User talk:WikiWikiWayne/Archive 2

Transclusion
As noted at the Asiana Flight 214 article, transclusion makes no sense at all and there is insufficient support for any mention in the article of the prank at all. Apteva (talk) 07:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

FYI
I've removed most of your tags from W v. Registrar because they did not seem to be correctly applied. If you believe there is a neutrality problem, you are also required to state on the talk page what you believe the problem to be. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:50, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Darius McCollum / Typo?
Hi. Regarding this edit: your edit summary says "typo"; which typographical error did you try to fix? See also the explanation about ab -type links at Help:Link. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 09:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Bitcoin vs bitcoin
Please see Talk:Bitcoin Chris Arnesen 20:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Bitcoin Reception - Recentism
Hi - The reception towards bitcoin is an extremely rapidly evolving space and more so now than ever before - While it might appear slanted towards recent events, most nations haven't made comments on bitcoin until recently. Poland, Iceland and Norway all made their first comments this week. This part of the bitcoin article is likely to continue to avoid rapidly as more nations "weigh in" - In my view recentism shouldn't apply here :-) VinceSamios (talk) 22:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Bill Cowsill
I believe I have substantially addressed your concerns in relation to the page, and so have removed the tags. Hope this is OK.

Dreadarthur (talk) 05:03, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Required Valuable Feedback on My Created Article
Greetings Rwadhaawa, Are you aware of their umbrella page Shriram Group? It is only 245 words. I would suggest expanding that article first. Checkingfax (talk) 11:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Reply: Yes, I am aware of their umbrella page Shriram Group, but i have collected these information and sources about "Shriram Automall India Limited". so, kindly let me know what is the right procedure if i create the page with same name or if i go to edit Shriram Group Page, what are the requirements to edit a previous page? can you please help me out? Rwadhaawa (talk) 09:36, 9 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Dear, Just go to the Shriram Group page and click on the Edit link, or the Edit-source link, or if you're in Mobile-view click on the pencil icon to edit the page. Then, click on the Preview button, make sure the page looks good, then click on the Save button. Hope this helps. Cheers! Checkingfax (talk) 09:49, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

George Foreman
Hi, Checkingfax. If you look more carefully at my edit in the Infobox boxer for the above article, you'll see that the conversions are retained, but done automatically rather than by additional, crufty sub-templates. Cheers.--173.35.178.65 (talk) 22:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Nerd
Checkingfax -- the nerd quote for which you asked a page number had already been posted with "page 105." Not sure why you are asking. Contact me at bsutton@alum.mit.edu even if you leave the change as is, it seems to be appropriately referenced with book, publisher and page number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.45.78.71 (talk) 19:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Further research uncovers important Photo source info for "File:Michael Laucke with Andres Segovia -PBS TV at Met Museum NY.jpg". Your input?
Hello User:Checkingfax, I just wanted to keep you abreast (favorite English word) of the following, as you have been so immensely helpful. I realise it might not be in your area of expertise though. Nevertheless, I find the debate kind of interesting, a bit time consuming for just one photo, albeit one of historical importance I think. I'd be delighted to have your thoughts on this or ideas of an expert who could help. à votre santé ("Cheers" in French) --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 19:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC) (Sorry, some ping addresses don't work from Commons)

Thank you u|Hedwig in Washington and u|Túrelio for looking into this and helping make Wikipedia better, and safer! I understand your concerns, which or course concern us all.

To clarify and help resolve this issue, I have been on a fact finding mission regarding the photo of Andres Segovia and Michael Laucke at the Metropolitan Museum for the PBS TV special. Indeed, I am pleased to divulge what I have learned, in order to expedite a resolution in this matter.


 * If you go to both the Flickr and the Michael Laucke websites, the personal photo attribution is clearly indicated! On April 12, 1982, this photo was taken by an assistant of Mr, Laucke, called Christine Arenella of New York. The film was produced by Nathan Kroll. Both websites state: "April 12, 1982; photo by Christina Arenella, New York. Press secretary to Michael Laucke."


 * Upon further research, a pattern emerges where we clearly see that a Christine Aranella was Press secretary to Mr. Laucke from at least 1982-1988 and she is mentioned as having taken these personal photos under Mr. Laucke's emploi.


 * We can safely say that this photo was created by an employee of Mr. Laucke as part of that person's job (a ). Mr. Laucke has written:
 * I hereby certify that I own all rights pertaining to this photo. Cordially, Michael Laucke Mlaucke 08:23, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Of less importance, this photo can also be found reprinted in other newspaper articles, albeit with much lower resolution. There is a further photo with maestro Segovia and Michael Laucke, taken that same evening backstage, after the PBS filming (of less interest), and there are other personal photos with Mr. Laucke and Maestro Segovia on other occasions, such as this one.

