User talk:Bri/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Roehr

Added all I could find. Do not know if it helps.Seasalt 04:57, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

"19xx in motor racing" categories

Good work on categorising all those Grand Prix reports and season summaries into the "19xx in motor racing" categories. One minor point: most of the existing "19xx/200x in motor racing" categories themselves belong to Category:Motor racing by year. So it might be an idea to include "[[Category:Motor racing by year]]" in any future "19xx in motor racing" categories you create. (I've already added it for the ones you created earlier today). DH85868993 03:24, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Herding Cats

Bianchi (bicycle manufacturer)(1885 - ), Bianchi (Motorcycle)(1887 - 1967), Autobianchi(1995 - ), (and Bianchi (cars) (1903 - 1939) is possible, but not yet existing). Could u by any chance check the categories? - Seasalt 07:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Seasalt, not sure what you're looking for here. I see two Bianchis listed at Bianchi#Manufacturing. There's a third redlink for a lorry manufacturer, who I think is the Bianchi (cars) you mentioned. Which of course means the article hasn't been written yet. The categories on the existing two articles look OK to me. -- Brianhe 07:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Aha, I think you want me to check categories on the new Bianchi (Motorcycle) article you created. Will do. -- Brianhe 08:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

well I'm told (motorcycle) outnumbers (motorcycles), but capitalisation was an error; at least there are other (motorcycles), and thanks for re-directing links and checking on my cats. (I forgot the links. Doh.)- Seasalt 09:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Cyclists

Both of them. However, we have Category:Motorcycle racers for people who do it semi-professionally, as opposed to just as a hobby in their spare time. >Radiant< 08:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

InSAR article

I've just started a draft attempt to expand InSAR from a stub into a proper article, and I noticed you contributed useful stuff to it recently. I'm only playing with structures and ideas at the moment, so I'm doing it in my sandbox out of everyone's way. I'll update the page properly once I've got something that doesn't look a half-completed mess, so everyone can start working on it. In the meantime if you're interested I would really welcome comments and feedback (especially on the suggested structure) on my talk page. Cheers, Eve 15:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you help a little?

I created a infobox template on a personal wiki of mine, but I can't figure out how to make it so some entries on it only show up if you enter something (for example, the persons death date only shows up if you enter a date). Here it is: [1]. TJ Spyke 08:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I got an account on that server and set up a trial template in my sandbox, but it didn't work. I think that the site administrator has not enabled ParserFunctions extensions. This is how you would evaluate if/then statements that are the core of formatting text optionally the way you want to. You should ask the admin to turn ParserFunctions on, and see if my template starts working. --Brianhe 21:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Toutle River

I noticed that you did some editing on Toutle River. I also added a link to the “Sediment Retention Structure” (a.k.a. dam) on the North Fork. I think it’s worth an article in itself. There is a good source for info on the USACE website link that I added. I may write the article when I find the time, but if you feel motivated, go ahead and write the article. There are some photos on the website and I can send you a link for a few more in the USACE Digital Visual Library (source: see the picture source on Wikimedia Commons). ●DanMS • Talk 20:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I was also glad to learn about {{Geolinks-US-river}}, which I did not know of before. ●DanMS • Talk 20:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good, let's edit it here before creating the official article: User:Brianhe/sandbox/Toutle River Sediment Retention Structure. --Brianhe 21:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Article under construction looked pretty good, so I posted it to Toutle River Sediment Retention Structure. Could still use some expansion & conversion to metric units. -- Brianhe 01:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Whitewater Canal

Thanks for the clean up and contributions to the article. chris4682

Thanks for the thanks! I'm glad to be a contributor. (Whitewater Canal) Brianhe 17:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Cat sorting

Hi Brianhe

If there is a defaultsort located with the categories you do not need to add a sort to each of the categories. The defaultsort does it for all cats and stubs. Bluetooth954 03:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed that was there right when I hit "save" :) Brianhe 03:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

your change to {{Protected Areas of Washington}}

Thanks! I'm surprised I missed that. Murderbike 06:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Brianhe 16:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Northwest post-grunge cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Northwest post-grunge cover.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Break out Motorcycle construction

Hi Brianhe. In light of the comments made in the recent Good-Article review of Motorcycle, in which the construction section is specifically mentioned, I would say you have a green light to attempt a breakout article. --Evb-wiki 20:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Motorcycle construction

