User talk:Weatherman90/archive5


 * }

October 2006 - November 2006 

Hello, User,
I noticed your contributions. Please refrain from uploading pictures with no source information, wrong copyright information and the correct tags - if you continue uploading them and adding them to the articles, it will be considered vandalism and you will be blocked. Best regards, feydey 19:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Image Warnings
Please do not remove image warnings from Your user talk page, it is not considered polite. feydey 19:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Just removed excessive messages. Don't need to say the same thing 9 times. Weatherman90 19:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Then please add sources to Your images. feydey 19:26, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Sourcing images
I see You upload lots of images without proper source information (www.microsoft.com or www.mattmechtel.com are not sources). To do this please

add: in the image's Summary. Thanks, feydey 19:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * the exact source page of the image (like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Atlantic_Monthly)
 * and the exact link to the image (like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Battle_Hymn_of_the_Republic.jpg)

Image licensing
Please note: feydey 19:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * promotional - for items
 * promophoto - for photos of persons

Unspecified source for Image:Mattmechtel.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mattmechtel.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. See above. feydey 19:28, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Rushlake.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Rushlake.gif. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey 19:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mattmechtel.jpg‎
You have not yet indicated the copyright status of this image, only the source. Please see WP:TAG for a list of available copyright tags. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 21:00, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Def Leppard songs
You don't need to make a new stub for each Def Leppard song. According to WikiProject Songs, the song must have been on the Top 100 charts of a country to be eligible for an article. -- Ci e lomobile talk / contribs 04:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Kneedeep.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kneedeep.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. 13:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:S_01.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:S_01.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. 10:44, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Please categorize your articles e.g 1985 albums album-stub etc Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Confusion
You were in 2nd grade in 1999. I was in 2nd grade in 1999. You are a junior in high school. I am a freshman in high school. I've never been held back. How is this possible? Ahh! The confusion... →Cycl  one1 → 21:10, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahhh that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up. Lol. →Cycl   one1 → 22:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Barry70s.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Barry70s.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. 02:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Barry Manilow
Me and several others, as I recall. I just don't like someone getting slandered. The point being, I don't know anything about his private life, because he apparently keeps it private; so anyone who thinks he does know is, by definition, spreading gossip and/or pushing a personal agenda. OK, enough of the soapbox for now. :) Wahkeenah 02:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Weathermen
Oddly enough, in my day, the term "Weathermen" referred to a far-left bomb-throwing element of the Vietnam War protestors. Or maybe you knew that. :) Wahkeenah 03:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Music
Much of the kind of criticism you direct at current rock music was also leveled at the disco music writers and performers, and I recall that KC and the Sunshine Band were specifically singled out for their sex-based lyrics. The controversial music of any generation is often regarded as "safe" by successive generations, due to its familiarity. The things Bill O'Reilly says about Gangsta Rap are much the same as was being said about Elvis Presley by O'Reilly's parents' generation. And I recall the flap about The Beach Boys being banned from doing their July 4th concert on the D.C. Mall, during one of the Reagan years, on the grounds that they were promoters of drugs and immorality, until Reagan duly informed that idiot (James Watt) that he liked the Beach Boys. Manilow, to be sure, has never been accused of being vulgar or degrading in any way. The criticism of Manilow was/is that he's old-fashioned. Ya can't win. An artist is going to get criticized, no matter what. So the best he can do is to be true to himself. P.S. I have several of those suggestive K.C. songs on my iPod, along with the awesome 6-minute version of the mostly-instrumental number called TSOP. That one will get your disco juices flowing. :) Wahkeenah 04:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * You've hit upon something. Blatant vulgarity, to me at least, is generally not very entertaining, although it can be (rarely) in the right context. To me, there's nothing clever about it. Those who derided the inuendoes of way-back-when, if they are alive today, should be asked, "You like this better?" I'm reminded of a line from a Peter, Paul and Mary song called "I Dig Rock and Roll Music", which was intentionally ironic, and this was funny: "I Dig Rock and Roll Music, I could really get it on, that scene; I think I could 'say' something, if you know what I mean; but if I really say it, the radio won't play it, unless I 'lay' it between the lines." Wahkeenah 01:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Deleted Image:Barry70s.jpg
Image:Barry70s.jpg was deleted because it comes from the BBC web site, the terms of use of which state, " You may not copy, reproduce, republish, download, post, broadcast, transmit, make available to the public, or otherwise use bbc.co.uk content in any way except for your own personal, non-commercial use. You also agree not to adapt, alter or create a derivative work from any bbc.co.uk content except for your own personal, non-commercial use. Any other use of bbc.co.uk content requires the prior written permission of the BBC.". Wikpedia takes copyright seriously. Please read Copyrights and Image use policy before uploading future images that were taken from the Web or that were not made by you. Thanks, --MCB 05:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Barrymanilowvegas.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Barrymanilowvegas.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. Arniep 14:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC) -- Arniep 14:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #6
The November issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Bush
Between his party having been whomped in the recent election, and prominent members of his own party, such as Gingrich, also beating up on him, I'm guessing Dubya could use the implied hug you're giving him. :) Wahkeenah 04:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

