User talk:Mud4t/Archive 1

Image Tagging Image:Buildering_on_doran_bridge.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Buildering_on_doran_bridge.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read Wikipedia:Fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "Special:Contributions/|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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia. If you have any questions, contact Carnildo.

Image: Buildering_on_Doran_Bridge.jpg
This photograph of me was deleted for lack of documentation, and I would like to upload it again documenting it properly. However, I find the instructions on the licensing pages to be absolutely impenetrable, and I really don't know where to start. If there were a "wizard" or decision tree to help decide which license and exactly what documentation to include, that would be very helpful.

My photograph has no commercial value, and I would like to release it for noncommercial use on Wikipedia, but protect it from commercial use elsewhere. Any help including examples would be appreciated.

--Mud4t
 * Wikipedia requires that any images uploaded permit commercial use. This is to allow both use by Wikipedia such as a CD-based distribution of the encyclopedia, and re-use by sites such as Answers.com. --Carnildo 07:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

New user
There's so much to learn with the article standards and tag syntax, and I'm hoping to get more immediate guidance to keep me on the right track
 * Looks like you're doing fine. The Trail braking I'm not familiar with. I almost never use article tags.


 * I really like the Pulgas Water Temple article; creating original content is harder than it looks and not all editors can do it. Some people like to motivate themselves by writing new articles that are good enough for the main page Did You Know section. If you create a new article that you think is good enough you can suggest it at Template talk:Did you know. The article must be less than three days old. Keep up the good work! --Duk 08:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Bitterside
So since I decided to undo your contribution for Bitterside, then you chose to state arguments agaisnt the article that there is a copying violation.

JEPAAB 08:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes. The edits I made were to remove the copyright violations. When you reinstated the copyvio wording, it makes the article a candidate for speedy deletion again. If you fix the copyviolations, that will only leave the POV and references as debatable issues.  Believe it or not, I really was trying to help everyone, as I thought it was a worthy article but don't want to see wikipedia mirroring copyrighted promotional sites. --Mud4t 08:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

What's going to happen about the page Biterside?

JEPAAB 12:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Report at WP:AIV
Thank you for making a report Wikid222 at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism|all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators generally only block users if they have received a recent final Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace|warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. --Ginkgo100 01:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Evolutionary Astrology
Mud4T writes:

This seems to be a book review, dropping the author's name some 16 times while never explaining what the heck evolutionary astrology is. Smacks strongly of commercialism.

Hi Mud4T,

Thank you for reviewing my FIRST article for Wikipedia. It was a university assignment to write an entry for Wikipedia on a subject I know something about. It wasn't meant to be a 'book review' but I did go to the source to attempt to articulate what it is Green is doing with Pluto and the soul's evolution. Apparently, I failed! I can accept deletion on those grounds but just want to set the record straight on the commercialism angle. It wasn't my intent...I wanted to add to the list of "Recent Western" contributions in astrology as EA does have a growing following. I didn't cite 'other notable astrlogers' by name simply because I wasn't 'bold' enough.

Your articulate and concise observations are appreciated. I'm sure future 'newbies' will find your comments constructive.

Thank you, Leslie Lucrisia 09:12, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Chasing Pandora
I really appricaite if you do not delete the article.

I arranged tha article, according to the the talk page that you've created. I changed the wording of some sentences and deleted some exact sentences.

If there's anything that should be arranged please let me know.

Thanks! JEPAAB 12:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Kevizzle
Thanks for your message - I'm not going to list him just yet...if he persists, though, I will. Gilesbennett 09:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

De Baca County
I have replied. Timneu22 11:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * VERY GOOD WORK! Well done. Timneu22 01:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Richard Fuisz
Not sure its kosher to give you my real name in this forum, but I am not the subject of the article if that is the question. Fuiszt 01:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC) Not sure how adding a photo and changing formatting is going to start a discussion of conflict of interest-unless you think its too flattering a shot. I do know the subject (as I know GrannyD-the other person's page I have edited). Do you have any relation to the any of the links on the page? Fuiszt 02:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC) No offense taken! ( I thought maybe you were a russian model) The whole wikipedia system is very interesting and I've learned a lot over the last week or so. Dr. Fuisz had suffered from sports car knee and been diagnosed with it, researched it and had noticed it wasn't in wikipedia part(no doubt because he found himself on another wiki page). Though I thought it notable enough at the time to add the page, and then tried to answer some critiques of the readers, I understand the POV of the editors. Maybe it can return if sports car knee returns to the medical world in a google-searchable form. Fuiszt 02:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm Game
I've declined the speedy tag you placed on I'm Game. The reason is:
 * Subject not covered by CSD A7

For your information, Od Mishehu 06:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I just saw this. I suppose the red link pretty much says everything I could say on this. --Mud4t 01:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD participation
I've seen you in a few Articles for Deletion recently -- could you please provide a rationale, instead of just saying "Delete" or "keep"? It's considered bad form to just give a vote with no reasoning attached. TenPoundHammer 00:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

branding photo
I'm sympathetic to the caption issue if this is your photo, but as the photo cannot name the person or the ranch in the article (per wikipedia guidelines), the caption needs to be "generic." And, while it's true that many ranch owners (at least on relatively smaller places like my dad's or your cousin's) work to do actual branding, it is not universal (I'm pretty sure the shareholders of the King Ranch by and large do not do much of the day to day work in modern times). So if there is some term that encompasses both "owner" and "hired hand," that would probably be the best solution. (smile) Montanabw 06:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * UnaSmith's edit solves the problem for me if it solves it for you. As far as "incorrect" captions, no, of course not, but captions and photos need to align with the text.  In this case, many people brand calves, and it would be as misleading to imply that a ranch owner always does the branding as for a hired hand to always do the branding.  That's all I meant.  And, like I say, Una's new caption works for me, it describes what it is happening without mentioning who is doing it.  I think it a reasonable compromise if you do. Montanabw 02:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)