User talk:Pcb21/Archive2

Dear Pete: cheers for comments about Lords Dudley page, I am concerned however that the info I have placed upon it only covers the family of John Sutton, 5th Baron Dudley, and would like to the text in its entirity to a page named John Sutton, 5th Baron Dudley, but do not wish to mess up the links some one has kindly placed in my original text.

If you know how to do this I will happy re write something useful on the new (original) blank page. Otherwise it must remain a glitch for the moment. I am new to Wikipedia, and can not learn everything overnight.

Thanks again for comments Faedra 12:03, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

PS: copywright was my own, as far as I know!!!, IE I wrote the item myself using commonly available sources.

Any update to List of Wikipedians by number of edits coming soon? - Fredrik (talk) 14:22, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Political terrorism
I've printed the article as it stands; it is of such length that it will need a paper edit before it ever hits the computer. I don't know how long it will take to complete, but I'll drop you a note here when it is and ask for your thoughts (odds are, as with all articles of this type, it'll get an NPOV nod right off the bat - when I write articles of this sort, I'll put them on the NPOV page myself just to save someone else the trouble of doing so...) Denni 02:50, 2004 Jun 11 (UTC)

Kasparov versus The World
I noticed that you removed this (incredible) article's listing from VfD the same day it was nominated for deletion. The clear trend was a resounding vote to keep, but I was wondering what the policy is in cases like this. Would there be any good reason (history, possible future VfD, etc.) to let it stay the entire five days and then have the debate archived? Just curious. Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 04:32, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Derivatives
Hi Pete,

I have seen that you are one of the "key contributors" in the mathematical finance area - all good stuff. I was fairly pleased with the rational pricing article and in fact was going to message you to ask what you thought. Now I'm busy adding a section on fixed income valuation to generalise away from derivatives - what do you say? Cheers,

Fintor | talk | June 13 14:25 UTC

Cetaceans
Category:Cetaceans? Testing it out the see what works before bringing your thoughts to ToL?

Ah. Understood. I had fun deleting all the other ToL categories.... I'll leave yours alone. I know you're a serious contributor and we've had good discussions. The other folks have not been ToLers so they're thoughts don't hold as much weight. Which is why I invited some of the more long term ToLers in to speak their mind on Categories. I'm still ambivalent about them. - UtherSRG

Good work
I second Sverdrup's comment on WP:FAC about your work on Humpback Whale. While I'm at it, I'll also commend you for the other work you do on Wikedia; I've seen lots of great edits with your username next to them on RC and in article histories. Please keep up the invaluable work! :) - Fredrik | talk 23:41, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Political terrorism
Hi Pete,

I've taken the time to clean up political terrorism. Boy, was that fun! If you get a few minutes, look it over and let me know what you think, please.

Thanks, Saaga 02:19, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)

Generalist
No I don't mean a spy! I did apply to GCHQ out of university, but they didn't write back... I've just started wickiing in earnest, perhaps I don't really have time, but if you glance at my contributions they are wide ranging, although not really deep. I have a particular interest in Bletchly Park (although I've packed away all my books relating to cryptography etc.) hence I stuck them on my page to remind myself to check them (I know Welchman was a non page). In addition to quick edits of stuff I spot needing doing I'm looking at a number of pages about numbers. I reckon theres many hours of work knocking them into shape. Thanks for the welcome. Rich Farmbrough 01:41, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Worst ever!
Ah - thanks! I see the point, a lot of the others were pretty bad though.... See you around, Mark Richards 04:17, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Good work
Good work on Baise-moi, W 1 as a token of appreciation. - snoyes 13:27, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Quick question: I have not encountered the expression "as without point", a google search doesn't turn up anything useful. (ref: End of "plot" section of Baise-moi) Would you mind explaining it? Thanks, snoyes 14:28, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Vandalism and Thanks
Thanks for your post in my talk pages. I did eventually work out from the history of the Current Events page that the vandalism happened elsewhere on the page and must have happened while I was adding something myself (the difference between the vandalised post and mine was about a minute and I was probably reading and editing for 5 minutes myself). Thanks also for your welcome message - I am getting up to speed quite quickly and although I've mostly been doing small edits mostly I have created a couple of stubs with a little starter information in them. --Colin Angus Mackay 12:24, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