ND political articles
Thank you for helping out with the political articles as of late. I'd appreciate it if you would help me refer to the North Dakota Democratic-NPL Party and North Dakota Republican Party articles rather than their national counterparts where possible, I know a lot of the templates have autoformatting that would need to be fixed, but other references should be kept within the state. Also, in most cases referring to the state-level party and its members since 1956: instead of Democratic, Democratic-NPL; instead of Democrat, Dem-NPLer; as with Minnesota, DFL and DFLer. I have myself been omitting "Party" after NPL in order to avoid RAS syndrome from having "Party" follow "League". --AlexWCovington  (talk) 22:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Rickclayburgh.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Rickclayburgh.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Chowbok  ☠  02:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Golf course issue is back
Check it out. --AlexWCovington  (talk) 06:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

"Satanosi"?
That reminds me of when certain southern politicians used to refer to a certain black civil rights leader as "Martin Lucifer King". However, that other user that tried to post a "POV" sticker in your page is also lacking in a sense of humor. Wahkeenah 01:59, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

But technically that user is right. "Polemic" statements are against policy. See User page Wahkeenah 02:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The one about how Ted Kennedy should be in jail reminds me of this National Lampoon joke from decades ago:
 * Reporter: Senator, will you be running for President in 1976?
 * Ted Kennedy: I'll drive off that bridge when I come to it.

Wahkeenah 02:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Byrd etc.
Luckily, it is possible to grow past one's youthful wrong-headed ideas. :) Wahkeenah 04:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You jumped to a conclusion. I was talking about Byrd. :) Wahkeenah 04:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * "Used to" that user? He's only existed for like 2 days, at least according to his contributions list. Or does he have "several" names? Wahkeenah 04:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Roger. This is an ongoing discussion that has seen many venues, this one just being the latest. Wahkeenah 04:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's worth mentioning that although I consider myself liberal-leaning (as opposed to "slanting", if you get what I mean), I also like to hear a variety of viewpoints. There's room in my "tent" for commentators like O'Reilly and Buchanan, who show some independent thought, and who are also, as I see it, "America-firsters", which is probably what my true political soul is. Wahkeenah 04:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

How old is that user? Your age, or mine, or somewhere in between? While it's true that slanderous or polemic statements are against policy, I've seen far worse stuff here, and I don't think it's appropriate to directly mess with somebody's page up front. There's a process to go through, such as posting something on the talk page and trying persuasion. If that doesn't work, one should go to an admin and ask for help. I suspect you two are a bit beyond that stage. Having said all that, I think it's fair to assume that Rep. Pelosi couldn't care less what any wikipedia editor has to say about her - good, bad, or indifferent. :) Wahkeenah 04:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I guess when you're a teen, 2 years seems like "way back". One thing to bear in mind about Coulter is to understand that she loves fiery discussions and loves to push people's buttons. She likes when people argue back. Throwing pies at her is stupid. Throwing verbal brickbats is fair. But she is one strong woman. It's funny to see her on O'Reilly sometimes. He's as blunt as they come, yet she even has him cowed. I should point out that I don't watch O'Reilly, or any particular show, on a regular basis. I do try to catch The McLaughlin Group on Sunday morning. That's a group that really does go way back, probably to your infancy. You know who I miss? William Buckley. He retired from TV around the time of the Y2K rollover. He was always interesting to watch and listen to. Of course, his I.Q. is probably higher than yours and mine combined. :) Wahkeenah 04:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

By "replying style" I assume you mean "civil". I'm not always that way. You should see the debates I got into on the Moon Hoax page, before the contentious user (and his sockpuppets) finally got tired of it and left, or whatever. So that user is 37, if I read you right, which means he's "Generation X"; too young to remember the lunacy of the 1960s. I'm over 50, and I've seen enough to convince me to be suspicious of all politicians. I'm also convinced that having the President and the Congress in opposite parties is much healthier than the "rubber stamp". That's what dragged us into Vietnam, and into Iraq. There needs to be some balance. Now we have some. If the Democratic majority continues, we should probably put another Republican in the White House in 2008. Right now, McCain looks like my guy. There are certain things about him that are worrisome, but nobody's perfect. :) Wahkeenah 05:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Aha, you mean the bullet points. Well, that varies depending on the situation. The problem with the indenting is that it slides more and more to the right (I thought you would like that???) until, theoretically, a sentence could become a single column. It seldom gets to that point. I wonder, sometimes, what would have happened if McCain had been successful in his 2000 campaign, when he was 8 years younger, for one thing, and how he would have dealt with 9/11. Some would be tempted to say "better", but there's no way to know. It's kind of like Oliver Stone thinking Vietnam wouldn't have happened if JFK hadn't been killed, and I am not at all convinced of that: I think JFK and LBJ had similar views on it and it might well have turned out pretty much the same way; namely, a disaster. Maybe JFK wouldn't have blatantly lied to the public about his intentions, though, like LBJ did. Or maybe he would have. And maybe McCain would have decided independently to go into Iraq. No way to tell. I don't envy whoever gets that job, if we are still in Iraq by then. Wahkeenah 16:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
Thanks, Weatherman; I didn't think to request them for protection.. though the thought crossed my mind that if WPND had an admin we'd probably see faster action in such matters. Perhaps we should consider nominating Gene Nygaard or Matt again. --AlexWCovington  (talk) 06:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I sent an e-mail to the state ITD (they renamed the ISD), we'll see what happens in that regard. --AlexWCovington  (talk) 19:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I would be happy to become an admin, but I'm not sure if voters would think I have enough experience or not. They didn't think so last time. After all, what does someone with 8,000 edits know about WP anyways? I have considered nominating Alex before, but I'm just not sure if voters would consider any of us suitable. --Matth e w UND (talk) 01:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)