Hi Brianhe. You are off to such a great start on the article Motorcycle construction that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. The Main Page gets about 4,000,000 hits per day and appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Also, don't forget to keep checking back at Did you know suggestions for comments regarding your nomination. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 23:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Arai logo.GIF)

Thanks for uploading Image:Arai logo.GIF. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

John W. Stanton

I think I may double post sorry. I am trying to reach out to John Stanton about a situation in our town concerning a cell tower. I was wondering if you had a direct way to reach him. I'm not asking for it but perhaps I can send you a note that you could forward to him? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gscaleta (talk • contribs) 19 July 2007

I don't know the man personally. Isn't he retired? Sounds like you want to send a letter to the company that owns the tower. Or your local utilities regulator. Brianhe 17:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I am new to wiki. Last I read he was still active but I could be wrong. Thanks for your reply. I ended up sending a letter to their address in Washington. I appreciate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gscaleta (talk • contribs) 18:40, 27 July 2007

BMW C1

Do me a small favour... Keep an eye on the BMW C1 article. I am having a bit of an edit war (not 3RR yet but it could be close!) with someone who keeps adding links that have little or no content. See the discussion page and the edit history. I would appreciate you adding some weight to the argument given your passion for reducing the number and improving the quality of links in motorcycle related articles. Thanks in advance. Mike --Cheesy Mike 16:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

This is a great case for the no-web-forums rule. But I'm tired of making that case to the WikiProject now. Focusing on one article might be better. I love this guy's attitude, "I own the site and have a right to spam Wikipedia with it?" Get real. Brianhe 19:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Clearwire Page

Briahhe, quit editing the Clearwire page. You obviously know nothing of the product nor the history of the page itself. Go play in another sandbox. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.159.254 (talk) 20:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm, very constructive edit. How is reverting clearly advertising related external links harming the Clearwire page? Brianhe 23:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The reason is because the link that you have deamed as "advertising" was the original link on that page. In addition, it allows readers to locate rate information and coverage information without inputting address verification. This allows users in all parts of the country to see Clearwire data even if it the service is not available to them. This can obviously only be used for informational purposes in these areas and therefore is NOT advertisting. So stop meddling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.159.254 (talk) 06:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I follow this external link that you are defending and what do I see? It's a commercial site advertising Clearwire broadband hookups with a toll-free phone number and other clearly commercial come-ons. This is specifically prohibited by many policies including WP:LINKSPAM. Wikipedia is not to be used to promote any company, especially any one reseller over others. If this information is so great it should be hosted somewhere else. As for your argument that this was 'the original version of the page', so what? Articles go through changes by many, many editors and no one has a claim to own any version of a Wikipedia article. That's a basic attribute of how WP works. Your attitude towards so-called meddling shows that you have a real conflict of interest going on here, are you connected to this Gold Coast outfit? Brianhe 06:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of British and United States military ranks compared

An article that you have been involved in editing, British and United States military ranks compared, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British and United States military ranks compared. Thank you. Caerwine Caer’s whines 22:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Furst Bismarck

I deliberately left them as the one article because I felt there wasn't enough information to justify two separate articles yet. I thought that would just make it harder for people to find the information they want.

Since you have split them however, I'm not going to bother re-merging them. I'm not sure what the policy on this is anyhow, is it policy to split articles like this where possible? Gatoclass 07:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I think you've gone overboard with the dab page. Perhaps you didn't know I had already created a dab page called Furst Bismarck (without the dots over the "u")? IMO, your new dab page should be merged back into the original one, as there are three ships which share the name Furst Bismarck, not two. Regards, Gatoclass 07:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

1) I could not find an explicit policy but it only makes sense IMHO to have two articles for two subjects with distinct sets of references and links to them. The Wikipedia infrastructure to disambiguate with {{for}} and dab pages is pretty robust and well understood by readers. 2) I think we should merge the DAB pages. I'm assuming that all 3 ships should actually have an umlaut in the first word of the title? -- Brianhe 22:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm now thinking you did the right thing in splitting the article into two, one of those ships was a bit overwhelmed by the content for the other. And I think the standalone articles look neater as well.

