User talk:Nine Tail Fox/Archive 2

userpage vandalism
Thanks for the reverts! --F a ng Aili talk 17:09, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
, thank you for participating in my RfA. Unfortunately, a great number of oppose voters felt that I lacked experience, and a consensus was not reached (the final tally was 30/28/10). Perhaps I will try again in another few months when I have a few more edits under my belt. If I do, I hope I can count on your support. Thanks again!

Cool3 talk 20:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC) (UTC)

A haiku of thanks

 * Thanks for your support
 * In my RfA, which passed!
 * Wise I'll try to be.

-- Nataly a 04:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for the trust that you had in me when you supported my Request for Adminship. The nomination ended successfully and I am actually overwhelmed by the support that I received. Thanks again! -- Kim van der Linde at venus 07:06, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Julien Cahn
Brookie here - I have started the above article and would aprreciate some help from those with more knowledge. Thanks Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 12:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Help with an article about Spain, please: Grammar
Hi, Nick Boalch!

I am Garcilaso and I am writing about Spanish art and History in this Wikipedia. The problem is that I am far away from been a native English speaker. I try hard, but I'm afraid that some of the sentences I write may not be grammatically correct. I have been told by othe editor that one of my contributions needs "thorough cleanup": Baroque architecture, the section about Spain (The first part of Spain and North America). I would never have deared to write in English Wikipedia due to my level of english, but I found in it a lack of contents in Spanish Art and History. If you were so kind to review that paragraph, and correct the grammatical errors it would be very important for me. I ask fot it to you because of your interest in Spain, and I don't know anybody in this Wikipedia. Thank you for advance,--Garcilaso 17:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

A short Esperanzial update
As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

'mania style guide
looks great so far! I will try and add to it over the coming days. Brassratgirl 18:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm planning to delete the Globalize tag on School accreditation soon
Unless you can provide an example of another country with the same unique legal problem as the United States (a federal government with no plenary power), I'm deleting the tag. --Coolcaesar 05:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:MetroValenciaCentreAccidentGFDL.png
Hi. Thanks for making this image. I presume you made it with a vector graphics program. If so, could you perhaps upload an SVG version? — Gulliver ✉ 05:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

mania template:abstract
good idea to make all gfdl automagically? I am wary, since we didn't actually say anything about it explicitly (except a long time ago on the cfp...) I know we just agreed to it for the full papers, I'm just hesitant about saying so in the templates w/o talking to the authors. bah. I don't know. phoebe 16:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's true we say everything's under the GFDL anyway through the site license, so I suppose it's ok. It just caught me off guard to have it just appear :) and I was doing the abstract for one of the laywers, which always makes me a little nervous :) I don't know. I can check with the others. phoebe 16:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

'mania template
do you think it would be ok to move the edit status template to the bottom, underneath the links, rather than the top? Or else shrink it a little? It's a little jarring, especially since everyone at this point will be bright red! Otherwise, though, I think it looks good.

will send you the full papers I have soon. thanks! :) phoebe 19:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Wikimania biography
Sure, I will write something in a few days, for now I wanted to replace the red link to something functional.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Spanish architecture, nominated for Collaboration of the week
Hello! I have just nominated the article Spanish architecture for WP:CotW, and ask for your support to the election. Thank you for advance! Garcilaso 13:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:User:194.119.153.9
Thanks for handling the matter, and also, now I know the procedure for the future.--Esprit15d 14:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Cicilline pic
Yeah, I noticed that, which is why I didn't upload it myself. :-( --Sar e kOfVulcan 22:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikimania
The name of the presentations are not displayed everywhere the bios are. What about people who end up there from a Google search (and the pages from that wiki appear very high in search results). The bio pages then make no sense. Angela. 19:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Spanish writer stubs
It is strongly recommended that you first discuss new stub types on the stub sorting projects Proposals page so as to avoid potential problems. The three new stub types you created have the problem of being too small. The stub sorting project has a minimum recommend size of 60 articles for new stub types (30 if it will be the primary stub associated with a Wikiproject). Considering that has under 100 stubs (even including the three new types you created), I'm going to be nominatng them for deletion on SFD. Caerwine Caerwhine 14:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The 60 stub limit may seem arbitrary, but keep in mind that stub sorters can only handle so many different stub types. The limit exists to keep the total number of stub types down to a somewhat manageable size. Caerwine Caerwhine  15:01, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, we've seen a few too many well-intentioned people who say they plan on populating newly-created stub categories to accept such plans at face. In addition, stub types are not the only way for Wikiprojects to organize things.  Indeed, that's not even their purpose at all.  Their purpose is to bring stub articles to the attention of editors who have the interest and resources to make them into full-fledged articles.  Given the scope of your project, once we've delivered the stub to, we've accomplished our intended task, and further splitting is warranted only if the stub type gets too large to be manageable.
 * Besides, it sounds like your project already has an organizational tool, namely those To Do lists you intend on turning into stub articles. Another tool that some WikiProjects use is to place notices on the talk pages of the articles they are interested, such notices have the advantage of not being limited to just stub articles. Caerwine Caerwhine  15:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Such redirects are reasonably common and accepted, so that won't be a problem. The main point of the above was pointing out that there are other ways besides stubs to organize articles of interest that don't suffer from the limitations of having to work with us crotchety stub sorters. Caerwine Caerwhine 15:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

