User talk:Postdlf/Archive16

Commons:Template:Painting
Hi, I see some uploads you recently did to Commons:Category:Vincent van Gogh.
 * 1) It would be nice if you used the actual version of Commons:Template:Painting, not Information (I'm aware that a drawing is not a painting, but would like to work towards a more general rename anyways, which might be "Commons:Template:Art" and be used for statues as well. Unfortunately, there's hardly any traffic on the COM-tl talk page. Any comment on my ideas would be welcome.)
 * 2) Besides, if you care about what you provide, you might like to know that there are already a few templates which support multilinguality, like Commons:Template:O_c, Commons:Template:Size Commons:Template:VGM, Commons:Template:Amsterdam and there is an easy-to-adapt folder-function which is for instance used in File:Women_of_Arles.JPG for the titles (at least, if more than 2 languages are given ;).
 * And, of course, Commons:Creator:Vincent van Gogh (and similar for other renowned painters) already exist and should be used. Happy uploading ;) Best, [w.] 08:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Help!
Please see this discussion Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games

There is an ongoing issue with Kung Fu Man over an edit dispute which is getting out of hand, and I'm fairly certain the user is relying on sockpuppets to make revisions to the article. Check the revision history yourself to verify this. Also, I've been receiving harassing comments and threats from this user and am not sure where to turn for help. Please get involved and try to act as the voice of reason. Thank you. 74.242.123.2 (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, look at our approval by the Chapters Committee, develop ideas for chapter projects at museums and libraries throughout our region, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the November meeting's minutes and the December mini-meetup's minutes).

We'll make preparations for our exciting museum photography Wikipedia Loves Art! February bonanza (on Flickr, on Facebook) with Shelley from the Brooklyn Museum and Alex from the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

We'll also be collecting folks to join our little Wikipedia Takes the Subway adventure which will be held the day after the meeting.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Q?
Did you ever receive the email from me from a few days ago? Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I did, I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to follow up. You know how I feel about ad hominem attacks.  Has it continued since then?  Postdlf (talk) 14:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I've tried to back away, but see Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_January_22. I don't mind disagreements with proposals, but so far I've been accused of trivializing child molestation and now I'm accused of trivializing the experiences of Holocaust survivors. His idea of AGFing seems to be "he must not be anti-Semitic; he must just be ignorant". Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I blocked him for 24 hours for incivility, failure to assume good faith, and personal attacks, per his editing restrictions, for this CFD comment of his and others this month. Let me know if it continues; hopefully he'll tone it down.  Postdlf (talk) 21:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for you attention to this trouble. Users can attack content proposals vigorously and I'll have no problem with it; when they repeatedly attack personal motivations or attitudes, it's unacceptable in my view. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:10, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Jane
You seem to be into art, so I'll explain my change: A basic design principle is that a picture goes on left if subject is facing right. Pepso2 (talk) 18:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That layout principle makes sense; the gaze of the subject then directs the reader back to the content rather than off the screen. But it's always awkward, if not completely undesirable, for an image to be at the top left corner of an article, particularly where that first block of text is then sandwiched between that left corner image and another one on the right.  Also in this case, the comic strip image is more defining of the character than the comic book cover that just reprinted that strip (and subordinated the Arden character to another).  Maybe there's another way to fix the layout?  Postdlf (talk) 22:02, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: You're invited!
Join us the evenings of Friday February 6 and Saturday February 7 around Wikipedia Loves Art! museum photography events at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Brooklyn Museum.

There will also be a special business meeting on Saturday dedicated to discussing Wikimedia New York City issues with guests from the Wikimedia Foundation.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:Cringe-inducing foods
For my research and work on Category:Diets, I would be interested in taking a look at/having a copy of what was in this category when it was deleted. Do you know someone who could do this, or someone who could recall some of the foods it contained? Sticky Parkin 23:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It was actually already empty when I deleted it. Its creator,, added Lutefisk, Casu marzu, Escamoles based on his contribution history.  I don't know that anyone else used the category.  Postdlf (talk) 14:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Seduction of the Innocent cover
I see you uploaded the book covers for this so I thought you'd be a good place to start. A book on Marvel's British comics has a list of images it needs, which includes a request for "Fredric Wertham – Seduction of the Innocent cover" hence this quick note. Cheers. (Emperor (talk) 00:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC))

