section more than the main article). I believe thre rest of the section is based on the writtings of James Howard Kunstler and others, so it's hardly OR. I do think some discussion of suburbs could go there (as I'm sure do those who wrote the section), so care to help flesh out what you would consider acceptable? NJGW (talk) 16:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * If there had been a single source in that section making the point it makes, I would have had no problem with it. But as it stands, it reeks of "I told ya so" from the Smart Growthers and New Urbanists, promising energy-profligate suburbs to be "slums of the future".  Speaking of which, what is this quoting?  There's no source saying it.  There's also no guarantee a lack of oil, out of all energy sources, will strand our suburbanites.--Loodog (talk) 16:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * So if I cite one source from Kunstler you'd be satisfied that the section can stay? NJGW (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As much of the section as appears in the source.--Loodog (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * And do you consider any mention of "new urbanism" to be a plug? In my opinion that's a bit extreme, as any mention of mitigation forms (as in hybrids, wind energy etc.) would be plugs by the same rational. NJGW (talk) 16:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I mostly see it as a plug because of the lack of sources, but also because the availability of one energy source is, at best, peripherally related to housing patterns.--Loodog (talk) 16:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added references to Kunstler's book on the subject, as well as a video lecture he gave at TED 2004. I also added other forms of mitigation so it doesn't seem like a plug for "new urbanism". I've moved this conversation to the Peak oil talk page.  NJGW (talk) 18:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Rhode Island International Film Festival
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Rhode Island International Film Festival, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Rhode Island International Film Festival. Jfire (talk) 03:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Cutting down Rhode Island Intro
Hey, not that I don't agree that the intro could use a little shortening, I'd just prefer it if you moved information from the intro to other applicable areas rather than deleting them outright. Namely, the fact that Rhode Island is the smallest state by geographic size and population, as well as the state with the longest official name, strikes me as something that should be kept in the article. If you could redo your revision so that information is displaced, not lost, that'd be great. Thanks. -CitrusFreak12 (talk) 08:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

WTF???
I just recieved a message from you about making inappropriate edits. I haven't made any edits what so ever to the page you said i had so i don't understand???
 * The edits in question were these.--Loodog (talk) 17:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Student Village (Victoria University)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Student Village (Victoria University), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: :. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Student Village (Victoria University), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G6 Housekeeping. This article must be deleted to make room for a clean page move.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 01:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Copy-and-paste page moves
The rationale you gave for contesting the speedy deletion of Student Village (Victoria University) is the exact reason why it SHOULD be deleted. The page was not moved. It was copied and pasted. You transferred the text, but not the edit history that comes with it. It needs to be moved. Please refrain from editing either page until the page you created is deleted, and Student Village moved to Student Village (Victoria University) as you intended to do. --Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 01:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh. I see what you mean.--Loodog (talk) 01:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Images tagged for deletion
I just wanted to let you know that I tagged three non-free images that you uploaded, Image:Waterplacetower.jpg, Image:Westinres.JPG, and Image:Waterplacecondos.JPG for speedy deletion per CSD1, as the Residences at the Westin is now complete and the Waterplace Towers are very near completion. I went out and took a few photos of the buildings, and uploaded two, Image:Waterplace Providence.JPG and Image:Residences Westin Providence.JPG, to use in place of the non-free ones. I apologize for the poor image quality... I will try and get some better ones to upload soon. Cheers, Rai - me  04:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * K. Good work.--Loodog (talk) 04:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Baby
Dude I just looked at ClayMort's page and I must say. He is a baby. He acts like a childish four year old and hes an idiot! Quahog in Kent! What an idiot! You should have rubbed it in his face that you can see the Providence Skyline from the Griffins house!Crips r us (talk) 22:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you live in Rhode Island? I live in Providence.Crips r us (talk) 22:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't live there now, but I lived in Providence.--Loodog (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you tell me about the RI Film Festival? I tried but I really didn't get it.Crips r us (talk) 22:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It's an event where they show independent films. It takes place thorough Providence and the films are always interesting and unique.--Loodog (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops
Oops sorry. I thought Textron was shown in Family Guy! Sorry.Crips r us (talk) 23:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit dispute on Kardashev scale
In the last month or so there's been a edit dispute on the article, about what it is, who it was meant for, where the article needs to go, whether it needs to be split. Not of lot of people work on it, so there's very few people deciding these issues. I was wondering if you could take a look at the article, it's history, and talk page and put your two cents in at the bottom of the Talk:Kardashev scale page. If you could, it'd be really helpful. THX--Sparkygravity (talk) 22:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Empireatbroadway.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Empireatbroadway.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) 20:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

APTA ridership numbers
Concerning the article List of United States light rail systems by ridership, I like how you're dedicated to the validity of the ridership numbers using the APTA as the primary reference, but the New Jersey stats are dated and need updated. Though I have not computed the difference compared to the APTA, the reference found by Edg2103 seems to be legitimate enough. At the very least, it doesn't use big round numbers like Houston does in their METRORail literature. Anyways, the article does allow for exceptions as per the first sentence.

