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.

How did you do that! I just did a quadruple take - the fact that my userpage was fixed couldn't even register. Thank you sooo much! I need to look over that code, I can't believe you actually got it!!Daniel()Folsom ^T| _C| ^U 04:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Could you review me again Sir because this time I think I have made a bit of Improvemant ..Here is the Link..-- Cometstyles 17:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you didn't add the Halo 2 FAC to the FAC page, so I went ahead and did it. Thunderbrand 22:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Dude all i did was change march 2003 - februrary 2007 to march -, because if it has the second date usally means it has finished

u got owned by me u no nothing your just stupid GunSlinger360 21:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by GunSlinger360 ( talk • contribs) 21:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

I have done some (70%) of the issues you addressed in the talk page for Battlefield 2142 and left comments on why I didn't do the other ones. Additionally, I played Golden Sun on hold, please see it's talk page regarding that. Pem bro ke 23:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit I see you already started on the Golden Sun. Pem bro ke 23:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Could you have a look at The Spitting Image and tell me what exactly is wrong with my edits? I have been given two reasons for the removal of the edits. One, the sources are unreliable. However, all the sources have been given the date of publication and the newspapers (mostly the New York Times and Washington Post) that they appear in. Additionally, I've also supplied links to the summaries of each articles. I cannot do anything better than this since the articles were written between 1967 and 1971, thus they are too old for free online access. Two, I am told that I am supplying original research. However, in my view all I have done is supplied articles that contradict the premise of the book. The person who keeps removing the edits (and it is only one person) says that such information must first be written as a critique of the book in a reliable source before it can be included in the article. But if the book's premise is to deny that such articles existed prior to 1980, shouldn't there be an inclusion of this fact in the article? I think the person editing me just wants a fuzzy phrase such as, "There may exist some articles that contradict the book, but there is no proof that the articles are factual." If you go to Talk:The Spitting Image, the discussion is in the bottom section under "Lembcke is Debunked!". Am I completely wrong to be adding such information? If not, am I including the information in the wrong area and should add a new section called "Controversies" for the edits? If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. If I'm in the right, I'd like the information to be included. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lokifer ( talk • contribs) 11:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

I've removed the speedy deletion tag from the above article. While the subject might not be notable, the article does assert notability in a reasonable way. You may wish to list it at WP:AFD instead, to get a broader consensus on the article. Thanks for your time and your hard work reporting these articles - even though I'm not deleting this particular one, your efforts are very much appreciated. Kafziel ^Talk 16:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

• I agree completely. I created the article, ans all baseball players are notable. 11kowrom 16:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, David, for your involvement in my case vis-a-vis the administrators of the Hebrew wikipedia. Your support and advice were valuable to me. Itayb 22:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for picking me for adpot. Yes i would like to be adopted as a wiki user. I've made a few edits, but haven't really got into it because i was afraid that i was going to do something wrong and get myself banned. Could you tell me the ropes. I've started on wikihow. User name Ajindustires, but i don't believe i'm spending my time wisely by using it only on there. Regards. AJ> —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ajindustries ( talk • contribs) 07:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Hello, recently you db'd the move of the article Run! (Heroes) to Run!. However, I have recently posted several points that support this move, namely that Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(television)#Episode_articles clearly states: "For an article created about a single episode, add the series name in parentheses only if there are other articles by the same name". Since there is no article at "Run!", per the guidelines, the "(Heroes)" is unnecessary. If you have a chance, I invite you to return to the article's talk page and discuss this further, and perhaps my arguments can convince you to change your opinion. Thanks! - Seinfreak37 15:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Look at this I did just what you said, I created two new pages Category Development Index and Brand Development Index, please check them out, add some, format, and tell me your review. AJ Ajindustries 07:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey David, i've been busy. I've created a user hom page, a welcome template an a user box. You can view them here:

• Home page
• Welcome Template
• The user box can be viewed in my home page or here My user box Ajindustries 09:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ajindustries ( talk • contribs) 09:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

My welcome template, i don't know how to close the tags, and all other posts that come after it on a talk page become just like it. Please tell me how to close this welcome template. You can find it here User:Ajindustries/welcome. Thanks in advance. Ajindustries 08:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The template is fine now, the user cometstyles fixed it, but thanks for the subst tip. Ajindustries 04:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Ensure you get the right revision when reverting, you accidentally vandalised the page Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos! -- Exarion 23:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I had actually taken out the repeats of the article and deleted some vandalism. Leeferdude 23:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I'm currently focusing on overhauling and improving the Halo Graphic Novel Wikipage to bring it in line with the high quality present in the main Halo article and Halo 2 article, and I noticed you were a keen editor on the Halo series and instrumental in getting the aformentioned articles to the level of quality they currently have. Consequently I was wondering whether you'd be able to assist me or provide some advice on the process of improving the Halo Graphic Novel article. I currently have the bare bones of the potential future article on my user talk page HERE. I'm hoping to exorcise some of the long-winded notes the article currently has without completely gutting it. As you can tell I have only just begun, and I dread the overhaul may become bogged down in the editting process by attempts from various parties to insert information irrelevant to all but the dedicated fan, but nevertheless even at this stage any advice you can give - however small - is greatly appreciated. Thankyou. Qjuad 05:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant. I'm currently scouring the likes of the Watchmen article. I confess most of my experience is with improving lists, so I'm currently poorly acquainted with articles pertaining to literature. Qjuad 14:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the Halo Graphic Novel and I was hoping to ask your advice once more on a few issues (inbetween your rescuing of the main Covenant article!) Temporarily stumped you see. I need a fresh pair of eyes to go over the article's lead/background/composition sections. I feel at the moment they may read too much like fanwankery or a press release straight from Marvel and/or Bungie. Plus my prose has no flow. Secondly, how involved do you think the story sections should be? The briefest of overview as they stand now, or a short summary of the entire story? Personally, I'm leaning toward the latter; I don't think that each story warrants its own page but I guess an overview of primary plot points would be a better idea - without, of course, tempting anyone to open discourse on the colour of Covenant armour or whether the Legate is or is not a super-flood-thingie.

