User talk:MapsMan/Archive 1

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Aprod-t.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Aprod-t.png. 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) 05:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * — done —  MapsMan  [  talk  |  cont  ] — 19:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Eiffel Tower Photo
Why move the photo that my father took right after the end of World War II? It's a photo of historic significance that I took the time to upload, and not one simply taken from some website. Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation is a repository of photographs of historical significance. This picture has been on Wikipedia for much longer than you've been editing. Please, move another photo. Thanks, Googie man (talk) 20:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * - replied on user talk page. —  MapsMan  [  talk  |  cont  ] — 21:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * MapsMan, thank you very much for your response. I can certainly see your points, and agree completely that many articles, including the one on the Eiffel Tower, are getting a little unruly with images.  It's really not a vanity issue, trust me - my father just happened to take a really beautiful, artful photograph.  Thank you for leaving it where it is.  Best regards, Googie man (talk) 22:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ClamAbuse StopThinking.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ClamAbuse StopThinking.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) 19:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * — MapsMan  [  talk  |  cont  ] — 21:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Darlingtoncoatofarms.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Darlingtoncoatofarms.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) 21:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * — MapsMan  [  talk  |  cont  ] — 21:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Darlingtoncoatofarms.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Darlingtoncoatofarms.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 may 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) 13:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * — MapsMan  [  talk  |  cont  ] — 21:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:OV Chipkaart.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:OV Chipkaart.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Editor Assistance Request by Ian Snowball
Hi there,

I thought it best to inform you that Ian Snowball requested that your edits be looked into as he seems to think you are harassing him. I've looked into both of your edit histories and also your discussions on his talk page and found no harassment. If you'd like to join in the discussion - as a way of putting forward your point of view - then it is located here, although I don't think it's necessary if you feel you'd rather not get involved. I'm hoping that Ian will read my response and agree with it and then the whole matter can be resolved.

Howie &#9742;  06:11, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again, could you please add your support to Requests for comment/Ian Snowball as Ian Snowball's behavior includes him calling both you and I anti-disabled people, and also accusing you of harassment; whilst he has created an edit war and continually reverts edits and adds non-factual info. Many thanks. Howie  &#9742;  16:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * – comment provided.

Inaccurate and conflicting information
Dear Mapsman,

Your last edit of Primrose Hill ry sta was to delete the para that the line thru PH was used to get to Wldn J when the track thru S Hmpd etc had been closed and to delete a comment about a possible future development. Which of those was inaccurate and which conflicted with what? When the tunnel was closed for overhead electric installation NLL trains did run from Camden Rd to Wldn Jn LL. Table 58 of the BR Jan-June 1996 timetable confirms that my trips were real and not hallucinogenic. 90% of WP is written without references, and many future dreams get woven into the text but short of a bot to label every article "Unsourced. Delete!" and then saving only what editors chose to rescue what's to be done?--SilasW (talk) 16:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC) – replied on talk page
 * Message received. I now see my ambiguity.--SilasW (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

RE Primary destinations
Hello. I wanted to ask what the exact definition is of a pd. such as Frome, Somerset is and Crowborough, East Sussex isnt but they are a similar size and only one primary route goes anywhere near them? Blackwave...... (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * – replied on talk page

A148 road/A149 road
Flexibility! Is the key word here? In the past when I have got into discussions about this particular page, there has been very little of that. I apologies if you think that I’m getting at you, but many of the editors involved in UK Roads Project are completely inflexible and in some cases dame right arrogant. I just don’t see the point in slapping tags on pages and then not doing anything constructive about putting right what “in there OPINION is a bad article. The essay like tag has been on and of that page for more than a year now!. I have removed it on occasions but other editors also have. I have no doubt that the UK Roads Project will get around to ripping the page to its bare bones at one stage or other. I just don’t agree with there sterile outlook of road descriptions. In the past when I have tried to get into some sort of debate with members of the project it has been a complete waste of my time! They have there views and no one else’s count. Stavros1 (talk) 18:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Further More
 * Is it necessary that you have to cry off to other editors (Regan123) to enforce your views. I repute the allegations you make of me of being possessive of these articles (being from Norfolk) and immature with his "don't agree with your opinion so I'll ignore it" attitude. I have got into pointless discussions before and why do you think I should be given a wp:3rr. If you check the history I have reverted twice as have you!. It was initially removed by another editor!. Your need for back up is just the reason you did not get a response from me. I’v been down this ROAD before, and as it makes you angry!, you Know how it has got to me in the past.Stavros1 (talk) 19:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * – replied on talk page

