![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The
December 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
22:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you please look at this and give a quick opinion? Lara ❤ Love 06:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot ( talk) 23:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI, I have nominated List of longest suspension bridge spans as a featured list of the day for March. See User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200803. -- Orlady ( talk) 03:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
The January 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 ( talk) 02:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
I took an educated guess on which bridge it was when I moved that page. So I could be wrong because the Chinese media tend to be vague on names of lesser known objects. For official names, unless there are photos showing the names, I would not trust the names found on Internet. Here is a quick translation of the table that had the 5 bridges I mentioned. -- Voidvector ( talk) 10:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Name | Literal Translation | Purpose | Province | City/County | Start of Construction | Completion | Main Span (meters) | Type |
宜昌长江大桥 | Yichang Changjiang Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Dec-97 | Sep-01 | 960 | Suspension bridge |
宜昌长江铁路大桥 | Yichang Changjiang Railroad Bridge | Railroad bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Feb-04 | Under construction | 810 | Beam bridge |
葛洲坝三江大桥 | Gezhouba Dam Three River Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | 1981 | Beam bridge | ||
夷陵长江大桥 | Yiling Changjiang Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Nov-98 | Dec-01 | 348 | Cable-stayed bridge |
西陵长江大桥 | Xiling Changjiang Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Dec-93 | Aug-96 | 900 | Suspension bridge |
I noticed that you have participated Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates in the past. There are now two candidates and the project appears to be abandoned. If you could look at the candidates and vote it would be appreciated. Zginder ( talk) ( Contrib) 18:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not sure where else to put this, so please go ahead and delete it right away, but thanks a lot for your very polite and helpful moderating! I appreciate it very much! Shadowshark ( talk) 09:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for the intrusion but could you look at this article? A series of anon IPs (same person based on comments) has added an unusual addition under popular culture with no attribution other than his/her viewpoint/OR. Of a more serious nature, the editor has also made inappropriate comments on the article's discussion page and my talk page. Thanks for your assistance. FWIW, I may be asking a number of admins for their review of the article. Bzuk ( talk) 19:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC).
Congratulations. List of largest suspension bridges was the leading votegetter at WP:LOTD and will be list of the month as well as be featured as list of the day twice. Let me know if you have any date preferences.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTD) 02:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
The
February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
18:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot ( talk) 17:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 09:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, I see you are interested in semi-protection. I'm looking at the issue from the point-of-view of an anonymous user and I was wondering if you have any figures concerning the percentage of total articles SPd, and more importantly the percentage of the most viewed (say the top 5%) of articles that are SPd? From my experience it seems that indefinite and long-term, often repeated SP, is a creeping disease that will soon mean virtually all the most popular articles are unavialable to edit for anons. This flies in the face of Jimbo's statement that "you can edit this article, right now" - paraphrased. What are your thoughts? Thanks, 82.20.24.97 ( talk) 16:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
The
March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Regardless of the technically correct terminology, the common English usage is moon bridge, and so I think it appropriate that the English WP title be such. In my opinion a minor note and a redirect from 'drum bridge to moon bridge would be more appropriate in this case than the other way around. I will also consult with my (non WP) China native resident friend concerning chinese useage. Also, it would seem possible that drum bridge may refer to the wooden type illustrated but perhaps not to the stone type shown. - Leonard G. ( talk) 23:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Have you seen User_talk:BrownHairedGirl#Category_intersects_Real_Soon_Now_maybe? One thing shocked me there. It seems you can intersect categories using the search funtion. For example, like this. Never knew that. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Have you seen User_talk:BrownHairedGirl#Category_intersects_Real_Soon_Now_maybe? One thing shocked me there. It seems you can intersect categories using the search funtion. For example, like this. Never knew that. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
The
April 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm stopping by with a big request for help. There has been a discussion and !vote going on over the last 5 days at WT:Good articles#Good article signs about the possibility of adding a sign like the FA star at the top right of good articles as some other Wikipedias now do. This is a subject that has been raised many times in the past and has often generated heated debate.
By contrast, I believe, the latest discussion has been quite measured, but it is unclear whether any consensus is being established. I think it would be enormously helpful if an uninvolved admin with a lot of experience at evaluating consensus were to look at the discussion and close it in once it has run its course. However, finding such an admin is rather difficult, as most have been actively involved with GA, FA or both. You came to my mind because we overlapped at a controversial CfD over a year ago, and I was extraordinarily impressed by the way you closed it.
Would you be willing to help? And if not, do you have any suggestions whom I could ask? Geometry guy 20:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Sam, for doing such an excellent and thorough job. I'm sure your objective assessment will be of value to everyone involved in the discussion, no matter how they !voted and for what reason. Geometry guy 10:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Not sure if you're still checking on Wikipedia talk:Special:Categories, so I'm dropping you a note here... I just had an idea on a possible better solution for the Categories link. How about sending it to the Categories section of Special:Allpages? It's easier to navigate than Special:Categories since there's at least a rudimentary search, and as such I think it's an easier way to find more obscure categories than Portal:Categories/Categorical index. -- SonicAD ( talk) 04:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Next time you may want to take your own advice and check the discussion page before wiping out work that has been carefully pieced together with consensus. You really screwed things up, without even realizing it, I'm sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.73.94.131 ( talk) 09:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello Sam. First, I have to offer my apologies for edit warring over the picture that you are trying to add to Marat/Sade. I have self reverted my last change. You will want to join the conversation that I have started here [1] to make your case for the inclusion of this pic. I know that you are trying to improve the page. My interpretation of the current picture policy, which is highly restrictive, is that the picture would be removed now or latter. However, this is just one editors opinion. If the consensus is that it can be included I would only ask that the size of it is reduced. What I really wish is that you had a picture of the actor Ian Richardson recreating David's pose from the film. Again apologies and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 00:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Talk:Marat/Sade#Image -- ☑ SamuelWantman 07:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Sam, I hope this message finds you well. I work for a New York advertising agency called Korey Kay & Partners and a client of ours would like to use an image you shot of the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge. The link to the image is as follows: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Newburgh-Beacon_Bridge_2.jpg
I would appreciate an email so we may discuss more about how we would like to use it as well as compensation. I can be reached at pwarkolla@koreyaky.com. Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.166.235.180 ( talk) 14:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The
May 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
20:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
A new discussion you may be interested in: Consensus on reasoning for LGBT Project Articles. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot ( talk) 16:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you please confirm that you were the one that requested access to the account request tool? Thanks :) Alex fusco 5 22:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
In the area? You're invited to | |
San Francisco Meetup # 6 | |
![]() | |
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2008 | |
Time: | |
Place: Glen Park Branch Library | |
prev: Meetup 5 - next: Meetup 7 |
You received this invite because you added your name to the Invite list. If you don't wish to be invited any more, simply remove your name. Thanks. -- ShakataGaNai Talk 05:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I'm one of the ACC interface admins/developers, and I will take over for SQL, who is busy negotiating the move to the stable toolserver, in completing your request. All I need to know is what exactly you want added to the similar e-mail message for the interface, and I will make such changes (please reply on my talk page to guarantee that I will see your reply). Cheers, FastLizard4 ( Talk• Index• Sign) 07:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
G'day, I am adding this section to report User:Gabrielkat because he is constantly deleting cited (from a reliable source) information, he has been warned that it was vandalism but he keeps doing it. In the 1999 Documentary "From Star Wars to Star Wars: The Story of Industrial Light & Magic" they talked about Amblin and they showed clips from Amblin films, whether it be Who Framed Roger Rabbit, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Back to the Future, they even showed Splash and the first two The Terminator movies, because imdb.com doesn't list Amblin under production companies it can safe to conclude they were uncredited, and they even showed. In the first sentence when they talked about Amblin they talked about directors who directed these films and they mentioned Ron Howard (Splash's director) and James Cameron (the director of the first two Terminator films). They even showed interviews of those two talking about their Amblin films. Now if Amblin didn't produce the three films the documentary wouldn't say they did, or at least wouldn't have gotten away with this. So after sending him a message on his discussion page he came to the conclusion that I was a sockpuppet of banned user DaffyDuck619 and he keeps editing my userpage, you mentioned it before and nothing came of it. I suggest he be blocked, a mere 24 hour block, nothing so serious, I did warn him that if he continued to delete the cited information it'd be regarded as vandalisim, and if he continued to vandalise pages he'd be blocked, but I'll let you decide -- AKR619 ( talk) 02:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The June 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 00:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
can you determine if Help talk:Archiving a talk page#Proposal to discourage pagemove archiving has achieved consensus? best, – xenocidic ( talk) 15:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, feel like being it? I don't like the chaotic do-it-yourself thing there, and like Featured Lists, which recently made the transition to a directorship, I think the time has come to do it for sounds. Let me know what you think. There'd have to be a gathering of consensus there, and probably a formal appointment by Raul, as at FLC. Tony (talk) 08:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Here's the link, http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:AKR619&action=history, User:Gabrielkat who insists on calling me a sockpuppet of a user who was blocked indefinetly for violating the rule of three too many times, has broken the rule of three. So I suggest the normal punishment, a 24 hour block. Oh and for the record I also broke the rule of three here's the link http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Gabrielkat&action=history so there won't be a fuss here if you block me for 24 hours as my punishment for breaking the rule of three first time, BUT, I suggest you block User:Gabrielkat for 48 hours, because that's the punishment when you violate it twice. -- AKR619 ( talk) 09:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I think this user is afraid he's in the wrong, because the user just deleted this section, trying to prevent you from reading this -- AKR619 ( talk) 10:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again for your great work on the poll at WP:GA: the result has really engaged editors to question many issues and improve process.
The above is another example of a discussion that would benefit from the comments of an uninvolved expert on consensus building with a fantastic ability to interpret a discussion in the light of previous consensus and policy. You are the only person I know who fits that job description, so I'm afraid I'm asking for your help again.
The summary, in case you didn't look into it already, is as follows. A bot was approved to create stubs for places around the world. It had the potential to create 2 million stubs, but also had the goal to address Wikipedia's systemic bias towards the Western World in the area of human settlements. The issue was questioned at WP:VPP, and a debate insued based partly on misunderstanding, but also on genuine problems with the proposal. The bot operator revised the proposals in the light of this, the earlier discussion was archived to WT:Village pump (proposals)/FritzpollBot, and a new discussion was started at WP:Village pump (proposals)/FritzpollBot. The new proposals scaled back the original ones and clarified quality control issues. The resulting discussion has received a lot of comments, and desperately needs an impartial editor to assess them.
