Archive from User talk:Infrogmation for March and April, 2007

• Next older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive Feb 07
• Next newer archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive May-August 07
• Current: User talk:Infrogmation

I sympathise, I'm pretty disgusted too, especially at the dogpile on the whistleblower User:Purples. Enjoy your wikibreak, hope you come back soon. Bishonen | talk 01:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC). reply

The community is finally dealing with it. I hope to see you back soon too, Infrogmation (even if you've never heard of me). Jazz on Wikipedia still needs your help and a lot of improvement. --- Sluzzelin talk 03:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Sorry I zapped the image too when I rv'd. Didn't mean to, didn't see it. Gwen Gale 23:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Noticed your photos of the Revolutionary Snake Ensemble from the Muses 2007 parade in Wiki Commons. Nice! Thanks for posting. I might put some up on http://www.RevolutionarySnakeEnsemble.org or http://myspace.com/revolutionarysnakeensemble

Do you have any others that you didn't post? How do I properly credit you?

12.76.172.193 05:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Ken Field ken[aght]kenfield.org reply

I uploaded all my photos of the band that turned out halfway decent at Commons:Category:Krewe of Muses 2007. As I multi-licenced them GFDL and Creative Commons attribution required, reuse with credit along the lines of "Photo by Infrogmation, New Orleans, CC-BY-2.5, via Wikimedia.Commons.org" would be fine. (I also communicated with the Sousaphone player by phone.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 20:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC) reply

If you get a chance, could you check out User:24.148.63.47's contributions? They are all links to the online Britannica. I'm dubious about an account whose only edits are to add links to a single website, but I don't really know if these are OK links. Thanks. - Special-T 13:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Sorry; I was not thinking when I removed those templates. -- NE2 19:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your attention. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 20:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi. I saw your welcome message on a user talk page, and thought you might want to try {{tl|helpme}}, which shows up as {{ helpme}}. Cheers. Xiner ( talk, email) 20:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Would you mind adding a date of when the pictures were taken at wikimedia commons, please? Are they from 2006? Great pictures. Have a nice day. Bib 03:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I believe the date automatically displayed on the Commons pages of 16 December 2006 is correct for those. I seem to have mistakenly suggested another date in some of the titles. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 04:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks. I'm adding the "December 2006" to the pictures. Bib 17:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Heh it's good to see a different name in the log :) In case you don't remember, your last bureaucrat action was on 23 August 2004! I look forward to seeing more of you. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Eeep, no I hadn't realized it was that long ago. I've had my mind on other tasks. Let me know if there's any backlog I might help with. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 23:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Sorry to butt-in on this old conversation, but you may want to check out WP:CHU and WP:CHU/U along with RfA if you're looking for some 'crat stuff to do. John Reaves (talk) 04:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm a new user to Wiki and tried to add a useful refence to the article on Copan, but you removed it without explanation. The reference contains new research about British attempts in the 1850s to cart away the ruins to the British Museum. The research was done from primary documents in British archives, and is authoritative. Wouldn't you want readers of Wiki to know about it? Rdaguirre 16:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I replied on your user talk page at User talk:Rdaguirre. -- Infrogmation 23:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Further comments consolodated on User talk:Rdaguirre, which I will watch for the next few days if you wish to have further discussion on this topic with me. However if your questions are about Wikipedia policies, they would be better asked on the talk pages for those policies. -- Infrogmation 23:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I tried to make a minor correction to a chemistry page without bothering to log in and found that my IP address was blocked on 01:55, 16 March 2007.

I tried to send you an e-mail, but found I had to verify my e-mail address. When I did so, the automated message from Wikipedia gave a different IP address than what was listed on the block. Additionally, when I clicked on the "contributions" associated with the IP address listed on the block page, it produced a list I didn't even recognize (e.g., I've never even read the entry on Neo-Nazism in Croatia, much less edited it).