Unblock request of Janitor999
Hello Postdlf. , whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, —  Aitias  // discussion 18:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: The unblock request seems to be made in good faith. Perhaps they should be given a second chance. —  Aitias  // discussion 18:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to figure out where to place my comment in the template on his talk page... ; )  I recommend against removing the block because there is no reason to believe this editor will behave any differently, that he was acting under some mistake.  I don't believe it's plausible that the blocked editor honestly believed that Cardinal Newman Catholic School (Hove) had switched to an Islamic school.  Even setting aside the prima facie absurdity of such a belief, this could have been checked by a quick visit to the school's website, which is prominently linked to from that article.  The blocked editor also, in the same edit, changed the genders of all the faculty listed, which can only be interpreted as vandalism.  See also this edit, in which the user wiped out the talk page of the contributor who warned him about that vandalism, and promised to evade any blocks by signing in with another account.  His multiple edits to Seaford, East Sussex prior to and after editing the school article were also clearly vandalism.  Postdlf (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you very much for your reply. :) —  Aitias  // discussion 19:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI, he's requested unblocking again. This time pretty please with sugar on top.  Postdlf (talk) 20:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Not sure if you saw it...
...but I hope you know it's just my weird sense of humor.  APK  ain't the baby daddy  16:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Dispute on SCOTUS case
Just to let you know that there is a dispute on this SCOTUS case, Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (see talk page). Third opinions welcomed... Cheers, --Edcolins (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

DKY prob
Hi. I was trying to get a SCOTUS case onto the DKY column at Template_talk:Did_you_know (it's Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police) and I ran into some trouble finding a short enough hook while still adequately describing the case. Thought you might have some suggestions. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 03:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Wexner Center for the Arts
Hi, and thanks for the message. I am a student at OSU that works for the Wex, and I am just updating the page with new info and pictures. There was recently a large overhaul of policy such as new admission charges and the vast majority of the things on the current page are extremely dated and/or irrelevant. I plan to just update some of our past shows as well as highlight the programming that we do. Please let me know if you find anything that seems biased in any way and I can change that because its not my intent. I just want to make the site an accurate representation of what the Wexner Center is.

Also on a semi-related note, I need to upload new pictures and it seems i meet the requirements of the Autoconfirmed users group, although i am still listed as a user. Any advice on how to proceed is much appreciated. WexArts (talk) 19:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I would like your permission to use a copy of the image: Lighting_in_arlington.jpg in a journal styled philosophical treatise I hope to get published. Of course, I would give you credit.

Please reply.

Respectfully submitted,

Elizabeth Hugate Hudgins, USA email: e.hugatehudgins@verizon.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.225.133.156 (talk) 13:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

CFD for Category:Psychics
I've made an alternative proposal for renaming Category:Psychics, and I thought you might like to read my remarks and respond in some way. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 11:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

File:John_Marshall_Harlan_II.gif
Since you uploaded this image, you may be interested in this discussion. The problem is that I can not find any evidence that the image is the work of US government. You help is appreciated. Ruslik (talk) 17:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've marked the image for deletion. Awadewit (talk) 19:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Alas, I can't help. Too many years ago...  Postdlf (talk) 19:45, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Picture of red brocket
Dear Postdlf,

I work for the french Museum of natural history. We are updating the multimedia devices in the Grande Galerie de l'Evolution and one of this device treats about the rainforest of South America. I'm looking for pictures and found your picture of Red brocket on Wikimedia :

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Red_Brocket_Deer_in_Barbados_10.jpg

There are some stuffed specimens in the Gallery which represent the rainforest, and for every specimen we would like to show a picture of the animal in his natural area (picture attached). This is a non-commercial use, our purpose is to show how rainforests are threatened by human activities.

Do you agree if we use your picture in this device ? Of course your name will appear in the device.

We would be very pleased to invite you at the Grande galerie if you go to Paris once a time.

Thank you,

Best regards,

Ingrid Verleye

http://www.mnhn.fr/museum/foffice/tous/tous/GuideDecouverte/lieuxVisiter/LieuxAVisiter/FLieuAVisiter.xsp?AE_ID=203&INFO_ID=1&LIEU_ID=164&MAN_ID=259&SITE_ID=10&idx=2&nav=liste