A149 road
Hello MapsMan

I appreciate your comments and welcome any contributions to the discussions. I am pleased that you have made positive criticisms of the article rather than just say that it is all wrong as some editors have done in the past. I have absolutely no problem in the article being revamped as you suggested. When I created the article it was my first attempt at contributing to an article on a road. The article has not been altered vastly by anyone in particular. But all the same it did initially come under huge criticism from some editors in the project. This would have been fine by me, But! Criticisms where never backed up by any actions and in some point felt like I was being ordered. i.e. you must do this! Or that information is wrong! With out any explanation why it was wrong. One editor even made the accusation that the A149 was built on an old railway track bed and was not even worth the effort of writing about, a view that was never backed up or replied to when I pointed out the error in there information. I am not attached to the page and would welcome any positive contributions to make the page as good as we all can make it. Thanks!Stavros1 (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * – replied on talk page.

Trolleybus
Can you please add some information in the article for the Poland section instead a simple wikilink?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 11:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * – replied on talk page —  MapsMan  [  talk  |  cont  ] — 11:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Park Republika Srpska
Hello. Thank you. First report I've seen was from the city officials (ref. 2 in the article), saying that the park is between Gazela and Old Railway Bridge. That sounded strange because that area is occupied by the notorious slum of Kartonsko naselje and city can't wait to displace the locals because the land will be one of the most expensive in Belgrade. Creating such a park there made no sense. Few days before I wrote the article I was, accidentally, crossing Gazela so I tried to see if really there is a park in that location...and it wasn't. I guess I was looking to the wrong side :o) Then I've found a report saying it was on the other side, between Gazela and Old Sava Bridge. So your location is OK. I like to walk in that area, along Sava bank, so when I go there I will see exactly which part of this section it occupies.

I have a question for you. I am trying to find someone who's native language is English to help me edit my future articles. I am mostly into geography and history. To see some of my work, I've wrote most of stuff on List of Belgrade neighborhoods, created Rivers of Serbia and Lakes of Serbia (which I am planning to develope soon). If you are not interested maybe you could recommend me someone else. If not, it's ok, no hard feelings :o) Greetings PajaBG (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * – replied on talk page.

Thanks. Until I write something new, when you have free time, you might check the latest I posted: Muhar, Zaovine Lake, Skadarlija, Zasavica (bog)...Do you prefer some other view of communication, e-mail, msn? Thanks again. PajaBG (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * – replied on talk page., Monday July 29 2024 (UTC)

User:Ian Snowball
Hi MapsMan. Thanks for letting me know, but I already knew of this discussion. I agree he may have good intentions somewhere, but his recent edits using User:86.138.137.197 suggest otherwise... Craigy (talk) 23:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Serbian articles
Thank you very much, hope it wasn't much of a mess. I won't be adding much of a new stuff...for now (at least, I don't plan to) so I won't bug you much...for now :o) I do have a question: exactly for which parts of Zaovine Lake and Skadarlija you think additional citations are needed? Almost everything is from the already cited sources, I just didn't insert it in every line taken from it. For Muhar, I know it doesn't have much sources to work on, but I will try to find something. Thanks again PajaBG (talk) 19:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Just wanted to tell you I've visited Park Republika Srpska. Trees are still young, though. It is located just south-west of the point you marked on the map, where those three white circles can be seen. They are central part of it. PajaBG (talk) 01:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:A10 road/Sandbox
The content itself wasn't deleted, it was moved to Talk:A10 road/Sandbox. I just deleted the redirect to the talk page. ... disco spinster   talk  20:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

