User talk:Rentaferret/Archive 2007-04

Matt Sanchez
Your editing verges on WP:POINT. Please refrain from making the rest of us work to satisfy your peevishness. Why don't you pitch in and source the article yourself since you're so interested in it. Thanks.Wjhonson 04:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I added quite a few sources. I'm not being peevish; I'm trying to meet the requirements of WP:Citing sources and WP:Biographies of living persons. Regardless of the fact that Sanchez started the article, everything in it has to be attributable to a reliable source to avoid anyone getting "peevish" enough to file a lawsuit against Wikipedia. I'm trying to help; adding unverifiable "sources" to the article doesn't do that. &mdash; Chidom   talk   05:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * As I pointed out on the Talk page of that article, your claim that we cannot use sources which require registration is only relevant to the External Links section, and nothing else. I dispute that the external links article actually implies what you are implying, but it's irrelevant to the use of references. Wjhonson 20:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

1911 category
Hello. For the Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, can you leave that for now? I'm thinking we should add a template to the talk pages, maybe the same one as is used on the article and code the template to categorise only talk pages. That seems better than just adding a cat to a talk page where it's likely to get archived, or deleted, by accident. Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Unless you're planning on adding the template to the top of the talk page, there's no difference in the likelihood of the category link being archived/deleted versus the template being archived/deleted.


 * I'm not sure what the procedure is here; you may need to take this up at Deletion review.


 * You may also want to put a note on the Categories for discussion/Working page in the area where the categories are listed (there are 28, I think); are you planning on a similar solution for all the other categories that are being moved to talk pages?


 * I'll hold off a bit, but you need to keep me posted on what's going on decision-wise. Thanks. &mdash; Chidom   talk   21:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * As a solution, I created 1911 talk and am adding that to talk pages. Once that's done, I'll ask that the category be removed from 1911. While 1911 talk allows for the 1911 article name, url, and author, I think that information more properly belongs in the 1911 template on the article page. I just wrote it in to allow for the possibility that someone would want more information on the talk page. &mdash; Chidom   talk   02:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * That looks like a great solution! Thank you, Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Aaron Austin on Choose Me DVD cover.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Aaron Austin on Choose Me DVD cover.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. —Angr 15:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Kewl!
Left you a message on the new page's talk page. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 04:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Spam whitelist - what do you think?
At User:Eagle 101's request, I have gone to various editors seeking a consensus on this discussion, as I personally know the artist whose site it is - therefore, there is a small issue of WP:COI. Please take a look and leave your thoughts there.--Vox Humana 8&#39; 23:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll pass on participating in the discussion, but thanks for the invite. Have good days. &mdash; Chidom   talk   02:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
Hello! Why don't you join WP:LGBT? Your efforts here are splendid, it would be good if you'd join... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 03:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the invitation; however, I'm not much of a "joiner". I'll just stick to the mayhem I've already "joined". Have good days. &mdash; Chidom   talk   03:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool. Good luck with the list. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 03:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Mark Dalton name/dates
Hi; 'twasn't me but I had noticed these changes before, and undid them, and left a note in the IP address user's page about it; they just got back to me (see here) and I did the google, and he's right, the court documents have the a-spelling; it's why I didn't rerevert it myself; unless the court reports there aren't correct; see my reply on the IP address user's talkpage, also. Just trying to be helpful. The earlier change I was almost under the impression it was someone who knew him, or it was him, making the correction, partly why I bothered leaving the message on the IP usertalkpage given that IP address edits are usually suspect (though often corrective in various areas).Skookum1 23:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I found reliable sources for both spellings and edited the article to reflect them both. As I said in the edit summary, we don't have to know which one is the correct spelling unless we say that in the article. The way it is written now allows for both spellings—they both have been reported. &mdash; Chidom   talk   23:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Civility
I take exception to a comment you recently made:
 * "and I feel like I'm starting to swing a 2x4 here"

I didn't deserve or appreciate that. I request that you keep a civil tone and avoid making veiled threats against fellow editors. Sincerely, Cleduc 14:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you feel that way. It wasn't directed at you or any individual at all; it was meant to demonstrate my level of frustration. It certainly wasn't any sort of "veiled threat", and I'm sorry you misread it. Even when I'm frustrated, I try to maintain civility in my dealings with others; I'm sure I miss the mark at times. I also try to assume good faith and believe that personal attacks are quite rare. My comment was obviously completely off the mark and was perceived in a way that I never intended. I freely acknowledge that it was in very poor taste and sincerely apologize.


 * I appreciate your drawing this to my attention and I certainly won't use the phrase again.


 * Have good days. &mdash; Chidom   talk   15:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I apologize for being oversensitive, but I felt like I was getting slapped down for making what I felt were valid and necessary arguments. Cleduc 16:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)