User talk:Renamed user 995577823Xyn/Archives/2011/1

Lipoproteins
Wouldn't it be more efficient to fix the template than remove the template on all the pages it is transcluded into? Boghog (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I wasn't sure I would be able to correct the problem with it properly. We hope (talk) 00:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have quickfixed that template (never seen it before) and reverted user:We hope all through. I think we have all been counterproductive here: (i) mass reverts never look good, (ii) user:We hope could have alerted the template author (red text at the bottom of an article is not an emergency which would warrant reverts) (iii) @Boghog: adding second reflist to articles might not be the best solution - a template should be self-consistent (correct me if I'm missing something). However, I won't go and remove it now as it is harmless too. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that fixing the template is the best solution and that templates should be self-consistent, but wasn't 100% certain about the consequences of removing the citation. Adding a second reflist to the articles was I admit a bit of a kludge, but as you say, it is harmless.  I will remove these redundant reflist templates when I get a chance. The redundant reflist templates have now been removed.   Thanks for fixing the template.  Boghog (talk) 01:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Hands off our Forest Meeting.JPG
Hello, I don't understand the edit you made to this image. Please can you explain what effect it will have. Rgds Obscurasky (talk) 14:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award
For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award. (Explanation and Disclaimer) ♠  TomasBat   02:26, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment
The reference-removal you reverted (or at least referred to in your comment) was due to the fact that the citation used as a source the mirror of the very article it was in. Heh. AKA circular reference. See WP:VERIFY, section 6.3 – this practice is not allowed in Wikipedia. Thus, I have re-removed this feeble attempt at sourcing an WP article from a mirror of the same article on another website. 82.181.58.232 (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Barbara Randolph
Thanks for those sources. It seems that I probably over-interpreted my original source, which states: "Sometime in 1957, the Red Caps added two female singers, but this time with a twist. One of them was Lillian Randolph... The other singer was 15-year-old Barbara Ann Sanders, who had been in the movie Bright Road with Dorothy Dandridge and Harry Belafonte. The twist is that Barbara was Lillian's adopted daughter. While they only remained with the Red Caps for a couple of months, Barbara went on to greater fame as "Barbara Randolph." So, all we know is that she was using the name Sanders in 1957, four years after Lillian Randolph and Edward Sanders divorced. She may have been adopted as a child by that couple, or (probably more likely) by Lillian and her first husband.  Anyway, we don't know, and we don't know her birth name either.  I'll amend the article.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

reqphoto tags needed
I notice you removed the reqphoto tag for multiple list-articles of National Historic Landmarks, such as in this edit for the Montana NHL list-article. I don't think that is right. The list-article still needs photos; there are blanks for many entries in the table.

Honestly i don't know if the Reqphoto system works as intended, i.e. whether it brings anyone to go out and take photos and add them. But the Reqphoto system is there and provides a category/list of articles in a state that need photos, and these NHL lists majorly need them. It's valid and good to have the reqphoto there.

Could you please discuss, and/or agree not do that anymore? -- do ncr  am  02:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for agreeing. It's a relief, there are several thousand list-articles of National Register of Historic Places listed places that this would apply for, i think.  or maybe only the National Historic Landmark lists (a small subset) have the reqphoto on them.  anyhow, thanks. -- do  ncr  am  02:29, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Image Resizing
Hello I'm unaware of the policy with the scream image you tagged, the image posted is a composite of original images so it can't be used as a substitute for the original one without modification, does it still require changing?Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:46, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No I've taken care of it, just would've preferred the larger version for peoples inspection, I don't know why but it is ridiculously hard to find media and documentation for these Scream films so I thought having that version would be helpful. I took your advice, resized it to 350 and uploaded, thanksDarkwarriorblake (talk) 22:08, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello again, I thought i'd post here rather than waste your space creating a new section. I thought you might be the person to ask, what is the policy on editing images for use on wikipedia?  I have this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Scream_film_series_box_set.jpg that I'm using as the main image for Scream (film series) but I wanted to edit out the "The Ultimate" and "Collection" leaving just the "Scream", for aesthetic purposes only nothing that I desperately have to do.  Was just wondering if that is allowed?  If you don't know sorry for wasting your time but thanks for reading Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah sorry I've misled you, I meant editing the image itself not its filename. I can edit the image fine myself I'm just not sure if you can edit a copyrighted image and are then still allowed to use it in an article.


 * So instead of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Scream_film_series_box_set.jpg
 * I want to change it to look like this: http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/6149/alternatedvdcover.jpg
 * So what I meant was, could I change it like that but still be allowed to use it as a representative image for the series?Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:25, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the input :D Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:56, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

delete delete delete
Ah, for the days of sofixit! Now they are the days of csd and afd! Alas... - Keith D. Tyler &para; 21:26, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Links to MBC Videos
I am not sure that the links you have posted to various videos from the Museum of Broadcast Communications are authorized. (such as on the BJ & Dirty Dragon Show page, Ray Rayner Show page, et al) The MBC requires users to log in to their archives with a verified e-mail address and password in order to search for or view clips which they have provided to their members online. It says right on the MBC archives page, "A quick registration is required for access". These "MMS" links you are using, to a specific IP address and port number are not authorized links through the Museum.TV website but instead appears to be a "backdoor" way to circumvent the streaming protection set up by their security company Cleversafe. I think you should remove them and not post any more links to MBC assets unless they are officially authorized links. These direct links to videos with the Cleversafe secuirty omitted make them more vulnerable to piracy and downloading. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.168.2 (talk) 03:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Here's the link to the landing page for all the videos-it's on the Museum of Broadcast Communications' website:


 * http://www.museum.tv/exhibitionssection.php?page=564


 * Looking for a Smaller Audience - Chicago Television


 * http://www.museum.tv/exhibitionssection.php?page=562


 * Mining the Local Talent - Chicago Television


 * The Museum has apparently chosen to allow free viewing for certain clips in this manner. All the video links come directly from the Museum's website. We hope (talk) 04:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

!== file for deletion ==

Hi, you tagged, does it need to go for deletion discussion? Off2riorob (talk) 23:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 23:45, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again
Thanks for blowing through the Mistagged BLP backlog. I'll take a look at some of the remaining ones. Gigs (talk) 13:32, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

File:SmileyCultureLWTPubPic.jpg
When I uploaded this I looked for some guidance for how big a non-free image should be and didn't find anything that wasn't vague - compared to the full scan this was already substantially reduced and low-res enough that it would not print well on a 6x4. The tag you placed on the file page isn't really any more enlightening regarding how small it should be. I've sized it sufficiently for its use in the article, so hopefully that's small enough? If so let me know and I'll delete the original upload. If you could point me towards the relevant guidance on image size that prompted the tag I would be grateful. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK review of North American Star League
Hi We Hope, and thanks for the review. However, what was it? (i.e. pass, problems, fail. etc.) You just wrote "reviewed". The Interior (Talk) 21:48, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, no worries and welcome to the project. A DYK review doesn't need to be very in-depth, as opposed to GA or FA reviews.  One must make sure that the main points at WP:WIADYK are satisfied.  Then you use the templates that are above the edit window when you click "edit" on the DYK noms page (check mark, possible thingy, bad X mark).  It's nice to leave some comments so the prep makers and DYK admins know you've actually looked at it.  Hope this helps, have fun,  The Interior  (Talk) 22:17, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers! The Interior  (Talk) 22:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

delete File:Chidvilaasam.jpg
Delete File:Chidvilaasam.jpg as the original essay page is deleted! Chavakiran (talk) 17:44, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Jo Stafford Supper Club CDs
Nice work on these. I'll definitely add them to her article. There's been a few releases since I compiled the list in 2008 so I'll update everything. We could also add them to the Jo Stafford template. Even though some don't have articles just now, it would be useful to include a full list there. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

2 The Best of Jo Stafford albums
Hi. I made a start on creating some of the other articles, but have discovered something a little confusing. There are apparently 2 albums with the same title, released on the same day and on the same label (see   and here). I have created the first (with 23 tracks) at The Best of Jo Stafford, but I'm not quite sure what to do about this. Can you help? Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 16:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you're right as Amazon only makes reference to the first one. Interestingly the other album has a different track listing, and fewer tracks (18 rather than 23). My first thought was that it was a Double CD for which someone had created different links for Disc 1 and Disc 2, but most links seem to point to the one I've created so I think I've created the right one. Thanks for taking a look anyway. TheRetroGuy (talk) 17:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, so I see. Would be interesting to know what he discovered. TheRetroGuy (talk) 17:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Nick Perito
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

re: Elmo Tanner pt2
Hello! Thanks so much for all your fantastic edits to the new Elmo Tanner article. Truly appreciated. 78.26 (talk) 22:56, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mitchell Ayres
Hello! Your submission of Mitchell Ayres at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Rationale tagging
Hi We Hope, quick question for you. When I load an image, am I supposed to flag it as having a free use rationale supplied, or am I supposed to leave it to folks like you? Thanks, Rob. Robman94 (talk) 00:47, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Chesterfield
Okay. Thanks. Pepso2 (talk) 13:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Somewhat puzzled. Where do you want this image placed?

Jo Stafford albums
Hi, I've created another ten today and have now reached the beginning of 2000. I'll try to get the rest up over the weekend. Just wondering though if Jo & Friends and Jo Stafford and Friends might be one and the same album. I found Jo & Friends for sale on ebay and it has the same track listing and artists as the later album. The covers are also similar, so it could be a reissue. TheRetroGuy (talk) 18:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Introducing Jo Stafford
This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Introducing Jo Stafford, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://eil.com/shop/moreinfo.asp?catalogid=411733.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 03:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It is listed as the source of the information. There is no way to list album tracks other than the way they are on the album. I am removing the tag from the page as the bot appears to need work re: music listings.  If this is a copyright violation, then every music listing on WP has the same problem. We hope (talk) 03:28, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

991.com The same information regarding this album is also shown at the link; it is an entirely different website. We hope (talk) 03:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries here, this is just a false alarm by a bot. --joe deckertalk to me 16:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the help with uploaded photo
Hello, We hope: Thanks for your help regarding file: bradlamm2011.jpeg. I followed your directions (amending its page as per your instructions) but am still uncertain as to whether I've satisfied requirements. Leoniana (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Preserving Anonymity
Hello We hope: Thanks for your help with file:bradlamm2011.jpeg. In Requesting copyright permission the section "When permission is confirmed" gives directions for forwarding both the original email and the email which gives permission. In both of these cases I, the forwarder, would be giving up my editor's anonymity. Is there a way to satisfy this that will also preserve my privacy as an editor? Thanks. Leoniana (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Mitchell Ayres
The DYK project (nominate) 18:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: counterregulatory hormone
I checked to see what conventions other vet med articles had been following, but didn't come up with much; (animal) or (pets) could probably work as well, but (veterinary medicine) is clearer albeit more verbose. I think I prefer (veterinary medicine), but the other two would be fine redirects.

Hope that's helpful in some way! – anna  06:48, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Jonathan and Darlene Edwards in Paris
Hi, I've written an article for the Jonathan and Darlene Edwards in Paris album and wondered if you'd take a look at it for me. I've basically used the information from the main Jo Stafford article as a basis and rewritten it for the new page. If all is well I'd like to put it up for DYK in the next few days, and I'll see if I can find some info on other Jonathan and Darlene albums. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 14:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)