I really hope you can help again. My own involvement here is slight. I tentatively questioned the original proposal, but tentatively support the new one. The summary above is intended to help you decide if you want to help, not to influence your view. I hope you can help. Geometry guy 22:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Sam - the quality of your close exceeded even your own high standards (in my view). Your closing statements often provide a great reminder what Wikipedia is about, and reading them rekindles my enthusiasm for the project. Geometry guy 09:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam. Thanks for taking the initiative to make the decision on one of the most important decisions in the history of wikipedia when there is a lot of pressure to do so. I believe you have evaluated it exceptionally well and neutrally and shown a solid understanding as to what wikipedia is about. In a project that strives to achieve the "sum of all human knowledge" ignoring 95% of the planet was not a good idea even if the articles begin as stubs. We want to make this website the best reference site imaginable and can at least set it on the right path to achieving what many consider "impossible". Nothing is irreversible, and if it doesn't work out and we are "stuck with zillions of perma substubs" it can always be undone. I'm sure most people can see that a lot of thought will go into each country and we will try to achieve the best initial result possible, and also work at expanding those that can be expanded to make the encyclopedia flourish. I'm certain that once people begin to see it in action and how much content it can add in such a small timeframe under monitoring then people will realise the potential of this new ambitious project. Regards ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 11:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks to you, Sam, not for coming to the "right" decision (although, it is clearly one I am pleased with) but for actually doing what must have been a very difficult piece of closing. Thank you very much for the time and effort you have expended on this. Best wishes
Fritzpoll (
talk)
14:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
For closing the huge debate at
WP:GEOBOT,
Lego
Kontribs
Talk
M has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Lego Kontribs Talk M 23:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry to rain on the parade here, because you so clearly were acting in good faith. :( But, though I participated in that discussion, I do not see a clear consensus. Granted, that means no consensus either way, there is not consensus for the "no" side either. This seems, however, to be under the "fait accompli" that ArbCom ruled on, where if this is allowed, we would be stuck with all these articles. To have consensus, we would have to see far stronger support and far less opposition. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Could you please unblock it for me? Gabrielkat ( talk) 19:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
It is clear that your decision to delete Category:Jewish businesspeople was incorrect/unjust and was riddled with your personal POV, i.e. by all accounts you did not maintain a NPOV regarding this category. I'd like to know how such a large and old category can manage to be deleted by the decision of only ONE PERSON (?!), namely yourself. In closing the CfD discussion you wrote that "The result of the discussion was: Delete" even though 7 users voted to keep the category and only 5 voted to delete it (including the person who nominated it); thus it is clear that the result of the discussion was No consensus just like the previous CfD discussion regarding this category back in 2007, or even "Keep" given that more people voted to keep the category rather than delete it. Also, myself and many others are interested to know if you are ethnically/religiously Jewish; if you are we would like to know how this may have influenced your decision to delete this category despite the fact that, as noted above, more people voted to keep this category than delete it. Myself and others would really appreciate it you could please further explain your actions, reasoning, and background regarding the unjust deletion of this long-established and very well populated category. Thanks, Wassermann ( talk) 15:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations! -- PeterSymonds (talk) 01:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, Thought you'd like to know that I like your new proposal and decided to formally change my nomination to support it. I think it could garner concensus from the other folks, but I doubt they're even checking in at this point. How do you suggest we proceed? Cgingold ( talk) 23:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello. Please review the discussion going on at Talk:Truss bridge#Use of the HAER Publication on Truss Types as a Reference Document. Input from members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bridges would be appreciated. - PennySpender1983 ( talk) 04:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
I saw your comment at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Arbitrary break to the first mention of Portal:Wikipedia. You said you might support a proposal to move the main page to Portal:Wikipedia. Well, thanks to you, that's what the proposal has become, so would you be willing to come out and support it? — Remember the dot ( talk) 19:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Just want to say I read your arguments regarding putting little GA signs on articles and I now completely agree with you. Your user page seems to talk sense too! Wikipedia can sometimes feel like defending against dark age barbarian hordes. At least someone here is remaining chipper! And infectiously so. Thanks Sillyfolkboy ( talk) 23:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
In the area? You're invited to | |
San Francisco Meetup # 7 | |
![]() | |
Date: September 6th, 2008 | |
Time: 3 PM | |
Place: Freebase HQ, San Francisco | |
prev: Meetup 6 - next: Meetup 8 |
You received this invite because you added your name to the Invite list. If you don't wish to be invited any more, simply remove your name. Thanks. -- ShakataGaNai ^_^ 06:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The
July 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
02:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Please take note that a deletion review has been requested for the category Category:Mononymous persons which was recently decided to be deleted. You receive this notification because you took part in the preceding discussion. __ meco ( talk) 16:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Just thought you could use some positive reinforcement. I thought that was rather well-explained.
And incidentally, should this go to DRV, and I miss it, please let me know : ) - jc37 08:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
This is actually quite a surprise and affront. I cannot imagine why it would be improper to keep a category on Wikipedia of Jewish businesspeople, and having read the very slight discussion and the closing statement, I see no cogent explanations. Categories get deleted without a whole lot of input because nobody gets notified in advance. Yet either the majority, or a substantial minority, of well-reasoned opinions were for keeping. Under the circumstances it is very aggressive, POV, and frankly, disturbing, to deny the ability of Wikipedians to categorize businesspeople by ethnicity, particularly Jewish businesspeople. The subject itself is more than notable [4] [5] [6] [7]. Please reconsider. If you do not the obvious step is DrV or simple recreation. Wikidemo ( talk) 10:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. This is to alert you that the article was nominated for deletion, sort of, and there has been considerable sentiment to do so. I did a nonadministrative closuse because the nomination was incomplete and seemed to be withdrawn, but it's pretty obvious that people don't understand the purpose of the article and conflate it with lists they do not like. I'm not sure what to do here - the subject is terribly important, and easily satisfies our notability requirement. But some people don't seem to be comfortable with the notion of ethnicity, so the information gets kicked from one place to another. If not a category, and not an article, where can we talk about the subject of Jewishness as it relates to business? Wikidemo ( talk) 00:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Death of Marat from Marat-Sade.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I created a redirect to the Moon bridge article - I don't think the reference is common in the US as your note was the first that I have heard of this and I think that Moon bridge is the common term.
- Leonard G. ( talk) 19:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 06:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
The
August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I have corrected you edit to Films considered the greatest ever. Please note that when adding the fact tag that the month needs to be spelled out completely. Your edit was {{fact|date=Sept 2008}} it should have been {{fact|date=September 2008}} Using Sept adds the article to the non-existant category Category:Articles with unsourced statements since Sept 2008 instead of the correct category Category:Articles with unsourced statements since September 2008. Just thought you might be interested. Dbiel ( Talk) 03:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I am not in a blue with any of the users, I'm not nagging you to block anyone, recently I have gotten the idea that the Disney Legends category should be reinstated, because there are dozens of categories focusing on various halls of fame, some of which don't even have an actual HALL. So who do I speak to? -- AKR619 ( talk) 08:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
In view of your work at Wikipedia:Categorization, please feel free to comment at the National parks category name DRV. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 00:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categorization/rewrite, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Categorization/rewrite and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Categorization/rewrite during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- -- Suntag ☼ 07:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I recall you saying that you had trouble verifying the span of various suspension bridges. Obviously it won't work for historical bridges that don't exist anymore, but how close could you come in Google Earth to measuring a bridge? Just a thought. -- Dvortygirl ( talk) 04:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi remember the discussion we had at the village pump ages ago? I'm requesting that we start articles on the adminstrative regions of Nepal, known as Village Development Committees. An example is shown at User:Fritzpoll/Nepal. However Fritz is under the impression the community would not want this and that they are not notable, given that they make up governed areas of Nepal. Is this an adequate start or not? I was sure the argument against was about computer generated sub stubs on hamlets or villages which are barely verifiable. These however have government sources and data and UN map territory verification to boot. SHould we start another pump discussion? The Bald One White cat 14:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Sam. I have renamed the section headers for Ellet and Roebling to make it clearer that they were two different structures. Does that allay your concern? Jappalang ( talk) 23:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Dear Sam,
I would like to request to unblock an article titled edgo and one titled Edgo Group. We created both, but it looks like the content was promotional, so we reviewed the policy and were able to create a better article that was accepted by wikipedia.
The new article title is The Edgo Group and now I would like to create a new article titled edgo and one titled Edgo Group to have the same content as the The Edgo Group.
Can you kindly review the blocked and assist us. Also The Edgo Group Account can be deleted.
Thanks.
-- Nabil.shalan ( talk) 19:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I answered your query on my own talk page - see you there! ;-) -- Janke | Talk 10:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, You made a wiki page about my Matthew Shepard photograph. It is not the full photo which is much more powerful than the illegally cropped version. Could you not have written to me to get your facts straight first? like what is my connection to Matt, what is my website rather than my lightstalkers page, where the photograph was taken and when, etc..... Could you edit that with the right info please? email me at gvanhoof@gmail.com - which you could easily have found by googling me and getting my website 1st. And I will send you all the correct details via email. Thanks, Gina —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.186.19.118 ( talk) 09:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Would you be interested in this discussion? Carcharoth ( talk) 16:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
The problem is that your readers won't know that they're helpful unless they have X-ray vision. MOSLINK says this:
[[1991 in music|1991]]
) in the main prose of an article in most cases. Use an explicit cross-reference, e.g. ''(see [[1991 in music]])''
, if it is appropriate to link a year to such an article at all. However, piped links may be useful:and this: *Keep piped links as intuitive as possible. Do not use piped links to create " easter egg links", that require the reader to follow them before understanding what's going on. Also remember that there are people who print the articles.
It's not the links themselves but the concealed piping that is the problem. There are several options for dealing with this. One is to simply spell out the pipe. See whether this works; it looks much more likely to attract clicks now. I think you're overestimating the likelihood that readers will click on single year links, which normally lead somewhere very unfocused. Tony (talk) 02:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I didn't see your note. The Werdnabot piecemeal archiving process sometimes covers up other edit notifications unless you check carefully. It's a pity that, unlike the last fix to the table (which you don't like, anyway), many edits have occurred; many had occurred even before your previous message, so by then a quick-fix revert had become difficult. You yourself had the option of reverting at any stage. There are two relevant statements at MOSLINK:
[[1991 in music|1991]]
) in the main prose of an article in most cases. Use an explicit cross-reference, e.g., ''(see [[1991 in music]])''
, if it is appropriate to link a year to such an article at all.and
WRT the first statement, there's an inescapable likelihood that most readers won't catch on to the fact that behind what look like trivial links to year-pages are your concealed year-in-film links. I've gone for a more explicit and prominent approach: a "See also" overriding link beneath the two relevant sections, leading straight to the gateway page "List of years in film". This will alert all readers to the facility rather than concealing it. I think it's a significant improvement of the navigational aspect of the article. I do not believe that readers will want to divert from this overview at every turn, but the option is there for them to do so as flagged at the top of these sections. At least they know about it now.