How to get images permission
Hi Pcb21. Last month you contributed to a discussion on the Village pump about How to get images permission (see ). Since there were lots of people with questions, I created a Finding images tutorial with some tips and hints. Let me know what you think. Thanks -- Chris 73 | Talk 00:09, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sandbox/Test area
Hi! Was there any particular reason to rename 'sandbox' to 'test area'? Thanks, &mdash;Lady Lysi&#0331;e Iki&#0331;sile | Talk 12:17, 2004 Jul 15 (UTC)


 * OK, that makes sense&mdash;although it seems like the loss of a nice bit of wikiculture ;-) &mdash;Lady Lysi&#0331;e Iki&#0331;sile | Talk 13:05, 2004 Jul 15 (UTC)

Neutrality admin poll
Hello, I didn't see the fuss about my vote until just now. Since it's closed now I have responded here and here. pir 11:06, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Whaling
I have put a proposal. Tell me what you think. FWBOarticle

"Commercial" sites
I agree with you; the problem is not that they are commercial. More detailed response to your comment on my user talk page (I put this here just in case you aren't watching it). Jdavidb 21:20, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Notifying use of Black-backed jackal pcb.jpg
Just to let you know that your image Black-backed jackal pcb.jpg will be used in Enciclopedia Libre - Chacal under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. For any concerns that you may have, you can reach me here.

Best regards, ejrrjs

Thanks! ejrrjs

new users
I disagree, but I've had a similar conversation in the past wherein I made a number of compromises, giving links to varius newbie pages. It took me a (seemed to me to be anyway) long time to figure out what was going on here on the wiki. While Welcome, newcomers is fine, and the Tutorial and Help desk links are good, they need to know what the mailing list is, and how to handle a dispute, etc... as well. I guess I disagree w your general complaint, but I am open to some specific suggestions, particularly if they don't involve shortening my list of links (which I get copious compliments on btw, have a look at my talk page archives). Sam [Spade] 17:06, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Stout Infantfish
hey, thanks for the tip (about stub versus cleanup). I put it on cleanup because I had no idea how to put the scientific classification in and even if I did I wouldn't know what it was! But yeah, stub would have been more appropriate. MDCore 20:52, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your response on Darfur conflict. I try not to unilaterally edit content on current articles dealing with political subjects. Arminius 19:27, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

u wanted to undelete full nice handbag...
I saw it on the undelete page cuz I had a baby there. Also got retired. Then brought back for like 2 days, then killed again. Any way, I love the name of the company, I think it shoulda lived. It's on a list with 20 other chinese companies I never heard of, but it gets the wrath of the deletion police. weird, isn't it?? Kzzl

hi again.
I've noticed what you told me before seems to be pretty true- there is no lack of minutia on dorky subject matter like LOTR. I came across troll today- very thorough. I'm wondering how this bias manifests itself, most commonly. Surely thoroughness in their favorite areas is not bad for an encyclopedia as long as it's well organized. I think there is bias out there, though. What else have you had trouble with, beside full nice handbag? I looked at the link to systemic bias but it really didn't say much about the phenomenon on wikipedia. it was a talk page. lemme know if you have any insight for me. thankz, Kzzl 02:10, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Cheers
Thanks, that was helpful. Someone already but it back in though. Thanks anyway, and I'll try to tone down the F*****g language. --Crestville 11:27, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Siula Grande
Thanks, I've added a bit and made a German version in probably bad German. A lot later I'll attempt the other peaks in the Cordillera (articles not climbing). -Wikibob | Talk 20:23, 2004 Aug 2 (UTC)

Good faith
Wikiquette: "Assume the best about people whenever possible." Thanks. Hyacinth 21:53, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Journal/periodical/feed summaries, academics
Hi Pete, are there journals you read regularly? You might be interested in this project: Wikisummaries. I think I will begin somewhere on en:, perhaps in my user space... +sj + 00:00, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

On Orca and "Shachi"
"Shachi" is the most commonly used word for "Orca" but it is being increasingly substituted with "Orca" as it is more academic, in few decades they might be completely replaced in mmost of books. As to when this word dates from, I have no idea because it is too far back in the history, probably from the era of oral history, may be somehow connected with ancient and extinct Polynesian languages. It is very old because "Shachi" doesn't mean "a fish that helps fishermen by herding fish, bringing good catch." in the current Japanese, I only found out by researching and has no idea where this came from. It is a indigenous Japanese word as there is no Chinese character that could be used, it could only be written out using phonetical hiragana. Revth 02:14, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