August Metro
Simply south (talk) 19:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Cheers
Cheers...--ChocChipCookie (talk) 15:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

AWB

 * It is perhaps a small matter but your recent edit to Ealing Common Depot seems contrary to AutoWikiBrowser so you might need to review these. They are fresh in my mind because I recently started using this tool myself. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

alwaystouchout.com
Hi MapsMan, are you able to add an "indication of importance" to the alwaystouchout.com article? Or it could be deleted under A7. Marasmusine (talk) 12:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You need to "just give a reasonable indication of why it might be notable." (WP:WEB is probably a good guideline for that.) Marasmusine (talk) 12:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have moved it to User:mapsMan/alwaystouchout.com so you can work on it. Marasmusine (talk) 13:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Minor Edits
Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.'  Olana North (talk) 13:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice that you have been making a lot of minor edits using AWB recently. please could I ask that you tick the "minor edits" box as it makes it easier for other editors to review changes. By not marking minor edits, other editors (myself included) waste time reviewing edits that we would normally have screened or filtered. This is the reason for the warning being issued above. Olana North (talk) 13:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * As the user a couple of posts above notes, can you please stop using AWB to make pointless edits like this. I really don't want to disable your automated tools access, but if you carry on ignoring the rules of use, I will do so. –  iride scent  19:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

September\October Metro
Simply south (talk) 13:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

New Year Met
. Simply south not SS, sorry 17:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:OV Chipkaart.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:OV Chipkaart.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorted! —  MapsMan  [  talk  |  cont  ] — 23:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Feb metro!
Simply south not SS, sorry 14:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

April Metro
Simply south (talk) 11:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

MapsMan I need your help
Regarding article rescue - I think that there may be an article in peril, and I am so new to Wikipedia as to be virtually powerless to help.

I was doing a research project on ancient/historic trade through Afghanistan and Central Asia in general, and jumped online to look at some pictures of Caspian tigers - In the course of which I checked out Wikipedia. I found that some gross changes had been made to the tiger pages that are threatening to sweep away the Caspian tiger's place on Wikipedia. I joined Wikipedia thinking that I could help, but with zero experience as a contributor/editor - I have been wandering around for days now (countless hours) trying to find a place to run up a flag of distress. The articles in question are linked to multiple concerns - WikiProject Cats, WikiProject Afghanistan, WikiProject China, WikiProject Extinction, etc. I went to these portals, but could find nowhere to communicate my alarm. I desperately need to find someone to help. I found your name by burrowing into WikiProject Afghanistan where someone had invited you to join the "Article Rescue Squadron"; Can you help?

Here's the situation - It so happens that very recent DNA research (pub. January 2009) indicates that the Caspian tiger (Panthera tigris virgata) and the Siberian tiger (Panthera tigris Altaica) are so closely related that they are for all intents and purposes - one and the same; that they once had a contiguous range that spanned from modern Turkey through Armenia, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Northern China, and into southeastern Russia. Apparently it was only in the past 200 hundred years that the Caspian tiger and the Siberian tiger were separated by human pressures, and only recently (1950's) that the Caspian tigers in the Western ranges were entirely eliminated. The Siberian tiger is now basically the last remnant. These wide ranging tigers kept mostly to the fertile riversides and alluvial marshes and were part of the rich history of these regions since man began to trade along the same routes as the tiger's range. These are the same tigers that are depicted in numerous stone reliefs, sculptures, tapestries, miniature paintings, and prose, the same tigers that were encountered by caravan drivers, traders, emissaries, and religious travelers for thousands of years - and in Wikipedia there are serious threats to remove their page with editors beginning to regulate them to a status below that which they deserve.