I realise wikipedia could have legal problems about copyright infringement, and I certainly dont want to be the one to spur these on! Nevertheless, based on the above facts, the veracity of which can be proved, I think this photo is perfectly safe. Kindly let me know what other proof I need to provide, if any, to make it so.

Once again, thank you for your concern. Kinldy consider making an un-deletion request so that I may have a little more time to contribute worthwhile articles :) Otherwise, alas, "la bataille continue" (the battle continues) ...

BTW, where did that funny claim come from, that Mr. Laucke took his own photo from 20 feet away while playing guitar for Andres Segovia at the same time : ) Merci! Cordially, --Natalie.Desautels ( --[[User:Natalie.Desautels|Natalie.Desautels (talk) 19:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)


 * , can you provide me with a direct link to the Commons inquest? Thank you. Cheers!  20:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Wow, that was fast! Here is a short summary of this issue:
 * This concerns a photo where the following facts have been ascertained:
 * The photo was created by an employee of Mr. Laucke as part of that person's job, (a ).
 * The photo was taken by an assisant of Mr. Laucke, called Christine Arenella of New York
 * Mr. Laucke certified that he own alls rights pertaining to this photo.
 * Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication is attributed whereby Mr. Laucke waived all rights, thus all rights are released and the photo may be freely used.


 * The Commons:Deletion requests page which is here
 * The main photo page on Commons is here.
 * Many thanks, best wishes, much appreciation and Merci! Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 20:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

michaellaucke.com
I don't understand your edit. Where does it indicate this site is freely licensed? — Earwig   talk  07:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)


 * , I'm running a content copyvio self check on the Michael Laucke article. Michael Laucke freely licenses the content and images from his site to be used in his article. Cheers!  08:05, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Would it be possible to show some proof of this, or prior discussion? Perhaps your wording was unclear, but he can't freely license the content for use in his article only (per WP:DCP). — Earwig   talk  08:16, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , go ahead and remove it until we get our ducks in a row. Cheers!  08:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I will attend to this matter latter today, and remove possible offending links to michaellaucke.com until matters in this area are sorted out. Thanks again for your diligence and for helping make Wikipedia better. Cordially, --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 10:30, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you for your quick responses. I've removed the link for now. As a general rule of thumb, I prefer to keep article-specific exclusions off the list as it is usually easier to handle those on a case-by-case basis. It's intended more for pages that show up very frequently (like mirrors, or freely licensed sites with lots of hits). — Earwig   talk  23:47, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

TAFI talk

 * Hello :


 * You are invited to participate in this discussion at the TAFI talk page regarding improving the automation of project processes and management of the project. Your input is appreciated.

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on

Hotel
So you would rather add bare urls in any place you want, rather than accept adding archive urls? This is ridiculous. —Indian:BIO  [ ChitChat ] 09:30, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * And where did you find working links? This is dead and this is a search page. I'm seriously not getting what are you trying to do? —Indian:BIO  [ ChitChat ] 09:35, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Ukraine corruption perceptions index data
I realized that in the edit history for Ukraine, you reverted a couple of edits from an IP user (I am not the editor for the IP). I realized that in your edit summaries when reverting it, you stated that the score was 142 and that anything over 100 is clean. I believe that you have misinterpreted the statement as the CPI score is 26 out of 100 (viewed in the map as "2014 score"). The 142 comes from its rank as being the 142nd least corrupt country; basically the country is pretty corrupt. The information is very useful as it indicates the endemic corruption that still plagues Ukraine (many reliable news sources regularly mention it) after Euromaidan. I hope that clarifies any confusions. Ssbbplayer (talk) 04:25, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Greetings, Verbatim:
 * In the **Rank** column the Ukraine is ranked at 142.
 * Bad documentation. Carry on. Cheers!  04:39, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Bad documentation. Carry on. Cheers!  04:39, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Charles Manson
I didn't vandalize anything. I've never seen references displayed that way and thought I was removing stray text. Why don't you try assuming good faith. SocialJusticeWarriors (talk) 10:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 52, 2015)

 * The last two sections could be converted from bulletted fomat into prose format to make it a 5x expansion. Nvvchar . 09:08, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Can you pl find a reference to the first para of the "Use" section? The article is now much more than 5x.  Nvvchar . 16:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , Reference added per your request. We are now up to 7.5x. Cheers!  17:52, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Shall I nominate it on DYK? Any suggestions for a hook? Nvvchar . 01:17, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , looks like beat us to it  Cheers!   17:05, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
—cyberpower Happy 2016:Limited Access 17:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Jack Lalanne article
You've recently reverted edits I made to the Jack Lalanne article. I removed unsourced statements in an effort to clean the article up pursuant to the Fan POV tag. Would you mind explaining why you reverted my edits? Please reply to my talk page. 99.135.156.219 (talk) 02:38, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
North America1000 03:13, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Google Doodle task force collaboration for 4 February 2016

 * (Note that this doodle is only targeted to German users of Google.)