I'm hoping to get a peer review done soonish; hopefully within a week. Realistic? Thanks in advance. Qjuad 05:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

On 22 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Raptor Red, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

-- Mgm| ^(talk) 10:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey David

I can't thank you enough for having the confidence to prepare an RFA for me. While I'm flattered beyond belief, I hope you don't take it personally if I say I'd rather leave it a couple more months. In the wake of my last failed RFA I've broadened my horizons and believe that, right now, I have a lot more to offer by contibuting to articles than channeling my energies into justifying why I ought to become an admin. I'm 100% sure that I'll go for it soon, and hope you'll support me when I do, should I still meet your criteria, but in the meantime I'd like to gracefully decline. With sincerest thanks, The Rambling Man 21:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:DenverBroncos_100.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi David Fuchs,

I saw that you removed the Fair Use Rationale tag on this image after adding an URL to the source of the image. The issue is not the source of the image, that was fully explained by the previous reference. The issues are the copyright ownership of the image and the Fair Use Rationale for having it in WikiPedia.

This image came from Sportslogos.net. Here is the disclaimer statement, per their website:

"All design Copyright ©1997-2007 Chris Creamer Properties, Inc. The Sports Logos.Net "C-Leaf" Logo is property of this site. I do not own any of the sports logos depicted within this site, therefore do not have the power to grant usage rights to anyone. All team and league information, sports logos, and names contained within this site are properties of their respective leagues and/or organizations. This site is maintained for research and historical purposes only, please do not abuse it! Any information obtained from this site may not be sold to any third parties!"

The copyright holder is likely the team. That is what you could state.

The Fair Use Rationale is the set of statements which you make which should allow WikiPedia to legally present the image in the encyclopedia, such as the following statement (with modifications) as shown (leave the comments, if you want to make the rationale usable for others):

User:lmcelhiney asserts that the limited use of this copyrighted image in Wikipedia articles directly pertaining to it is a fair use of the image, for the following reasons:

• It is of the logo, helmet or uniform of an NFL team which retains the copyright.
• It was obtained from the Sportslogos.net website which serves only to collect and archive these images.
• No free-license alternatives are available that convey the same information.
• The image is no larger, and of no higher quality, than required for its use in articles.
• It is used in Wikipedia only for educational purposes and is not used for profit.
• Its use on Wikipedia does not compete with the copyright holder.
• Its use on Wikipedia is not expected to decrease the value of the copyright to its holder.

I hope that this helps in understanding why the tag is there.

Please let me know if you have questions.

Thanks,

Larry Lmcelhiney 01:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't even know how to do that... hopefully my talk page shows up when I do this —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Legolas50 ( talk • contribs) 05:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

Hi!

I am really new here at the Wiki, and I was wondering if you would be willing to adopt me. I am on during the evenings, and it appears that you have the same time zone I do. I would like to know more programming, and would also like to know more about how to use bots to revert vandalism.

Thank you for your time, and if you are unable to adopt me at this time, it would be nice if you could recommend me to someone who can!

Thanks, dragonwish 16:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC) a.k.a. Will

I've replied to your comment on my talk page. Shimeru 19:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wikihalo.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I did it as a formal renomination due to the amount of time I took to take care of the issues you outlined on the DMC2 talk page, but I figured I'd drop in to your talk page and let you know anyway. Cheers, Lankybugger 17:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Per your suggestion, I've added two screenshots. Cheers, Lankybugger 13:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the GA-class confirmation. Now to make it FA-class... Cheers, Lankybugger 17:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Fuchs.

WikiProject Strategy games has finished it's first collaboration: Risk (game) ( ). We are now asking for nominations and input for a new one. Please voice your ideas at the talk page.

Clyde ( talk) and WikiProject Strategy games.

Since many of the comments about Halo 2 are about copyediting, I suggest requesting the League of Copyeditors to put their skill to work. Cheers, S.D. 02:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I imagine you'd have something to say about Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Menachem_Z._Rosensaft, which I proposed for deletion because there aren't multiple articles about the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumanji123 ( talk • contribs)