List of Wikipedians by number of edits
Hiya. I notice I have an "X" for "Includes automated edits" on this list. What does that actually mean (or how is it determined?) I don't actually make any automated edits, in that all my edits are done manually. Thanks  &mdash; Kate | Talk 06:06, 2004 Aug 11 (UTC)


 * Oops, I didn't mean to come across quite so accusingly there - I was only curious. No need to apologise :-) Thanks for the clarification   &mdash; Kate | Talk 21:11, 2004 Aug 11 (UTC)

Announcements
The "sudden announcement" is because apparently some people are quite surprised by the fact that this has been policy for months, it having been decided on the mailing list. See User talk:Jimbo Wales. Accordingly, I'm trying to publicize it more broadly. --Michael Snow 16:49, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, there is some degree of difficulty in reconciling our position on fair use images with our position on other nonfree content. I would say that is partly because people have relied on fair use to a far greater extent than contemplated by our official policy. If you piece together Jimbo's various statements, it amounts to something like "fair use is ok, especially when no other alternatives are available, but we should replace fair use with truly free content if possible". But a lot of people take this and hear only "fair use is always allowed", then proceed to claim that whatever they want to use must be fair use (after all, it's for a good cause, right?).


 * As for methods of communication, I can't tell how much IRC cannibalizes from the mailing list, but of course there are people with significant objections to IRC as well, especially as a place to actually decide policy. --Michael Snow 17:26, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Re: Template:fairuse
Thanks, I was going to sleep but I stayed up to edit it, damn you boy! ;)   &mdash;John | Talk 09:19, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)

Hurricane season links
Templates won't work very well for that because reusing the template requires variable links. MediaWiki apparently still chokes on those. If they worked, I would have used one myself, to save me a lot of trouble putting those boxes in on all the older articles (which I need to get around to expanding, *sigh*).

Feel free to obliterate any markedly premature creation of articles on 2005, 2006, or 2007. We know they're going to happen, but about all we know beyond that is the lists of names that are going to be used. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 18:38, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Chita Rivera
Thank you for your comments and advice. At long last I have found somebody who makes sense. I hope that I can count on you in the future for advice. Thank you again. User:marine 69-71

Template:Spoiler
You can't be serious. Why this article? Why not bring up this issue up at Template talk:Spoiler instead of adding custom messages with no links and no coloring and, most of all, no opportunity for alteration except one by one? If you really want to do this, here you can get started and then keep going. I'm at a loss for words.... V V 09:24, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * This article... because it is an article that I wrote, so I continue to care how it looks. I have struck up a discussion at the template talk page in order to try to get a general change, but there is considerable debate there about what the template is intended for. If the template remains unchanged, it is clear that it is inappropriate for this article ("solutions", hideous colouring, break of flow, etc) and so shouldn't be used here. Pcb21| Pete 10:59, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Surely it's more important that we have Wikipedia-wide style consistency and standards than that those standards be exactly what we want them to be. Having one article with a specialty message with the same function is just silly.  The points you make apply to all articles about plot details. V V  11:19, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I guess I would be helping the 'pedia most by throwing my weight around at the template talk page, which I've now done. Pcb21| Pete 11:40, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I noticed. Good luck. V V  11:57, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Apologies and background on Sea urchin
Let me say a bit more, just so both of you will know why I over-reacted to a simple mistake. (I'm self-diagnosing a mild case of Wikistress, BTW...) (However, a simple edit summary such as "category re Tree of Life project" or even just "category" would reduced my "tension.")

At one point, I did a fair amount of work on Sea urchin myself, so it's on my watchlist. I know nothing of paleontology. In late July I saw that very good on section on geological history had been added by Dlloyd. It was so good, in fact, that I thought it might be a copyvio. Dlloyd explained the circumstances and provided a suitable statement indicating that he was a) was the author and held the copyright, and b) was releasing it under GFDL. Great stuff.