more on mania template
time of presentation was a feature request that I think is a good idea... walkerma is taking charge of filling in times. As he pointed out, it saves people from having to flip back & forth to the schedule to see if they can make a session.

Also, I've had a couple requests that we move the edit status template bar to the bottom of the template. I have to agree, there is no particular reason for it to be at the top (since most people are using the abstracts to check out various sessions now) and it's distracting. Could it go below the icons? I tried fiddling with it but was having trouble getting it to align properly. What do you think? 169.237.141.10 17:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * drat, that was me, of course. phoebe 17:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, this *is* the defacto programme; as such, it's getting a lot of traffic by people who are confused by the editbar. This isn't a bad thing; it's nice for our work to serve double duty...

Anyway, most of the questions have been from authors who are saying "why does it say missing on my abstract?!" we should figure out a good explanation..phoebe 23:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Category:Proceedings by edit status
Wikimania Category:Proceedings by edit status is something that has been puzzling me for some time. I'd suggest adding some description and ilinks to the category pages, starting with to whom and how are we submit (and what), and who will advance the steps (are we supposed to do it ourselves?).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:11, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Tnx for the link, perhaps it should be more prominent. I looked through categories and found only one (1 - !) entry in category other then '0', I'd wager a guess that it is partially due to other editors being as confused about this as I am. PS. How can one contact the 'Proceedings editors'?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

papers, conference scheduling
good luck at the Fringe! I am in Boston at the moment going crazy trying to get everything ready for the conference, so I don't know how much I'll be able to harrass people about their papers. We do have emails & such & you're welcome to send a message to speakers. more in email. phoebe 04:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

First Family
Please help me. I am asking you, as a favor, to review the First Family of the United States article as it was immediately following my last contribution, before entire families were reverted. I seem to be the target of some kind of vendetta, and recently it seems that all of my contributions have been swiftly deleted. There wasn't even a reason given; they just axed the Ford, Eisenhower, and Nixon families without explanation. There was no political bias in my wording, no controversial claims, nothing even remotely resembling a hoax. They even took down my pictures, all of which were public domain.

Please read this article and then write your honest opinion in its talk page. I have been writing with Wikipedia for over ayear now but am seriously considering leaving because of this.

History21 05:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)History21

Sorry
Several users have expressed concern over my block nomination of several college a cappella groups. I would like to apologize for causing a medium-sized ruckus on the AFD page and thereby wasting the time of several excellent contributors. I see now that this was an ill choice for a block nomination. I'll be relisting most of the articles individually as soon as I can double check the list. Again, please accept my apologies. savidan(talk) (e@) 17:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

William H. Kennedy
A couple of days back you did the delete/revert trick to this page to remove a recent WP:BLP violating edit. But in the process you restored a large number of similarly critical edits from mid-July that had previously been deleted from the history. I was wondering if this was intentional or accidental. I'm guessing accidently, but I'm not going to jump in to "fix" it in case you did have a legitimate reason to restore those edits. - TexasAndroid 15:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Diff
It's entirely appropriate. It's ridiculous to expect me to sit there constantly reverting an article for half an hour when an admin can sort it out in a couple of clicks. If there's a problem getting timely administrator intervention, then either there aren't enough admins or there isn't an adequte way of alerting them. Either way it's a problem with wikipedia and edits like that are only going to become more common Dave 00:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It's not an ideal method, but it worked. Therefore the deficiency is with the current setup of wikipedia, in that it encourages violation of WP:CIVIL. I do have a couple of proposals on how to improve the software in this regard (and at the same time sort out the RFA problem), and will be publishing them somwehere tomorrow. Dave 00:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

William H. Kennedy
I was asked to do so by Kelly Martin, who had been discussing the matter with Brad, on IRC. I haven't been following the issue, so I'm not sure of the reasoning which led them to decide it should be deleted, but I'm sure they would be glad to enlighten you. Regards &mdash; Dan | talk 20:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image sources
Understood. Was working on clearing out the (rather large) CSD backlog, and unfortunately I'm a bit new to image policies. I'll work on that. If you catch me making any other mistakes, please feel free to let me know. :) Thanks. Luna Santin 15:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Are you an administrator?
I am confused about the vote at Tal:Bill O'REilly, I agree with your statement, I just dont understand why its protected. Are you an administrator? I am unfamiliar with the process but it looks to me like the issue is still on backlog http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RM#22_September_2006, waiting for an administrator to close it. Mrdthree 17:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Correction
On rechecking my comments, I found that the fourth and last copyvio mentioned there, on Internews Pakistan, wasn't made by User:PM Poon, so I've now deleted my comment about that on their talk page, and on AN/I. I stand by the rest of my comments.