Please contact me at this adress (without spaces): verleye @ mnhn.fr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ingridv (talk • contribs) 16:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Woods v. Cloyd W. Miller
You deleted this page because the material was copyrighted, right? I just re-created it summarizing from the Courts opinion. I'm new at this, did I do it right? StarryC84 (talk) 00:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Big Bear et al
You protected Big Bear Stores in the belief that "Two editors have been reverting each other", when in actual fact User:SchuminWeb has recently been widely editing department store articles to suit some personal agenda. I have no interest in this subject, but this is blantant bullying of inexperienced contributors and deletion of major sections without discussion. 70.48.64.182 (talk) 15:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You're invited...
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Watergate
I have nominated watergate for renaming to watergate scandal. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Sceptre (talk) 11:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
See last post. SchuminWeb (Talk) 21:16, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, Thanks
Yeah, I didn't know how to add those bands to that category so I put them on top hoping someone would see them and add it somehow. Anyway, thanks for the help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soundgarden (talk • contribs) 21:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Closure of CfD on Category:North Cascades of British Columbia
Hi; I just picked you off one of the "closing" templates on the June 4 CfD page, as I'm wondering what the procedure is with the North Cascades of British Columbia CfD, now that the issue has been resolved by the creation of the needed Category:Canadian Cascades category. Can I just delete the section and remove it from the process or does an admin need to close it first, or do the removal? Another CfD now is apparent, btw, on Category:North Cascades of Washington as it only needs to be titled Category:North Cascades and the "of Washington" is superfluous. Also, would you know of a bot that I can set or ask to be set to move the contents of Category:North Cascades of Washington to Category:North Cascades. The moves/cats are not controversial btw, and the originator of the BC and WA ones is in agreement.Skookum1 (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Curiosa re your JD training/degree
One other thing, just noting your JD in the member boxes, I thought maybe you might find the procedural/political manoeuvring in a current hot-potato political case in British Columbia somewhat interesting - see the last few days' entries at this blog and related material on this one. Too long a story to fill you in on the details/background, but the scenario is getting to be "high theatre", in addition to being a political fiasco of the first order. Nothing to do with US or UK laws at this point, though the case involves the transfer of government assets to American-owned companies that kicked into party kitties, so it may yet break into US current affairs; the jurisprudence aspects right now include the kicking-upstairs of the presiding judge (though she could still decide to hear the case despite being appointed to a higher court) after five years of exhaustive examinations of discovery and more procedural delays than I can begin to recount (all to keep high-ranking politicians out of the witness stand); one thing holding it up right now is a Supreme Court of Canada judgement to decide whether the Special Prosecutor can have a secret witness whose identity and testimony will be kept secret from the Defence. Needless to say, and as you may be aware, the Canadian judiciary is not constitutionally separate as is its US counterpart, though nominal independence is asserted; there is no such thing as an elected judge in Canada, or for higher courts positions any kind of real parliamentary review of such appointments. Anyway, the various accounts of courtroom shenanigans in this case I think you may find.... amusing? Up here, we find them distressing but they're largely kept out of public view by a compliant media....Skookum1 (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Unprotect Marbury v. Madison?
Marbury v. Madison is indefinitely protected&mdash;and has been for going on 6 months now. Do you think it's time to unprotect it? There appear to be non-autoconfirmed users who want to contribute. See Talk:Marbury_v._Madison. Thanks!&mdash;C45207 | Talk 04:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw that old talk page thread; I responded to it months ago. The page has been protected because every time it's unprotected it receives nothing but anonymous vandalism; check the edit history.  Postdlf (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked back some more and see what you're talking about now. Thanks for the response.&mdash;C45207 | Talk 23:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Cardozo cases
I've replied on my talk page. I don't see any good arguments, and surely that's the important point. I expect you to inform me about whatever, and that you'll support the category being created.  Wik idea  17:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I've just tried to work out the DRV page. But can you list it for me, please? I'm a bit incompetent with this admin stuff. Also, was the Category:Cases involving Justice Cardozo created initially by me? I've got a bad memory and I think it might've been.  Wik idea  17:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, another reply on my page. Maybe discuss here instead, to stop jumping about.  Wik idea  17:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

That prior category was not created by you. I'm more than willing to help you through procedure, but I don't see a valid reason for overturning that CFD. A better idea might be to contribute to the CFD I started for Category:Justice Holmes cases, here, as the same reasons apply. But I think an even better idea is to spend your time expanding articles and making lists rather than trying to document cases by justice through the category system. Take a look at Category:United States Supreme Court opinions by justice for lists by justice by term, to get an idea of how these can be structured.

Of course I'm going to personally agree that Cardozo and Holmes are two of the most important and influential judges in American history (though Cardozo not so much on SCOTUS, rather than the NY COA), but the problem is that in practice these lines can't be drawn in the category system, and over time people try to fill in the gaps so that a category system is complete; eventually there would be a category for even Van Devanter. This is particularly true when the categories are broad enough to include all cases in which a justice even participated, which would then be almost identical to every case handed down during that justice's tenure on the Court. I don't think that's a useful way to organize this information, whether you are focusing on the individual justice as the topic, or on the case itself.

BTW, thanks for discussing this civilly with me. I'm sorry that my speedy deletion of the Cardozo category upset you; I certainly meant no disrespect, but my time on Wikipedia is sporadic and so often things get done piecemeal. I should have posted a notice on your talk page. I'm always glad to see other contributors interested in case law articles on here, and I hope you'll help expand the opinion articles and opinion lists. Postdlf (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Category
Thanks for replying. Yes, I can see from the discussion it was a non-starter, and I mainly did it for a diversion. I was just taken aback by how quick it went; I don't even remember seeing it on my watchlist. Anyway, thanks for your time... Moonraker12 (talk) 16:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)