I was shocked when the uncommented "minor edit" turned out to be the whole section, and was concerned about the possibility that a) someone hadn't carefully read the copyright/attribution/license stuff, or b) the possibility that it could actually have been some kind of vandalism. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 12:24, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Dog categories
Sounds good to me. Thanks. Elf | Talk 15:08, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The Carpetbaggers Let sleeping dogs lie?
Mike Storm's user contributions list shows that he has made a small number of edits since the time when you removed the from The Carpetbaggers, but has not left any comments on Talk:The Carpetbaggers and has not contacted me. I assume that nobody has solicited him directly to comment, right? I have not, and I am not going to do so, because a) I'm involved in the dispute, and b) because of what happened the last time.

Since Mike Storm once said (on Jimbo's talk page IIRC) that he is fourteen years old, I didn't really feel comfortable asking him to review a page that has such frank material on the treatment of sexuality in The Carpetbaggers. But I also felt that the person who inserts an tag should be consulted about its removal and should, ideally, be the one to remove it. I left a carefully-worded message on his talk page saying:


 * The Carpetbaggers was, to put it bluntly, considered borderline-pornographic when it was published. If it offends you to have that stated, then you probably will not like the new article, either. This time, however, I am not asserting it as my own opinion, but quoting the words of the New York Times review that accompanied its publication. I believe that quoting reviews from a well-respected source is well within the bounds of NPOV. I also try to put The Carpetbaggers into context in terms of other books that were being published during those days of the sexual revolution. That section contains some frank language which may offend some but which I think is necessary and appropriate to the subject.


 * Please take a look at it again, or perhaps consider asking some Wikipedian you trust to take a look at it, and see whether it might be appropriate now to remove the notice.

His reaction was to remove the, then to insert it again five minutes later, with a puzzlng comment.

As things stand, you removed the tag and you have a note on the Talk page saying "Should Mike Storm wish to re-apply it, he must note here why."

I'm thinking that the right thing to do is leave things as they are, and hope that Mike will simply let things lie&mdash;and, if he doesn't, worry about it when it happens. I do not request any specific actions from Mike at this point. I believe all his actions were well-meaning and done in good faith.

In your opinion, is there anything at all I should be doing? In regard to the Request for Comment page, for example? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:08, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Snakes
My fault, editing late and out of my area of expertise. I'll remove it. Best wishes, and if I can be of further help, just let me know. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 08:10, 2004 Aug 25 (UTC)

The business and economics forum
Anouncing the introduction of The Business and Economics Forum. It is a "place" where those of us with an interest in the business and economics section of Wikipedia can "meet" and discuss issues. Please drop by: the more contributors, the greater its usefulness. If you know of other Wikipedians who might be interested, please send this to them.

mydogategodshat 19:07, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Gmail invite
I tried to email you my last remaining Gmail invitation, and it bounced back to me. I have emailed the link you need to use through Wikipedia, and if that doesn't get to you, come onto #Wikipedia and I will tell you it through there. - Mark 03:56, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Mail
I sent you an email. Mintguy (T) 08:57, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

IRC
Hi I saw your note to RickK and wondered if you'd help me. I've never bothered with IRC before as I've only just got broadband, but I'd like to give it a go. I'm using XP at the moment. Any advice? Theresa Knott (stroke the ant) 13:09, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Most Active Wikipedians
Hey, how do you update that article? What type of script/method do you use? &mdash; Il&gamma;&alpha;&eta;&epsilon;&rho;  (T&alpha;l&kappa;)''' 22:52, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Exploding whale
After several more objections, I've renominated it. Could you revote? Thanks mate. - Ta bu shi da yu 16:50, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Categories/dogs/cats
Sort of responding (again) to your note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dog breeds/Categories. I left messages in random places, including Tree of Life project, about Horses and Cats to try to follow the same model that you suggested--e.g., Canines lists all Canids, whereas Dog on down deals with the domestic dog and similar topics. The link I just gave to the Categories subpage of the Dogs project has an existing & proposed structure for Dogs and below, which probably also ought to apply to Bovines/Cattle (which I have just started working on--in miniscule amounts) and Felines/Cats (which User:Lachatdelarue has been making great strides on). Just wanted to keep you up to date--  Elf | Talk 20:28, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