Any ideas on how the IP address or "IP address" for my computer got assoicated with someone else's contributions? I am the only one that has access to this laptop. I'm not even sure which of the two addresses Wikipedia considers to be from this computer, given the difference in what was listed on the block page and the e-mail that was sent to my personal e-mail address. prokaryote 13:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Unlike a small minority of dweebs in Florida, no one in Washington Parish, Louisiana hates you, but if someone could verify the info in my last note and unblock me it would be appreciated.  :) prokaryote 13:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't see any blocks for User:Jodybruton nor for User:Prokaryote. If you're having problems, let me know what ip# is displayed and what type of message you're getting -- some isps can put multiple users on an ip#, and if there is someone else causing problems I can adjust a block to anon only. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 17:23, 17 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Removing message; checking on it; will get back to you shortly... -- Infrogmation 19:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC) reply

The first of the two ip#s you mentioned is clear with no blocks. The second has had an anon vandalism problem (see Special:Contributions/number for examples) , and has a temporary block set for anon only. This shouldn't affect you if you edit while logged in. Has it been affecting you while logged in? If so there may be some sort of glitch. Are you having problems while logged in now? -- Infrogmation 19:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm trying to track down what is happening here, but I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what "Special:Contributions/number" means. Can you give me some info on that? Sorry so slow here; I've been away from Wikipedia for a while because of grad school but am now back among the living.

In answer to your question, I'm having no problems on blocking while logged in, but I would sort of like to know what's going on with my IP address.

This would be a moot point if you know of some way to switch usernames, or create a new account and migrate the data from the old account to the new one. I checked on it some time ago and found that you could not do so. The reason I'm asking is that I didn't initally realize that the username would be posted on logs, etc., every time I made an edit. It's not hard to go from "prokaryote" to the other one that is a little higher profile than I am comfortable with. After I realized this, I switched to editing while not logged in, which doesn't give me much of an attribution, but lowers my profile to potential mischief-makers.

On a different topic: really enjoyed the Katrina photos. ("Enjoyed" may not be the operative word, but it did bring back memories.) We're a couple of hours north of you and thought we'd be okay, but got ~85% of our house wiped out by the trees. Most is on the road to repair now, though, and it was only wind to deal with an no water (other than that pouring down from the sky), so no real griping here. I am in the USN Medical Service Corps and did recovery work on the MS and LA Coast and saw how much worse shape most people were than we were, and we thought we were in pretty bad shape.

prokaryote 12:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply

OK, I solved part of it. As improbable as it sounds, there is another user named prokaryote. When I found out I couldn't change my username a year or two ago, I customized my signature to something a little more generic. Apparently, someone else likes that name too, so I altered my signature a little, as well as removed my material from the user: prokaryote page.

I'm still stumped on how the Wikipedia computers can be reading two different IP addresses off this computer. For the reasons cited above, I'd really appreciate any info that can be obtained on that one.

Thanks very much for the time and trouble.

prokaryote1234 13:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply

See Wikipedia:Changing username about that topic. The second of the two ip#s you mentioned earlier has been used by someone vandalizing articles including adding irrelevent profanity. My reference to "Special:Contributions" is the way one can see any editor or ip#'s edits, for instance mine can be seen at Special:Contributions/Infrogmation; substitute another name or ip# if you wish to see their edit history. Hope this helps. Glad to know you appreciate my disaster photos. I only made two trips of less than a day to get any photos north of the Lake. If you or friends have photos of interest they'd be willing to free licence and upload to Commons, I encourage you to do so. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 17:54, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply

The blockquote was totally unnecessary and probably a typo. 68.187.198.235 02:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Certainly not a "typo". It was a direct quote of the reference linked. It should be so noted somehow, either quotation marks or blockquote. Also, you removed the front blockquote, but not the close blockquote at the end. -- Infrogmation 02:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

User 193.164.133.194 has vandilized many wikipedia pages, started many edit wars as like here [1], and has not stopped even after warning. This is why I ask for you to please block this user. Justinpauloberg 04:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I have added a "{{ prod}}" template to the article Kerrada, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also " What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Zazzer 22:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I removed the tag, PROD was "Incorrect spelling" but a google search shows otherwise, and that is not a reason for a deletion, it is a reason for correction... -- Whereizben - Chat with me - My Contributions 22:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes it was free use, it was under the creative commons 2.0 license, restore it now.-- E tac 22:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Presuming you're refering to [2], note that it is licenced as Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0, which is not considered a sufficently free licence for purposes of Wikipedia. Also, I would suggest in the future that if you have questions about an action you please ask about it rather than giving an order. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation 00:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC) reply

the license page clearly states that:

• You are free:
  • to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
• Under the following conditions:
  • Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
  • No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
• For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.
• Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
• Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author's moral rights.