WRT to the second MOSLINK statement, this was indeed a further concealment, since many readers (including me, at first) saw one link, not two in items such as The Godfather ( 1972). Numerous film articles do indeed include the year in parentheses. Tony (talk) 04:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello, an article that I helped create has recently been vandalized - I tried undoing most of the edits, but I'm told that some of them cannot be reverted due to 'conflicting intermediate edits'. Suffice to say, I need help - can you grant me the Rollback feature? At the very least--if possible, please revert the page back to the state it was in on October 10th, before any of the vandalism occurred. ANY help would be greatly appreciated.
The article in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Militia
In A Conundrum (
talk) —Preceding
undated comment was added at
20:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC).
Sam, thanks. Worked like a charm - although I'm worried that the vandal will try to sabotage the article again, as he tried to revert the edits I made this afternoon when I posted my complaint. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Mot%C3%B6r_Militia&limit=500&action=history
It has been traced to two similar IP addresses so far: 137.222.218.140 , and 137.222.218.52. Is it possible that you can lock the article and still allow me to have access to it? What measures do you think are appropriate in this situation? Let me know, thanks.
In A Conundrum ( talk) 09:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam. User:Geometry guy recommended you as a neutral and diligent person who would be able to read through a tough RFC and find common ground. I was hoping you would be willing to in one particular case. It's gonna be tedious, but it's highly important work and will likely have a large impact on Wikipedia content. (Specifically WP:N.) I figure you're busy, but I hope I can convince you to take this on and make it a priority. Let me know how things are going on your end, and if you're open to the idea. Randomran ( talk) 18:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I assume that Wikipedia:Notability/RFC:compromise is the RFC you are talking about, you didn't include a link, but I was able to figure it out from your edit history.
I would be interested in taking this on, but with a few conditions:
If this all sounds good to you, talk to the other people involved, and we can start the process in November.
(Outdenting) I think the RFC is a very appropriate way to gather information to analyze the views of the community. I'd want to use that information to create a list of concerns, a list of criteria, a list of potential solutions, etc... Sorry I can't be more specific now. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 08:15, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
In the area? You're invited to | |
San Francisco Meetup # 8 | |
![]() | |
Date: November 8th, 2008 | |
Time: 2PM | |
Place: Metacafe, Palo Alto, California | |
prev: Meetup 7 - next: Meetup 9 |
Hi Sam -
I don't know if you are the right person, but I am very confused and hope you can help.
I have received the following message:
] Speedy deletion of Image:T422 ADN.JPG
A tag has been placed on Image:T422 ADN.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{ hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Sdrtirs (talk) 10:40, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I created the page in the first place, & I don't understand why it has been whisked away to "Commons" (whatever that is), and why it has subsequently been deleted.
Could you enlighten me, please?
Good luck today. Let's preserve equality under the law. Randomran ( talk) 16:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for jumping on this so soon after what was probably a grueling time. To recap where we left off, I think we agreed that it would be a good idea to analyze the RFC as source of information on the community's views. The problem with the RFC in the form that it is now is that it's damn long. On the other hand, breaking it down into a bunch of ballot with yes/no votes won't reveal the underlying truth. Someone neutral and detached has to read through the whole thing, and avoid getting locked into treating it like a bunch of ballots.
That's where you come in, hopefully. Your name was recommended by User:Geometry guy. I know it's tedious work. But you can invest as much time as you think is reasonable. The report can be long or short, so long as it helps move the discussion forward. (Again, recall how difficult the discussion has been thus far, but that we've made a lot of progress already. It's just taken a lot of time.)
I mean, I have ideas about how to do it. I might suggest organizing the comments by user, rather than by proposal, in order to get away from the "ballot" structure. ... then trying to organize the users from "left to right" on the issue, and look for the "juicy middle". But you were recommended to me because you have experience with this kind of thing. I figure you might have some ideas about how to best analyze this in a way that's neutral, but thorough. Randomran ( talk) 02:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, there has been continued vandalism in the Motor Militia article since we last spoke - all from the same IP address. I've tried telling him to stop previously, posting comments on another user name with his IP, but he did not respond. At this point, it is simply irritating to have to constantly revert his edits.
Here is the history of the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Mot%C3%B6r_Militia&action=history
And here is his contributions page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/137.222.218.140
I would appreciate it if you could semi-protect the article. I also believe this is grounds for blocking the IP address in question, as he has been constantly vandalizing the article for the last month.
Please respond when you can, thank you.
In A Conundrum ( talk) 21:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
The way User:Aervanth did a non-admin closure of this discussion made it look like you closed the discussion and he had merely appended his signature to endorse your closure of it.
I still strongly disagree with your move, and with Aervanth's non-admin closure. The wikipedia is not solely an American project. And, IMO, the wikipedia's naming should not be structured as if it is.
I agree that Rome and Evolution merit pride of place. Should the local TV show be given pride of place? Given that there had already been a discussion, that proposal had failed, no offense, but I think your action in moving the article without discussion, was an instance of administrator over-reach.
I listed the move back in the "uncontroversial proposals" section of WP:requested moves. The wikipedia's policies are both imperfect and incomplete -- and they have grown to be baroque, convoluted and, at times contradictory.
I have no problem with proposals to give the article a new name. But I think the new naming should follow the wikipedia's established procedures.
The show's fans might think this is an important show. But the claim in the discussion that it was "available worldwide" was flatly untrue. The article cites a couple of reviews from the UK. But there are no reviews from Canada, a big portion of the anglosphere. Popularity is not tied to importance.
Candidly, Geo Swan ( talk) 20:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
The Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was sent by §hepBot ( Disable) at 21:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC) by the request of Moni3 ( talk)
Hello Sam--I'm not the original creator of the article in question (which has stood for several years) but I did make a recent edit and the article has now been deleted. The edit I made was to add quotation marks to a quote to avoid the appearance of copyright infringement. The admin who deleted the article cited "blatant advertising" which seems odd as the tone of the article was precisely the same as every other article about similar and related institutions, none of which were flagged for deletion. Would you be willing to help me restore the page and/or understand why the admin would have made the decision he did? The page in question is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_God,_an_International_Community. I'm confused as to why my edits would have suddenly led to deletion when the page has stood for so long and seems no different in tone from any of the other pages in this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_god . Thank you for any help you can give. Richard Abrahams ( talk) 10:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello again Sam--I tried to reconcile the issue with the admin who deleted it and am at a loss. He refuses to help further, and I can't help but notice his talk history with others, so am hoping you can give me some advice--what's my next step? Richard Abrahams ( talk) 18:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your help! I'll see what I can do to improve it. All the best Richard Abrahams ( talk) 19:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay Sam--I think I may have improved it. Would you mind taking a look in my workspace to see if this is better? I really appreciate your help. Richard Abrahams ( talk) 22:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I have added what I could. Unfortunately, major newspapers don't usually mention individual churches by name. They usually just refer to "Christians" in general--or the Pope. :) I have been all through the Wikipedia articles on churches and there are few that have any references from newspapers. Most seem to rest their credibility on their activities--and in comparison to most, the Church of God that produces Vision certainly seems to have met the criteria of being noteworthy--else why would they get interviews with people like Uri Savir or Shimon Peres? I'm not sure what else I can do seeing that Religion pages in newspapers tend to talk in generalities. I would submit that noteworthiness in some walks of life are harder to document. But if this one is deleted for not having a newspaper reference, then I would submit that nearly every other Church should be as well. (The Catholic Church being the exception--they do have the Pope, after all!) :) Richard Abrahams ( talk) 00:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks tremendously for the clean-up. I'm very new at this and your patience has been greatly appreciated. I'll give it a little time and see what more I can find before trying to repost. Many thanks again for your help! Richard Abrahams ( talk) 04:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
We are hoping to obtain permission to use your images of the high and low tides in our marine science textbook. The following letter describes our project.
In 2005, Current Publishing Corp. (an affiliate of The Professional Association of Diving Instructors [PADI]) was successful in developing Life on an Ocean Planet, a high school marine science program consisting of a student textbook and accompanying teacher materials. Current Publishing Corp. is excited to inform you that the textbook and instructional materials have achieved leadership status in the high school science marketplace and we are now in the process of producing a second edition.
As the new Media Archivist for Current Publishing Corp., I am contacting you to request the possible use of your image(s) in our latest edition of Life on an Ocean Planet. I have either found the attached images(s) on your website and/or attached a list of images we are seeking. If your submission is chosen, the image(s) may be used in the student textbook, the Teacher Curriculum Guide, the Laboratory and Activity Manual, the Teacher Digital Resources and Assessment Tool, the Teacher Transparency Resource Package, Professional Development Materials, and Current Publishing Corp.’s website. Please review the attached PDF and, if agreeable to being included in the next edition, complete and return the attached Permission Agreement, along with any high resolution image(s) to be considered.
If you have other image(s) you would like us to consider, please submit them as soon as possible. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you in advance for your support!