However, I don't want your comments on their talk page to be taken out of context, so I'm telling you this now, to avoid any possible confusion, and to allow you to change your comments in that article if they are now rendered invalid because of the removal of the Internews Pakistan copyvio notice. However, if you read up that page, to my analysis of the Yescard edits, I hope I have provided sufficient evidence there that your comment is still valid. Good grief, I'm tired, I'm making mistakes, I'd better stop. -- The Anome 13:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Internews Pakistan
Seems like Anome is on a fault-finding mission that is tiring him out. He must have thought that he struck gold when he found Internews Pakistan, LOL. A person who is on a fault-finding mission cannot be impartial, can he?

Let me tell you the history of my involvement with Internews Pakistan. I left Wikipedia a year ago because of one or two admins (Mel Etitis was one; if there is another, I cannot remember who he was) and when I came back a week or two ago, I went to Community Portal and seek out the To Do List under Wikifying, and found the article, Internews Pakistan, listed there for wikification. I then added links, corrected spelling and grammatical mistakes, if any, and reformatted the article. That's all. Nothing hideous, right? Fancy some admin trying to find fault with me for that when I am not even paid for my time!

Among others, I also wikified: and even translated this:
 * Bass River (Massachusetts) for which I got the following comment: Nice work wikifying this! -- Caliga10 18:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Architecture of Ancient Greece for which I got the following comment: Nice job cleaning up Architecture of Ancient Greece! ~ crazytales56297 O rly? Ya rly! 15:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Reichsjustizamt for which I got the following comment: awesome -- thanks for the article! &mdash; 01:06, 18 October 2006 The Anome, LOL.

Yescard
Ngb, thank you for drawing my attention to Fair use criteria, which I find quite unusual for a publisher. But I will not dispute this, as it is a community consensus, not based on legal requirements. Can you please tell me whether the below sentence constitutes a copyright violation?

My statement:
 * In 1997, using the latest methods and research in factoring large numbers into primes by means of algorithms derived from "polynomial quadratic sieve", Serge Humpich, a French engineer, discovered a method of forging credit cards that could defeat the security measures that [were] put in place by the organizations issuing them.

Original statement:
 * Serge Humpich (a French Engineer) made a discovery that criminals can only dream of - how to forge credit card that can defeat security measures put in place by the organizations that issue genuine cards.

AND THREE PAGES LATER IN THE ORIGINAL TEXT, THIS:


 * Serge Humpich used in 1997 the latest methods and research in factoring large numbers into primes using algorithms derived from "polynomial quadratic sieve".

To be fair to Anome, this is to me one of his weakest contention, but we will get to the others later. A yes or no answer will suffice, cos it either infringes or it does not. &mdash; PM Poon 14:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC) -- Thank you for writing to me on 24 October 2006. It is now crystal clear that your purpose of contacting me then was to support The Anome. You represent TRUTH only when it suits your purpose, NOT when it doesn't. Keep it up!!! You will be very successful in life, LOL.

I have stop using this pseudonym and so far, I have no problems with anyone. Is it therefore not clear enough what The Anome was up to? &mdash; PM Poon 15:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:¡átame!_poster.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:¡átame!_poster.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 13:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[|Inactive Policy]
Could I get you to post your current (if they have changed) opinions to the current proposal policy comment request? Somitho 01:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Protect ITN images, please!
Hello, Ngb. Please be reminded that whatever image we put on ITN, it must be properly protected. Otherwise, we are making MainPage vulnerable to vandalism. Be careful when you revert and re-use an old image that may or may not be still protected. Thank you. --PFHLai 16:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Bill O'Reilly
Thanks for moving Bill O'Reilly, but the same user moved it straight back again. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Please stop trying to push your own POV and trying to give the cricketeer equal notability. It has been stated over and over again that the commentator has infinite more notability than a deceased cricket player.  Having the disambiguation page causes more inconvenience than it relieves.  And because there are only two Bill O'Reillys, a disambiguation page is not even necessary.  Simply have Bill O'Reilly be for the commentator, the one that 99.99% of people are familiar with, and then have a disambiguation note at the top of the article redirecting to the cricketeer for the 0.01% of people who want to read about him.Fistful of Questions 15:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but they are not equal. The sheer magnitude of the commentator's notability over the cricketeer's notability means that it is more convenient overall for everyone to have the commentator own the primary article "Bill O'Reilly".  The practice of giving one person who is much more notable than everyone else ownership to the article name is common in every other situation.  I guess you also believe that George Washington should redirect to George Washington (disambiguation)?  Fistful of Questions 15:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * So George Washington (C&O) and George Washington (film) don't count? But I thought we have to give all POVs equal emphasis, regardless of their inherent importance.  You better start working on fixing the George Washington disambiguation page, and then you can get back to the Bill O'Reilly page and fix that one next.  Of course you won't try that, since you know you are wrong, and you are trying to fall back on irrational arguments to push your POV. Fistful of Questions 15:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Wrong, the commentator is much more well known than the cricketeer. You know this as well as I do, but you continue to push your POV by feigning ignorance and pretending that they are somehow equally notable.  You have also tried to build a false consensus on the previous debate by having other members of Wiki project: cricket present their opinion, thus acting as meatpuppets to overrepresent an opinion.  Then you abused your admin powers to push your own POV and take the opportunity to declare that there is "no consensus" for the page move, and left the disambiguation format as it is, a format already set up by similar POV-pushers who try to hold claim to the "status quo".  Your argument is riddled with fallacies, and you are trying to use this irrational reasoning to support a POV you know is wrong.Fistful of Questions 15:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