All figures are average weekday unlinked passenger trips, unless otherwise noted, and come from the American Public Transit Association's Ridership Reports Statistics[1] for the third quarter of 2007, unless otherwise noted. --Millbrooky (talk) 20:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There may well be more updated numbers for any given system, but this is a relative ranking we're doing. We can't very well start comparing ridership at different points in time, much less by different reporting authorities.  Local agencies tend to overestimate for the same reason that local population estimates tend to go over.  If an agency is covered in the APTA report, we must use it.  Alternative sources should only be used when APTA has nothing to say.--Loodog (talk) 20:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Understood, but then there are 6 transit systems that don't use the APTA as their source for ridership data. Why is using old non-APTA data on the NJ systems acceptable when new non-APTA data is not?  Should we remove the cities that the APTA does not list or at least remove the ridership data? --Millbrooky (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, that was my fault. I thought we were currently using APTA data on them.  Carry on.--Loodog (talk) 15:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Spam warning in Arguments for and against drug prohibition
hi. please refrain from sequentially erasing whole sections of articles just because you disapprove of their content. the OR claims is meant as a general guide line for the quality of the text, not as an excuse to erase it. moreover, The fact tag request on most of them was less than a week old. more specifically this kind of article, by it's title is meant to make "Arguments", if you believe these are wrongly attributed to people, please feel free to use the "cite" tag. thank you.-- Procrastinating@ talk2me 01:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Investigation Into An Edit Made by Whole Foods
I've been trying to figure out what the deal is with an edit coming from Whole Foods on the Cannabis page which is shown here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=144326956

Evidence that it came from Whole Foods here: http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?ip1=64.132.0.0-255

Did whoever this person from Whole Foods is remove the ancient history section?

My problem is that in the edit history of July 17 2007 I can't find their edit in the list. If this is a real edit why isn't it in the history list?

My other problem is that Whole Foods has a policy against marijuana use and competes against it by selling legal mood enhancers so it's conflict of interest for them to be messing with that page at all.

Please don't reply on my discussion page as I might be trolled by a wikipedia user called novangelis and he may then start tampering with the Cannabis page if he sees I have anything to do with it. Please reply to me at truthkeepers-at-hushmail.com

Note that that's truthkeepers with an s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starfire777 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Albuquerque is larger than Tucson, and Portland is larger than Denver.
If you enter the page for Albuquerque, it will list a new population for Albuquerque, which is currently 523,590, larger than Tucson's current population. Portland is also larger than Denver, according to its page, with an updated population of 568,380. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickjtorres (talk • contribs) 15:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Permission to keep updated
Although I understand you want all cities according to the 2006 Census, I am changing cities' population so that they are updated. Updated information (such as population from 2007 to 2008) will guarantee accurate information to the public. Really, it's not a big deal for me to change the rankings and populations, I enjoy doing it. I was also asking for permission to change the following cities with current populations from 2007 to 2008: San Jose-973,672; Austin-715,893; Charlotte-695,995; and Washington D.C.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickjtorres (talk • contribs) 16:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That misses the point. If you update these, you won't be using the same source for all of them.  These are comparative rankings.  To use difference sources, or worse, different points in time, is terrible practice.--Loodog (talk) 16:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

My apologies
Dear brother,

Apologies for my reaction to your edits for the Karachi article. I took it personally. Thanks for showing me the right way.