Cheryl M. Regan Media Archivist Cheryl.regan@padi.com P. 800-729-7234 x 2415
30151 Tomas Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688-2155 U.S.A. P. 1-949-267-1232 P. 1-866-348-7234 F. 1-949-267-1233 206.107.76.4 ( talk) 16:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. In a discussion you closed, it was decided that this page is to be upmerged to Category:British expatriates in the United States and Category:British people of Black African descent. I stumbled upon the page today, surprised to see it still there, and discovered that it s deletion nomination tag had been removed. I ve readded the tag. Mayumashu ( talk) 19:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
There are 2 bridge-related cfds on the list for 8 Dec. I know that this is an area close to your heart, and that your views on categories are always worth seeking. Occuli ( talk) 10:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, Would you take a look at my contributions and tell me whether I would be suitable for Rollback Rights? Only just over 1400 edits so far, (it's quality, not quantity that counts!) but I seem to be doing more and more revertions of vandalism, so rollback would be really useful. Thanks. ♦ Jongleur100 ♦ talk 20:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Greetings: Please see Talk:Googie_architecture#Christchurch casino image and weigh in if you have an opinion following detailed examination of the image in dispute. Thanks, Leonard G. ( talk) 08:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Exccuse me, is it possible to have a deleted page i recently created userified? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AY AY AY AY AY YO ( talk • contribs) 00:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I've been reluctant to bring this up, but for many months now, a certain user has continued to provoke others, add uncited info to pages (or in some cases, citing IMDb; I found out he was adding entries for non-existent Dave the Barbarian episodes and claiming John Cena voiced the character), and in general has been less than cooperative, at one point removing info from several pages to prove a point when irked over this edit on Frank Oz. He has continually returned to old disputes and edit wars. He has undone comments to his talk page with the summary "oh quit you're complaining people," and in a very involved edit war over one page, as seen here, he has used profanity and personal attacks within the article itself when he disagreed with another user's edits (I have no view on the argument itself, but the other party has asked for sources and left talk page notices and so on). I'm only a sporadic user and I don't like to bring these things up in a public talk page, but you're very familiar with his past behavior, and some intervention seems warranted at this point (and not just on one specific talk page). Thanks. -- Aleal ( talk) 04:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for fixing the various All-Time pages. I wanted to let you know I re-moved all the "All-Time" pages you fixed to more succinct titles, while still leaving the words "Time magazine's" in the titles. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 18:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
Would you please take a look at the edit history of Caryl Churchill over the past 3 days. I am trying to preserve the neutrality of the article but three editors with newly-created accounts seem determined to politicise it. (Possible sock puppets?) I have reverted as far as I can. What do you think? ♦ Jongleur100 ♦ talk 12:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Calamitybrook ( talk) 18:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of longest suspension bridge spans for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks, where editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion 0422 04:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have been expanding Simple suspension bridge and also cleaning up some related articles, Wikipedia categories, and categories on Commons; take a look? -- Una Smith ( talk) 04:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, your are listed in WikiProject Bridges and I wondered if you might want to weigh in on a requested move? There is a discussion here Talk:Suspension_bridge_types#Requested_move which results from a previous move. The discussion has major consequences on the content of the main article on suspension bridges? The root question: Is a suspended deck bridge the proper name for a typical suspension bridge? - ¢Spender1983 ( talk) 02:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello Sam,
the article I have written about CMS Made Simple was nominated for speedy deletion and already deleted.
As I understood from talk with DoriSmith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DoriSmith#CMS_Made_Simple_deleted there is a possibility to get the copy of the deleted article. I have made custom translation for it from German http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMS_made_simple and it took time for me to do it, could you please give me a copy of it or recover the translation in any way?
My mistake was choosing the same username as the article itself, but I am not a developer of the project and not involved in the development. I am just an advanced user of CMS Made Simple and had no better idea for username. I am not sure now if I have to register with Wikipedia again and choose another username for new submission through AFD to avoid treating as spam again. Do you think it would be better to register with another username?
CMS Made Simple is not an exotic CMS, it has already won a packt Best PHP Based Open Source Award in 2008 http://www.packtpub.com/article/2008-best-php-open-source-cms-drupal and it's a pity that no information about this CMS can be found in Wikipedia.
Thank you for your reply, Sonya CMS Made Simple ( talk) 07:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam, I found your name as a contributor of Incategory article. I'm very interested about, but some tests into it.source are disappointing, since +incategory seems to work only with "hard" categories (those written as [[Category:...]] into the code of the page) but not with "soft" categories, coming from the transclusion of a template. If this is true, most of a project I'm working about is to be done from scratch. Is this a known limitation of incategory tool? Are you deep into this matter, or do you know who is? Thanks!
-- Alex_brollo Talk| Contrib 15:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC) (mainly active here: s:it:User talk:Alex brollo )
-- Alex_brollo Talk| Contrib 08:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
You had participated at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_November_18#Category:LGBT-related_television_episodes which ended five months ago with a strong consensus of keep. The subject is up for discussion again at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 18#Category:LGBT-related television episodes, where you may want to review the matter at hand and express your opinion on the subject. Alansohn ( talk) 04:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Your "spirit of cooperation" extends as far as people being civil with you. In terms of aiding you in keeping an item of featured content up to task, it's where "spirit of cooperation" ends and "willingness to put in the work and having interest in the subject" comes up. It's up to you to comply with our guidelines and fix the problems with the list, not the people who brought up the issues with the list, many of which were not addressed or simply blown off. It's not your interpretation of our style guidelines that's always right, it's not what you think should be the perfect article or list, it's what consensus dictates and it's why for something to be featured, it needs to comply with what our style guidelines put forth. If you disagree with them, then go to the guidelines and change them. And honestly, your list was a far cry from the current featured list standards, even with the fixes made during the FLRC. If you don't believe me, then submit it for FLC. Barring substantial improvements, it's not going to pass. I'm sorry if you think this is unfair, but it's expected for items of featured content to meet a certain level of quality that is determined by the community. As evinced by the FLRC, that list didn't, despite what you believe. — sephiroth bcr ( converse) 06:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of gamelan ensembles in the United States, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gamelan ensembles in the United States (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Black Kite 19:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I called you out for your comments at ANI then thought the better of it and reverted. I'm hoping they were made in the heat of the moment, and I felt that some damage control was warranted considering that we've not discussed such issues before. I'm always open for discussion. -- Ronz ( talk) 22:27, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Tireless Pointer Out of that which they cannot see | |
Satu Suro 01:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC) |
Thanks for trying :( Satu Suro 08:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you haven't seen my edit summaries and talk page comments or not. This is a simple and blatant case of WP:SPAM - links added to an article for promotion rather than as sources. Please join the talk page discussions. Thanks! -- Ronz ( talk) 00:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Drawing your attention to these comments again. It's a month later, and I don't see much progress other than you've finally attempted some discussion directly with me.
One thing you might want to try: stop interfering with my attempts at cleaning up the article. I've made it crystal clear what I'm most concerned about and why: the links to official sites are inappropriate for many reasons. Even if you ignored all my arguments for removing them, there's no consensus for keeping them based upon what others have noted. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi sam. Though i've been here on wikipedia for a long while but my interest in contributing to WP caught vigor in last few days. I looked at your user page and was wondering how did you add the boxes that say about you that you're eventualist etc. I found the Wikipedia Babel page. It helped me but cannot find similar page for the boxes above Wiki Babel. I should've searched more but sorry for i cannot find help. One more thing... how do i add link to talk page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammad Hamza ( talk • contribs) 09:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I cited the same reference for two different statements in an article. Is there any way to make the second reference directly point to the first reference instead of creating another entry in reference section. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Muhammad Hamza (
talk •
contribs)
18:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Figured it out. Nevermind. Muhammad Hamza ( talk) 11:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
At [13] is a discussion on music genre and equipment categories. Viriditas recommends that your contribution be invited. So please do if you can. Thanks - Redheylin ( talk) 03:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
You have created an unusual, but interesting Name on your user page. But, may I make the following suggestion? if you change the 2nd line from this:
{| style="position:absolute; top:21px; height: 40px; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
to this:
{| style="position:absolute; top:15px; height: 60px; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
With this change, you won't see the letters underneath (which I don't think you intended to show?). :)
--
stmrlbs|
talk
09:34, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
{| style="position:absolute; top:21px; height: 40px; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
{| style="position:absolute; top:1em; height: 2em; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
Hi, Sam. I just wanted to let you know I sent you a Wiki email about the template. -- stmrlbs| talk 21:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Sam
I work for a marketing company in Bethlehem, PA and we would like to use your photo of the bear mountain bridge in one of our projects. If you could please call me at 888-641-1215.
Thank you Ashley —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.3.93 ( talk) 18:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The
Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter: Special Pride 2009 Booty call edition | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
With User:87.69.130.159. I'm citing sources, anonymous is not and is accusing me of making invalid contributions and describing those as incivility. Also chord-scale system. Hyacinth ( talk) 07:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam, I need your help to get a copy of a deleted page [Whizbase], and some help to make a page which will not be deleted. Looking forward to hearing from you.
NurAzije ( talk) 07:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I've created two initial pages for the ACPD:
Please add them to your watchlist, stop by, and so forth. The latter page has a couple of logistical issues that we should discuss sooner rather than later, so I'd appreciate if you could find some time to comment on them.
Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
your page on facilitated discussions deserves more attention. I left updates there and a comment for you. +sj + 22:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Sam,
We seem to have come via different routes to creating similar disambiguation pages from different redirects (mine from Metropolitan Transit Authority and Metropolitan Transportation Authority, both of which unhelpfully redirected to MTA rather than to more specific pages).
While I like several things in my own pages, there are many that I very much like in yours. Would there be some agreeable way to collaborate on the eight (23) combinations of Municipal/Metropolitan Transit/Transportation Agency/Authority that's most complete and helpful to the reader while saving us from tripping over each other or requiring unnecessary work?
Best wishes, —— Shakescene ( talk) 06:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
You had expressed interest in being an admin on the Strategic Planning wiki. I've created a process page for that, and wonder if you would look it over and see if you have any suggestions? You can find it on the strategic planning wiki at [[Strategic Planning:Administrators]]
Thanks! - Philippe 12:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey Sam. Quick comment on the strategy:Call for Proposals process. The purpose of that section is not so much to get new ideas (although we're obviously open to that). It's a place where people can articulate and synthesize proposals, including those that have been made before. A proposal that simply summarized something that has already been proposed elsewhere and that then referenced those pages would be tremendously useful.
