User talk:Miguel.mateo/Archives/2009/February

Someone asked me for help
Hey, Mateo. I'll get to your request later to-nite. In the mean time could you check out my talk,the thread: An idea--Can you give this guy (?) a helping hand. As you know, im not that good at the comp stuff. thanks--Buster7 (talk) 01:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have explained how to do it in your talk page, I hope it helps ... Miguel.mateo (talk) 03:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Finland
I checked on the comm.coins of Finland. I assume it is the single 2009 coin that tou wanted copt/edited. IMO it needs no improvement. Its clear, not wordy, and not any longer than previous segments.--Buster7 (talk) 05:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, do you mind checking also the 2009 section for Belgium and Austria? Thanks again, Miguel.mateo (talk) 05:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Belgium

 * either "Prince of Humanists" or "crowning glory of the Christian Humanist's"...I would suggest one or the other but not both.
 * "...in the space of a week" is interesting but Im not sure its necessary and it adds to the "wordiness" which I assume is a concern.
 * "...sojouning with Sir Tommie Moore at his estate"...Keep the mention of Sir Thomas (notable) but drop the estate etc. Again, lets not be afraid to chop where necessary. I await you advice!--Buster7 (talk) 05:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You have absolute freedom to do whatever you feel is the best for the article. I trust you blindly.  I can always review post your corrections.  So are you making them or do you want me to make them? Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 06:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Austria
Aside from those two it still needs a little copy/edit, but i'll wait till we clear these up. TC buddy!--Buster7 (talk) 06:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * is it "this coin" or should it be "these coins"???
 * "In 1860...to Zurich. Back to Vienna, to teach..." I suggest we chop all of that.
 * The first one I do not even know how it finished there :( but it is fixed now. The second one, please go ahead. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 06:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Favor #32
BTW...Is there some copy-editing that I forgot to do? Let me know. The reason I stopped by was to ask for some help to make editing easy for me. I"m sure there must be an easier way to do something... also, Good luck with the above negotiations regarding Images. I see that you have made it all the way to "Grand Wizard of Images, Elcobbola", who seems to be quite helpful. (I always knew there were various "wizards" around. It only makes sense to have one individual final source to makes decisions and provide guidance, each in his/her arena of interest. Congrats that you seem to have made it "behind the curtain'. You can depend on the answers you get from "a wizard"--Buster7 (talk) 12:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm involved with the Rescue Squad, saving articles (mostly created by newbies) that are up for Deletion. I google for more information pertaining to the topic from different angles...looking for some meat to put on the bare bones. Then I come back to the article, add it and add the reference...
 * So, right now, I have to type in the long and complicated address ( example: http;//www___/______/28749%80/blah/blah/blah/blah/blah.pdg...) mistakes in transfer are common and very time consumming. Ive tried to cut/copy/paste but I must be doing something wrong. It doesnt work. I thought to myself "there must be an easier, less problematic and faster way than to have to type it out all the time.."...That leads me here to Mateo, my friend, the problem solver. Any ideas?
 * Thanks for the compliments, the battle in converting the euro collector articles to FL is still not finished and IMO it's a very soft ground to step on. I want to do a good copy edit of the Finland article and then submit it to see what happens. If you have time, please take a look at the whole Finland article. I am running out of time these days, but I contribute whenever I can.


 * With regards to your problem, yes indeed, it is a very painful process. But for me copy and paste works great to create a where ever I need references.  What browser do you use so I can tell you exactly how does that work better for you (Microsoft Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, Safari ... etc.)? Let me know. Miguel.mateo (talk) 00:52, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Microsoft Internet Explorer.--Buster7 (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Try going to the url you want to reference to, click in the icon shown in the url bar as in the picture, then press Ctrl C (to copy), you should be able to go back to Wikipedia edit box and press Ctrl V to paste the URL. That is what I usually do. I hope it helps. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 23:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Favor #33
Can you please go to Timeline of the Presidency of Barack Obama and crop the Feb 10 picture that is there to remove the overhead lights??? If you can thanks!--Buster7 (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done, this one was slightly tricky, since the picture is in commons. Regards, Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I am asking for help!!!
If you read this talk page and you are willing to help me, can you please come over to this talk page? Another user is claiming that my contributions do not fit that article (which is almost a stub), basically saying that noone is interested in the type of contributions I do. Your comments, in favour or against, are very appreciated.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 06:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * This is getting personal now, please check this thread Media_copyright_questions Miguel.mateo (talk) 03:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Nothing personal. Its about the coins, not you.  Please don't claim its personal to gain leverage in your dispute.  Thanks. DavidRF (talk) 03:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * You' re removing blantly lots of my contributions, even when consensus have said that they should be kept. You're based on a copyright infrigement, which is not true and I have said so already several times. You have removed text saying it is SPAM, in more than 20 articles, this is WP:POV used against me, nothing else. Miguel.mateo (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * @Editor:DavidRF...Actually, it is not Editor:Miguel.mateo's dispute. It is the dispute of those editors who feel that the coins violate Wikipedia standards or rules. Some of the claims and charges against Editor:Miguel are quite barbed and contrary to assuming good faith. To call a fellow editors work SPAM is not exactly endearing. He has diligently worked to assure that his images are within all the guidelines set forth. To revert these images without so much as a "hello" is a denunciation unworthy of someone of your elite status. --Buster7 (talk) 04:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You accuse *me* of violating [WP:OWN]], but *I* have notify *you* before changing one of your edits? I have to keep track of who's putting what in what articles?  I have no problem with the Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Austria) article.  Its great.  But, adding a "link back" with image for almost every article that is "blue-linked" on that page is the very definition of SPAM.DavidRF (talk) 05:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Miguel. Please don't take this personally. But really now, if a website says an image is copyrighted and not to be distributed without their written permission, then you should respect that right. Also, the WP should stay out of potential legal trouble by scrupulously respecting copyright law. This is not all that controversial, no? Yours very sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 05:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Not personal, but by law, the legal ussage of currency images, is very clear. You can be the copyright owner, and you are in all rights to say that you allow no distribution. But the law clearly says that currency images can be used "to describe or criticize" the  the coin.  That is what I have been doing.  I would ask again, don't you think that I have done that research way in advance?  I have been doing this type of additions for almost two years now.  The policies in Wikipedia are quite clear too; now, it seems that after a very recent dispute in stamps, they have decided to change the policy to "just critics" of the image.  If that is the case, I have no intentions on doing so in the other articles, and I will remove the images myself.