Regards, Mik357 (talk) 02:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Fall River
No, I'm not looking for a gold star. I'm looking for a better way to word that sentence, because "8th largest" sounds silly - that's pretty far down the list. How would you suggest we word it so that it is clear that there are many, many cities in Massachusetts with between 80,000 and 100,000 residents? I feel that the factual answer of "8th largest" is misleading in spirit. CSZero (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a simple honest fact. If it sounds unimpressive, tough.  Readers know that rankings don't give regard for relative gaps between consecutive items.--Loodog (talk) 19:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Providence meetup
There is now a planning page to arrange a meetup in Providence. Please sign up if you are interested. --mikeu (talk) 12:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Garden Grove (song)
Another editor has added the  template to the article Garden Grove (song), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 05:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Exactly
In regards to this edit, I totally agree. Notice the reason given for the Albuquerque population change. "My father is a council member." Eh. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 04:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Charlotte
Hello Loodog. I want to let you know that you can change the source on the Charlotte page back to the Census Bureau as a source. I have researched this and I have also consulted with another admin and we both have agreed that the census source is going to be the best one to deal with. I hope this helps. If the other editor continues to ignore and revert the edit, then we will have no other choice but to block or to ask for a 3RR review. I hope this helps. Canyouhearmenow 04:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's a 3RR violation. Time to report him.--Loodog (talk) 12:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, I have looked at the US Census Bureau and here is a link that needs to be used . As you can see, neither one of your numbers are correct according to the bureau's web site. The source that you put on is not referenced correctly and it leads you to an excel spead sheet. We cannot use that. Also, when you are sourcing, it is better to use cite web with your sourcing and referencing. Here is a link to a very easy way to cite web. Make sure to give the publisher and to add a quote. . I hope this will help. I also hope that this issue between you and the other editor can be fixed. As I agree with you that your source is the better and more reliable one, I have to also acknowledge that his is not unsourcable either. Try to be a little kinder and explain why you feel the way you do about your edit. Remember that through this media, we are not looking each other in the face so the remarks we make via these talk pages may not seem as nice or be relayed the exact way we meant for them to be. Just a thought to keep in mind.. Have fun and let me know if I can be of further assistance. Canyouhearmenow 13:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I fail to see what's wrong with this one. The source you present has a 2000 Census and a 2003 estimate, why not go with the 2006 Census estimate?  Also, I've fixed the citation format.--Loodog (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Lol I am sorry I was just coming back to change my link. I do think the 2006 is the best one. I changed it on the talk page. If you click, I have changed it on yours as well. I am sorry for my haste in linkage! Canyouhearmenow 13:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Departedhostage.JPG
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Departedhostage.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. Rockfang (talk) 04:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Template?
Your opinion, please? Nyttend (talk) 14:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

New Providence Metro Area map
Hey, your friendly sporadically-motivated cartographer came back around and updated the map for the Providence metro area. I think it looks a lot nicer now. (I've been playing with SVG! Can you tell?) Anyway, since you seem to be a heavy maintainer of the page, I thought I should let you know. Petros63 (talk) 08:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Worcester
I recently discovered the Wikipedia article traffic statistics tool, and found a pretty interesting situation for Worcester (UK) and Worcester, Massachusetts. Using the tool, I found that despite "Worcester" being located at the UK city, Worcester, Massachusetts gets about 15,000 searches per month, while the UK Worcester gets only 10,000 searches per month. And there is pretty much no chance that all of those 10,000 readers going to "Worcester" are intending to go to the UK city; the dab page gets only 500 hits per month, but as there is dab link to Worcester, Massachusetts, there is a very good chance that a sizeable portion of the 10,000 hits for "Worcester, UK" are readers intending to look for the MA city, but these numbers are not represented, as these readers do not go through the disambiguation page.

I expressed my concerns at Talk:Worcester (disambiguation), but am reluctant to begin another discussion or requested move at Talk:Worcester. The last move request turned into such a petty "my Worcester is better than yours because..." argument, and the last thing anyone wants to see is a repeat of that. But do you think another move request would be a good idea? 15,000 readers should not be redirected to the wrong article, even if there is a dab link in a hatnote present there. The current situation is simply unacceptable; this is a primary example of why disambiguation pages exist in the first place on Wikipedia; there is obviously no primary topic. What do you think? Cheers, Rai • me  03:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Let's go for another round with them.--Loodog (talk) 17:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Mounthopebridge.JPG
Hi Loodog!

We thank you for uploading Image:Mounthopebridge.JPG, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation. This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Jamestownbridge.JPG
Hi Loodog!