As for your note on SJ's strategy talk page, I'm curious about the language that you find distasteful. Would love to hear more. -- Eekim ( talk) 16:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
There is a thread on the talk page of the above named article regarding whether that council is still active at Wikipedia talk:Advisory Council on Project Development#Still viable?. As one of the listed members, your input would very likely be useful. Thank you. John Carter ( talk) 16:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Ashkenazi Jews, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ashkenazi Jews (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jayjg (talk) 00:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of Ashkenazi Jews. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ashkenazi Jews (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
The page I created at Wikipedia:Facts precede opinions is not an essay. It is a description of a process that has long occurred on Wikipedia. Same as the page I created at Wikipedia:Project namespace. It is not an essay. Bensaccount ( talk) 04:17, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Please continue participating in discussing the issues rather than edit-warring. As you can see from the discussion on the talk page, there are multiple problems under discussion, any single one of which could warrent the article meeting the criteria for WP:LISTCRUFT [14] -- Ronz ( talk) 21:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Please focus on the content, rather than the editors. I've pointed you to WP:OWN before. Each time you make your comments personal, about other editors, the more it appears you are taking this all too personally yourself. More importantly, you overlook or ignore the content issues in the process of commenting on others. If you don't like other editors editing this article, if you won't take the time to consider that this article may have problems, then you are obstructing proper editing and maintenance of the article. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate your replacing taking the time to find links that actually verify the information in the article. However, some of the tags you've removed were done without changing any corresponding content. Again, this looks like hiding problems rather than addressing them. I will be restoring the tags. I hope in the future you'll discuss the disputed information, rather than removing the tags once again. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The
December 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
22:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you please look at this and give a quick opinion? Lara ❤ Love 06:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot ( talk) 23:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI, I have nominated List of longest suspension bridge spans as a featured list of the day for March. See User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200803. -- Orlady ( talk) 03:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
The January 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 ( talk) 02:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
I took an educated guess on which bridge it was when I moved that page. So I could be wrong because the Chinese media tend to be vague on names of lesser known objects. For official names, unless there are photos showing the names, I would not trust the names found on Internet. Here is a quick translation of the table that had the 5 bridges I mentioned. -- Voidvector ( talk) 10:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Name | Literal Translation | Purpose | Province | City/County | Start of Construction | Completion | Main Span (meters) | Type |
宜昌长江大桥 | Yichang Changjiang Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Dec-97 | Sep-01 | 960 | Suspension bridge |
宜昌长江铁路大桥 | Yichang Changjiang Railroad Bridge | Railroad bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Feb-04 | Under construction | 810 | Beam bridge |
葛洲坝三江大桥 | Gezhouba Dam Three River Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | 1981 | Beam bridge | ||
夷陵长江大桥 | Yiling Changjiang Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Nov-98 | Dec-01 | 348 | Cable-stayed bridge |
西陵长江大桥 | Xiling Changjiang Bridge | Road bridge | Hubei | Yichang | Dec-93 | Aug-96 | 900 | Suspension bridge |
I noticed that you have participated Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates in the past. There are now two candidates and the project appears to be abandoned. If you could look at the candidates and vote it would be appreciated. Zginder ( talk) ( Contrib) 18:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not sure where else to put this, so please go ahead and delete it right away, but thanks a lot for your very polite and helpful moderating! I appreciate it very much! Shadowshark ( talk) 09:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for the intrusion but could you look at this article? A series of anon IPs (same person based on comments) has added an unusual addition under popular culture with no attribution other than his/her viewpoint/OR. Of a more serious nature, the editor has also made inappropriate comments on the article's discussion page and my talk page. Thanks for your assistance. FWIW, I may be asking a number of admins for their review of the article. Bzuk ( talk) 19:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC).
Congratulations. List of largest suspension bridges was the leading votegetter at WP:LOTD and will be list of the month as well as be featured as list of the day twice. Let me know if you have any date preferences.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTD) 02:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
The
February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
18:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot ( talk) 17:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 09:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, I see you are interested in semi-protection. I'm looking at the issue from the point-of-view of an anonymous user and I was wondering if you have any figures concerning the percentage of total articles SPd, and more importantly the percentage of the most viewed (say the top 5%) of articles that are SPd? From my experience it seems that indefinite and long-term, often repeated SP, is a creeping disease that will soon mean virtually all the most popular articles are unavialable to edit for anons. This flies in the face of Jimbo's statement that "you can edit this article, right now" - paraphrased. What are your thoughts? Thanks, 82.20.24.97 ( talk) 16:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
The
March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Regardless of the technically correct terminology, the common English usage is moon bridge, and so I think it appropriate that the English WP title be such. In my opinion a minor note and a redirect from 'drum bridge to moon bridge would be more appropriate in this case than the other way around. I will also consult with my (non WP) China native resident friend concerning chinese useage. Also, it would seem possible that drum bridge may refer to the wooden type illustrated but perhaps not to the stone type shown. - Leonard G. ( talk) 23:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Have you seen User_talk:BrownHairedGirl#Category_intersects_Real_Soon_Now_maybe? One thing shocked me there. It seems you can intersect categories using the search funtion. For example, like this. Never knew that. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Have you seen User_talk:BrownHairedGirl#Category_intersects_Real_Soon_Now_maybe? One thing shocked me there. It seems you can intersect categories using the search funtion. For example, like this. Never knew that. Carcharoth ( talk) 22:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
The
April 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm stopping by with a big request for help. There has been a discussion and !vote going on over the last 5 days at WT:Good articles#Good article signs about the possibility of adding a sign like the FA star at the top right of good articles as some other Wikipedias now do. This is a subject that has been raised many times in the past and has often generated heated debate.
By contrast, I believe, the latest discussion has been quite measured, but it is unclear whether any consensus is being established. I think it would be enormously helpful if an uninvolved admin with a lot of experience at evaluating consensus were to look at the discussion and close it in once it has run its course. However, finding such an admin is rather difficult, as most have been actively involved with GA, FA or both. You came to my mind because we overlapped at a controversial CfD over a year ago, and I was extraordinarily impressed by the way you closed it.
Would you be willing to help? And if not, do you have any suggestions whom I could ask? Geometry guy 20:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Sam, for doing such an excellent and thorough job. I'm sure your objective assessment will be of value to everyone involved in the discussion, no matter how they !voted and for what reason. Geometry guy 10:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Not sure if you're still checking on Wikipedia talk:Special:Categories, so I'm dropping you a note here... I just had an idea on a possible better solution for the Categories link. How about sending it to the Categories section of Special:Allpages? It's easier to navigate than Special:Categories since there's at least a rudimentary search, and as such I think it's an easier way to find more obscure categories than Portal:Categories/Categorical index. -- SonicAD ( talk) 04:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Next time you may want to take your own advice and check the discussion page before wiping out work that has been carefully pieced together with consensus. You really screwed things up, without even realizing it, I'm sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.73.94.131 ( talk) 09:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello Sam. First, I have to offer my apologies for edit warring over the picture that you are trying to add to Marat/Sade. I have self reverted my last change. You will want to join the conversation that I have started here [1] to make your case for the inclusion of this pic. I know that you are trying to improve the page. My interpretation of the current picture policy, which is highly restrictive, is that the picture would be removed now or latter. However, this is just one editors opinion. If the consensus is that it can be included I would only ask that the size of it is reduced. What I really wish is that you had a picture of the actor Ian Richardson recreating David's pose from the film. Again apologies and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 00:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Talk:Marat/Sade#Image -- ☑ SamuelWantman 07:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Sam, I hope this message finds you well. I work for a New York advertising agency called Korey Kay & Partners and a client of ours would like to use an image you shot of the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge. The link to the image is as follows: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Newburgh-Beacon_Bridge_2.jpg
I would appreciate an email so we may discuss more about how we would like to use it as well as compensation. I can be reached at pwarkolla@koreyaky.com. Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.166.235.180 ( talk) 14:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The
May 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
20:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
A new discussion you may be interested in: Consensus on reasoning for LGBT Project Articles. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 07:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot ( talk) 16:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you please confirm that you were the one that requested access to the account request tool? Thanks :) Alex fusco 5 22:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
In the area? You're invited to | |
San Francisco Meetup # 6 | |
![]() | |
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2008 | |
Time: | |
Place: Glen Park Branch Library | |
prev: Meetup 5 - next: Meetup 7 |
You received this invite because you added your name to the Invite list. If you don't wish to be invited any more, simply remove your name. Thanks. -- ShakataGaNai Talk 05:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I'm one of the ACC interface admins/developers, and I will take over for SQL, who is busy negotiating the move to the stable toolserver, in completing your request. All I need to know is what exactly you want added to the similar e-mail message for the interface, and I will make such changes (please reply on my talk page to guarantee that I will see your reply). Cheers, FastLizard4 ( Talk• Index• Sign) 07:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
G'day, I am adding this section to report User:Gabrielkat because he is constantly deleting cited (from a reliable source) information, he has been warned that it was vandalism but he keeps doing it. In the 1999 Documentary "From Star Wars to Star Wars: The Story of Industrial Light & Magic" they talked about Amblin and they showed clips from Amblin films, whether it be Who Framed Roger Rabbit, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Back to the Future, they even showed Splash and the first two The Terminator movies, because imdb.com doesn't list Amblin under production companies it can safe to conclude they were uncredited, and they even showed. In the first sentence when they talked about Amblin they talked about directors who directed these films and they mentioned Ron Howard (Splash's director) and James Cameron (the director of the first two Terminator films). They even showed interviews of those two talking about their Amblin films. Now if Amblin didn't produce the three films the documentary wouldn't say they did, or at least wouldn't have gotten away with this. So after sending him a message on his discussion page he came to the conclusion that I was a sockpuppet of banned user DaffyDuck619 and he keeps editing my userpage, you mentioned it before and nothing came of it. I suggest he be blocked, a mere 24 hour block, nothing so serious, I did warn him that if he continued to delete the cited information it'd be regarded as vandalisim, and if he continued to vandalise pages he'd be blocked, but I'll let you decide -- AKR619 ( talk) 02:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The June 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 00:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
can you determine if Help talk:Archiving a talk page#Proposal to discourage pagemove archiving has achieved consensus? best, – xenocidic ( talk) 15:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, feel like being it? I don't like the chaotic do-it-yourself thing there, and like Featured Lists, which recently made the transition to a directorship, I think the time has come to do it for sounds. Let me know what you think. There'd have to be a gathering of consensus there, and probably a formal appointment by Raul, as at FLC. Tony (talk) 08:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Here's the link, http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:AKR619&action=history, User:Gabrielkat who insists on calling me a sockpuppet of a user who was blocked indefinetly for violating the rule of three too many times, has broken the rule of three. So I suggest the normal punishment, a 24 hour block. Oh and for the record I also broke the rule of three here's the link http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Gabrielkat&action=history so there won't be a fuss here if you block me for 24 hours as my punishment for breaking the rule of three first time, BUT, I suggest you block User:Gabrielkat for 48 hours, because that's the punishment when you violate it twice. -- AKR619 ( talk) 09:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I think this user is afraid he's in the wrong, because the user just deleted this section, trying to prevent you from reading this -- AKR619 ( talk) 10:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again for your great work on the poll at WP:GA: the result has really engaged editors to question many issues and improve process.
The above is another example of a discussion that would benefit from the comments of an uninvolved expert on consensus building with a fantastic ability to interpret a discussion in the light of previous consensus and policy. You are the only person I know who fits that job description, so I'm afraid I'm asking for your help again.
The summary, in case you didn't look into it already, is as follows. A bot was approved to create stubs for places around the world. It had the potential to create 2 million stubs, but also had the goal to address Wikipedia's systemic bias towards the Western World in the area of human settlements. The issue was questioned at WP:VPP, and a debate insued based partly on misunderstanding, but also on genuine problems with the proposal. The bot operator revised the proposals in the light of this, the earlier discussion was archived to WT:Village pump (proposals)/FritzpollBot, and a new discussion was started at WP:Village pump (proposals)/FritzpollBot. The new proposals scaled back the original ones and clarified quality control issues. The resulting discussion has received a lot of comments, and desperately needs an impartial editor to assess them.
