User talk:MakeRocketGoNow

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to... using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.
 * 1) ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
 * 2) ...all articles...


 * Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff.  So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the   template (or    for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace   with   . If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man 16:25, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:25, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * With 13,004 edits over the course of 1.5 years, you're more than qualified. You should consider a bid for adminship. &mdash;  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  14:57, Dec. 25, 2005

Great Username
Hey I just wanted to let you know I love your username- it made me laugh when i saw it. Then I told my sister and she laughed. :) I assume it is from The Simpsons from when Homer joins NASA? That is a funny episode. Regards, --Rachel Cakes 09:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Yep, it's from the "Deep Space Homer" episode. MakeRocketGoNow 23:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I too got a big laugh when I saw it. :D The Wookieepedian 02:40, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Requested template
I put together something for the template you requested at Requested_templates. --CBD &#x260E; &#x2709; 02:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Sweet! Thanks! - MakeRocketGoNow 02:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Philotics
Most of the reference for the ideas of Card at Philotics will come from the content of the books Xenocide and Children of the Mind. I'd hate to try to delve into it and decipher what all of it means. But should we reference these books there? I always thougt this was just an invention of Card; I've never heard them mentioned anywhere else. In fact, this article might need to be merged into one of the articles on the Enderverse. --ShadowPuppet 03:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I never heard of this, so I have no idea if it's purely Card's brainchild/fancruft, or based on some other real science/philosophical conceit. Either way, this distinction needs to be clearly made, and backed up with references. If it's just Card's, it can go under category:Fictional technology. In any event, Philotics needs to be merged with Philotic Web and most of philote. MakeRocketGoNow 01:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Please check your WP:NA entry
Greetings, editor! Your name appears on List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct: Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 04:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
 * 2) If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
 * 3) Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thanks

 * Hey, my first star! Thanks! MakeRocketGoNow 16:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[Year] works categories
I think a better solution than categories such as "1859 works", which consensus on CFD seems to consider too vaguely defined, might be to create "[year] in literature" categories. This could then capture short stories, essays, poems, etc., that aren't included in the narrower [year] books categories, and the book categories would then be a logical subcategory of the [year] in literature categories. There is precedent in this kind of organizing/naming scheme in the [year] in law and [year] in sports categories. Cheers, Postdlf 14:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure, that sounds good. I deliberately chose "works" for its very vagueness- I imagined the category being able to cover political documents, works of art, buildings, anything human-created. I can see how this is considered TOO vague. Subsequent categories could follow from your idea: [year] in art, [year] in architecture, etc. Should the [year] in literature categories idea be posted here? MakeRocketGoNow 16:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Category sorts
By using the * sortkey, all the sub-cats appear on the first page of the category; from what I gather, this makes it easier to find a sub-cat under which to file an article. There was some discussion about it at Wikipedia_talk:Categorization. If this annoys anyone, please revert it with impunity, and I plead obsessive compulsiveness. Cheers, Her Pegship 22:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks for the link. I can see some advantage to getting all the subcats up front. But if you're going to do it, go do all the subcats for that category! MakeRocketGoNow 00:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Please join in
Locations in fiction, fictional locations, and settings is a proposed policy on how to list fictional locations and to differentiate between a physical place and a setting (ie. universe or world). Please join in and give your thoughts. Bring some friends! &mdash;Lady Aleena talk / contribs 05:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Works by year
I notice that, along with User:Jpbowen, you were instrumental in creating many of the "Works by year" categories. However, the actual population of these categories has been somewhat erratic, aside from certain specific genres (e.g., film). Has there ever been any discussion in the WP community about what it would take to populate these categories consistently? Or is this something you have moved on from, and haven't been pushing? Marc Shepherd 13:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * There has been no discussion to my knowledge. Yes, category population has been erratic, but that seems endemic to Wikipedia. I also have not been consistently working on it. I welcome your suggestions. MakeRocketGoNow 17:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

More thanks

 * Thank you very much! MakeRocketGoNow 14:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Help me out?
Could you please help with page creations on ABC Daytime & CBS Daytime? If would be much appreciated. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.108.244 (talk) 06:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

February 2021
 Your account has been blocked indefinitely because it is suspected that it has been compromised. If your account is locked, please contact. Otherwise, if you are able to confirm that you are the user who created this account, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section), then add this below the block notice on your talk page: .Mz7 (talk) 01:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Slipstream (science fiction) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Slipstream (science fiction) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Slipstream (science fiction)& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WorksInCentury
Template:WorksInCentury has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 21:15, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:BonAppetitMagazineApril2019.jpg


The file File:BonAppetitMagazineApril2019.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "replacing this cover art with File:Bon appetit october 2006 50th anniversary.png as lead image..."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PlaceCalledEsthervillepaperback.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:PlaceCalledEsthervillepaperback.JPG. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mr. Winkle


The article Mr. Winkle has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "the page is not well built and the references are not correctly added,there is a lot of grammar errors too I think the page should be deleted or moved to a draft until it's improved."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of fictional religions


The article List of fictional religions has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "G5. Creations by banned or blocked users. Sock of User:Arshifakhan61, who is banned indefinitely by the Wikimedia Foundation"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Maile (talk) 21:37, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of List of fictional religions for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fictional religions is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of fictional religions until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Dronebogus (talk) 10:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Mr. Winkle for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mr. Winkle is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Mr. Winkle until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Dronebogus (talk) 10:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Open House (1964 TV series)


The article Open House (1964 TV series) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG. Tagged for notability since 2022"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donald D23  talk to me  16:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Open House (1964 TV series) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Open House (1964 TV series) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Open House (1964 TV series) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Donald D23  talk to me  03:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

File:ChrisGainsAlbum.PNG listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ChrisGainsAlbum.PNG, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)