We thank you for uploading Image:Jamestownbridge.JPG, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation. This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 17:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008
Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Dorftrottel (warn) 14:30, April 28, 2008 14:30, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I will have none of this. Find and cite your reliable sources, or stop adding the material. Carefully read WP:V, particularly WP:PROVEIT: The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Furthermore, an article talk page consensus (which exists only in your fantasy in the first place) which defies one or more of our core content policies is obsolete. Dorftrottel (ask) 16:04, April 28, 2008


 * My edits are non-negotiable reversions of your vandalism. Dorftrottel (harass) 16:19, April 28, 2008
 * FWIW, you are the one who will commit a 3RR violation with their next revert, not me. However, I have posted to WP:RSN (the best place I could think of). Present your arguments there. Dorftrottel (canvass) 16:25, April 28, 2008
 * Also note that in your over-eagerness to inappropriately revert to a policy-violating revision which you alone prefer, you overlooked a constructive edit which you also reverted. Please restore that edit at once. Dorftrottel (troll) 16:37, April 28, 2008

RfC - images on Physical attractiveness
Please note that I have filed a RfC here. Dorftrottel (complain) 20:28, April 28, 2008

Image:Onetenaerial.JPG
I have tagged Image:Onetenaerial.JPG as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Use rationale examples. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 22:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Ripta.gif)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Ripta.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, because it has been replaced by Image:RIPTA Logo.png. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? AEMoreira042281 (talk) 15:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Worcester
I am usually quite happy to assume good faith. The anon's original post was totally unclear, and I can't tell for certain what it what supposed to mean, but trying to turn an "oppose" vote into a "support" vote is twisting things a bit too far, I think. Therefore the anon was right to be upset by you doing that; however, quickly descending into petty personal attacks and accusations of maliciousness was clearly not the right thing for them to do.

When debates turn into two sides throwing incivility accusations at each other, then it's time to keep a few paces back, which is what I'm doing now. --RFBailey (talk) 02:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * But you must be able to see where I'm coming from. I wasn't trying to "twist" anything.  I thought he misinterpretted the proposition.  What I spent more time doing than arguing for what he meant was clarifying the terms of the move, so that he himself could respond.--Loodog (talk) 02:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should just have asked for them to clarify what they were talking about, rather than saying "I think you mean "support"", when it really wasn't clear what they were saying one way or the other. Then you would have avoided any claims of misrepresenting or manipulating their view.  --RFBailey (talk) 04:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess you're right. Doesn't seem to matter now.  He's off on a poorly-written tirade that's not helping anyone, and that's far more his doing than mine.--Loodog (talk) 18:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Providence-Federal-Hill-Pineapple.2008-05-05.imgp7906.jpg
Thanks for the compliment on my photo. I've been meaning for months to get "The Pineapple" onto Wikipedia, and I finally got around to it. It seems to be one of he main things that visitors to the city remember seeing. Shortening my original caption was probably a good idea, too. --Zigamorph (talk) 10:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ripta.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ripta.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

American Jews
Don't want to make that page a chat... I am really not arguing anything anymore over there, but rather stating an opinion. I abhor the ethnic Jew idea, but some Jews think otherwise. Yes, I can see calling Ashkenazim an ethnic group to a degree. But, my Grandmother was blonde haired and blue-eyed, and she didn't look at all Jewish, so there was something else going on there too. One could argue that there are several ethnic groups that make up the Jewish people, but even that is a stretch. The Eastern-European Jews (Russian/Polish/German/Lithuanian) certainly have some similar genetic markers, but thanks to the Cossacks and rape, there is lots of Slavic blood in the Russian Jews. And, with substantial assimilation, lots of German blood in German Jews, so even the Ashkenazim are not really a strong ethnic group. The Sephardic have several distinct groups among them as well. And, with the Diaspora, there are far-Eastern Jews (very few) that are certainly a distinct ethnic group, as are the Negro Jews of Ethiopia.

Personally, I consider myself to be an American, not Russian or Polish, which is my ancestry. That makes me of Ashkenazi descent, but that is meaningless to me. I also am Jewish religiously, although not Orthodox in any way, shape or form, but definitely attached to the religion in far more than a cultural way.Sposer (talk) 23:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Agganis Arena Exterior.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Agganis Arena Exterior.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Top Importance Chicago Articles
If you want to help me choose Category:Top-importance Chicago articles, come comment at WikiProject_Chicago/Assessment by June 5th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:10, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Ridership stats and unlinked trips
I've noticed you've been updating the ridership info of many light-rail systems with the latest APTA data. I recommend you either stop, or add an asterix on multi-line systems that the number represents unlinked trips and may overstate the actual ridership. Anyways, would it not be better to have the latest yearly data on each systems page instead of quarterly trend data? e.g. SF Muni dropped from 132,500+ to 83,000 in just the last quarter. Showing just the latest quarterly data could be misleading.-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Millbrooky (talk • contribs)
 * The best way to do this is with a standardized national source, which APTA is perfect for. I do see your point that someone could just transfer lines and be counted twice, which isn't "fair" to the single line systems.  I favor the asterisk idea.--Loodog (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)