As for the dab page - I don't think the dab page should have an umlaut, how many people know where to find an umlaut on their keyboard when typing in the search box? I certainly don't. But if you think an umlaut for the dab page name is appropriate, I think we will also need a redirect page using the plain "u" to the dab page. That will solve the problem. Gatoclass 06:31, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Furst Bismarck redirects to Fürst Bismarck, I think it's all good now. -- Brianhe 06:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I see you beat me to it. Well done :) Gatoclass 06:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For fantastic work wikifying, copyediting, and sorting out categories and stubs on a huge range of articles. --TeaDrinker 15:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! It's nice to be appreciated. Brianhe 22:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Ship categorization discussion

BTW, since you're apparently interested in working on categories, I recently started a discussion about problems with the naval categorization tree here (the "More messed up categorizations" thread). Perhaps you'd like to participate? Gatoclass 06:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Ships

I didn't know the answer to the LCI question either, until you asked and I started digging into it :) Thanks for the work you've been doing on ship article sorting! Maralia 01:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

SOTEC discussion

You still haven't answered my question - are you a follower of Christ? If you are, then you know that truth is important. Shepherd119. Sorry for writing on this spot, but I still don't understand how to get a hold of you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shepherd119 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we should continue discussing the Scum of the Earth Church article on your talk page for continuity's sake. Brianhe 15:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't.

I wasn't going to contine this, since we seem to have settled on some factual, cited statements for the article. But since you asked again about my faith on my talk page, here you go. I'd rather keep that private. I don't think one must qualify oneself that way to be a WP editor on any subject, nor should it be a disqualification. This is just one reason why the objectivity rules I called out above are a good idea. Brianhe 15:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually? You just answered the question.  :) NO true follower of Christ would deny Him by wanting to "keep it private." The article is about a community of followers of Christ who don't ACT like followers of Christ. You wouldn't know anything about that since you aren't one. God IS truth, and since you seem to be all caught up in objectivity? Truth IS objective. Being a follower of Christ neither qualifies nor disqualifies you to be an editor. It is simply a fact.

And, oh, by the way? It's spelled c o n t i n U e. Since you seem to think that facts are important. :)

And "we" didn't settle on ANY factual cited statements. YOU did. There are MANY facts MISSING from that article.

And, since you're not a follower of Christ, you'll have to answer to your Maker on that since "Every knee will bow and every tongue will declare that Jesus Christ is Lord." Every single one, Brian. It will happen on Judgement Day whether you spend eternity in paradise or are separated from God for eternity. And that, IS fact. I cite the Bible. And, no, that's not my 'opinion.'

And yeah, I'm done. You won't hear anything more from me on the subject because since you're not a follower of Christ you will have all kinds of things to say about what I've just written about how that it's not fact or how its private or whatever. It's not that I don't want to listen. It's that nothing more I can say to you will change your mind. That's not my job. It is the job of the Holy Spirit to convict. I simply witness. Most people would sign off with 'good luck' here. But followers of Christ don't believe in luck. They believe we are here to do God's will and if what we want is in line with that will, then it happens. As one gets to know God better, one's will lines up with His will more and more closely.

I hope you find the peace you so obviously are looking for.

And I didn't sign the stuff above because I didn't know HOW to sign it. I figured it was obvious who wrote it. Followers of Christ don't have ulterior motives of hiding what they do since God sees everything anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.162.26 (talk) 05:47, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Zenas King

Thanks for your additions and copyright cleanup, please see my Hares Hill Road Bridge page and Thomas W. Moseley work in progress. Saguinter 18:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Mark Fitzsimmons

A tag has been placed on Mark Fitzsimmons requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Michael Johnson (talk) 20:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't really my page, I just moved it there for capitalization regularity. No matter, it's already deleted. Brianhe (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

RE:AMAZON KINDLE

I'm sorry, did I? I've just started using WP:LUPIN to combat vandalism, so I might have pressed the wrong button because It's going very slow and I need to keep refreshing. Sorry about that; Cf38 (talk) 18:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem, undid your revisionn to Amazon Kindle. Brianhe (talk) 18:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Witch of the Wave

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Witch of the Wave, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/Ships/Clippers/Witch_of_the_Wave(1851).html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:16, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

It does seem to be a copy of the page indicated created by this change by User:M0nde. I copied it to a new article from List of clipper ships. Brianhe (talk) 03:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Sorry for the intrusion. CosmicPenguin (Talk) 06:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:RoadcrafterRedBlack.jpg

Replaceable fair use

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

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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 13:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:White Zombie Make Them Die Slowly Cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:White Zombie Make Them Die Slowly Cover.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)