TV Naming conventions.
I'm spamming this... sorry

At some point in the past you expressed an opinion on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television). I have instigated a new poll on that page. I am hoping that this poll will properly allow all users who have an interest in the subject to express their views fairly before we come to a consensus. I have scrapped the poll that was previously in place on that page because I believe that it was part of an unfair procedure that was going against the majority view. I am appealing to all users who contribute to that page to approve my actions. I would appreciate it if you could take the time and trouble to read the page carefully and express an opinion and vote as you see fit. Mintguy (T) 16:58, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

what's Up
Where are you? Just curious... &mdash; Il&gamma;&alpha;&eta;&epsilon;&rho;  (T&alpha;l&kappa;)  00:48, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd appreciate it if you could e-mail it to me (pretty please) -- ilyanep at gmail dot com. Thanks  &mdash;  Il&gamma;&alpha;&eta;&epsilon;&rho;  (T&alpha;l&kappa;)  22:30, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, but I think I did something wrong -- was the page ever 202 KB long?  &mdash;  Il&gamma;&alpha;&eta;&epsilon;&rho;  (T&alpha;l&kappa;)  23:29, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mean Combat on Films considered the worst ever
Pete. The entry does have a cite (Pulp Fiction). Plus the list is inherently POV. What happened to "all films removed will be moved to the list on the discussion page" anyway? I have replaced the entry on the discussion page. Truly bad films have a small fan base and this is very definitely in that category. Try Googles on its various names or check the Internet database and you will get a feel for what the movie is like. Very definitely so bad it's good.


 * The list is obviously not inherently POV, if the films listed have a decent cite. "all films removed will be moved to the list on the discussion page" refered to a batch move of a load of films from when the page was a stupid list of people's personal favourite worst movies. Although I am sure Mean Combat is a truly dire movie, there are lots of these. I am in two minds whether the Pulp Fiction reference is a decent enough cite. Pcb21| Pete 08:42, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

beta Systemic Bias section opened
See User:Xed/CROSSBOW. You are welcome to sign up on my User talk:Xed page. Please feel free to add to the discussion. --Xed 13:05, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Poker pages
I saw your edits on WSOP and the talk page. Over the past few weeks I've been working on poker articles and biographies. If you have more than a casual interest in the area, you may want to check out User:CryptoDerk/poker where I keep tabs on the status of them, who should be added, etc.

Right now the only people that have articles are those who have won the main event of the WSOP, those in various halls of fame, those who are in the top 20 or so in all time money winnings, or those poker players who are notable for primarily other things.

As of right now I'm making a second pass through all the articles I started and am at "L". When I get done I'll probably start writing articles for those who don't have them yet. Feel free to let me know if I'm leaving out notable players, if you think some don't deserve articles, etc. Any input is good input. Don't feel obligated to, though, if you don't care too much. Cheers. CryptoDerk 03:46, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Cetaceans
Hello Pcb21,

I just want to say thank you for the great work you have done in Cetaceans in the english Wikipedia. I am working on some species for the geman Wikipedia and it is great, to find all this great work done here. I just have constructed the first Wikireader on the stuff we have in the german WP. Greetings from Berlin, Germany, Necrophorus

Official invitation
Hi!

This is a message to let you know that there is now a UK-specific Wikipedia community page at UK wikipedians' notice board. It would be great if you could come and get involved! -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 23:06, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

CC license template
On the page m:Guide_to_the_CC_dual-license your name is listed as duel-licensing your edits under the CC lincense. If you still want to do that, you should proably use the Template:DualLicenseWithCC-BySA. Add to your user page. That way, you'll be listed in What links here page. JesseW 07:03, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks! JesseW 02:58, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Orca
Hi. Please respond on Talk:Orca about your specific objections to my edits. Warmest regards, [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 13:36, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC).

The Kursk
Ah, I see. Thanks for letting me know about that. Warmest regards, [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 17:15, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I am trying to push ahead with the idea for Wikijunior, for which we have received a small grant. I would be more than happy to speak to you about it and answer any questions you might have. I would also be very eager to hear your ideas. Danny 00:56, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Counties policy
Hello I have added an explanation note to the counties naming policy at Naming conventions (places). I have done this to make it clearer because certain people have insisted upon mis-interpreting it (see Shipston-on-Stour and Talk:Gloucestershire). I dont think it has changed the policy just explained it better.

It has already been OK'd by User:Angela and User:Warofdreams, is it OK with you?. The reason I'm contacting you is because you voted on the original policy. G-Man 17:05, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Full Nice Handbag Co
Recreating articles which have had a long and contentious VfD and VfU discussion, and which had consensus to delete and keep deleted, is a violation of Wikipedia policy, and can lead to your being blocked from editing. RickK 22:29, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)