I really hope you can help again. My own involvement here is slight. I tentatively questioned the original proposal, but tentatively support the new one. The summary above is intended to help you decide if you want to help, not to influence your view. I hope you can help. Geometry guy 22:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Sam - the quality of your close exceeded even your own high standards (in my view). Your closing statements often provide a great reminder what Wikipedia is about, and reading them rekindles my enthusiasm for the project. Geometry guy 09:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam. Thanks for taking the initiative to make the decision on one of the most important decisions in the history of wikipedia when there is a lot of pressure to do so. I believe you have evaluated it exceptionally well and neutrally and shown a solid understanding as to what wikipedia is about. In a project that strives to achieve the "sum of all human knowledge" ignoring 95% of the planet was not a good idea even if the articles begin as stubs. We want to make this website the best reference site imaginable and can at least set it on the right path to achieving what many consider "impossible". Nothing is irreversible, and if it doesn't work out and we are "stuck with zillions of perma substubs" it can always be undone. I'm sure most people can see that a lot of thought will go into each country and we will try to achieve the best initial result possible, and also work at expanding those that can be expanded to make the encyclopedia flourish. I'm certain that once people begin to see it in action and how much content it can add in such a small timeframe under monitoring then people will realise the potential of this new ambitious project. Regards ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 11:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks to you, Sam, not for coming to the "right" decision (although, it is clearly one I am pleased with) but for actually doing what must have been a very difficult piece of closing. Thank you very much for the time and effort you have expended on this. Best wishes
Fritzpoll (
talk)
14:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
For closing the huge debate at
WP:GEOBOT,
Lego
Kontribs
Talk
M has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Lego Kontribs Talk M 23:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry to rain on the parade here, because you so clearly were acting in good faith. :( But, though I participated in that discussion, I do not see a clear consensus. Granted, that means no consensus either way, there is not consensus for the "no" side either. This seems, however, to be under the "fait accompli" that ArbCom ruled on, where if this is allowed, we would be stuck with all these articles. To have consensus, we would have to see far stronger support and far less opposition. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Could you please unblock it for me? Gabrielkat ( talk) 19:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
It is clear that your decision to delete Category:Jewish businesspeople was incorrect/unjust and was riddled with your personal POV, i.e. by all accounts you did not maintain a NPOV regarding this category. I'd like to know how such a large and old category can manage to be deleted by the decision of only ONE PERSON (?!), namely yourself. In closing the CfD discussion you wrote that "The result of the discussion was: Delete" even though 7 users voted to keep the category and only 5 voted to delete it (including the person who nominated it); thus it is clear that the result of the discussion was No consensus just like the previous CfD discussion regarding this category back in 2007, or even "Keep" given that more people voted to keep the category rather than delete it. Also, myself and many others are interested to know if you are ethnically/religiously Jewish; if you are we would like to know how this may have influenced your decision to delete this category despite the fact that, as noted above, more people voted to keep this category than delete it. Myself and others would really appreciate it you could please further explain your actions, reasoning, and background regarding the unjust deletion of this long-established and very well populated category. Thanks, Wassermann ( talk) 15:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations! -- PeterSymonds (talk) 01:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, Thought you'd like to know that I like your new proposal and decided to formally change my nomination to support it. I think it could garner concensus from the other folks, but I doubt they're even checking in at this point. How do you suggest we proceed? Cgingold ( talk) 23:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello. Please review the discussion going on at Talk:Truss bridge#Use of the HAER Publication on Truss Types as a Reference Document. Input from members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Bridges would be appreciated. - PennySpender1983 ( talk) 04:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
I saw your comment at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Arbitrary break to the first mention of Portal:Wikipedia. You said you might support a proposal to move the main page to Portal:Wikipedia. Well, thanks to you, that's what the proposal has become, so would you be willing to come out and support it? — Remember the dot ( talk) 19:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Just want to say I read your arguments regarding putting little GA signs on articles and I now completely agree with you. Your user page seems to talk sense too! Wikipedia can sometimes feel like defending against dark age barbarian hordes. At least someone here is remaining chipper! And infectiously so. Thanks Sillyfolkboy ( talk) 23:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
In the area? You're invited to | |
San Francisco Meetup # 7 | |
![]() | |
Date: September 6th, 2008 | |
Time: 3 PM | |
Place: Freebase HQ, San Francisco | |
prev: Meetup 6 - next: Meetup 8 |
You received this invite because you added your name to the Invite list. If you don't wish to be invited any more, simply remove your name. Thanks. -- ShakataGaNai ^_^ 06:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The
July 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
02:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Please take note that a deletion review has been requested for the category Category:Mononymous persons which was recently decided to be deleted. You receive this notification because you took part in the preceding discussion. __ meco ( talk) 16:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Just thought you could use some positive reinforcement. I thought that was rather well-explained.
And incidentally, should this go to DRV, and I miss it, please let me know : ) - jc37 08:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
This is actually quite a surprise and affront. I cannot imagine why it would be improper to keep a category on Wikipedia of Jewish businesspeople, and having read the very slight discussion and the closing statement, I see no cogent explanations. Categories get deleted without a whole lot of input because nobody gets notified in advance. Yet either the majority, or a substantial minority, of well-reasoned opinions were for keeping. Under the circumstances it is very aggressive, POV, and frankly, disturbing, to deny the ability of Wikipedians to categorize businesspeople by ethnicity, particularly Jewish businesspeople. The subject itself is more than notable [4] [5] [6] [7]. Please reconsider. If you do not the obvious step is DrV or simple recreation. Wikidemo ( talk) 10:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. This is to alert you that the article was nominated for deletion, sort of, and there has been considerable sentiment to do so. I did a nonadministrative closuse because the nomination was incomplete and seemed to be withdrawn, but it's pretty obvious that people don't understand the purpose of the article and conflate it with lists they do not like. I'm not sure what to do here - the subject is terribly important, and easily satisfies our notability requirement. But some people don't seem to be comfortable with the notion of ethnicity, so the information gets kicked from one place to another. If not a category, and not an article, where can we talk about the subject of Jewishness as it relates to business? Wikidemo ( talk) 00:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Death of Marat from Marat-Sade.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:13, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I created a redirect to the Moon bridge article - I don't think the reference is common in the US as your note was the first that I have heard of this and I think that Moon bridge is the common term.
- Leonard G. ( talk) 19:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Girolamo Savonarola ( talk) 06:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
The
August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk)
01:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I have corrected you edit to Films considered the greatest ever. Please note that when adding the fact tag that the month needs to be spelled out completely. Your edit was {{fact|date=Sept 2008}} it should have been {{fact|date=September 2008}} Using Sept adds the article to the non-existant category Category:Articles with unsourced statements since Sept 2008 instead of the correct category Category:Articles with unsourced statements since September 2008. Just thought you might be interested. Dbiel ( Talk) 03:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I am not in a blue with any of the users, I'm not nagging you to block anyone, recently I have gotten the idea that the Disney Legends category should be reinstated, because there are dozens of categories focusing on various halls of fame, some of which don't even have an actual HALL. So who do I speak to? -- AKR619 ( talk) 08:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
In view of your work at Wikipedia:Categorization, please feel free to comment at the National parks category name DRV. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 00:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categorization/rewrite, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Categorization/rewrite and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Categorization/rewrite during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- -- Suntag ☼ 07:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I recall you saying that you had trouble verifying the span of various suspension bridges. Obviously it won't work for historical bridges that don't exist anymore, but how close could you come in Google Earth to measuring a bridge? Just a thought. -- Dvortygirl ( talk) 04:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi remember the discussion we had at the village pump ages ago? I'm requesting that we start articles on the adminstrative regions of Nepal, known as Village Development Committees. An example is shown at User:Fritzpoll/Nepal. However Fritz is under the impression the community would not want this and that they are not notable, given that they make up governed areas of Nepal. Is this an adequate start or not? I was sure the argument against was about computer generated sub stubs on hamlets or villages which are barely verifiable. These however have government sources and data and UN map territory verification to boot. SHould we start another pump discussion? The Bald One White cat 14:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Sam. I have renamed the section headers for Ellet and Roebling to make it clearer that they were two different structures. Does that allay your concern? Jappalang ( talk) 23:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Dear Sam,
I would like to request to unblock an article titled edgo and one titled Edgo Group. We created both, but it looks like the content was promotional, so we reviewed the policy and were able to create a better article that was accepted by wikipedia.
The new article title is The Edgo Group and now I would like to create a new article titled edgo and one titled Edgo Group to have the same content as the The Edgo Group.
Can you kindly review the blocked and assist us. Also The Edgo Group Account can be deleted.
Thanks.
-- Nabil.shalan ( talk) 19:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I answered your query on my own talk page - see you there! ;-) -- Janke | Talk 10:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, You made a wiki page about my Matthew Shepard photograph. It is not the full photo which is much more powerful than the illegally cropped version. Could you not have written to me to get your facts straight first? like what is my connection to Matt, what is my website rather than my lightstalkers page, where the photograph was taken and when, etc..... Could you edit that with the right info please? email me at gvanhoof@gmail.com - which you could easily have found by googling me and getting my website 1st. And I will send you all the correct details via email. Thanks, Gina —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.186.19.118 ( talk) 09:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Would you be interested in this discussion? Carcharoth ( talk) 16:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
The problem is that your readers won't know that they're helpful unless they have X-ray vision. MOSLINK says this:
[[1991 in music|1991]]
) in the main prose of an article in most cases. Use an explicit cross-reference, e.g. ''(see [[1991 in music]])''
, if it is appropriate to link a year to such an article at all. However, piped links may be useful:and this: *Keep piped links as intuitive as possible. Do not use piped links to create " easter egg links", that require the reader to follow them before understanding what's going on. Also remember that there are people who print the articles.
It's not the links themselves but the concealed piping that is the problem. There are several options for dealing with this. One is to simply spell out the pipe. See whether this works; it looks much more likely to attract clicks now. I think you're overestimating the likelihood that readers will click on single year links, which normally lead somewhere very unfocused. Tony (talk) 02:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I didn't see your note. The Werdnabot piecemeal archiving process sometimes covers up other edit notifications unless you check carefully. It's a pity that, unlike the last fix to the table (which you don't like, anyway), many edits have occurred; many had occurred even before your previous message, so by then a quick-fix revert had become difficult. You yourself had the option of reverting at any stage. There are two relevant statements at MOSLINK:
[[1991 in music|1991]]
) in the main prose of an article in most cases. Use an explicit cross-reference, e.g., ''(see [[1991 in music]])''
, if it is appropriate to link a year to such an article at all.and
WRT the first statement, there's an inescapable likelihood that most readers won't catch on to the fact that behind what look like trivial links to year-pages are your concealed year-in-film links. I've gone for a more explicit and prominent approach: a "See also" overriding link beneath the two relevant sections, leading straight to the gateway page "List of years in film". This will alert all readers to the facility rather than concealing it. I think it's a significant improvement of the navigational aspect of the article. I do not believe that readers will want to divert from this overview at every turn, but the option is there for them to do so as flagged at the top of these sections. At least they know about it now.