 * BTW, I can easily find you in the Austrian website, that they give some of their coins free licence, but not for all, that is why I have not used that. Thanks,  Miguel.mateo (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Please refer to the Meta-wiki page Avoid copyright paranoia.

Also, please see Non-free content criteria and Non-free content for the official English Wikipedia guideline and policy on the inclusion of copyrighted materials in the project. Refers to the Meta-wiki page Avoid copyright paranoia.--Buster7 (talk) 08:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I am also asking for help which is surprisingly slow in coming. See User:Jimbo's talk page. --Buster7 (talk) 11:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

3RR
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.Nrswanson (talk) 09:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * This topic has been brought to this page: Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 14:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Non-free images
Coin images are non-free and should not be added to any articles that are not directly about the coins themselves (e.g. the coin articles, or perhaps an article about the mint). Doing so is clear fair-use overuse, and edit-warring over it is likely to lead to a block. Please cease doing so. Black Kite 14:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Where does it say that in the policy? Please see Billy Ripken, the classic sample of fair-use rationale: a copyrighted image of a baseball card is used in an article of its subject. Miguel.mateo (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see my reply at WP:ANI. Thanks, Black Kite 14:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

On the first name of C.G.Mannerheim
I have put a source for Mannerheim's use of Gustaf as his first name. The other material in the "Varia" section is written by other editors. As a personal note: I am Finnish as C.G. Mannerheim was, and ever since schooldays one is taught in Finland what was Mannerheim's first name. Tellervo (talk) 15:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Tellervo, thank you very much, one source at the time will make our articles better. Many thanks again, Miguel.mateo (talk) 15:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

re:FYI
Thanks for letting me know but I think I am going to avoid the battle. My only concern was stopping the edit war at Maria Callas. I am pretty much neutral on this issue. My sympathies that you are on Kleinzach's bad list. Just a warning, once you're on it you never leave it. He holds a long grudge.Nrswanson (talk) 18:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Usually a section is archived automatically by a bot if no-one edits it for a certain length of time. I presume that's what happened here. Black Kite 01:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Weird, I made an edit just one day ago ... Miguel.mateo (talk) 01:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It was archived here. Last edit to the section was at 09:29UTC on February 21 (by you) and it was archived at 10:35UTC on February 22. 24 hours is the cut-off point. Black Kite 01:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but doesthat make sense? No one said anything about my claim, and I do feel left alone against three editors that did not do the right thing, and instead they teamed up clearly to removed everything I have done. Miguel.mateo (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we have the discussion of the policy here please? Again you might be right, but this is not what a lot of people understand of the policy.  Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 01:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sadly, the non-free policy is often difficult to understand and interpret. Can I suggest that this page might be a good place to start a discussion? Black Kite 01:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have done that in the past, I think it is a waste of time. If you want to start the topic I will back you up that the policy is not clear, and if you're right, I will even suggest what the policy should say to avoid confusion. Again, it's not just me, I can show you at least four samples I can think of done by four different editors.


 * What can I do about my other complain? It is obvious that at least two editors teamed up, that is not concensus, that is blindly removal of another person's contributions, even from stubs, even from article that consensus had said, just two days before the incident, that this information should stay. Miguel.mateo (talk) 01:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Miguel. See User talk:Antandrus. He seems to be a reasonable veteran administrator that may be of assistance, if not to resolve your crisis, at least to console you. Check out the first thread on his talk. A friendly voice. --Buster7 (talk) 04:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)