I see nothing in how the image was uploaded that violates any of these conditions. Now I am asking you again to put the image back as you had no right to remove it. You didn't even discuss the image with me first you just took it upon yourself to just go ahead and delete the image. Is that what being an administrator on wikipedia is about? -- E tac 03:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC) reply

The "no derivitives" portion of the licence is what has been judged to not be sufficently free for Wikipedia. Note that when tagged with that licence, such images are automatically tagged into the Candidates for speedy deletion category; see: Template:Cc-by-nd-2.0. Like it or not, that's the policy. Yes, helping to clear out backlogs in "candidates for speedy deletion" is one of the janitorial tasks that is part of what being an admin is about. If you think the image is particularly good, and there are no images of sufficently free licence availible to illustrate the article, you might be able to make a "fair use" arguement for the image until such time as a free licenced replacement can be located. Hope this helps. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 04:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC) reply

How does putting it on wikipedia does not make it a derivitive? It isn't based on the image, it is the exact same image, and the original photograph was credited.-- E tac 04:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia's free use policies specify that media should be able to be reused and modified. I rather think your argument is with policies rather than with me. Don't try to tell me I "had no right to remove it" when policy labels that as an unfree licence and tags it as a speedy delete candidate. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Uploading images, and Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. If you still have questions or disagreements about policy, I suggest you then bring it up on a relevent talk page there. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation 04:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the vandal block on Dragon150! -- KNHaw ^(talk) 20:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Infrogmation are u a student or alumni of Holy Cross Middle and High College Prepatory School in New Orleans, LA -- CzarNick 02:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)CzarNick___ÇzärøÑîçk reply

Heh, no. I have a number of friends who were though. -- Infrogmation 02:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Just wanted to say thanks for the help earlier. I contacted my Internet service provider about the IP address issue. Turns out the IP addresses aren't assigned to the same subscriber every time. Judging by the vandalism I saw, apparently some 14 year old boy who lives close to me has the same Internet service provider as I do. At least I know my computer security isn't comprimised.

About the Katrina pics, I do have some, although I have to dig them out of the hard drive of an old steam-driven desktop I used earlier. I'll sort through and see if I have any that are appropriate. Given what we were doing, I didn't get a chance to take many pics, but I do have some.

Thanks again. prokaryote1234 09:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Well, technically you were the only one who mentioned the images, so they may not have had to be deleted. But you are right about the redirect. Cbrown1023 talk 16:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC) reply

The images were uploaded as "fair use" and only used in the article deleted. Orphaned "fair use" images become speedy candidates. My note was simply a reminder. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 17:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Okay, thank you for deleting them. Cbrown1023 talk 17:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Why do you keep changing the pictures back to those old ones? Leave the most recent pics they are better quality and more recent Seasonsfan 02:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I explained both on your talk page and in my edit summary. The photos you uploaded (at the time I reverted) were not free licenced and sourced. As Wikipedia has the goal of being a free content (verified copyrights compatable with re-use) encyclopedia, free licenced media takes precedence over media which is not. If you are the photographer who took those photos and are willing to release the images under a free licence, that would be great! Cheers, -- Infrogmation 03:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply

from 72.204.143.203 CzarNick 03:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC) reply

The Guatemala page seems to be getting vandalized several times a day. Is it time to make it semi-protected again? I generally don't like to see that, but there haven't been any non-vandal IP edits for quite some time. Notmyrealname 04:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC) reply

re: On the opposite side of the square are three 18th‑century historic buildings which were the city's heart in the colonial era. The center of the three is St. Louis Cathedral, making it one of the only major public squares in the United States that incorporates a Roman Catholic church.

you deleted the phrase about the public square and the church and commented: "No, not uncommon in older cities with historic Catholic majorities."

Just curious, if you know, how common are older cities with major public squares and Catholic majorities in the US?

Kind of struck me that the original phrase sort of implied that New Orleans is an older city with an historic Catholic majority, as well as talking about about the church in the public square.

Is that just bad wiki-style?

I haven't traveled far outside of the New Orleans area and am not as well-read as I should be but it seemed to me that the orignal phrase shouldn't have been deleted on grounds of being "not uncommon" when the basic condition is itself somewhat uncommon?

Not quibbling, just trying to understand the logic of the deletion.