WRT to the second MOSLINK statement, this was indeed a further concealment, since many readers (including me, at first) saw one link, not two in items such as The Godfather ( 1972). Numerous film articles do indeed include the year in parentheses. Tony (talk) 04:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello, an article that I helped create has recently been vandalized - I tried undoing most of the edits, but I'm told that some of them cannot be reverted due to 'conflicting intermediate edits'. Suffice to say, I need help - can you grant me the Rollback feature? At the very least--if possible, please revert the page back to the state it was in on October 10th, before any of the vandalism occurred. ANY help would be greatly appreciated.
The article in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_Militia
In A Conundrum (
talk) —Preceding
undated comment was added at
20:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC).
Sam, thanks. Worked like a charm - although I'm worried that the vandal will try to sabotage the article again, as he tried to revert the edits I made this afternoon when I posted my complaint. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Mot%C3%B6r_Militia&limit=500&action=history
It has been traced to two similar IP addresses so far: 137.222.218.140 , and 137.222.218.52. Is it possible that you can lock the article and still allow me to have access to it? What measures do you think are appropriate in this situation? Let me know, thanks.
In A Conundrum ( talk) 09:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam. User:Geometry guy recommended you as a neutral and diligent person who would be able to read through a tough RFC and find common ground. I was hoping you would be willing to in one particular case. It's gonna be tedious, but it's highly important work and will likely have a large impact on Wikipedia content. (Specifically WP:N.) I figure you're busy, but I hope I can convince you to take this on and make it a priority. Let me know how things are going on your end, and if you're open to the idea. Randomran ( talk) 18:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I assume that Wikipedia:Notability/RFC:compromise is the RFC you are talking about, you didn't include a link, but I was able to figure it out from your edit history.
I would be interested in taking this on, but with a few conditions:
If this all sounds good to you, talk to the other people involved, and we can start the process in November.
(Outdenting) I think the RFC is a very appropriate way to gather information to analyze the views of the community. I'd want to use that information to create a list of concerns, a list of criteria, a list of potential solutions, etc... Sorry I can't be more specific now. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 08:15, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
In the area? You're invited to | |
San Francisco Meetup # 8 | |
![]() | |
Date: November 8th, 2008 | |
Time: 2PM | |
Place: Metacafe, Palo Alto, California | |
prev: Meetup 7 - next: Meetup 9 |
Hi Sam -
I don't know if you are the right person, but I am very confused and hope you can help.
I have received the following message:
] Speedy deletion of Image:T422 ADN.JPG
A tag has been placed on Image:T422 ADN.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{ hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Sdrtirs (talk) 10:40, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I created the page in the first place, & I don't understand why it has been whisked away to "Commons" (whatever that is), and why it has subsequently been deleted.
Could you enlighten me, please?
Good luck today. Let's preserve equality under the law. Randomran ( talk) 16:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for jumping on this so soon after what was probably a grueling time. To recap where we left off, I think we agreed that it would be a good idea to analyze the RFC as source of information on the community's views. The problem with the RFC in the form that it is now is that it's damn long. On the other hand, breaking it down into a bunch of ballot with yes/no votes won't reveal the underlying truth. Someone neutral and detached has to read through the whole thing, and avoid getting locked into treating it like a bunch of ballots.
That's where you come in, hopefully. Your name was recommended by User:Geometry guy. I know it's tedious work. But you can invest as much time as you think is reasonable. The report can be long or short, so long as it helps move the discussion forward. (Again, recall how difficult the discussion has been thus far, but that we've made a lot of progress already. It's just taken a lot of time.)
I mean, I have ideas about how to do it. I might suggest organizing the comments by user, rather than by proposal, in order to get away from the "ballot" structure. ... then trying to organize the users from "left to right" on the issue, and look for the "juicy middle". But you were recommended to me because you have experience with this kind of thing. I figure you might have some ideas about how to best analyze this in a way that's neutral, but thorough. Randomran ( talk) 02:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, there has been continued vandalism in the Motor Militia article since we last spoke - all from the same IP address. I've tried telling him to stop previously, posting comments on another user name with his IP, but he did not respond. At this point, it is simply irritating to have to constantly revert his edits.
Here is the history of the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Mot%C3%B6r_Militia&action=history
And here is his contributions page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/137.222.218.140
I would appreciate it if you could semi-protect the article. I also believe this is grounds for blocking the IP address in question, as he has been constantly vandalizing the article for the last month.
Please respond when you can, thank you.
In A Conundrum ( talk) 21:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
The way User:Aervanth did a non-admin closure of this discussion made it look like you closed the discussion and he had merely appended his signature to endorse your closure of it.
I still strongly disagree with your move, and with Aervanth's non-admin closure. The wikipedia is not solely an American project. And, IMO, the wikipedia's naming should not be structured as if it is.
I agree that Rome and Evolution merit pride of place. Should the local TV show be given pride of place? Given that there had already been a discussion, that proposal had failed, no offense, but I think your action in moving the article without discussion, was an instance of administrator over-reach.
I listed the move back in the "uncontroversial proposals" section of WP:requested moves. The wikipedia's policies are both imperfect and incomplete -- and they have grown to be baroque, convoluted and, at times contradictory.
I have no problem with proposals to give the article a new name. But I think the new naming should follow the wikipedia's established procedures.
The show's fans might think this is an important show. But the claim in the discussion that it was "available worldwide" was flatly untrue. The article cites a couple of reviews from the UK. But there are no reviews from Canada, a big portion of the anglosphere. Popularity is not tied to importance.
Candidly, Geo Swan ( talk) 20:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
The Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was sent by §hepBot ( Disable) at 21:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC) by the request of Moni3 ( talk)
Hello Sam--I'm not the original creator of the article in question (which has stood for several years) but I did make a recent edit and the article has now been deleted. The edit I made was to add quotation marks to a quote to avoid the appearance of copyright infringement. The admin who deleted the article cited "blatant advertising" which seems odd as the tone of the article was precisely the same as every other article about similar and related institutions, none of which were flagged for deletion. Would you be willing to help me restore the page and/or understand why the admin would have made the decision he did? The page in question is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_God,_an_International_Community. I'm confused as to why my edits would have suddenly led to deletion when the page has stood for so long and seems no different in tone from any of the other pages in this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_god . Thank you for any help you can give. Richard Abrahams ( talk) 10:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello again Sam--I tried to reconcile the issue with the admin who deleted it and am at a loss. He refuses to help further, and I can't help but notice his talk history with others, so am hoping you can give me some advice--what's my next step? Richard Abrahams ( talk) 18:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your help! I'll see what I can do to improve it. All the best Richard Abrahams ( talk) 19:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay Sam--I think I may have improved it. Would you mind taking a look in my workspace to see if this is better? I really appreciate your help. Richard Abrahams ( talk) 22:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I have added what I could. Unfortunately, major newspapers don't usually mention individual churches by name. They usually just refer to "Christians" in general--or the Pope. :) I have been all through the Wikipedia articles on churches and there are few that have any references from newspapers. Most seem to rest their credibility on their activities--and in comparison to most, the Church of God that produces Vision certainly seems to have met the criteria of being noteworthy--else why would they get interviews with people like Uri Savir or Shimon Peres? I'm not sure what else I can do seeing that Religion pages in newspapers tend to talk in generalities. I would submit that noteworthiness in some walks of life are harder to document. But if this one is deleted for not having a newspaper reference, then I would submit that nearly every other Church should be as well. (The Catholic Church being the exception--they do have the Pope, after all!) :) Richard Abrahams ( talk) 00:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks tremendously for the clean-up. I'm very new at this and your patience has been greatly appreciated. I'll give it a little time and see what more I can find before trying to repost. Many thanks again for your help! Richard Abrahams ( talk) 04:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
We are hoping to obtain permission to use your images of the high and low tides in our marine science textbook. The following letter describes our project.
In 2005, Current Publishing Corp. (an affiliate of The Professional Association of Diving Instructors [PADI]) was successful in developing Life on an Ocean Planet, a high school marine science program consisting of a student textbook and accompanying teacher materials. Current Publishing Corp. is excited to inform you that the textbook and instructional materials have achieved leadership status in the high school science marketplace and we are now in the process of producing a second edition.
As the new Media Archivist for Current Publishing Corp., I am contacting you to request the possible use of your image(s) in our latest edition of Life on an Ocean Planet. I have either found the attached images(s) on your website and/or attached a list of images we are seeking. If your submission is chosen, the image(s) may be used in the student textbook, the Teacher Curriculum Guide, the Laboratory and Activity Manual, the Teacher Digital Resources and Assessment Tool, the Teacher Transparency Resource Package, Professional Development Materials, and Current Publishing Corp.’s website. Please review the attached PDF and, if agreeable to being included in the next edition, complete and return the attached Permission Agreement, along with any high resolution image(s) to be considered.
If you have other image(s) you would like us to consider, please submit them as soon as possible. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you in advance for your support!