TharkunColl
Heh Nick - are you beginning to share my feeling that TC is a bit of a pest and an irritant? :-) MarkThomas 12:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Second City
Broken up that you removed the tallest buildings and motorways. But aren't for example tallest buildings often quite an issue between cities? They were properly referenced entries. Seriously, give it a chance - it's more fun if the article covers more grounds. And I wouldn't rule out pigeon counting totally. :-) MarkThomas 18:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

That's a shame (companies) - I was starting to enjoy neutralising that one!! But seriously, couldn't we have just a bit more in the article? It's starting to look unworthily short for such a major subject. :-) MarkThomas 22:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow
Nick, I am frankly surprised that you made an edit today. Because you've been idling on the admins channel on IRC for upwards of 17 days, and I thought you were maybe dead or something. DS 19:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me

wikimania06
Hi Ngb,

I saw today (thanks for explaining to me) that you reverted twice (i wasnt even aware i changed it twice) my edit on my presentation-page. Maybe I have totally no clue about what that edit-status is about, but isnt it true that the presentation is over, and done? effeietsanders 21:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Aha! I was just going to ask a question about the presentation template myself today. Effe, I think the editing template was originally meant for the status of the edited proceedings -- in other words, if you had submitted a full paper, the template would refer to that. Unfortunately, it's totally confusing and we never finished the proceedings. Maybe we can change the template around a little so that it's more clear what's going on -- for instance, maybe a template that says "presentation given," "full paper", slides", "Paper edited", etc -- instead of just "missing" and "complete" which is hard for people to understand. Ngb, comments? cheers, -- phoebe (brassratgirl) / (talk) 17:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi! thanks for the info. I'm glad you're still planning to work on the proceedings... I think it would be good to sort them out, they're a good advertisement for next year, for one thing. Let me know if I can help (not that I've been too much help so far). cheers, -- phoebe (brassratgirl) / talk) 18:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Caps in Spanish titles in an English Encyclopedia
I've let this matter hang much too long. Now where does it say in the Wikepeida rules that your POV is correct insofar as titles in Spanish titles? I say, no where, anywhere! We are working with an English encyclopedia here. However, it's late and it's time for bed. This argument is not over. I've talked about this with a few Wikepedians and we are at limbo. This means, in my POV, "do not change" my edits. I can by all means change most Spanish titles to English as per Wiki policy. More tomorrow. I'm tired. Yes, I read your message a few weeks back, and you gave this tude that you were quoting from up "high" on your changes. As far as I'm concerned it's only your POV. Please quote a Wiki source about Spanish titles. Don't ever change my work unless you have sound Wiki evidence behind you. Luigibob 11:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The tone of the above message is not nasty and is civil. I said not to change my work "unless you have sound Wiki evidence behind you." Users like Cop 633 have changed my work, but he always has solid reasoning (per Wiki) for doing so. I've made my POV known on the page your referenced.  And I even said please.

Gibraltar is not Spain
It seems like someone else finds sticking a Spanish flag on a Gibraltar page offensive too.

--Gibnews 19:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Protect?
Given that only an anon has been removing the Spain flag that caused the re-locking of the Gib talk page I am baffled as to why it wasnt merely semi-locked, which in this case would have been appropriate as no established user has removed it, SqueakBox 21:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Gibraltar Talk Page
The flag has been removed. I agree with everything you've written in the debate, and think this sets a terrible precedent. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick 01:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Durham CCC crest.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Durham CCC crest.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Caravan Club.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Caravan Club.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. 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. BetacommandBot 20:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)