Economy1 04:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Hello,

I have replied to your inquiry on my talk page. --Cheers, Folajimi (leave a note) 00:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply

How exactly is it that wikipedians find vandalizement so fast? My user page was vandalized, I refreshed and BAM! It was back to normal. Please explain.

I WISH it was always as simple as BAM! With lots of folks at least on and off keeping an eye on recent changes, watchlists, &/or new users, lots of vandalism does get caught quickly. Keep an eye out and help if you like. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 01:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Anon comment replied to at User talk:72.131.59.27

Sorry for my hasty action on the Fairmont, New Orleans article. I explain the reason for my action here. Anyway, I'm glad you were able to restore the text with a good citation. zadignose 13:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I appreciate your welcome message to me. As a newbie here, I'd appreciate it if you'd stop in at the first page I extensively edited when you have time and point out any boo-boos (see: Jimmie Spheeris). Until yesterday, the page was a stub, complete with errors and some broken links. I'm in the process of (hopefully) updating it to meet Wikipedia standards. Jimmie was a good friend and I want to help make his page accurate and complete.

You may remember Jimmie by the way. He played New Orleans often and always thought of it as his favorite town.

best wishes, Art101 19:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Can you take a look at Image:Widespreadpanic.jpg? It seems that Mattd523 ( talk · contribs) has uploaded it under a Creative Commons lisence, but I think his tag usage is possibly incorrect. Since there is already a Commons image on the Widespread Panic page, Image:WidespreadPanic.jpg, I don't think it should be replaced with a promo one. Thanks for your time! -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 19:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I've asked the user abut the image on his talk page. -- Infrogmation 20:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I represent the band Widespread Panic as part of the band's management at Brown Cat, Inc. They had asked me to please look into putting a recent photo of the band on the page. I did indeed mess up the licensing. The photographer is Michael Weintrob and released all use rights of the photo to the band. My initial attempt at uploading a photo led me to the Wiki Commons. Please allow this photo to remain as part of the group's wishes. Take care! -Matt (Mattd523)

I don't know how exactly to comment, but this is a school computer and our IP address is 216.77.96.34. can you please unblock it? Our school is McIntosh High School. Located in Peachtree City, Georgia. In fayette COunty. (just if you want to know). My username is: iluvuzumaki. I'm quite a new user. ... so... I hoope this person above won't mind me editing on his/ her page. Sorry!

4/19/07 3:13 PM.

Please! Sorry I apologize for the innapropriate behavior of our school's students...

Hi, thanks for your message. The block is set for "anon only", so you shouldn't have trouble editing while logged in. Unfortunately, that school ip# has a long history of lots of vandalism whenever anon editing has been allowed. Unless some steps have been taken recently that make repeat vandalism from the ip# significantly less likely than it has been (if so, please explain), sorry, I think Wikipedia needs to keep it blocked. The block shouldn't interfere with you editing while you're logged in; anyone else who wishes to create an account for legitimate edit should log in at home or on another ip#, and then they should be able to edit via that ip# as well while logged in. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation 02:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

How could I go about becoming an admin?

Do you have any tips?

I know that I need to make alot of edits and i will try and get it to 5,000 by the end of May.

(is that enough?)

please help me out

and I'll tell you if I apply

(please nominate me)

Right now, My GOAL is to upload images and create and develop as many pages as I can.

I have created 3 pages and uploaded 3 images.(I will definitely upload way more images)

p.s. can you please block User:ResidentNavel?

He/she will not stop vandalizing my page and harassing me.

Thank you.

You reverted the blanking of my talk page for some reason. Do not do that. It is entirely withing Wikipedia policy for users to blank their own talk page. Please see this [ [3]] if you need anymore information. Thanks.

ok thanks..=] Aint no stoppin me + ma sis cuz we da baddezt! 05:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I have no problem with your indef block of that user. Many thanks, Gwernol 11:03, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Just wanted to pop in and say hey. I had no idea you were on here. :) Ikilled007 18:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Why'd you use rollback on my edit to Louisiana? Where does it say in the PDF you're citing that New Orleans has the largest metropolitan area and is the 'most visited area'? 1ne 19:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I replied to you there. -- Cat ^chi? 09:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Next older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive Feb 07
• Next newer archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive May-August 07
• Current: User talk:Infrogmation