Cheryl M. Regan Media Archivist Cheryl.regan@padi.com P. 800-729-7234 x 2415
30151 Tomas Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688-2155 U.S.A. P. 1-949-267-1232 P. 1-866-348-7234 F. 1-949-267-1233 206.107.76.4 ( talk) 16:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. In a discussion you closed, it was decided that this page is to be upmerged to Category:British expatriates in the United States and Category:British people of Black African descent. I stumbled upon the page today, surprised to see it still there, and discovered that it s deletion nomination tag had been removed. I ve readded the tag. Mayumashu ( talk) 19:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
There are 2 bridge-related cfds on the list for 8 Dec. I know that this is an area close to your heart, and that your views on categories are always worth seeking. Occuli ( talk) 10:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sam, Would you take a look at my contributions and tell me whether I would be suitable for Rollback Rights? Only just over 1400 edits so far, (it's quality, not quantity that counts!) but I seem to be doing more and more revertions of vandalism, so rollback would be really useful. Thanks. ♦ Jongleur100 ♦ talk 20:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Greetings: Please see Talk:Googie_architecture#Christchurch casino image and weigh in if you have an opinion following detailed examination of the image in dispute. Thanks, Leonard G. ( talk) 08:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Exccuse me, is it possible to have a deleted page i recently created userified? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AY AY AY AY AY YO ( talk • contribs) 00:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I've been reluctant to bring this up, but for many months now, a certain user has continued to provoke others, add uncited info to pages (or in some cases, citing IMDb; I found out he was adding entries for non-existent Dave the Barbarian episodes and claiming John Cena voiced the character), and in general has been less than cooperative, at one point removing info from several pages to prove a point when irked over this edit on Frank Oz. He has continually returned to old disputes and edit wars. He has undone comments to his talk page with the summary "oh quit you're complaining people," and in a very involved edit war over one page, as seen here, he has used profanity and personal attacks within the article itself when he disagreed with another user's edits (I have no view on the argument itself, but the other party has asked for sources and left talk page notices and so on). I'm only a sporadic user and I don't like to bring these things up in a public talk page, but you're very familiar with his past behavior, and some intervention seems warranted at this point (and not just on one specific talk page). Thanks. -- Aleal ( talk) 04:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for fixing the various All-Time pages. I wanted to let you know I re-moved all the "All-Time" pages you fixed to more succinct titles, while still leaving the words "Time magazine's" in the titles. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 18:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
Would you please take a look at the edit history of Caryl Churchill over the past 3 days. I am trying to preserve the neutrality of the article but three editors with newly-created accounts seem determined to politicise it. (Possible sock puppets?) I have reverted as far as I can. What do you think? ♦ Jongleur100 ♦ talk 12:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Calamitybrook ( talk) 18:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of longest suspension bridge spans for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks, where editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion 0422 04:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have been expanding Simple suspension bridge and also cleaning up some related articles, Wikipedia categories, and categories on Commons; take a look? -- Una Smith ( talk) 04:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, your are listed in WikiProject Bridges and I wondered if you might want to weigh in on a requested move? There is a discussion here Talk:Suspension_bridge_types#Requested_move which results from a previous move. The discussion has major consequences on the content of the main article on suspension bridges? The root question: Is a suspended deck bridge the proper name for a typical suspension bridge? - ¢Spender1983 ( talk) 02:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello Sam,
the article I have written about CMS Made Simple was nominated for speedy deletion and already deleted.
As I understood from talk with DoriSmith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DoriSmith#CMS_Made_Simple_deleted there is a possibility to get the copy of the deleted article. I have made custom translation for it from German http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMS_made_simple and it took time for me to do it, could you please give me a copy of it or recover the translation in any way?
My mistake was choosing the same username as the article itself, but I am not a developer of the project and not involved in the development. I am just an advanced user of CMS Made Simple and had no better idea for username. I am not sure now if I have to register with Wikipedia again and choose another username for new submission through AFD to avoid treating as spam again. Do you think it would be better to register with another username?
CMS Made Simple is not an exotic CMS, it has already won a packt Best PHP Based Open Source Award in 2008 http://www.packtpub.com/article/2008-best-php-open-source-cms-drupal and it's a pity that no information about this CMS can be found in Wikipedia.
Thank you for your reply, Sonya CMS Made Simple ( talk) 07:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam, I found your name as a contributor of Incategory article. I'm very interested about, but some tests into it.source are disappointing, since +incategory seems to work only with "hard" categories (those written as [[Category:...]] into the code of the page) but not with "soft" categories, coming from the transclusion of a template. If this is true, most of a project I'm working about is to be done from scratch. Is this a known limitation of incategory tool? Are you deep into this matter, or do you know who is? Thanks!
-- Alex_brollo Talk| Contrib 15:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC) (mainly active here: s:it:User talk:Alex brollo )
-- Alex_brollo Talk| Contrib 08:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
You had participated at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_November_18#Category:LGBT-related_television_episodes which ended five months ago with a strong consensus of keep. The subject is up for discussion again at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 18#Category:LGBT-related television episodes, where you may want to review the matter at hand and express your opinion on the subject. Alansohn ( talk) 04:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Your "spirit of cooperation" extends as far as people being civil with you. In terms of aiding you in keeping an item of featured content up to task, it's where "spirit of cooperation" ends and "willingness to put in the work and having interest in the subject" comes up. It's up to you to comply with our guidelines and fix the problems with the list, not the people who brought up the issues with the list, many of which were not addressed or simply blown off. It's not your interpretation of our style guidelines that's always right, it's not what you think should be the perfect article or list, it's what consensus dictates and it's why for something to be featured, it needs to comply with what our style guidelines put forth. If you disagree with them, then go to the guidelines and change them. And honestly, your list was a far cry from the current featured list standards, even with the fixes made during the FLRC. If you don't believe me, then submit it for FLC. Barring substantial improvements, it's not going to pass. I'm sorry if you think this is unfair, but it's expected for items of featured content to meet a certain level of quality that is determined by the community. As evinced by the FLRC, that list didn't, despite what you believe. — sephiroth bcr ( converse) 06:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of gamelan ensembles in the United States, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gamelan ensembles in the United States (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Black Kite 19:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I called you out for your comments at ANI then thought the better of it and reverted. I'm hoping they were made in the heat of the moment, and I felt that some damage control was warranted considering that we've not discussed such issues before. I'm always open for discussion. -- Ronz ( talk) 22:27, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
Tireless Pointer Out of that which they cannot see | |
Satu Suro 01:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC) |
Thanks for trying :( Satu Suro 08:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you haven't seen my edit summaries and talk page comments or not. This is a simple and blatant case of WP:SPAM - links added to an article for promotion rather than as sources. Please join the talk page discussions. Thanks! -- Ronz ( talk) 00:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Drawing your attention to these comments again. It's a month later, and I don't see much progress other than you've finally attempted some discussion directly with me.
One thing you might want to try: stop interfering with my attempts at cleaning up the article. I've made it crystal clear what I'm most concerned about and why: the links to official sites are inappropriate for many reasons. Even if you ignored all my arguments for removing them, there's no consensus for keeping them based upon what others have noted. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi sam. Though i've been here on wikipedia for a long while but my interest in contributing to WP caught vigor in last few days. I looked at your user page and was wondering how did you add the boxes that say about you that you're eventualist etc. I found the Wikipedia Babel page. It helped me but cannot find similar page for the boxes above Wiki Babel. I should've searched more but sorry for i cannot find help. One more thing... how do i add link to talk page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammad Hamza ( talk • contribs) 09:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I cited the same reference for two different statements in an article. Is there any way to make the second reference directly point to the first reference instead of creating another entry in reference section. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Muhammad Hamza (
talk •
contribs)
18:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Figured it out. Nevermind. Muhammad Hamza ( talk) 11:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
At [13] is a discussion on music genre and equipment categories. Viriditas recommends that your contribution be invited. So please do if you can. Thanks - Redheylin ( talk) 03:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
You have created an unusual, but interesting Name on your user page. But, may I make the following suggestion? if you change the 2nd line from this:
{| style="position:absolute; top:21px; height: 40px; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
to this:
{| style="position:absolute; top:15px; height: 60px; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
With this change, you won't see the letters underneath (which I don't think you intended to show?). :)
--
stmrlbs|
talk
09:34, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
{| style="position:absolute; top:21px; height: 40px; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
{| style="position:absolute; top:1em; height: 2em; width:100%; padding-bottom:0px; background:#F8FCFF; color:#888;" valign="left"
Hi, Sam. I just wanted to let you know I sent you a Wiki email about the template. -- stmrlbs| talk 21:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Sam
I work for a marketing company in Bethlehem, PA and we would like to use your photo of the bear mountain bridge in one of our projects. If you could please call me at 888-641-1215.
Thank you Ashley —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.3.93 ( talk) 18:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The
Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter: Special Pride 2009 Booty call edition | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
With User:87.69.130.159. I'm citing sources, anonymous is not and is accusing me of making invalid contributions and describing those as incivility. Also chord-scale system. Hyacinth ( talk) 07:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam, I need your help to get a copy of a deleted page [Whizbase], and some help to make a page which will not be deleted. Looking forward to hearing from you.
NurAzije ( talk) 07:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I've created two initial pages for the ACPD:
Please add them to your watchlist, stop by, and so forth. The latter page has a couple of logistical issues that we should discuss sooner rather than later, so I'd appreciate if you could find some time to comment on them.
Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
your page on facilitated discussions deserves more attention. I left updates there and a comment for you. +sj + 22:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Sam,
We seem to have come via different routes to creating similar disambiguation pages from different redirects (mine from Metropolitan Transit Authority and Metropolitan Transportation Authority, both of which unhelpfully redirected to MTA rather than to more specific pages).
While I like several things in my own pages, there are many that I very much like in yours. Would there be some agreeable way to collaborate on the eight (23) combinations of Municipal/Metropolitan Transit/Transportation Agency/Authority that's most complete and helpful to the reader while saving us from tripping over each other or requiring unnecessary work?
Best wishes, —— Shakescene ( talk) 06:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
You had expressed interest in being an admin on the Strategic Planning wiki. I've created a process page for that, and wonder if you would look it over and see if you have any suggestions? You can find it on the strategic planning wiki at [[Strategic Planning:Administrators]]
Thanks! - Philippe 12:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey Sam. Quick comment on the strategy:Call for Proposals process. The purpose of that section is not so much to get new ideas (although we're obviously open to that). It's a place where people can articulate and synthesize proposals, including those that have been made before. A proposal that simply summarized something that has already been proposed elsewhere and that then referenced those pages would be tremendously useful.
As for your note on SJ's strategy talk page, I'm curious about the language that you find distasteful. Would love to hear more. -- Eekim ( talk) 16:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
There is a thread on the talk page of the above named article regarding whether that council is still active at Wikipedia talk:Advisory Council on Project Development#Still viable?. As one of the listed members, your input would very likely be useful. Thank you. John Carter ( talk) 16:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Ashkenazi Jews, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ashkenazi Jews (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jayjg (talk) 00:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of Ashkenazi Jews. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ashkenazi Jews (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
The page I created at Wikipedia:Facts precede opinions is not an essay. It is a description of a process that has long occurred on Wikipedia. Same as the page I created at Wikipedia:Project namespace. It is not an essay. Bensaccount ( talk) 04:17, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Please continue participating in discussing the issues rather than edit-warring. As you can see from the discussion on the talk page, there are multiple problems under discussion, any single one of which could warrent the article meeting the criteria for WP:LISTCRUFT [14] -- Ronz ( talk) 21:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Please focus on the content, rather than the editors. I've pointed you to WP:OWN before. Each time you make your comments personal, about other editors, the more it appears you are taking this all too personally yourself. More importantly, you overlook or ignore the content issues in the process of commenting on others. If you don't like other editors editing this article, if you won't take the time to consider that this article may have problems, then you are obstructing proper editing and maintenance of the article. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate your replacing taking the time to find links that actually verify the information in the article. However, some of the tags you've removed were done without changing any corresponding content. Again, this looks like hiding problems rather than addressing them. I will be restoring the tags. I hope in the future you'll discuss the disputed information, rather than removing the tags once again. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)