It must be noted that when scientifically classifying animals there is only one rank below the classification "species" (tigers in this case); below species there is only "subspecies." At times more than one person describes an animal and submits a name for it. This used to be common, and was due to distance, communication, and honest mistakes. In this case, the inaccuracies of early classification attempts has been revealed with the aid of DNA. Two persons, at different times, submitted a name for the same subspecies. The international governing body for animal classification, the ICZN, has a rule by which the first description always takes precedence (unless by a rare special ruling). Thus there can only be one subspecies. In this case the Caspian tiger (P. t. virgata) was described in 1815 by Illiger, and the Siberian tiger (P. t. altaica) years later by Temminck in 1844. Thus, the Caspian tiger becomes the official subspecies and the Siberian becomes what is known as a synonym, or a local common name. Most tigers have several synonyms. Synonyms are not an official scientific classification.

Prior to this latest published DNA analysis there were nine subspecies, including both the Caspian and the Siberian. Three were listed as extinct, including the Caspian. Apparently someone upon reading this recent study saw that both subspecies were in fact the same - but did not understand the ICZN rules, and have taken it upon themselves to cannibalize the Caspian tiger page and drag much of it's contents over to the Siberian tiger page, changing references throughout both articles to erroneously indicate that the Caspian is a synonym of the subspecies Siberian. Further the main Tiger page, which is semi-protected due to people having editing wars over minor (irrelevant) content, now lists the Caspian as a synonym of the Siberian - which by all rights is now not even a subspecies. There is a posted suggestion that the remainder of the Caspian page be merged with the Siberian page.

I need to find somebody who knows Wikipedia, who knows how to form an editing group, who knows how to inform the greater Wiki-world of a project, who knows how to make the changes needed, and who knows how to protect the pages once they have been changed. I am so very new to this you wouldn't believe it, but I can already tell from reading the tiger discussion pages (and some of the minutia that they argue over) that there will probably be need for cooperation and for page protections.

I see two options -

1.) Stick with previous knowledge, with both the Caspian and Siberian listed as subspecies - fixing all three related pages with a small note referencing the new DNA study; repairing the Caspian page and bolstering it with fresh copy and plenty of new references.

2.) Apply the new up to date understanding of the DNA relationships with the Caspian listed as the subspecies and the Siberian as it's synonym - fixing all three related pages; repairing the Caspian page and bolstering it with fresh copy and plenty of new references.

It is definitely not acceptable for things to remain as they are.

I have made my basic argument, and have even prepared a list of changes that need to be made (for all three relevant tiger pages); these are posted on the discussion page for the article - "Tiger." I posted a tag in the hopes that somebody would come by and see the need to help - but got an "X" - I can't seem to find an interested party.

I need someone with Wiki-experience and Wiki-clout; please help - please write back.

Regarding my contribution - I'm a fine graphic artist and an avid reader. When I was a small child I used to read the dictionary for fun. My most prized possession is a complete set of 1950's era Encyclopedia Britannia. I love Wikipedia (and I love maps by the way). But, even with my extensive computer design/graphics background I am completely lost in this huge Wiki-maze; it's just nuts. If you can help, or can find somebody to help, rescue the Caspian tiger page and retrieve accuracy within the related tiger pages. I promise that I will try my best to learn Wiki-editing and will contribute in the future to saving other articles (Altalaya (talk) 05:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)).

May Metro
As Simply South is busy, I've stepped in for this one; this is my first time, so feel free to fix any mistakes or let me know of anything I've missed. – iride  scent  18:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 

June Metro
I've decided to fill in the empty job vacancy for the Metro for this month, feel free to correct any mistakes or add any missing information. Cheers! Crest of London (T 22:35, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

July Metro
 Oliver Fury, Esq. message  •  contributions  21:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The Metropolitan - Issue 16
--DavidCane (talk) 00:48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

September Metro
Simply south (talk) 20:20, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Aprod-t.png
Thank you for uploading File:Aprod-t.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. +Angr 21:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)